4 ms·

About number 3, it was a blatant lie to keep the PPE for medical workers. I understand the rationale there, but I don't think it's worth treating people like ch

by eloff 6y ago

About number 3, it was a blatant lie to keep the PPE for medical workers. I understand the rationale there, but I don't think it's worth treating people like children and lying to them - even if it temporarily gives a better result. Because now when they say masks work, plenty of people are understandably skeptical - and that makes them vulnerable to believing less credible sources of information on the topic. I fully believe masks help, despite as you say, there being little specific evidence for Covid19, because we have good reason to think they reduce transmission just based on how masks work, evidence in general to support masks in a medical setting, and the transmission mechanism of the virus. However, I have zero sympathy for the authorities struggling to get people to take them seriously about masks after they started off by lying about it. And after an established history of authorities and politicians lying, it's little wonder conspiracy theories proliferate. You reap what you sow.

weaksauce 6y ago
Again that missed the point entirely. It certainly wasn't lying. We know and knew that some masks are effective. n95 masks when worn correctly are definitely safer than not having one full stop. we didn't know then which masks were also going to be effective and didn't know if those masks would be worse than not wearing one at all. there was also the issue of shortages of the effective masks for medical pros that needed them. that informed the speaking at the time and at no point was that a lie. and we do have studies now that masks do decrease the likelihood of transmission so we do know now that those cloth masks are effective. 1. shortage of proper n95 masks(look at toilet paper during the beginning) 2. no evidence of other masks being useful or not harmful at the time so they said socially distance yourself as a primary mode of protection and wash your hands often.
- orangecat 6y ago
  It certainly wasn't lying. It certainly was: https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/29/health/face-masks-coronavirus-surgeon-general-trnd/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/29/health/face-masks-coronavirus.... That's not a statement that mask effectiveness is uncertain, it's an authoritative statement that they don't help.
  - weaksauce 6y ago
    one political appointee from an administration that handled it about the worst as it could saying that(which also doesn't say what you think it says) doesn't change the facts of it... the overwhelming messaging at the time was how i noted it and wasn't a lie.
    - eloff 6y ago
      The fact that they ask on one hand not to buy PPE because there is a shortage for medical workers while on the other hand saying they're actually counter productive against covid19 is at least circumstantial evidence for the claim. It would be difficult to prove they definitely lied without an admission of guilt or leaked internal communications.
      - leetcrew 6y ago
        it's not a conspiracy theory. fauci admitted as much in this interview: https://www.thestreet.com/video/dr-fauci-masks-changing-directive-coronavirus https://www.thestreet.com/video/dr-fauci-masks-changing-dire...
        eloff 6y ago
        Thank you. I thought I remembered they admitted it, but I didn't trust my memory. Case closed.
DanBC 6y ago
> it was a blatant lie to keep the PPE for medical workers. Can you post a link to the published studies that you think CDC / WHO should have been using to inform their decisions around masks? > evidence in general to support masks in a medical setting We really do have lots of testing for masks in medical settings, and most of them struggle to show benefit.
- eloff 6y ago
  You're saying masks don't work at all and there is little reason to wear them even in a medical setting? I don't want to say that's impossible that we're doing something widely despite it being ineffective - because that does happen. But the burden of proof is on you if you want to make such a strong claim against the consensus view, and I reject your attempt to foist it on me. Probably you'll counter that you're just talking specifically about the public using masks to prevent covid19, and I agree the evidence to support that is thin. But that's to be expected, because it's also new. Again we have good reason to suspect that if masks work at preventing spread of respiratory illness in a medical setting, they should work for the public with covid19 too. So if you want to claim that, again the burden of proof is on you to make a strong case against the consensus view of the general efficacy of masks in preventing spread of respiratory illness.
seoaeu 6y ago
> However, I have zero sympathy for the authorities struggling to get people to take them seriously about masks after they started off by lying about it. This is a common argument, but it is honestly kind of ridiculous. Like how can you claim with a straight face both: a) Authorities lied about masks not working, and b) Since authorities are known liars (see a), their current claims that masks do work must be untrue. Do these people really not know there is now broad consensus in what people knowledgeable on the topic believe works, or are they just making bad faith arguments because they don't want to follow it?
- eloff 6y ago
  Keep in mind I'm not claiming B. I'm saying that the authorities lying gives people a reason to be skeptical about future claims. The dangers of crying wolf.
  - julianapostate 6y ago
    The authorities/institutions are always advancing their agenda. truth/lying is irrelevant. In most cases the agenda is consistent over years so it’s hard to notice the changes. During Covid the health agency agendas pivoted so rapidly their agenda changes where more abrupt. First, they needed to keep hospitals from getting overwhelmed so they said stuff about REAL n95 masks not working so healthcare could get them. Then they needed to stop people getting Covid figured masks might work so they said wear a face covering .. it can’t hurt. And then trump conspicuously didn’t wear a mask deep into the pandemic so it became about making trump look stupid and stopping his re-election, so the justification for masks came in full force shortly after trump went around not wearing one. Had trump been one of the first people wearing a mask talking about “China flu” early on. this whole mask policy would have been flipped.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- spookthesunset 6y ago
  > Do these people really not know there is now broad consensus in what people knowledgeable on the topic believe works I mean, I don't think there is broad consensus. I think there is a hell of a lot of group think going on. Going against the grain literally gets you ridiculed, mocked, harassed, called an idiot and if you are in the medical industry... probably gets you on the blacklist. I don't trust a single bit of research generated about masks, or anything, while in the middle of a politically charged pandemic. All of it should be taken with a very healthy grain of salt. The idea that every intelligent, well meaning person agrees with what we are doing is lunacy. It would be insane to think that. This whole thing went from "go on cruises" to "lock it all down" in literally a week's time. Of course intelligent, well intentioned people might not agree with what is going on. It amazes me that people assume everybody smart has to be for all this.

