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

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#491

Post by systemvoltage » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 7:10 AM UTC

whimsicalism wrote: post #338

cat_plus_plus wrote: post #307

How about the biggest dishonesty - lack of admission that not everyone is at the same risk and that lockdowns have significant irreversible costs for low risk individuals and for society? Young children are not getting critical development years back. Healthy 20 somethings only have limited time to date, party and have fun before being saddled with adult responsibilities forever. Most of shattered local businesses ar…

> lockdowns have significant irreversible costs for low risk individuals and for society Sure, but let's keep in mind what they can do when they are effective. China averted the deaths of 2.5-3 million people with an effective lockdown program. That's incredible. I'm not confident I can really think of any policy proposition that would save more lives off of the top of my head. The fact that we failed to do the same…

This is an argument based on emotional appeal than rational objectivity. See: “Think about the children”.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Think_of_the_children

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#492

Post by ltbarcly3 » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 7:16 AM UTC

alkonaut wrote: post #162

ltbarcly3 wrote: post #3

Edit: before you downvote this, read it? I'm not an anti-vax nutcase. They didn't trust the public with their actual thinking at any point during Covid. The guidance was initially "don't wear a mask, it will make it worse because you'll infect yourself with your hand" to "we'll just lock down for 3 weeks and then back to normal" to "we have to flatten the curve to avoid overwhelming hospitals" to the current policy o…

> Why would they initially tell us to not wear masks? Because hard data was scarce and authorities are reluctant to impose anything as mere precaution. Or rather, whether authorities would do that kind of thing as a precaution before there is solid evidence varies from country to country (unsurprisingly).

> Because hard data was scarce and authorities are reluctant to impose anything as mere precaution

No, no. I didn't say why did they not impose mask mandates. They said "DO NOT WEAR a mask, because wearing masks is inherently dangerous".

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#493

Post by oblio » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 7:25 AM UTC

SkyMarshal wrote: post #437

cjsplat wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there was never data that said "masks don't work for the public" Actually there was plenty of data saying that masks don't work for the public. For example, https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal... And there are many others - that was just an easy one I found today. Some similar studies even showed an increase in flu transmission among the subject population wearing masks. There were plenty o…

> Actually there was plenty of data saying that masks don't work for the public. ... (a year of arguing and studies ensues while a pandemic of a new and not-well-understood virus spreads out of control) ... > The new data was that ... even modest mask technology is a good source transmission interrupter, and that the contagion window is well in advance of active symptoms. A wasted year and all that rigamarole just to…

You're fighting against such an ingrained level of belief in one's superiority that's it's almost impossible. The US, especially.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#494

Post by raxxorrax » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 7:28 AM UTC

clairity wrote: post #315

Natsu wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This matches a lot of my own experience in trying to convince people to take reasonable precautions and get vaccinated. And I was one of the first in line for my age group in my state. You have to do things to build trust first, and you have to be willing to admit that some of the measures taken are farcical and have no basis in science. People will listen to a reasonable, nuanced discussion. They won't listen to som…

'just follow the rules'... that's exactly how we get the blind unreasonableness we're seeing everywhere. you need to examine your assumption that masks are doing anything at all in most common situations, and then consider what's actually reasonable vs. what you've rationalized yourself into. humility is missing in your thrust to convince others of your correctness.

It isn't just humility as many such measures are by nature precautionary without any basis in facts at all. Certainty is certainly wrong, especially when we are talking about risk management. That will affect the message negatively.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#495

Post by hyperpallium2 » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 7:32 AM UTC

Part of the long-term program to breed out distrust of authority.

It doesn't affect elites, who can choose sensibly without trust, because they have time, training and access to information.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#496

Post by hyperpallium2 » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 7:34 AM UTC

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #81

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…

In my opinion the biggest example of this was the poor mask guidance early on in the pandemic that was subsequently reversed. Zeynep Tufekci had a very good piece in the NYT on this: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/17/opinion/coronavirus-face-... The real fear was that there would be a run on masks by the public, making them unavailable for hospital use. Also, at the time, there wasn't clear evidence of the effective…

If there was a run on toilet paper, wouldn't there be a run on masks?

