Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths • Hacker News Board

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#401

Post by fknorangesite » Tue, Oct 12, 2021, 10:18 PM UTC

tomp wrote: post #250

rob_c wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just US, I would say there's a large number of very well educated people even in well off countries who have a large amount of hesitation toward this mainly due to information handling and lack of transparency. (Yes there is a very vocal anti-vax nut job crowd, but frankly that will always be there, and is always different to those who object to policy decisions on moral grounds of their failings and the deaths t…

> "please take it to stop it killing others" Given that the vaccine doesn't work to stop transmissions, I'd reckon this was just another way for the "experts" to further loose trust with the public.

> Given that the vaccine doesn't work to stop transmissions,

Nothing is perfect, but vaccination reduces transmission significantly:

> Two studies from Israel, posted as preprints on 16 July, find that two doses of the [Pfizer] vaccine ... are 81% effective at preventing SARS-CoV-2 infections. And vaccinated people who do get infected are up to 78% less likely to spread the virus to household members than are unvaccinated people.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02054-z

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#402

Post by whimsicalism » Tue, Oct 12, 2021, 10:18 PM UTC

rfreiberger wrote: post #223

ssully wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's also worth pointing out that even with them saying masks aren't effective for the public, there was still a run on masks. I don't have the exact date, but when I looked for n95's at my local hardware store in March 2020, they were all gone and this was definitely before we were told to wear masks. And soon after we started getting stories about hospitals running low on PPE. I am not saying what the right…

My father works in Taiwan and he was aware something bad was coming down well before it hit US news. This was late January 2020, and by then most all of the masks at the stores were sold out, followed shortly by the cleaning supplies. I would say the majority of buyers were shipping these back to family in Asia or they were prepairing for the peak that hit a few weeks later.

I don't think people assumed that it was coming to the US, but covid was definitely in public awareness by late January.

Some proportion of those people are disaster preppers that bought a ton of masks, just like the toilet paper people.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#403

Post by iammisc » Tue, Oct 12, 2021, 10:19 PM UTC

at_a_remove wrote: post #102

colordrops wrote: post #10

The article is discussing the media and government being intentionally vague or even misinformative because they don't trust the public, but it backfires and causes more distrust. The flip side that wasn't discussed is the belittling and censoring of voices that were skeptical of the narratives, which engendered even more distrust. Their strategy of information control backfired, and they doubled down. Now we've got…

And there has been this background ambient energy of "Big Pharma is evil, the Sacklers ..." (which I find rather scapegoaty for the Sacklers in particular) which just immediately ran afoul of "You should definitely trust in these vaccines produced by Big Pharma, the ones we have been telling you are so greedy/evil/incompetent." Then you have some discussion of what "gain of function" means and ... Well, the distrust…

The American has good reason to distrust science (see my other comments), but Thalidomide is not one of them. To its credit, the FDA did not approve thalidomide at the same time as other countries thus mainly preventing the birth defects.

Of course, then you read about Diethylstillbesterol, and your faith in american public scientists is once again crushed.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#404

Post by whimsicalism » Tue, Oct 12, 2021, 10:20 PM UTC

ajkdhcb2 wrote: post #253

ssully wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for clarifying. This is why I don't know what the right answer is on the messaging. The US government, and nearly every government, has a history of lying to people. The other side of the coin though is that during those early months, and well into lock down, everything was up in the air about the virus, how it transmitted, and how to fight it. If I was in the position of how to convey that information to p…

I've disagreed with the general global response at essentially every step. I think any reasonable person would have done better, and get the feeling that there are likely ulterior motives and disgraceful politicised actions to explain how bad the response was. In particular, in the beginning there were very clear indications given by Taiwan and China that there was a dangerous virus spreading among the people. Yet si…

> Yet sick Chinese people were free to spread over the world for months with no response except down-playing it. They practiced the opposite of the precautionary principle and horrendous risk management.

At what point did the spread in the US stop being driven by sick Chinese people? I don't know the answer, but my impression was pretty darn early - far before politicians were taking the virus seriously as a policy issue. Sometime like early February or even late January.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#405

Post by iammisc » Tue, Oct 12, 2021, 10:21 PM UTC

bad_username wrote: post #369

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the belittling and censoring of voices that were skeptical of the narratives, which engendered even more distrust What are examples of this? Most of the U.S. was quite loose about lockdowns and mask requirements until their specific geography got hit. (For example, I summered in the Smoky Mountains June of 2020. Compared to New York, it was as if nothing had happened. The tone changed by December, after the South h…

Massive, coordinated, media-sponsored mocking of people who discuss Ivermectin, calling them stupid horse paste guzzlers. I don't know if works for covid, but there is enough serious data and published science for a normal conversation to be had about it, instead of disdain, ridicule and suppression.

