4 ms·

And what's bullshit about that? Did you expect French politicians to be all-knowing robots who can never be wrong? This sounds like a run-of-the-mill political

And what's bullshit about that? Did you expect French politicians to be all-knowing robots who can never be wrong? This sounds like a run-of-the-mill political debate that hopefully in the end was decided on the basis of an expert panel. (And no, of course, medical experts are also not infallible. I don't think we have investigated a disease and responded to it as fast as to this one ever before in the history of mankind, so there were bound to be made some wrong or misleading hypotheses.)

988747 4y ago
>> Did you expect French politicians to be all-knowing robots who can never be wrong? I would expect government members making decisions to consult expert virologists/epidemiologists first. The fact that they can make two contradictory statements means that either they did not consult any experts, or they consulted different experts, which means there is no consensus among experts on the topic.
- jonathanstrange 4y ago
  Incorrect logic. One of the French politicians could have consulted experts and the other one might not, for instance. That's not uncommon. In other countries that happened all the time, think about Donald Trump musing about injecting bleach to kill the virus. Personally, I'd vote for the politicians who follow expert advise in such matters.