by eloff 6y ago

weaksauce 6y ago

Again that missed the point entirely. It certainly wasn't lying. We know and knew that some masks are effective. n95 masks when worn correctly are definitely safer than not having one full stop. we didn't know then which masks were also going to be effective and didn't know if those masks would be worse than not wearing one at all. there was also the issue of shortages of the effective masks for medical pros that needed them. that informed the speaking at the time and at no point was that a lie. and we do have studies now that masks do decrease the likelihood of transmission so we do know now that those cloth masks are effective. 1. shortage of proper n95 masks(look at toilet paper during the beginning) 2. no evidence of other masks being useful or not harmful at the time so they said socially distance yourself as a primary mode of protection and wash your hands often.

orangecat 6y ago
It certainly wasn't lying. It certainly was: https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/29/health/face-masks-coronavirus-surgeon-general-trnd/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/02/29/health/face-masks-coronavirus.... That's not a statement that mask effectiveness is uncertain, it's an authoritative statement that they don't help.
- weaksauce 6y ago
  one political appointee from an administration that handled it about the worst as it could saying that(which also doesn't say what you think it says) doesn't change the facts of it... the overwhelming messaging at the time was how i noted it and wasn't a lie.
  - eloff 6y ago
    The fact that they ask on one hand not to buy PPE because there is a shortage for medical workers while on the other hand saying they're actually counter productive against covid19 is at least circumstantial evidence for the claim. It would be difficult to prove they definitely lied without an admission of guilt or leaked internal communications.
    - leetcrew 6y ago
      it's not a conspiracy theory. fauci admitted as much in this interview: https://www.thestreet.com/video/dr-fauci-masks-changing-directive-coronavirus https://www.thestreet.com/video/dr-fauci-masks-changing-dire...
      - eloff 6y ago
        Thank you. I thought I remembered they admitted it, but I didn't trust my memory. Case closed.

DanBC 6y ago

> it was a blatant lie to keep the PPE for medical workers. Can you post a link to the published studies that you think CDC / WHO should have been using to inform their decisions around masks? > evidence in general to support masks in a medical setting We really do have lots of testing for masks in medical settings, and most of them struggle to show benefit.

eloff 6y ago
You're saying masks don't work at all and there is little reason to wear them even in a medical setting? I don't want to say that's impossible that we're doing something widely despite it being ineffective - because that does happen. But the burden of proof is on you if you want to make such a strong claim against the consensus view, and I reject your attempt to foist it on me. Probably you'll counter that you're just talking specifically about the public using masks to prevent covid19, and I agree the evidence to support that is thin. But that's to be expected, because it's also new. Again we have good reason to suspect that if masks work at preventing spread of respiratory illness in a medical setting, they should work for the public with covid19 too. So if you want to claim that, again the burden of proof is on you to make a strong case against the consensus view of the general efficacy of masks in preventing spread of respiratory illness.

seoaeu 6y ago

> However, I have zero sympathy for the authorities struggling to get people to take them seriously about masks after they started off by lying about it. This is a common argument, but it is honestly kind of ridiculous. Like how can you claim with a straight face both: a) Authorities lied about masks not working, and b) Since authorities are known liars (see a), their current claims that masks do work must be untrue. Do these people really not know there is now broad consensus in what people knowledgeable on the topic believe works, or are they just making bad faith arguments because they don't want to follow it?

eloff 6y ago
Keep in mind I'm not claiming B. I'm saying that the authorities lying gives people a reason to be skeptical about future claims. The dangers of crying wolf.
- julianapostate 6y ago
  The authorities/institutions are always advancing their agenda. truth/lying is irrelevant. In most cases the agenda is consistent over years so it’s hard to notice the changes. During Covid the health agency agendas pivoted so rapidly their agenda changes where more abrupt. First, they needed to keep hospitals from getting overwhelmed so they said stuff about REAL n95 masks not working so healthcare could get them. Then they needed to stop people getting Covid figured masks might work so they said wear a face covering .. it can’t hurt. And then trump conspicuously didn’t wear a mask deep into the pandemic so it became about making trump look stupid and stopping his re-election, so the justification for masks came in full force shortly after trump went around not wearing one. Had trump been one of the first people wearing a mask talking about “China flu” early on. this whole mask policy would have been flipped.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
spookthesunset 6y ago
> Do these people really not know there is now broad consensus in what people knowledgeable on the topic believe works I mean, I don't think there is broad consensus. I think there is a hell of a lot of group think going on. Going against the grain literally gets you ridiculed, mocked, harassed, called an idiot and if you are in the medical industry... probably gets you on the blacklist. I don't trust a single bit of research generated about masks, or anything, while in the middle of a politically charged pandemic. All of it should be taken with a very healthy grain of salt. The idea that every intelligent, well meaning person agrees with what we are doing is lunacy. It would be insane to think that. This whole thing went from "go on cruises" to "lock it all down" in literally a week's time. Of course intelligent, well intentioned people might not agree with what is going on. It amazes me that people assume everybody smart has to be for all this.