Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Covid-19 Was 'A Preventable Disaster,' WHO-Ordered Report Says

wbur.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 173 posts

Re: Covid-19 Was 'A Preventable Disaster,' WHO-Ordered Report Says

#131

Post by spankyspangler »

_y5hn wrote: post #129
spankyspangler wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean rationale? Entities have authority according to who and what they can influence and affect. It is false to say a state has absolute authority and the WHO has no authority. Those who listen to, act on advice from, censor and attack opposition to the WHO give it authority. This seems to be very upsetting to you for some reason.

On the contrary, and no need for hostile comments attempting to belittle other posters.

No need for badgering, asking pointless questions nitpicking and adding nothing to the discussion. Which itself is a form of bullying and belittling.

There is nothing wrong with my initial comment about the WHO's authority, it absolutely has a measure of authority. Why you would try to make up some definition of the word "authority" that nobody else uses, and then try to attack my comment with it is beyond me.

Re: Covid-19 Was 'A Preventable Disaster,' WHO-Ordered Report Says

#132

Post by A_non_e-moose »

_y5hn wrote: post #87
rcpt wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if it weren't developed as a weapon (I think the current theory is they were researching possible coronavirus vaccines) the WHO shouldn't be so complacent in letting China control the investigation.

WHO is an NGO and have absolutely no authority. I agree we shouldn't trust reports from China.

No authority does not imply they have to bend over and parrot governments' messages.

WHO could have simply requested permission to send an early investigation team, and if refused, warn the rest of the world that investigations were refused.

They could have been the canary in the coal mine and let other governments, who do have power, pressure the one that refuses to cooperate.

Re: Covid-19 Was 'A Preventable Disaster,' WHO-Ordered Report Says

#133

Post by A_non_e-moose »

_y5hn wrote: post #87
rcpt wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if it weren't developed as a weapon (I think the current theory is they were researching possible coronavirus vaccines) the WHO shouldn't be so complacent in letting China control the investigation.

WHO is an NGO and have absolutely no authority. I agree we shouldn't trust reports from China.

And by the way, the WHO is not an NGO. Its membership is open to all nation states, but exclusively for nation states, similarly to UN.

https://www.who.int/sidcer/links/en/ " World Health Organization An inter-governmental organisation whose objective is the attainment by all peoples of the highest possible level of health."

Re: Covid-19 Was 'A Preventable Disaster,' WHO-Ordered Report Says

#134

Post by yread »

cycomanic wrote: post #85

I agree that the WHO bears some responsibility, however much stems from the fact how they are funded. Because they rely on essentially "donations" from member countries, they can't effort to offend anyone. There was immense pressure from many countries not to declare a pandemic because of the economic implications. We have actually seen similar patterns in many countries. Strong resistance to measures because of the…

This is especially big factor as it originated from China and they can be pretty difficult on things so WHO is extra careful not to offend them. Everybody saw the interview "... and what does WHO think about Taiwan's response" "Well, we already talked about China" "Yes, but what about Taiwan?" "What I can't hear you the connection is really bad"

Re: Covid-19 Was 'A Preventable Disaster,' WHO-Ordered Report Says

#135

Post by viraptor »

samatman wrote: post #105
rzz3 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also WHO told people not to wear masks and that it could actually make it more likely to get covid (CDC echoed this as well). “But it was justified lying to protect the mask supply!”—some people already had masks, and didn’t wear them because of this. I had someone literally get mad at me and block me because I said wearing a mask was obviously a good idea, and an N95 is more likely to protect you than a cloth mask.

Ironically, WHO and CDC have done bad messaging on both sides of this. I get slammed every time I bring this up now, because the issue is politicized and, let's be honest, pretty traumatic as well. But I think it's important so I'll keep trying. Everyone should have been masking up as soon as possible in the pandemic. Case counts were low, we didn't know much about the route of transmission, and we also thought it wa…

> A good mask will filter some aerosols when inhaling: but a cloth mask won't.

There's an issue with statements like that. "Cloth mask" is not well defined - are we talking literal layer of cloth, or the cloth-synthetic-cloth design recommended in some countries. Either way there's some gradient between 100% protection and nothing - cloth masks will still be better than nothing, but purpose-designed masks will outperform them.

This is not a trivial scenario to talk about, so the more specific we are the better.

Re: Covid-19 Was 'A Preventable Disaster,' WHO-Ordered Report Says

#136

Post by kk58 »

Soumya swaminathan WHO chief scientist is the one to blame here.

The buck stops with her on bad scientific advice she peddled to the world

Criminal incompetence.

She comes from Indian princeling family. Her dad was key person Ms swaminathan who ran green Revolution in India

Re: Covid-19 Was 'A Preventable Disaster,' WHO-Ordered Report Says

#137

Post by unityByFreedom »

The CDC had someone embedded in China. Months before the pandemic hit that position was eliminated. Someone who previously held that position said,

> “If someone had been there, public health officials and governments across the world could have moved much faster.”

