5 ms·

Sure but if those experts were so smart, wouldn't they have been able to foresee the second order effect of crappy messaging and prevent conspiracy theories fro

Sure but if those experts were so smart, wouldn't they have been able to foresee the second order effect of crappy messaging and prevent conspiracy theories from taking hold? Or foresee the effects of labeling things that aren't conspiracy theories as conspiracy theories and ruining their own credibility?

__loam 3y ago
Trying to address every insane rant on social media is completely impossible. Also, do you have any actual examples of them mislabeling "conspiracy theories"? I think the public health establishment did a fine job given the challenge they faced. It was never going to be perfect. The fact that we got a vaccine as quickly as we did, organized a mass vaccination campaign and all that did end the pandemic is proof that all the policies succeeded, not that they failed.
- throwawaymaths 3y ago
  There was a concerted effort to label the lab leak as a conspiracy theory (there is email documentation of this effort) even though pretty much every biochem/bio PhD I know who has lab work experience... Myself included... was pretty certain it was a lab leak early on. The crappy messaging I'm referring to was the "don't get a mask"/"now masks are mandatory" flip flop. Literally anyone could have predicted what happened next.
  - giantrobot 3y ago
    The problem with the term "lab leak" is it means different things to different people. To smooth brained shitheads it means "weaponized virus leaked from a lab in China". To scientists it means a leak of a virus under study by breached protocols or lax adherence to same. The smooth brained shitheads ran with their version of "lab leak" and poisoned all discussion of it. They were of course egged on by right wing opportunists around the world to push their favorite bullshit narratives. Scientists and government bureaucrats acting in good faith didn't pick up on the stochastic meaning of "lab leak" and tossed it into public discourse with no qualifiers or definition. This opened the door for just more opportunism by anyone pushing an agenda.
    - __loam 3y ago
      Don't forget that the lab leak theory contributed demonstrably to violence against Asian Americans.
      - throwawaymaths 3y ago
        I find that hard to believe (I am pacific islander, often mistaken for Asian, I encountered zero extra racism over the pandemic). Even if it were unambiguously from the wet market, I would expect the tiny amount of extra violence to have happened. Moreover, a big chunk of the "anti-asian hate" hysteria is actively funded by CCP. I'm also not personally convinced that declaring that "anti-asian hate" weirdly normalizes it and gets people who wouldn't be participating in that kind of activity to think "oh hey yeah that's a good idea".
    - throwawaymaths 3y ago
      > The smooth brained shitheads ran with their version of "lab leak" and poisoned all discussion of it. They were of course egged on by right wing opportunists around the world to push their favorite bullshit narratives. Actually there was a concerted effort by high ups in the NIH to conflate the two, not right wing opportunists. https://oversight.house.gov/release/hearing-wrap-up-suppression-of-the-lab-leak-hypothesis-was-not-based-in-science/ https://oversight.house.gov/release/hearing-wrap-up-suppress... https://theintercept.com/2023/01/19/covid-origin-nih-emails/ https://theintercept.com/2023/01/19/covid-origin-nih-emails/
    - account42 3y ago
      > smooth brained shitheads What an argument, I bet you are really proud of it.
ImaCake 3y ago
They did. The reason for going hard and fast on quarantine and lockdown is to make them as quick as possible. A reminder that this worked really well in Australia, Nz, South Korea, China, Vietnam, etc etc.
- ta8645 3y ago
  > A reminder that this worked really well in Australia, Nz, South Korea, China, Vietnam, etc etc. Even excluding all the confounding variables, your assertion can not be stated so unequivocally, considering there has not been time to do long term studies on the outcomes overall. There may have been an initial success, but will it be maintained overall with all factors considered? How will it look 5 and 10 years later? Maybe you're right, and maybe that conclusion will stand. But it is this absolute insistence that we know the answer already, that is part of the reason trust in institutions has been undermined.
  - __loam 3y ago
    I don't think not having a perfect analysis of the long term impact of these policies is an excuse for the kind of "well if the experts are so smart, why didn't they..." kind of rhetoric you're espousing here.
  - ImaCake 3y ago
    >but will it be maintained overall with all factors considered? Is a straight up death count not enough for you? Like seriously, there are few less ambigious outcomes in biostatistics than mortality. And by that measure, yes, short hard lockdowns with long term international border closures absolutely worked. If you are implying mental health, then maybe consider being able to live your life without fear before the vaccines was a great way to maintain mental health. Also, not having anyone you know die of the virus (this is still true for most Australians including myself).
    - ta8645 3y ago
      > Is a straight up death count not enough for you? As opposed to what? And on what timescale? How can you be so absolutely sure that the numbers are what you think they are? That the counter-factual would have absolutely produced the death tolls you think they would? And how can you be so sure that the deaths that did happen weren't just more spread out and delayed, rather than averted? And at the end of the day, how can you be sure that suicides, and other missed medical procedures and tests won't result in greater long term deaths and suffering than would otherwise have been. In short, you're way more sure than you should be. You don't seem to have an ounce of doubt that you've assessed the situation correctly, or have been misinformed intentionally or otherwise. You have the faith of a true believer, rather than the measured skepticism of a scientist.

