61–70 of 404 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's your point? There's no way to eradicate SARS-CoV-2 because there are multiple animal reservoirs and the vaccines don't reliably prevent infection.
My point is the fact that the majority of infected individuals didn't suffer from it does not mean it is not a serious disease. Hardly anyone was paralyzed by polio, but we view it as an extremely serious disease.
>“We’re really talking here about two failures, not one,” says Sandman. “Being reluctant to change your mind, and being reluctant to tell people you changed your mind.” Like other public-health and scientific organizations, the WHO “are afraid of losing credibility by acknowledging that they got something wrong”, he says. Quite a good summary for the entire clusterfuck that was the pandemic response. I still cant wra…
Unfortunately, in the public/political realm, I think this isn't true. Flip flopping suggests weak morals. When scientific "facts" change, a lot of people conclude that the scientists know nothing.
WHO and other health authorities sent the entire world into sanitization frenzy.
The new variants are now as infectious as measles. We can only hope that new variants remain mild and / or limited in danger by current and developing vaccines.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>But labelling the opposite side as "misinformation" only to agree with them afterwards is disgusting. Is it though? If someone makes an unfounded guess and states it as fact isn't it fair to call that misinformation even if that turns out to be correct? What would be your preferred approach?
how about not calling anything misinformation until you're pretty damn sure you're right yourself?
I was the first in our office to go permanently WFH in February of 2020, three weeks before our offices closed, because I recognized that SARS-Cov-2 would be a huge problem, when pretty much everyone was in the 'just a flu/cold' mode. Here's the news that did not pass my bullshit detector: 1. Virus is not airborne (as initially claimed). I thought the water droplets claims were true for a while until I saw how fast i…
That turned out to be a surprisingly small minority.
>“We’re really talking here about two failures, not one,” says Sandman. “Being reluctant to change your mind, and being reluctant to tell people you changed your mind.” Like other public-health and scientific organizations, the WHO “are afraid of losing credibility by acknowledging that they got something wrong”, he says. Quite a good summary for the entire clusterfuck that was the pandemic response. I still cant wra…
>> You dont loose credibility by acknowledging you were wrong, you do so by lying to protect your image despite knowing better. You being wrong isnt dependent on you acknowledging it. Unfortunately, in the public/political realm, I think this isn't true. Flip flopping suggests weak morals. When scientific "facts" change, a lot of people conclude that the scientists know nothing.
Flip flopping for all the right reasons makes all the difference as G-man would say.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
“Follow the money” “George Soros” “Bill Gates” Etc
It's impressive how quickly people can go from "the WHO was wrong about a thing" to "massive conspiracy headed by a secret cabal that rules the world from the shadows" Where's the bug tracker for humanity?
>“We’re really talking here about two failures, not one,” says Sandman. “Being reluctant to change your mind, and being reluctant to tell people you changed your mind.” Like other public-health and scientific organizations, the WHO “are afraid of losing credibility by acknowledging that they got something wrong”, he says. Quite a good summary for the entire clusterfuck that was the pandemic response. I still cant wra…
He said there would be no requirement for quarantine soon and changed it to "quarantine stays" a day later.
All he did by that was alienating his biggest support group: vaccinated people. While the covidiots are cheering because "they knew it all along". We came out of this with a better solution but still...unnecessary loss of credibility. Next time people will think: I can ignore that, "they" will probably turn it around tomorrow.
The art is to only talk if you're sure what you say.
Super 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.
Only in the rest of the world. In the US that word was redefined to mean "people I do not like" and they use "libertarian" instead for the original meaning.