4 ms·

They did this themselves. Fauci, CDC and WHO constantly have gone back and forth between each other and themselves.

michaelmrose 5y ago
Do you have any other examples other than saying very early that people needn't mask up and then reversing on that point?
- symlinkk 5y ago
  * “We don’t need to ban travelers from China, that’s absurd and xenophobic!” * “2 weeks to slow the spread, then this will all be over”
  - michaelmrose 5y ago
    Nobody in the infectious medicine field actually said it will be over in 2 weeks and the travel ban proposal under trump was xenophobic theater because it made a point of banning only some travel after we had community spread and didn't even stop a lot of travel after that. It was the worst of both worlds.
  - javagram 5y ago
    > * “We don’t need to ban travelers from China, that’s absurd and xenophobic!” Fauci and the CDC were the ones who told Trump in January to ban travel, if you didn’t know. Fauci spoke in public in January 30, 2020 in favor of the ban. Trump claimed many months later the opposite but he is a known liar. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/fauci-china-restrictions/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/fauci-china-restrictions/ “ According to a March 2020 Wall Street Journal article, it was HHS health officials (including Fauci) who had to convince Trump to agree to the China travel ban, not the other way around:” > 2 weeks to slow the spread, then this will all be over” Unclear why you put this in quotes. This was the message from certain politicians like Trump, but it was never said by anyone who would typically be called an expert.
- krrrh 5y ago
  Here’s a handful of reversals from the first half of 2020 alone. It wouldn’t be so bad if they didn’t speak with such certainty about things that are not in fact certain. https://www.fumento.com/articles/erosion-of-trust-10-things-public-health-establishment-got-wrong-about-coronavirus/ https://www.fumento.com/articles/erosion-of-trust-10-things-... Fauci was also notoriously resistant to coming around on the evidence around aerosol spread.
  - michaelmrose 5y ago
    Michael Fumento author of "The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS: How a Tragedy Has Been Distorted by the Media and Partisan Politics" He's been wrong about a lot of things and its usually most evident after the fact but I'm sure THIS time he is prescient instead of completely full of it unlike with every other major issue he's taken a stand on.
baq 5y ago
scientific approach requires changing your mind in presence of new evidence and when there's not enough evidence, there will be differences in opinions. duh.
- tomp 5y ago
  Scientific approach requires you not to proclaim something as “true” if it’s likely that new information would change that. The 5-sigma approach used in physics is science. The “no evidence of human-to-human transmission” used by the WHO isn’t science.
  - ceejayoz 5y ago
    > The “no evidence of human-to-human transmission” used by the WHO isn’t science. You've misquoted them, for starters. The actual quote is "no clear evidence", and they make it clear it's based on what data they had from China at that point. https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1217043229427761152 https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1217043229427761152 https://www.who.int/news/item/29-06-2020-covidtimeline https://www.who.int/news/item/29-06-2020-covidtimeline Same day: > WHO held a press briefing during which it stated that, based on experience with respiratory pathogens, the potential for human-to-human transmission in the 41 confirmed cases in the People’s Republic of China existed: “it is certainly possible that there is limited human-to-human transmission”. > WHO tweeted that preliminary investigations by the Chinese authorities had found “no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission”. In its risk assessment, WHO said additional investigation was “needed to ascertain the presence of human-to-human transmission, modes of transmission, common source of exposure and the presence of asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic cases that are undetected”. Five days later: > The WHO Western Pacific Regional Office (WHO/WPRO) tweeted that, according to the latest information received and WHO analysis, there was evidence of limited human-to-human transmission. "The 5-sigma approach used in physics is science." So is the process used to get to a five-sigma result. Hypothesis, data gathering, analysis, etc. Like the WHO was having to do back in January of 2020.
    - krrrh 5y ago
      You’ve quoted the WHO accurately which is actually more damning. Taiwanese scientists had observed evidence of human-to-human transmission and submitted it to the WHO well before that and they ignored it. Positive evidence of human-to-human transmission had also been reported in Thailand. See Zeynep Tufecki’s Account of the timeline from last April. https://www.google.ca/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/610063/ https://www.google.ca/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/... > Hong Kong and Taiwan remembered that China has a history of covering up epidemics. In 2003, the world didn’t learn about SARS until after it had escaped China and become impossible to deny. (Back then, the WHO openly criticized China for its lack of transparency and cover-up, and we contained the epidemic just in the nick of time.) This time, the WHO was told the truth early on: Taiwanese health authorities sent their own medical teams to Wuhan in December. Those scientists confirmed human-to-human transmission—the most crucial piece of information for determining the difference between a local tragedy (if viruses are only jumping from infected bats or pangolins to humans in wildlife markets where people interact directly with them) and a brewing global pandemic. Taiwan isn’t allowed to be a member of the WHO, because of China’s objections, but it still informed the organization. Hong Kong health authorities, too, announced as early as January 4 that they suspected human-to-human transmission was already occurring, as they also looked at the evidence and their own contacts in Wuhan.
randomopining 5y ago
Rofl Fauci was on the money 95% of the time. Trump was utterly wrong 95% of the time. His misinformation led people to die lol!

