6 ms·

I would argue the opposite - the world needs less collaboration [coercion] in pandemic response. Having the WHO bludgeon countries into obeying standards set by

I would argue the opposite - the world needs less collaboration [coercion] in pandemic response. Having the WHO bludgeon countries into obeying standards set by a small committee of elites is an abuse of power waiting to happen.

AJ007 5y ago
From telling people it wasn’t airborne and they shouldn’t wear masks to saying no booster shots, their credibility is toast.
- hanniabu 5y ago
  All those points are taken out of context and are misleading.
- ed25519FUUU 5y ago
  Are they still saying it’s “impossible” the virus escaped from a Chinese weapons lab?
  - wesleywt 5y ago
    As a biologist looking at comments like these make me concerned that the general public has not learned its lesson on pandemics yet. It is far more concerning our destruction of the environment and our encroachment of habitats will lead to way more pandemics.
    - ed25519FUUU 5y ago
      I’m very much concerned with our government funding gof research in a foreign and adversarial weapons laboratory. Stopping that research would be a very important lesson to learn in this pandemic because it might actually be able to stop the next covid 19.
      - jacquesm 5y ago
        Yes, stopping such research is important. But it has nothing to do with COVID-19.
        ed25519FUUU 5y ago
        Am I to believe that China was working on weaponizing a virus without also concurrently researching a cure/vaccine? Virus provenance is important. It’s not a blame game. If it escapes from a lab they owe the world every piece of research they have on it but we’ll never get there if everyone says “hey hey let’s not play the blame game here”
        jacquesm 5y ago
        No, you are not to believe that, there is no evidence for it. But there is plenty of evidence that nation states in general have done research on the weaponizing of disease. Note that that doesn't rule out that it wasn't the case, but it is to the best of my knowledge not something that we have even a shred of direct evidence for.
fennecfoxen 5y ago
Having the WHO bludgeon countries into obeying standards *set by China. I mean, let's get right to the point, shall we?
wesleywt 5y ago
A terrible take. We are fully connected to a point that national borders mean practically nothing. Only a coordinated response and open sharing of information can stop a disaster.
- tcmart14 5y ago
  Really the big one here, I feel, is the open sharing of information. This is probably the single most effective thing there is. Free and open information that anyone has access to. If there is one thing WHO should be, is an international database for medical researchers, advisers and professionals around the world.
- fennecfoxen 5y ago
  If the WHO actually prioritized "sharing information" over the political machinations of the Chinese government, you wouldn't have the spectacle of Bruce Aylward pretending to have technical difficulties when someone mentions the word 'Taiwan' on a call, and the fear of political oppression by committee would be a lot less credible. This situation is, of course, a tragedy, but it is also what we have. I'm sure plenty of authoritarian regimes would love to have information on all sorts of things that health agencies could be made to collect by treaty. How about just "travel?" Let's track the movement of every person from place to place. It's for the pandemic! It's definitely is not part of a surveillance apparatus meant to stifle dissent, not in the slightest.
- toolz 5y ago
  Centralization is a surefire way to fail at pandemic response. You will necessarily be pressuring the wrong intervention measures on people who don't want them when they could stand to intervene in a better way for their own region and serve as a datapoint for the rest of the world to learn from. You can't sacrifice the superior computational power of decentralized peoples acting in their best interest and substitute it with some truly wishful thinking that there will exist some superior knowledge that just needs centralized power in order to control a pandemic.
  - prohobo 5y ago

AJ007 5y ago

From telling people it wasn’t airborne and they shouldn’t wear masks to saying no booster shots, their credibility is toast.

hanniabu 5y ago
All those points are taken out of context and are misleading.
ed25519FUUU 5y ago
Are they still saying it’s “impossible” the virus escaped from a Chinese weapons lab?
- wesleywt 5y ago
  As a biologist looking at comments like these make me concerned that the general public has not learned its lesson on pandemics yet. It is far more concerning our destruction of the environment and our encroachment of habitats will lead to way more pandemics.
  - ed25519FUUU 5y ago
    I’m very much concerned with our government funding gof research in a foreign and adversarial weapons laboratory. Stopping that research would be a very important lesson to learn in this pandemic because it might actually be able to stop the next covid 19.
    - jacquesm 5y ago
      Yes, stopping such research is important. But it has nothing to do with COVID-19.
      - ed25519FUUU 5y ago
        Am I to believe that China was working on weaponizing a virus without also concurrently researching a cure/vaccine? Virus provenance is important. It’s not a blame game. If it escapes from a lab they owe the world every piece of research they have on it but we’ll never get there if everyone says “hey hey let’s not play the blame game here”
        jacquesm 5y ago
        No, you are not to believe that, there is no evidence for it. But there is plenty of evidence that nation states in general have done research on the weaponizing of disease. Note that that doesn't rule out that it wasn't the case, but it is to the best of my knowledge not something that we have even a shred of direct evidence for.

fennecfoxen 5y ago

Having the WHO bludgeon countries into obeying standards *set by China. I mean, let's get right to the point, shall we?

wesleywt 5y ago

A terrible take. We are fully connected to a point that national borders mean practically nothing. Only a coordinated response and open sharing of information can stop a disaster.

tcmart14 5y ago
Really the big one here, I feel, is the open sharing of information. This is probably the single most effective thing there is. Free and open information that anyone has access to. If there is one thing WHO should be, is an international database for medical researchers, advisers and professionals around the world.
fennecfoxen 5y ago
If the WHO actually prioritized "sharing information" over the political machinations of the Chinese government, you wouldn't have the spectacle of Bruce Aylward pretending to have technical difficulties when someone mentions the word 'Taiwan' on a call, and the fear of political oppression by committee would be a lot less credible. This situation is, of course, a tragedy, but it is also what we have. I'm sure plenty of authoritarian regimes would love to have information on all sorts of things that health agencies could be made to collect by treaty. How about just "travel?" Let's track the movement of every person from place to place. It's for the pandemic! It's definitely is not part of a surveillance apparatus meant to stifle dissent, not in the slightest.
toolz 5y ago
Centralization is a surefire way to fail at pandemic response. You will necessarily be pressuring the wrong intervention measures on people who don't want them when they could stand to intervene in a better way for their own region and serve as a datapoint for the rest of the world to learn from. You can't sacrifice the superior computational power of decentralized peoples acting in their best interest and substitute it with some truly wishful thinking that there will exist some superior knowledge that just needs centralized power in order to control a pandemic.
- prohobo 5y ago