5 ms·

It's generally a political challenge for a free society to get the power and the megaphones back from the people they were given to during a crisis. After an a

It's generally a political challenge for a free society to get the power and the megaphones back from the people they were given to during a crisis. After an acute terrorism threat ends, it's hard to get power back from the military and the police. In this case, it will be hard to take back power and the narrative from the public health establishment. While they perform a crucial role in our society, they will tend to value safety over freedom and quality of life to an extent that would be crippling if we let them continue to set the agenda after the acute phase of the crisis has passed.

dragonwriter 6y ago
> In this case, it will be hard to take back power and the narrative from the public health establishment. Sitting in California where county sheriffs basically comprehensively vetoed the public health establishment throughout the crisis, I don't see that likely to be a real problem.
- NovaJehovah 6y ago
  That didn't stop thousands of businesses from being closed. But regardless, the narrative is just as important. After some threshold of vaccine distribution, people need to be convinced that it's ok to return to normal life, and that they don't need to cower in fear in their homes or wear masks for years and years just because we haven't completely eliminated covid. There's a cost to all of this.
  - dragonwriter 6y ago
    > After some threshold of vaccine distribution, people need to be convinced that it's ok to return to normal life, and that they don't need to cower in fear in their homes or wear masks for years and years. No one has suggested people should cower in fear, and people seem pretty happy going about without masks, or with masks worn in an openly defiant manner (under the chin, off of one ear, etc.) in public places with prominent mask mandate signage today, so, again, I don't think the issue you are alluding to is even remotely serious. As a society, whatever the formal provisions of law say, we haven't given public health authorities the power in practice that you argue we will have problems with when we need to take it away.
    - NovaJehovah 6y ago
      All the "long covid" stuff is essentially fear mongering. There's no science behind it. The implication is that everyone should be terrified, stay home as much as possible, and wear masks as long as there's any chance of catching covid. Even after being vaccinated. Sure, people flout the restrictions, and they are met with social disapproval for doing so. The worst thing is the hugely negative psychological effect this is all having on children. It shouldn't be taken lightly.
      - orra 6y ago
        > All the "long covid" stuff is essentially fear mongering. There's no science behind it. That's not true. Studies are showing large fractions, say 10-25% of COVID patients are suffering symptoms after a month. COVID infections have demonstrably damaged pretty much every organ in the body. That's very different from the initial assumption, whence all policy, that COVID is like the flu, and passes in two weeks if it doesn't kill you. > Even after being vaccinated. However, these vaccines are stupidly effective. Once enough people are vaccinated, COVID will die out in the community, just like measles. You're right that we can't fear COVID forever.
        NovaJehovah 6y ago
        It's not surprising that when a disease almost kills you, it (or the medical interventions that saved you) might leave your body in bad shape. But this is being spun to imply that it's a serious threat to people who are otherwise in extremely low risk categories for severe covid. There's no solid evidence for that.
        orra 6y ago
        > But this is being spun to imply that it's a serious threat to people who are otherwise in extremely low risk categories for severe covid. There's no solid evidence for that. It's a numbers game. When hundreds of millions of people are infected, you're still going to get a lot of hard hit people in 'low risk' categories, aren't you?
addicted 6y ago
The “public health establishment”. Is this a joke considering the vast majority of Western countries have basically ignored their “public health establishments” for almost all of the past year? Ironically (or not) the only country that has really followed their “public health establishment” until recently was Sweden. Which isn’t surprising because theirs was the only one not asking the government to make tough choices.

dragonwriter 6y ago

> In this case, it will be hard to take back power and the narrative from the public health establishment. Sitting in California where county sheriffs basically comprehensively vetoed the public health establishment throughout the crisis, I don't see that likely to be a real problem.

NovaJehovah 6y ago
That didn't stop thousands of businesses from being closed. But regardless, the narrative is just as important. After some threshold of vaccine distribution, people need to be convinced that it's ok to return to normal life, and that they don't need to cower in fear in their homes or wear masks for years and years just because we haven't completely eliminated covid. There's a cost to all of this.
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > After some threshold of vaccine distribution, people need to be convinced that it's ok to return to normal life, and that they don't need to cower in fear in their homes or wear masks for years and years. No one has suggested people should cower in fear, and people seem pretty happy going about without masks, or with masks worn in an openly defiant manner (under the chin, off of one ear, etc.) in public places with prominent mask mandate signage today, so, again, I don't think the issue you are alluding to is even remotely serious. As a society, whatever the formal provisions of law say, we haven't given public health authorities the power in practice that you argue we will have problems with when we need to take it away.
  - NovaJehovah 6y ago
    All the "long covid" stuff is essentially fear mongering. There's no science behind it. The implication is that everyone should be terrified, stay home as much as possible, and wear masks as long as there's any chance of catching covid. Even after being vaccinated. Sure, people flout the restrictions, and they are met with social disapproval for doing so. The worst thing is the hugely negative psychological effect this is all having on children. It shouldn't be taken lightly.
    - orra 6y ago
      > All the "long covid" stuff is essentially fear mongering. There's no science behind it. That's not true. Studies are showing large fractions, say 10-25% of COVID patients are suffering symptoms after a month. COVID infections have demonstrably damaged pretty much every organ in the body. That's very different from the initial assumption, whence all policy, that COVID is like the flu, and passes in two weeks if it doesn't kill you. > Even after being vaccinated. However, these vaccines are stupidly effective. Once enough people are vaccinated, COVID will die out in the community, just like measles. You're right that we can't fear COVID forever.
      - NovaJehovah 6y ago
        It's not surprising that when a disease almost kills you, it (or the medical interventions that saved you) might leave your body in bad shape. But this is being spun to imply that it's a serious threat to people who are otherwise in extremely low risk categories for severe covid. There's no solid evidence for that.
        orra 6y ago
        > But this is being spun to imply that it's a serious threat to people who are otherwise in extremely low risk categories for severe covid. There's no solid evidence for that. It's a numbers game. When hundreds of millions of people are infected, you're still going to get a lot of hard hit people in 'low risk' categories, aren't you?

addicted 6y ago

The “public health establishment”. Is this a joke considering the vast majority of Western countries have basically ignored their “public health establishments” for almost all of the past year? Ironically (or not) the only country that has really followed their “public health establishment” until recently was Sweden. Which isn’t surprising because theirs was the only one not asking the government to make tough choices.