3 ms·

I agree with you. There were several agencies putting out responsible messaging and trying to keep public trust. Ultimately it was a failure. Millions of peo

I agree with you. There were several agencies putting out responsible messaging and trying to keep public trust. Ultimately it was a failure. Millions of people didn't trust the gov and turned to alternatives like this. I'm not sure why you're being downvoted. Key figureheads undermined public trust.

fwungy 4y ago
The government's information was obviously was filled with inconsistencies that were obvious to anyone with the slightest prior mistrust of them. Ivermectin has a long history of safe and beneficial usage in the developing world, billions of doses. Yet it was actively discouraged as "horse medicine" here. Anyone with experience or relatives in the developing world would immediately question the veracity of such a discouragement.
- dragon-hn 4y ago
  It was discouraged (correctly in hindsight) because there was no evidence it would do anything for Covid. It was called horse medicine because the unfortunate people that fell for the kooks resorted to vet sources for it because doctors correctly refused. I can’t believe the revisionist history on this.
  - fwungy 4y ago
    [flagged]
    - dragon-hn 4y ago
      What a lazy response. At least you got the no evidence part right. For about a year governments around the world were willing to do _anything_ to get past Covid ASAP. To ignore that and chalk this up to a lazy conspiracy theory has less than zero merit.
- thrwawy74 4y ago
  Yeah, but I thought a lot of /inconsistencies/ were overblown with 1 side of the political spectrum jumping on any change in messaging to promote distrust. I wouldn't expect 20-30 people giving press conferences over 2-3 years to say the same things. I do remember precautions changing, like not using masks (supposedly to reserve them for hospital staff), and then it changed. I think a lot of the problem was we want to be treated like level-headed adults. We want to know the intent behind the messaging. Without being transparent, so many conspiracies filled the void.. :(

fwungy 4y ago

The government's information was obviously was filled with inconsistencies that were obvious to anyone with the slightest prior mistrust of them. Ivermectin has a long history of safe and beneficial usage in the developing world, billions of doses. Yet it was actively discouraged as "horse medicine" here. Anyone with experience or relatives in the developing world would immediately question the veracity of such a discouragement.

dragon-hn 4y ago
It was discouraged (correctly in hindsight) because there was no evidence it would do anything for Covid. It was called horse medicine because the unfortunate people that fell for the kooks resorted to vet sources for it because doctors correctly refused. I can’t believe the revisionist history on this.
- fwungy 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - dragon-hn 4y ago
    What a lazy response. At least you got the no evidence part right. For about a year governments around the world were willing to do _anything_ to get past Covid ASAP. To ignore that and chalk this up to a lazy conspiracy theory has less than zero merit.
thrwawy74 4y ago
Yeah, but I thought a lot of /inconsistencies/ were overblown with 1 side of the political spectrum jumping on any change in messaging to promote distrust. I wouldn't expect 20-30 people giving press conferences over 2-3 years to say the same things. I do remember precautions changing, like not using masks (supposedly to reserve them for hospital staff), and then it changed. I think a lot of the problem was we want to be treated like level-headed adults. We want to know the intent behind the messaging. Without being transparent, so many conspiracies filled the void.. :(