It also completely ignores the fact that ivermectin, whatever its merits for covid are, is an actual human medication. It is not a veterinary drug, although it has utility in animals too.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#406

Post by iammisc » Tue, Oct 12, 2021, 10:23 PM UTC

betterunix2 wrote: post #106

colordrops wrote: post #10

The article is discussing the media and government being intentionally vague or even misinformative because they don't trust the public, but it backfires and causes more distrust. The flip side that wasn't discussed is the belittling and censoring of voices that were skeptical of the narratives, which engendered even more distrust. Their strategy of information control backfired, and they doubled down. Now we've got…

Censorship is not what causes large numbers of US citizens to refuse this vaccine. If the Republicans in leadership positions took this seriously from the start and did not go around casting doubt on vaccination far more people would get the vaccine. If the previous president had not politicized the response to COVID and had simply told his followers to do what the CDC says we would have many millions more people get…

The previous president was and is extremely pro-vaccine. People claim there is a large republican cohort of anti-vax politicians, but there is not. There is a large GOP cohort of anti-vax-mandate politicians, but being against a mandate does not mean being anti vax, unless you're changing the meaning.

> If the previous president had not politicized the response to COVID and had simply told his followers to do what the CDC says we would have many millions more people getting the vaccine (and for the matter, hundreds of thousands of people would still be alive).

You are accusing Trump of politicizing COVID while ignoring Andrew Cuomo, who at the beginning of the pandemic, used COVID, and the fact he was not Trump, for his political advantage, and the media gushed and was happy to give him more airtime than Trump, despite the fact it was obvious from the very beginning that New York State's handling was much worse than Trumps.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#407

Post by iammisc » Tue, Oct 12, 2021, 10:25 PM UTC

betterunix2 wrote: post #302

nradov wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Prominent Democrats also cast doubt on vaccine safety. The governor of California essentially stated that he didn't trust the FDA and insisted on doing another safety review before authorizing vaccines for use in the state. This was inexcusable political behavior on both sides. https://www.gov.ca.gov/2020/10/27/western-states-join-califo...

That was done in response to concerns that Trump was trying to push the FDA to approve the vaccines faster to serve his own political ambitions: https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/03/politics/white-house-fda-coro... https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-business-mark-meadow... Moreover, Gov. Newsom's statements did not say that the vaccines were unsafe; he simply said that he was establishing an independent panel of scien…

Since the inception of the FDA, when else have state governments independently verified drugs like this? It is clearly a signal that one ought not to trust the FDA. Is it any surprise that large cohorts of the democratic party (namely, their non-white cohorts) do not want to get the drug? I am not surprised.

> "Get the shot if you want to."

That is exactly what any sane person should say. Trump is pro-vaccine. He has unequivocally said he has had it and thinks it's a good idea. He's just anti-mandate. You can be pro-vaccine (as in you believe others should get it), while being against a mandate. This is insanity. The expectation that one must believe that the government ought to require a vaccine in order to not be anti-vax is quite the shift of goal posts.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#408

Post by Permit » Tue, Oct 12, 2021, 10:25 PM UTC

motohagiography wrote: post #337

Kind words, but possibly too late, and they won't change anyones mind. Authorities have forfeited public trust by co-ordinating to decieve people, censor them, and then reward others who publicly expressed their contempt for their fellow citizens, just to maintain the leverage. I do not see the path to reconciliation yet. Destroying millions of businesses and then doubling down by attacking guarantees of freedoms (sp…

> will not be remembered as having been justified or proportionate.

Why not? Do you think there’s no chance that the majority of people _want_ these things and will remember them as justified and proportionate? Where do you get this confidence?

Do you think there’s a chance you have projected your own feelings about the pandemic restrictions onto others?

You’re surprised that there is no civil unrest. Consider the possibility there is no unrest because other people want the restrictions that you detest.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#409

Post by PeterisP » Tue, Oct 12, 2021, 10:26 PM UTC

ssully wrote: post #293

GloriousKoji wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they were open and upfront about limited masks and reserving N95 and other PPE for healthcare workers there was a possibility of a social stigma of individuals buying up and using N95 and PPE. Like how scalpers get the stink eye and angry stares when they take all the toilet paper, hand sanitizer and disinfectant wipes. Sure the masks might not have all gone to the right place but I imagine it would have been bett…

Doubtful. Just think about the toilet paper shortage; a common household item that never would have had a supply shortage if people just maintained their regular buying patterns. Now think of masks; a non-household item that a small percentage of households carried. Even if people were reasonable and only bought an amount to cover their needs, that would have introduced hundreds of millions of new buyers for that ite…

There would have been a supply shortage even if people just maintained their regular buying patterns, simply because they started to use their home toilets much more and their business toilets much less, and those are different products (sometimes literally physically incompatible with the holders) with different supply chains, so an unexpected switch from people using product A to product B is inevitably going to cause a supply shock.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#410

Post by s1artibartfast » Tue, Oct 12, 2021, 10:29 PM UTC

romwell wrote: post #208

8eye wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

no disrespect but i know plenty of liberals who will not get the vaccine. the media turned it into a bi-partisan issue when in all actuality it was a government handling issue in which the rest were used as scapegoats. you remember that they gave themselves raises while the rest of us were told not to go into work. which obviously we are gonna listen if we believe that covid is as dangerous as the scientist were sayi…

>no disrespect but i know plenty of liberals who will not get the vaccine No disrespect, just statistics [1]. Democrat:Republican ratio among is about 3:5 among the unvaccinated (and about 2:1 among the vaccinated). >you make them a slave to your narrative, and if they become slaves, they will push to make you a slave as well by whatever means necessary With all due respect, the example you gave of that is the behavi…

I think the fact that vaccination is only 3:5 demonstrates that it is remarkably close between parties and people should be more thoughtful about characterization. It is not like it is 100:1 or some extremely skewed distribution.