4 ms·

It is a documented fact that medical authorities in the United States lied to the American people to manipulate their COVID-related behavior. Specifically, Dr.

It is a documented fact that medical authorities in the United States lied to the American people to manipulate their COVID-related behavior. Specifically, Dr. Fauci discouraged people from wearing masks, not because there was a shortage and they needed to be saved for front-line medical workers (the real reason), but because - he claimed at the time - they were not particularly effective. "When you're in the middle of an outbreak, wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better and it might even block a droplet, but it's not providing the perfect protection that people think that it is. And often there are unintended consequences. People keep fiddling with the mask and they keep touching their face." At this point, it is dishonest to characterize Americans' distrust of medical authority as pathological. The distrust is well and truly deserved.

SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
So, you're saying that the evolving understanding of the use of _masks_ explains the _vaccine hesitancy_ ? That seems like a loosely-related change of subject to me. Why bring out this talking point? If you're not happy with nuance, probabilities rather than certainties, and changing understandings of a new situation then the modern world might not be for you. To be clear, you're saying that the avoidable unvaccinated disease mass casualties, are not pathological, i.e. illness-related, because, that mask guy the one time? That seems more like the kind of bogus reason that people seize upon to explain what they want to believe, than a logical explanation.
- native_samples 5y ago
  The subject hasn't changed - you're just trying to avoid it. The subject is trustworthiness of the public health authorities. They lie repeatedly in order to manipulate the public, there have been no consequences, and so it's rational to assume they're still doing it. You're trying to claim there's no link between a willingness to lie about one COVID related topic and willingness to lie about others, which is clearly wrong. But really, why bother. The propaganda has worked on you like a treat: you're arguing the science "evolved"! It did not evolve. That's an attempt to cover up what's really been happening. Public health authorities and scientists directly and knowingly lied about it to achieve policy goals, and in many cases, that's now either been admitted by them directly (with masks, herd immunity thresholds) or it's been proven in other ways (by DRASTIC).
  - dang 5y ago
    Personal attacks and name calling will get you banned here. No more of this, please. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
    > ut really, why bother. The propaganda has worked on you like a treat: you're arguing the science "evolved"! It did not evolve. That's an attempt to cover up what's really been happening. You are a pathological conspiracy theorist.
    - dang 5y ago
      Personal attacks and name calling will get you banned here. No more of this, please. We've had to ask you this multiple times before. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
      - SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
        > We've had to ask you this multiple times before I've just seen this, and I don't recall any previous occurrences.
        dang 5y ago
        Here are the posts I was referring to: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25394614 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25394614 (Dec 2020) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20418617 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20418617 (July 2019) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9748856 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9748856 (June 2015) Would really appreciate it if you'd review the guidelines and stick to the intended spirit of the site, including editing out any swipes that make it in to your posts. The way I look at this is: even if you don't (or feel you don't) owe the person you're replying to better, you owe the community better if you're participating in it.
- HelixEndeavor 5y ago
  >evolving understanding of the use of masks This is just absurd. Did our medical establishment not understand at all how masks worked before 2020? They were just guessing the whole time until COVID happened?
  - SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
    The understanding of airborne virus transmission has in fact come a long way in the last 18 months yes. Zeynep Tufekci is good on this subject, e.g. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/07/opinion/coronavirus-airborne-transmission.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/07/opinion/coronavirus-airbo... https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/07/why-arent-we-talking-more-about-airborne-transmission/614737/ https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/07/why-arent... And an interesting read today: https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2021/10/why-americans-wear-cloth-masks/620296/ https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2021/10/why-ameri... >there is still much to learn about the effectiveness of masking. So in summary, no, it's not absurd at all. Why would you say that? As per parent comment that dwelling on the masks was veering off topic, could you address _vaccine hesitancy_ in this context?

SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago

So, you're saying that the evolving understanding of the use of _masks_ explains the _vaccine hesitancy_ ? That seems like a loosely-related change of subject to me. Why bring out this talking point? If you're not happy with nuance, probabilities rather than certainties, and changing understandings of a new situation then the modern world might not be for you. To be clear, you're saying that the avoidable unvaccinated disease mass casualties, are not pathological, i.e. illness-related, because, that mask guy the one time? That seems more like the kind of bogus reason that people seize upon to explain what they want to believe, than a logical explanation.

native_samples 5y ago
The subject hasn't changed - you're just trying to avoid it. The subject is trustworthiness of the public health authorities. They lie repeatedly in order to manipulate the public, there have been no consequences, and so it's rational to assume they're still doing it. You're trying to claim there's no link between a willingness to lie about one COVID related topic and willingness to lie about others, which is clearly wrong. But really, why bother. The propaganda has worked on you like a treat: you're arguing the science "evolved"! It did not evolve. That's an attempt to cover up what's really been happening. Public health authorities and scientists directly and knowingly lied about it to achieve policy goals, and in many cases, that's now either been admitted by them directly (with masks, herd immunity thresholds) or it's been proven in other ways (by DRASTIC).
- dang 5y ago
  Personal attacks and name calling will get you banned here. No more of this, please. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
  > ut really, why bother. The propaganda has worked on you like a treat: you're arguing the science "evolved"! It did not evolve. That's an attempt to cover up what's really been happening. You are a pathological conspiracy theorist.
  - dang 5y ago
    Personal attacks and name calling will get you banned here. No more of this, please. We've had to ask you this multiple times before. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
      > We've had to ask you this multiple times before I've just seen this, and I don't recall any previous occurrences.
      - dang 5y ago
        Here are the posts I was referring to: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25394614 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25394614 (Dec 2020) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20418617 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20418617 (July 2019) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9748856 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9748856 (June 2015) Would really appreciate it if you'd review the guidelines and stick to the intended spirit of the site, including editing out any swipes that make it in to your posts. The way I look at this is: even if you don't (or feel you don't) owe the person you're replying to better, you owe the community better if you're participating in it.
HelixEndeavor 5y ago
>evolving understanding of the use of masks This is just absurd. Did our medical establishment not understand at all how masks worked before 2020? They were just guessing the whole time until COVID happened?
- SideburnsOfDoom 5y ago
  The understanding of airborne virus transmission has in fact come a long way in the last 18 months yes. Zeynep Tufekci is good on this subject, e.g. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/07/opinion/coronavirus-airborne-transmission.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/07/opinion/coronavirus-airbo... https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/07/why-arent-we-talking-more-about-airborne-transmission/614737/ https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/07/why-arent... And an interesting read today: https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2021/10/why-americans-wear-cloth-masks/620296/ https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2021/10/why-ameri... >there is still much to learn about the effectiveness of masking. So in summary, no, it's not absurd at all. Why would you say that? As per parent comment that dwelling on the masks was veering off topic, could you address _vaccine hesitancy_ in this context?