3 ms·

If your response to disagreeing with someone is to censor them, you are not doing science but instead engaging in faith. "Hey, lockdowns may be worse than the

• anigbrowl 4y ago
  In isolation that's true. If it's strongly correlated with other assertions like 'it's just a cold', 'only people with unhealthy lifestyles are at risk', 'it's a bioweapon' etc. then people may justifiably suspect it's part of a broad-spectrum attack on public health messaging.
  • nradov 4y ago
    Risk was heavily concentrated among people with unhealthy lifestyles. That doesn't mean we shouldn't take the pandemic seriously, but asserting that fact is in no way an attack on public health messaging. https://www.wfae.org/health/2021-09-30/novant-says-9-of-10-children-in-covid-icus-are-overweight-but-public-health-officials-rarely-talk-about-obesity https://www.wfae.org/health/2021-09-30/novant-says-9-of-10-c...
    • anigbrowl 4y ago
      That's why I'm saying we should look at the correlation between disparate assertions. Uncertainty about the efficacy or necessity of a vaccine is understandable, for example, but if it's coupled with assertions about 5g mind control I'm less willing to spend effort on the conversation.
    • strken 4y ago
      That article states that obesity was a risk factor in 34% of deaths under 65. The US obesity rate is 42% (EDIT: 36%, 42% is the adult rate). I'm not sure how to interpret that.