Why the WHO took two years to say Covid is airborne
1–10 of 404 posts
Re: Why the WHO took two years to say Covid is airborne
#2A powerful reminder that “science” and “scientists” don’t say anything.
There are organizations & researchers. They don’t speak with one voice, or have the same threat assessment, and they respond to different incentives.
It would be a gift to humanity to move beyond the antiquated idea that there are “FACTS” - static statements of truth that require no context or qualification.
Not only does context matter, it matters that we can have exploratory conversations in ambiguous contexts.
Re: Why the WHO took two years to say Covid is airborne
#3Simple if one thinks about it. Quit thinking of COVID itself and think of how the pandemic has been used. It’s easy to understand why after that.
Re: Why the WHO took two years to say Covid is airborne
#4The article claims it was a “mistake” to knowingly make a false statement. I stopped reading immediately at that. This propaganda is disgusting, I used to respect Nature.
Re: Why the WHO took two years to say Covid is airborne
#5A powerful reminder that “science” and “scientists” don’t say anything. There are organizations & researchers. They don’t speak with one voice, or have the same threat assessment, and they respond to different incentives. It would be a gift to humanity to move beyond the antiquated idea that there are “FACTS” - static statements of truth that require no context or qualification. Not only does context matter, it matte…
How many do you think are scared of becoming pariahs by saying anything counter to popular narrative?
I'd say it's a significant number. Wouldn't want to lose the chance to ever get a research project funded again.
Re: Why the WHO took two years to say Covid is airborne
#6> For example, even in the middle of the fast-moving epidemic, the WHO dismissed field epidemiology reports as proof of airborne transmission because the evidence was not definitive, something that is difficult to achieve quickly during an outbreak.
It seems the responsible thing to do in this situation, rather than tweeting definitively that the virus was "NOT" spread via airborne transition, would've been too withhold judgement...at minimum. The ideal thing to do would've been to at least acknowledge the countless scenarios that gained media attention which seemed to heavily indicate airborne transmission, while prefacing it that these scenarios aren't themselves sufficient to confirm that.
Re: Why the WHO took two years to say Covid is airborne
#7It's unfortunate that they were loud with the misinformation and very quiet with the correction.
Re: Why the WHO took two years to say Covid is airborne
#8Super interesting how /r/coronavirus and 4chan were more accurate in their conclusions about Covid.
Also it seem that institutions are deemed to feel, just how I used to hear "religions are good but religious institutions are bad", it seem to start to apply to science now.
It was disgusting how rabid were liberals about the whole Covid thing.
Re: Why the WHO took two years to say Covid is airborne
#9No post body was provided.
Re: Why the WHO took two years to say Covid is airborne
#10Super interesting how /r/coronavirus and 4chan were more accurate in their conclusions about Covid. Also it seem that institutions are deemed to feel, just how I used to hear "religions are good but religious institutions are bad", it seem to start to apply to science now. It was disgusting how rabid were liberals about the whole Covid thing.
Liberalism is about liberty. Those people haven't been acting as liberals. They've been acting as militant technocrats.
That said, I'm willing to forgive anyone who's been living that way and realizes it's not gonna make for a particularly joyous human life. We're human, we get scared, we make mistakes.