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

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#621

Post by SkyMarshal » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 4:23 AM UTC

autoexec wrote: post #476

titzer wrote: post #468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMHO it was just a stupid call, because in the face of conflicting data, it would have been a better default option to recommend masks. That's easier to walk back than "oops, we were lying because we don't trust you rubes enough not to hoard, even when explicitly instructed not to hoard." In the beginning of the pandemic I, with effectively zero sewing skills, made a cloth mask out of spare clothing. They could have…

I agree. Wanting to keep supplies to healthcare workers wouldn't have even been all that hard. Thanks to the horrific amount of consolidation in retail they could have gone to only a handful of major players like amazon and walmart and said "Please pull these masks off of shelves and help us save them for healthcare workers" and that would have kept them out of the hands of the vast majority of the population. A few…

> Thanks to the horrific amount of consolidation in retail they could have gone to only a handful of major players like amazon and walmart and said "Please pull these masks off of shelves and help us save them for healthcare workers" and that would have kept them out of the hands of the vast majority of the population.

Early on, Amazon and other online medical supply stores actually did this themselves. Restricted surgical masks to medical professionals only.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#622

Post by refurb » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 4:24 AM UTC

kelnos wrote: post #375

colpabar wrote: post #352

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point of the comment you're replying to isn't that we don't just distrust the government now , it's that distrusting the government was expected of all citizens by the people who founded the country. We have an amendment that basically says "if the government becomes tyrannical, use guns to make them stop." Some people think that we are supposed to distrust them, always .

No, I get that, and I explicitly reject it as "part of the country's DNA". Talk and assumptions like that merely perpetuate the status quo.

It's not a bug, it's a feature.

The idea is that power corrupts everyone. Thus the system should be set up that no one person has too much power and the citizens should be constantly suspicious of those that hold power.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#623

Post by Clubber » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 4:24 AM UTC

betterunix2 wrote: post #270

greenail wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are assuming "they" trust the Republican leadership. this Gallup poll says only 12% of Americans trust congress. https://news.gallup.com/poll/352316/americans-confidence-maj... Lots of other interesting tidbits about trust in there...

No, the Gallup poll says 12% Americans say they trust Congress. People say they do not trust politicians, but the fact is that when politicians speak people listen. Politicians know this and that is why they always give soundbite-oriented remarks and lines of questioning in their various hearings and "debates."

>People say they do not trust politicians, but the fact is that when politicians speak people listen. Politicians know this and that is why they always give soundbite-oriented remarks and lines of questioning in their various hearings and "debates."

If people are only listening to sound bites, they aren't really listening. I think most people are staring to realize that politicians are self serving. The reality distortion field is finally starting to wear off.

When shit hits the fan, like COVID, people listen though, they listen very carefully. The current crop of politicians have forgotten how to be leaders though and go through their same ole sound-byte-and-finger-point-for-reelection trope they've grown accustomed to getting them reelected. I think it will cause a few waves in the next few elections, especially as COVID draws out over the next few years.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#624

Post by Natsu » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 4:29 AM UTC

clairity wrote: post #604

Natsu wrote: post #553

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I agree that there are valid reasons to make different risk calculations, however, part of that calculation has to be the chance of catching and spreading Covid to people who have higher risk. I personally have almost no risk from Covid. But if I don't take precautions I could easily kill grandma, who can't vaccinate, and others at the nursing home. I agree that there's no one true risk calculation for everyone…

> "...I could easily kill grandma..." see, there's the hyperbole that makes you lose credibility. ~95% of those 65 and older in the US are vaccinated. visiting with grandma (or any family, for that matter) is an instance where wearing a mask (and certainly a number of other potential mitigations) could make a difference, so use your brain to make that assessment, not some brainless heuristic infringed upon you by an…

> ~95% of those 65 and older in the US are vaccinated

My grandmother can't vaccinate for medical reasons and I have other specific health reasons, including past issues with the flu, breathing troubles, general poor health, and the fact that she's 100, all give me reason to believe that she has special risk factors.

The place she is at has had Covid deaths and there are others of similar age with similar risk profiles.

> so use your brain to make that assessment, not some brainless heuristic infringed upon you by an irrelevant affiliation.

Please, I haven't done any sneering like this to you and you don't know my grandma's situation or her medical history. I have solid medical reasons to believe that Covid would threaten my grandmother specifically, far more than the general population.

That said, I'm not particularly cavalier about a 1-2% risk of death from Covid, even though I know that rate is a moving target (and hopefully getting lower over time with better treatment protocols, vaccinations, etc.). Climbing Everest is something like a 5% risk of death and you can see a trail of bodies on your way to the peak. I see no personal reason not to take a vaccine with a risk ~0.0002% [1] (though I know that some people do have specific medical reasons not to and yes I know of the study that accidentally inflated the risk by 25x due to bad math) and I do wear a mask indoors or when mandated, though I also realize that I'm fortunate enough not to have to wear a mask for long factory shifts or such and I have sympathy for those who do have such problems.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#625

Post by mistermann » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 4:34 AM UTC

Anthony-G wrote: post #268

fortuna86 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> no disrespect but i know plenty of liberals who will not get the vaccine. Respectfully, those people have been anti-vax for a while now ( https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/what-do-le... ) and were part of the group that were unpersuadable. But leftist anti-vaxers aren't a majority of current COVID-19 anti-vaxers. Those are politically motivated groups.