__loam 3y ago

Trying to address every insane rant on social media is completely impossible. Also, do you have any actual examples of them mislabeling "conspiracy theories"? I think the public health establishment did a fine job given the challenge they faced. It was never going to be perfect. The fact that we got a vaccine as quickly as we did, organized a mass vaccination campaign and all that did end the pandemic is proof that all the policies succeeded, not that they failed.

throwawaymaths 3y ago
There was a concerted effort to label the lab leak as a conspiracy theory (there is email documentation of this effort) even though pretty much every biochem/bio PhD I know who has lab work experience... Myself included... was pretty certain it was a lab leak early on. The crappy messaging I'm referring to was the "don't get a mask"/"now masks are mandatory" flip flop. Literally anyone could have predicted what happened next.
- giantrobot 3y ago
  The problem with the term "lab leak" is it means different things to different people. To smooth brained shitheads it means "weaponized virus leaked from a lab in China". To scientists it means a leak of a virus under study by breached protocols or lax adherence to same. The smooth brained shitheads ran with their version of "lab leak" and poisoned all discussion of it. They were of course egged on by right wing opportunists around the world to push their favorite bullshit narratives. Scientists and government bureaucrats acting in good faith didn't pick up on the stochastic meaning of "lab leak" and tossed it into public discourse with no qualifiers or definition. This opened the door for just more opportunism by anyone pushing an agenda.
  - __loam 3y ago
    Don't forget that the lab leak theory contributed demonstrably to violence against Asian Americans.
    - throwawaymaths 3y ago
      I find that hard to believe (I am pacific islander, often mistaken for Asian, I encountered zero extra racism over the pandemic). Even if it were unambiguously from the wet market, I would expect the tiny amount of extra violence to have happened. Moreover, a big chunk of the "anti-asian hate" hysteria is actively funded by CCP. I'm also not personally convinced that declaring that "anti-asian hate" weirdly normalizes it and gets people who wouldn't be participating in that kind of activity to think "oh hey yeah that's a good idea".
  - throwawaymaths 3y ago
    > The smooth brained shitheads ran with their version of "lab leak" and poisoned all discussion of it. They were of course egged on by right wing opportunists around the world to push their favorite bullshit narratives. Actually there was a concerted effort by high ups in the NIH to conflate the two, not right wing opportunists. https://oversight.house.gov/release/hearing-wrap-up-suppression-of-the-lab-leak-hypothesis-was-not-based-in-science/ https://oversight.house.gov/release/hearing-wrap-up-suppress... https://theintercept.com/2023/01/19/covid-origin-nih-emails/ https://theintercept.com/2023/01/19/covid-origin-nih-emails/
  - account42 3y ago
    > smooth brained shitheads What an argument, I bet you are really proud of it.

ImaCake 3y ago

They did. The reason for going hard and fast on quarantine and lockdown is to make them as quick as possible. A reminder that this worked really well in Australia, Nz, South Korea, China, Vietnam, etc etc.

ta8645 3y ago
> A reminder that this worked really well in Australia, Nz, South Korea, China, Vietnam, etc etc. Even excluding all the confounding variables, your assertion can not be stated so unequivocally, considering there has not been time to do long term studies on the outcomes overall. There may have been an initial success, but will it be maintained overall with all factors considered? How will it look 5 and 10 years later? Maybe you're right, and maybe that conclusion will stand. But it is this absolute insistence that we know the answer already, that is part of the reason trust in institutions has been undermined.
- __loam 3y ago
  I don't think not having a perfect analysis of the long term impact of these policies is an excuse for the kind of "well if the experts are so smart, why didn't they..." kind of rhetoric you're espousing here.
- ImaCake 3y ago
  >but will it be maintained overall with all factors considered? Is a straight up death count not enough for you? Like seriously, there are few less ambigious outcomes in biostatistics than mortality. And by that measure, yes, short hard lockdowns with long term international border closures absolutely worked. If you are implying mental health, then maybe consider being able to live your life without fear before the vaccines was a great way to maintain mental health. Also, not having anyone you know die of the virus (this is still true for most Australians including myself).
  - ta8645 3y ago
    > Is a straight up death count not enough for you? As opposed to what? And on what timescale? How can you be so absolutely sure that the numbers are what you think they are? That the counter-factual would have absolutely produced the death tolls you think they would? And how can you be so sure that the deaths that did happen weren't just more spread out and delayed, rather than averted? And at the end of the day, how can you be sure that suicides, and other missed medical procedures and tests won't result in greater long term deaths and suffering than would otherwise have been. In short, you're way more sure than you should be. You don't seem to have an ounce of doubt that you've assessed the situation correctly, or have been misinformed intentionally or otherwise. You have the faith of a true believer, rather than the measured skepticism of a scientist.