But seems securing masks for hospital use - compulsory acquisition or paying above market rates - would be a better solution.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#497

Post by gojomo » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 7:35 AM UTC

krainboltgreene wrote: post #457

gojomo wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By... getting vaxed himself? Why aren't the vax campaigns leading with Trump's action – and his repeated verbal endorsement of choosing to get vaxed – to overcome resistance in his followers? Such over-focus on Trump is a pathological scapegoating to deflect responsibility on the part of both the professional permanent bureacracies, and the current administration. Trump did awfully, yes. But the mistrust & errors spr…

> Why aren't the vax campaigns leading with Trump's action – and his repeated verbal endorsement of choosing to get vaxed – to overcome resistance in his followers? If you go to trump community sites you'll find out that: 1. They think he's an idiot for taking the vax 2. They think he was threatened to taking it 3. He didn't really take it

Interesting. But if they're that persistently delusional, even when Trump's actions & words are contrary to their beliefs, are their actions "entirely due" to Trump?

The phenomena you describe suggest it's bigger & deeper than any devotion given him. (Is it even fair to call them "Trump community sites" at that point?)

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#498

Post by raxxorrax » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 7:41 AM UTC

titzer wrote: post #376

cjsplat wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> there was never data that said "masks don't work for the public" Actually there was plenty of data saying that masks don't work for the public. For example, https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal... And there are many others - that was just an easy one I found today. Some similar studies even showed an increase in flu transmission among the subject population wearing masks. There were plenty o…

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 that it was stupid to take that route. You could always say it was a precautionary measure if effectiveness is low (it is for most masks). Although there is a limit on what you can propose here and it might cause a backlash if you do that too often and may affect future and more efficient measures.

But err on the side of caution for a new form of virus isn't that hard to convey. It was the hobby enforcers of rules that did the most damage in my opinion, with badly sourced data. People should focus to adjust their own behavior accordingly instead of that of others.

If supply for masks was critical, this should be communicated as well. There would be a run on masks, but it shouldn't be a problem to set aside contingency supplies for hospitals. This is what they should have focused on.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#499

Post by ameminator » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 7:55 AM UTC

whimsicalism wrote: post #338

cat_plus_plus wrote: post #307

How about the biggest dishonesty - lack of admission that not everyone is at the same risk and that lockdowns have significant irreversible costs for low risk individuals and for society? Young children are not getting critical development years back. Healthy 20 somethings only have limited time to date, party and have fun before being saddled with adult responsibilities forever. Most of shattered local businesses ar…

> lockdowns have significant irreversible costs for low risk individuals and for society Sure, but let's keep in mind what they can do when they are effective. China averted the deaths of 2.5-3 million people with an effective lockdown program. That's incredible. I'm not confident I can really think of any policy proposition that would save more lives off of the top of my head. The fact that we failed to do the same…

I really liked the Chinese policy of welding people in their homes (where some starved to death) and lying to the populace about the real numbers and severity of the coronavirus.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#500

Post by raxxorrax » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 7:55 AM UTC

laurent92 wrote: post #483

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…

But I have a question: Why did all governments have exactly the same behavior? Was there a handbook saying “talk to your citizen like dumb children” that was somehow mandatory reading before purchasing the vaccine? Why the coordinated action? Erratic behavior doesn’t explain it to me — it was far from random, all particles went the same way.

> Why the coordinated action?

In politics, if you do the same as other countries, you have a lot of support to justify said action without much effort. If you do it like Sweden you are bombarded with criticism. So the easy option is to copy from your neighbor.

Especially in times when the press tends to shield their favorite candidates from accountability. You don't even need to defend yourself, others do that for you.