3 ms·
>Two years ago, paranoia might have helped. That's an easy statement to make two years later. Now that we have the benefit of hindsight, we know a lot of thin
by SantalBlush 5y ago
>Two years ago, paranoia might have helped.
That's an easy statement to make two years later. Now that we have the benefit of hindsight, we know a lot of things that would have helped.
When you make evidence-based decisions, you are going to get some things wrong. The only way around that is to gather more evidence, and that takes time (and loads of money.)
- throwhauser 5y ago> The only way around that is to gather more evidence... That begs the question as to whether an evidence-based approach is the right approach in all circumstances. Another way around it is to not fully rely on an evidence-based approach, and take precautions before the evidence comes in. In some circumstances (e.g. rapid spread of an poorly understood disease) waiting for an evidence-based decision before taking precautions might be too slow.
- SantalBlush 5y agoFinding that the disease is spreading rapidly and taking precautions as a result is making an evidence-based decision. You seem to be repeating my point here. The issue is that they really didn't know how rapidly it was spreading at the beginning.