> ...

> As an American CDC employee, they said, Quick was in an ideal position to be the eyes and ears on the ground for the United States and other countries on the coronavirus outbreak, and might have alerted them to the growing threat weeks earlier.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-china-...

Re: Covid-19 Was 'A Preventable Disaster,' WHO-Ordered Report Says

#138

Post by tim333 »

samatman wrote: post #105
rzz3 wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also WHO told people not to wear masks and that it could actually make it more likely to get covid (CDC echoed this as well). “But it was justified lying to protect the mask supply!”—some people already had masks, and didn’t wear them because of this. I had someone literally get mad at me and block me because I said wearing a mask was obviously a good idea, and an N95 is more likely to protect you than a cloth mask.

Ironically, WHO and CDC have done bad messaging on both sides of this. I get slammed every time I bring this up now, because the issue is politicized and, let's be honest, pretty traumatic as well. But I think it's important so I'll keep trying. Everyone should have been masking up as soon as possible in the pandemic. Case counts were low, we didn't know much about the route of transmission, and we also thought it wa…

>primary vector is aerosols, not droplets

Any source for that? I mean it has always seemed likely that both aerosols and droplets would be a factor but where did 'primary' come from?

Re: Covid-19 Was 'A Preventable Disaster,' WHO-Ordered Report Says

#139

Post by samatman »

viraptor wrote: post #135
samatman wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ironically, WHO and CDC have done bad messaging on both sides of this. I get slammed every time I bring this up now, because the issue is politicized and, let's be honest, pretty traumatic as well. But I think it's important so I'll keep trying. Everyone should have been masking up as soon as possible in the pandemic. Case counts were low, we didn't know much about the route of transmission, and we also thought it wa…

> A good mask will filter some aerosols when inhaling: but a cloth mask won't. There's an issue with statements like that. "Cloth mask" is not well defined - are we talking literal layer of cloth, or the cloth-synthetic-cloth design recommended in some countries. Either way there's some gradient between 100% protection and nothing - cloth masks will still be better than nothing, but purpose-designed masks will outper…

Alright, that's a decent point. KN94 is cloth, after all, and it's what I use. I was using "cloth mask" colloquially to refer to the masks made of ordinary cloth which have become pretty much standard uniform in the parts of the US with mask mandates. You can do a little better with multiple layers and tighter weaves, but, not much. If it's not specifically designed to filter particles as small as aerosols, it won't, and if it doesn't have a number after its name, it isn't so designed.

I don't think it's accurate to say that those are better than nothing. The false sense of security could easily lead to people staying longer indoors, or entering indoor spaces which they would consider dangerous if they didn't have the misconception that cloth masks protect them. It's a very small amount of protection, so it doesn't take much moral hazard to overwhelm it.

Could you maybe get a little less sick, if say 10% less viral aerosols passed through the mask? Ok, if I'm going to be very generous, sure. At the margins, someone is going to inhale a sub-infectious dose of aerosol who would have gotten a just-barely-infectious aerosol dose.

But this is like talking about condoms with holes in them. Most of the semen would stay in! It's not as pregnancy inducing as going bare! But I wouldn't call it birth control either.

Re: Covid-19 Was 'A Preventable Disaster,' WHO-Ordered Report Says

#140

Post by samatman »

tim333 wrote: post #138
samatman wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ironically, WHO and CDC have done bad messaging on both sides of this. I get slammed every time I bring this up now, because the issue is politicized and, let's be honest, pretty traumatic as well. But I think it's important so I'll keep trying. Everyone should have been masking up as soon as possible in the pandemic. Case counts were low, we didn't know much about the route of transmission, and we also thought it wa…

>primary vector is aerosols, not droplets Any source for that? I mean it has always seemed likely that both aerosols and droplets would be a factor but where did 'primary' come from?

Here's a discussion of the subject from October:

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/protecting-agains...

I suggest, without intending to be dismissive, punching "covid aerosols primary" or the like into your search engine of choice and going to town. It's been a long debate, and by late last year every prestigious organization except CDC and WHO were in the aerosols camp. Even they have kind of low-key admitted it, while insisting that the measures to control it they promoted on an erroneous theory are still the correct ones. Which is, of course, nonsense.

A droplet is just a large blob of the same saliva that makes up the aerosols. If it gets in your lungs, it will make you sick. This is pretty easy to avoid behaviorally, and with face shields for workers who have to have contact with the public. Wearing a mask will also mitigate this, but it isn't necessary (just don't point your face at other people) and it isn't sufficient, because of aerosols, which are therefore the primary source of transmission.

When a droplet lands on a surface, it becomes a fomite. Picking these up with ones hands, and transmitting them to eyes, nose, and lips, is a major route of infection for influenza. It does not appear to be a significant route of infection for COVID.

Diseases which spread primarily through droplets do so by forming fomites. Unlike someone spitting on your face, it's very easy to touch a surface someone else spit upon, and people touch their faces a lot.

Post reply on HN