I’m not sure why you’re being down-voted; elements of the counter-cultural left has been skeptical of science for decades. The profit-motive is at odds with the nobler pursuit of science and companies like Monsanto, Exxon, Dow Jones are on the wrong side of history. Unfortunately, distrust of “big pharma” mutates into a suspicion of science in general – and the medical sector in particular. There also isn’t a catchy…

I'm curious: what percentage of the population tries to understand the complexities of reality, by your standard?

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#626

Post by mistermann » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 4:39 AM UTC

adamiscool8 wrote: post #460

yCombLinks wrote: post #362

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An example that jumps to mind is all of the media and academics that opposed the theory that the virus was a lab leak in china, primarily because Trump espoused the view. As much as Trump deserved ridicule, that was a perfectly valid theory.

Another that was roundly mocked was Trump's idea about bringing "UV light inside the body" as a treatment. Lo and behold a year or so later.. [0] >Ultraviolet light treatments introduced into the tracheas of five critically ill COVID-19 patients appeared to be safe and associated with a reduction in the respiratory load of SARS-CoV-2—the virus responsible for COVID-19—in all but one patient, according to a study cond…

I have no link, but at the time everyone was falling off their chairs laughing at Trump some company was involved in trials of some sort with a similar technology with the FDA.

The human mind is the most amazing phenomenon, simultaneously so amazingly capable yet so silly.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#627

Post by nobody9999 » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 4:41 AM UTC

themaninthedark wrote: post #377

nobody9999 wrote: post #370

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If you claim that gravity does not exist, then turn around and say that the effect we call "gravity" accelerates matter at 9.8 meters per second per second. >Then you go and claim that magnetism does not exist, I will probably not believe you. Fair enough. Now apply that reasoning to my original statement. If public health authorities claim that masks don't work, and that's a lie, then they say they do, that's a lie…

I am not sure of anyone who was on the mask bandwagon but then got off when the government approved them. Not saying that they don't exist. The problem is it is not just the health officials, you have the media and politicians also all trying to play doctor but also not following their own advice. And it does not matter that it is only a couple people that have done so, due to the way people group those couple are al…

>Look at how the religious right community is treated when it comes to morals. You probably don't believe them.

That's not really a good example, IMHO.

Especially since, as far as "morals" are concerned, despite the fact that many folks in one labeled "group" or another may espouse certain behaviors as "moral" or "immoral," morality isn't a team sport.

Rather, each individual makes their own moral choices when situations that require such decisions are presented to them.

The moral choices that individuals make are an individual thing. As such, attempting to paint any group with a broad brush like that is foolhardy at best and nasty and hateful at worst.

I evaluate people based on their individual actions, not some made-up group label. You must have me confused with somebody else.

I'm not really sure where you get the idea that I'm painting with a broad brush, or vilifying anyone. I expressed my confusion about why a specific set of people who assert that "the government lied when they said masks didn't work," then refuse to wear masks.

It doesn't make sense, as it's logically inconsistent, as the claims are diametrically opposed to the behavior.

And the argument that such folks "don't trust the messenger" doesn't really hold water since the "messenger" has been on both sides of this particular issue.

If you were to argue that people are taking a "don't fucking tell me what to do!" position, I would understand that better. I often take that position (not about masks, but in many other circumstances) myself.

But saying "they lied when they said masks don't work!" strongly signals that such an individual believes that masks do work. To then turn around and refuse to wear a mask seems like some heavy cognitive dissonance.

As such, is it a surprise that such behavior confuses me?

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#628

Post by cblconfederate » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 4:42 AM UTC

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #167

bedhead wrote: post #23

Hard truths and politics aren't compatible because there's too much incentive misalignment. People in power have no reason to tell the truth because it'll get them fired, and the reason for that is most people don't even want the truth anyhow, it triggers some form of pain. The path of least resistance inevitably seems to be lying in some form.

Ignoring the truth also triggers pain... it just comes a bit later.

correlation is not causation if they ve already forgotten what caused it. People are really not good at being governed

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#629

Post by Clubber » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 4:45 AM UTC

PeterisP wrote: post #438

WhisperingShiba wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I knew it was controversial when I posted it, and I know this comment will be too. That's not my energy at all, but I do think poor behaviors yield rightfully earned distrust and consequences. I was 100% on board with at home testing every 3 days schemes, mask wearing (even though I doubt the efficacy of most masks), but having compulsory medical procedures with a relatively untested, proprietary technology is where…

I'm omitting the "compulsory" part, however, the "medical procedures with a relatively untested, proprietary technology is where I draw the line." is simply ridiculous. I'm fairly certain (some exceptions do exist) that you have had many proprietary drugs and medical procedures which have been far less tested than Covid vaccines. I mean, pretty much all new medicine is proprietary; and the vaccines have now been inje…

>I'm omitting the "compulsory" part, however

It's intellectually dishonest to chop up what he says, even though you admit it, to make it easier to argue against.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#630

Post by swader999 » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 4:46 AM UTC

sokoloff wrote: post #609

CamperBob2 wrote: post #605

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you need to do some reading. Appeal to authority is a fallacy only when the appeal is to an unrelated authority. If I rely on public health authorities in determining how to deal with the pandemic, I'm in the clear, logically speaking.

If you rely on reliable public health authorities for pandemic-related advice, you're in the clear, logically speaking. If you rely on unreliable public health authorities, you might feel OK about your choice, but you're not in the clear, logically.

How did you get informed enough to decide which public health authorities were the right ones to trust?