Earlier quoted context omitted.
And thats a good thing too. Don't reward poor behavior with compliance.
This is such a silly mentality. Deciding to not do something that should be done just because someone who is incompetent tells you to is the definition of cutting off your nose to spite your face. You aren't 'punishing' those in power by not taking the vaccine. You are punishing every other person in society.
Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths
701–710 of 837 posts
Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths
#702The 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…
I also have serious doubt about those who took the vaccine now. Would they have ratted on Anne Frank after a similar propaganda campaign that made them take the vaccine?
Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths
#703Earlier quoted context omitted.
> People were dying from self-administered HCQ as a supposed prophylactic Yes, "people are dying" is the favored rallying cry for any number of poorly considered, knee-jerk reactions to unfortunate events. It's a big country. People die from lots of things every day, including a staggering number of people who die from overdoses from innocuous medications. A surprising number of these people poison themselves with su…
> "people are dying" is the favored rallying cry for any number of poorly considered, knee-jerk reactions to unfortunate events. Brilliantly parodied in this music video: https://youtu.be/eXWhbUUE4ko
Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths
#704Earlier 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…
San Francisco issued a mask mandate on April 17, 2020.
So that delay was mid February to mid April.
So help me out here since you say it three times.
Where is that "wasted year"?
Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths
#705Kind 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…
Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths
#706Earlier quoted context omitted.
I bought a bunch of N95 masks the day after I heard China was locking down Wuhan. There were still plenty of masks at regular prices at the time.
I bought them right around the time officials started admitting they were helpful. $120 for a box of ten N95 masks.
By the time officials admitted they were "helpful" (because of course they were, there's nothing particularly special about Covid in that respect), it was already way too late to get masks. Because anybody with any basic knowledge of disease and medicine had already bought up all the supply long before.
Another way of looking at it is in a betting scenario. I want to make money. The two options I can bet on are
a) Based on decades of scientific evidence, buy fuck loads of masks on the likelihood of them being anywhere from moderately to highly effective.
b) Masks are useless based on two early studies in a highly unstable situation with little accurate information and low confidence, counter to established medical practice with no other basis in reliable evidence.
Guess what I'm betting on. Further, the risks associated with being wrong are far lower with option A than with option B.
Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths
#707The 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…
When asked do masks stop the spread of the virus, the answer is factually no, and people then go and spread that about like masks do nothing. People don't want to listen to "No, masks don't stop the spread entirely but provide an x% reduction in airborne particles" because they've already zoned out
Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths
#708Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can't really win the debate anyway: if everybody had followed strict isolation from the get go there wouldn't have been a pandemic and people would have said the restrictions were completely uncalled for.
This is one of the greatest falsehoods out there. A stricter lockdown wouldn't have changed much. Australia and New Zealand couldn't keep cases from popping up despite incredibly strict border control and lockdown procedures. There are also animal hosts that can incubate this virus, sure you can cull a mink farm, but you can't really do that to a wild deer herd.
Speaking from Melbourne, Australia here, it certainly preserved life and (in the long run) the economy until vaccines came along (the rollout of which has been terribly bungled, but that's a different story.)
Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths
#709Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is a lot of rationalization you had to go through for that judgement. I think it is a ridiculous excuse.
> That is a lot of rationalization you had to go through for that judgement. I think it is a ridiculous excuse. You need to be deep in denial and very disingenuous to refute the nature of /r/HermanCainAward or even /r/LeopardsAteMyFace. You're talking about a very niche subreddit which is dedicated to posts on radical and very vocal anti-mask/anti-vax/Covid-hoax militants views who, after a long and well documented p…
I enjoy some of those myself from time to time, but it is what it is and has nothing to do with education and is more focused on self gratification. Just enjoy the pleasures in moderation.
Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths
#710Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I would tell people that they have no power to punish anyone whatsoever and design the Covid rules with that in mind, making them focused entirely on helping people instead of controlling them. How effective do you believe your approach would be? An unenforceable rule is merely a suggestion, and one which relies on responsible and informed decision-making to be followed. If anything, the current state of affairs sh…
The alternative is a world where a ~66% majority (if that) can override the remainder on their medical decisions - which is about as personal as decisions can get. The "force them to do what I say" approach will cause more damage the more effective it is. If this is an option for vaccines, there are a lot of things out there that are more important than COVID.
I'm sure that those who repeat the "rights and freedom" mantra are also aware that there is a tradeoff between individual freedom and the ability to live in a free society, which requires tradeoffs between your own personal freedom and the individual freedom of everyone around you.
The case of Typhoid Mary is a great example. Should she be entitled to dictate her "medical decisions" and not be subjected to any form of quarantine?
Your argument is actually not about freedom at all, but about exceptionalism, entitlements, and excluding yourself from any responsibility or duty towards ensuring that the priviledges you enjoy are also made available to others.