4 ms·

We're trusting WHO's perspective on China again?

• stubish 5y ago
  You have to trust somebody, or nobody. What source would you rather believe to corroborate or track these things?
  • Grakel 5y ago
    Somebody without a recent track record of protecting China's lies. https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/04/08/who-china-trump-coronavirus-176242 https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/04/08/who-china-...
    • stubish 5y ago
      And is there a somebody? Because if you are going to disbelieve everything the WHO does due to one highly politicized issue, you are going to need a replacement. The WHO certification is important because the WHO is the source governments use for providing travel advice and health related immigration controls.
    • deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    • xster 5y ago
      It's hard to figure out what you're trying to point out specifically. There's a lot of words and emotions and editorials but the article doesn't actually say anything. Can you point to some primary source for the point you're making?
      • TenToedTony 5y ago
        "Without China’s deceit and WHO’s solicitude for Beijing, the outbreak might have been more limited, and the world at the very least would have had more time to react to the virus." "So, the WHO endorsed China’s narrative during the crucial early days of its cover-up." "Despite the emerging consensus that China has lied about its number of cases and deaths, and despite China’s refusal to share key information about the virus, WHO hasn’t said a discouraging word about China’s actions." That's directly in the article. Purporting that the article doesn't say anything is somewhat a stretch. Maybe you don't subscribe to what it's saying and find its sources lacking - as it is an opinion piece.