Do you have any other examples other than saying very early that people needn't mask up and then reversing on that point?

symlinkk 5y ago
* “We don’t need to ban travelers from China, that’s absurd and xenophobic!” * “2 weeks to slow the spread, then this will all be over”
- michaelmrose 5y ago
  Nobody in the infectious medicine field actually said it will be over in 2 weeks and the travel ban proposal under trump was xenophobic theater because it made a point of banning only some travel after we had community spread and didn't even stop a lot of travel after that. It was the worst of both worlds.
- javagram 5y ago
  > * “We don’t need to ban travelers from China, that’s absurd and xenophobic!” Fauci and the CDC were the ones who told Trump in January to ban travel, if you didn’t know. Fauci spoke in public in January 30, 2020 in favor of the ban. Trump claimed many months later the opposite but he is a known liar. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/fauci-china-restrictions/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/fauci-china-restrictions/ “ According to a March 2020 Wall Street Journal article, it was HHS health officials (including Fauci) who had to convince Trump to agree to the China travel ban, not the other way around:” > 2 weeks to slow the spread, then this will all be over” Unclear why you put this in quotes. This was the message from certain politicians like Trump, but it was never said by anyone who would typically be called an expert.
krrrh 5y ago
Here’s a handful of reversals from the first half of 2020 alone. It wouldn’t be so bad if they didn’t speak with such certainty about things that are not in fact certain. https://www.fumento.com/articles/erosion-of-trust-10-things-public-health-establishment-got-wrong-about-coronavirus/ https://www.fumento.com/articles/erosion-of-trust-10-things-... Fauci was also notoriously resistant to coming around on the evidence around aerosol spread.
- michaelmrose 5y ago
  Michael Fumento author of "The Myth of Heterosexual AIDS: How a Tragedy Has Been Distorted by the Media and Partisan Politics" He's been wrong about a lot of things and its usually most evident after the fact but I'm sure THIS time he is prescient instead of completely full of it unlike with every other major issue he's taken a stand on.

baq 5y ago

scientific approach requires changing your mind in presence of new evidence and when there's not enough evidence, there will be differences in opinions. duh.

tomp 5y ago
Scientific approach requires you not to proclaim something as “true” if it’s likely that new information would change that. The 5-sigma approach used in physics is science. The “no evidence of human-to-human transmission” used by the WHO isn’t science.
- ceejayoz 5y ago
  > The “no evidence of human-to-human transmission” used by the WHO isn’t science. You've misquoted them, for starters. The actual quote is "no clear evidence", and they make it clear it's based on what data they had from China at that point. https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1217043229427761152 https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1217043229427761152 https://www.who.int/news/item/29-06-2020-covidtimeline https://www.who.int/news/item/29-06-2020-covidtimeline Same day: > WHO held a press briefing during which it stated that, based on experience with respiratory pathogens, the potential for human-to-human transmission in the 41 confirmed cases in the People’s Republic of China existed: “it is certainly possible that there is limited human-to-human transmission”. > WHO tweeted that preliminary investigations by the Chinese authorities had found “no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission”. In its risk assessment, WHO said additional investigation was “needed to ascertain the presence of human-to-human transmission, modes of transmission, common source of exposure and the presence of asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic cases that are undetected”. Five days later: > The WHO Western Pacific Regional Office (WHO/WPRO) tweeted that, according to the latest information received and WHO analysis, there was evidence of limited human-to-human transmission. "The 5-sigma approach used in physics is science." So is the process used to get to a five-sigma result. Hypothesis, data gathering, analysis, etc. Like the WHO was having to do back in January of 2020.
  - krrrh 5y ago
    You’ve quoted the WHO accurately which is actually more damning. Taiwanese scientists had observed evidence of human-to-human transmission and submitted it to the WHO well before that and they ignored it. Positive evidence of human-to-human transmission had also been reported in Thailand. See Zeynep Tufecki’s Account of the timeline from last April. https://www.google.ca/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/610063/ https://www.google.ca/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/... > Hong Kong and Taiwan remembered that China has a history of covering up epidemics. In 2003, the world didn’t learn about SARS until after it had escaped China and become impossible to deny. (Back then, the WHO openly criticized China for its lack of transparency and cover-up, and we contained the epidemic just in the nick of time.) This time, the WHO was told the truth early on: Taiwanese health authorities sent their own medical teams to Wuhan in December. Those scientists confirmed human-to-human transmission—the most crucial piece of information for determining the difference between a local tragedy (if viruses are only jumping from infected bats or pangolins to humans in wildlife markets where people interact directly with them) and a brewing global pandemic. Taiwan isn’t allowed to be a member of the WHO, because of China’s objections, but it still informed the organization. Hong Kong health authorities, too, announced as early as January 4 that they suspected human-to-human transmission was already occurring, as they also looked at the evidence and their own contacts in Wuhan.

randomopining 5y ago

Rofl Fauci was on the money 95% of the time. Trump was utterly wrong 95% of the time. His misinformation led people to die lol!