5 ms·
I don't dispute your broader point about humans and novel risk, I dispute that COVID is a valid example of this. In fact, I rather think we didn't react swiftl
by 1attice 4y ago
I don't dispute your broader point about humans and novel risk, I dispute that COVID is a valid example of this.
In fact, I rather think we didn't react swiftly or strongly enough.
Masks, in particular, should have been mandated (at specific levels of quality, such as N95 or, failing that, KN95) and distributed by the state. https://www.twincities.com/2023/03/16/zeynep-tufekci-why-the-science-is-clear-that-masks-help/ https://www.twincities.com/2023/03/16/zeynep-tufekci-why-the...
There was an era wherein liberals were reliably less science-based. For example, the absurd fuss over GMO foods, or nuclear power.
These days, for whatever reason, it feels like our conservative colleagues are the ones who favour gut instincts over evidence-based reasoning.
I hope this trend reverses, I've missed having a stimulating intellectual adversary.
- nradov 4y agoThe actual science never supported mask mandates. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006207.pub6 https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD006207.pub6 When you don't know the proper course of action it's better to gather more data instead of taking swift but wrong actions.