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

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#531

Post by s1artibartfast » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 1:31 AM UTC

romwell wrote: post #465

s1artibartfast wrote: post #410

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the fact that vaccination is only 3:5 demonstrates that it is remarkably close between parties and people should be more thoughtful about characterization. It is not like it is 100:1 or some extremely skewed distribution.

How about the death rate from covid being 3:1 in red vs. blue counties?[1] Is 3:1 big enough to say that there, perhaps, is a problem? [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/27/briefing/covid-red-states...

I'm still not sure why exactly the claimed problem is party affiliation?

Is there a casual link with being republican and dying of covid democrats are immune to?

Should the CDC list party affiliation as a comorbidity and recommend Republicans reregister as democrats for the health benefits.

Of course not, because we know that there is a more direct causal link with not being vaccinated. We know that people in both party are not vaccinated, but more of the unvaccinated are Republicans (50‰ vs d 30% per your link)

Why attribute deaths and vaccination to party affiliation, when we know it crosses party lines?

If we want to really understand the "problem", we should look at traits that are associated with more than 50‰ of the unvaccinated.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#532

Post by Natsu » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 1:37 AM UTC

jjgreen wrote: post #413

Natsu wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you meant to reply to someone else, because you're quoting words that I didn't write. If I was running things, 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.

To be fair, "helping people comply with rules" and "just follow the rules" are pretty much synonymous.

Properly understood, they're on opposite sides of the equation and as mentioned, I'd prefer not to do any punishment at all, because I feel like that cuts off most of the nonsense. So that means giving people masks if they don't have one or making reasonable accommodations where possible and making interventions about safety.

But I know it's not quite so easy and especially now a lot of people are hardened and less willing to work together to smooth things over.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#533

Post by thomaskcr » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 1:38 AM UTC

iammisc wrote: post #406

betterunix2 wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Censorship is not what causes large numbers of US citizens to refuse this vaccine. If the Republicans in leadership positions took this seriously from the start and did not go around casting doubt on vaccination far more people would get the vaccine. If the previous president had not politicized the response to COVID and had simply told his followers to do what the CDC says we would have many millions more people get…

The previous president was and is extremely pro-vaccine. People claim there is a large republican cohort of anti-vax politicians, but there is not. There is a large GOP cohort of anti-vax-mandate politicians, but being against a mandate does not mean being anti vax, unless you're changing the meaning. > If the previous president had not politicized the response to COVID and had simply told his followers to do what th…

Trump literally still calls it the "Trump Vaccine". Also I think people forget how much airtime went into "the vaccine isn't the answer" once Trump started talking about warp speed and the second the election was over it was "the vaccine is the only answer".

I think you can blame a lot on Trump and repubs with regards to protocols, level of concern, being actively anti-mask, etc but it takes a very selective memory to act like Trump wasn't 1000% on board with the vaccine.

Examples:

- Past vaccine disasters show why rushing a coronavirus vaccine now would be 'colossally stupid' By Jen Christensen, CNN Updated 11:34 AM EDT, Tue September 01, 2020

- CNN: The timetable for a coronavirus vaccine is 18 months. Experts say that's risky By Robert Kuznia Updated 2:14 PM EDT, Wed April 01, 2020

- Here's where we stand on getting a coronavirus vaccine By Holly Yan, CNN Updated 1:45 PM EDT, Mon June 08, 2020

- With big talk and hurled insults, the gloves come off in the race for the coronavirus vaccine By Elizabeth Cohen, CNN Senior Medical Correspondent Updated 7:00 AM EDT, Wed May 27, 2020

> (CNN)Ethicists and physicians are concerned that, amid a desire to put an end to the Covid-19 pandemic, developers of drugs and vaccines have become overly enthusiastic about the chances their products will work.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#534

Post by hn_throwaway_99 » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 1:39 AM UTC

kccqzy wrote: post #330

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

The goal of public health officials is to reduce the overall amount of deaths / infections / disease spread. The goal is not to ensure maximum survivability for a specific individual. The mask guidance made perfect sense in this light. For the overall benefit of the society, masks were prioritized for health care professionals rather than the general public, in the face of limited supply. But of course wearing a mask…

But public health officials are royally screwed if nobody trusts them.

Importantly, I am NOT arguing that health officials should have changed their guidance in early 2020, I'm arguing they should have changed their messaging. "It's vital that people don't go out and buy masks because if you do hospitals will run out of masks and then we're all screwed" is very different from "masks worn by the public don't work".

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#535

Post by electrondood » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 1:39 AM UTC

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…

Are we just going to ignore all of the anti-vax disinfo then? That seems like a far more significant factor than "the government didn't give the public the complicated version from the start."

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#536

Post by motohagiography » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 1:40 AM UTC

Permit wrote: post #408

motohagiography wrote: post #337

Kind 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…

> will not be remembered as having been justified or proportionate. Why not? Do you think there’s no chance that the majority of people _want_ these things and will remember them as justified and proportionate? Where do you get this confidence? Do you think there’s a chance you have projected your own feelings about the pandemic restrictions onto others? You’re surprised that there is no civil unrest. Consider the po…

Indeed, I have had to consider that, and am pretty sure I have not projected my feelings about the pandemic because I was tracking this scenario in earnest since 2012. Most people aren't nihilists, but the ones who are have managed to find each other again.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#537

Post by aakresearch » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 1:43 AM UTC

SamoyedFurFluff wrote: post #505

mattgreenrocks wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fully agree. One of the best takes I read on this argued that the public health institutions failed the US because they were so intent on forcing outcomes ("don't buy masks") rather than, as you said, simply saying hard truths and giving guidance. People can tell when they're being talked down to, and there's been a lot of that since this started. I don't even think anyone's doing it maliciously, they're just really,…

Genuinely asking: how does this compare with other safety mandates like seatbelts? Those were also government mandated and highly unpopular for the exact same reasons.

Seat belt mandates:

- Have accumulated evidence of well quantified effectiveness, however small.

- Have no practical downsides, even speculative.

- Practically are not 100% enforceable, and therefore are not 100% adhered too. Technical means of enforcement (like beeping) are lame and easily bypassed, at least for now.

- Are related to a man-made activity of reasonably increased danger and, importantly, licensed. Someone may choose not to participate in such activity (driving), with relatively low downsides. Public health mandates are, effectively, an attempt to license the mere existence.

- Do not have religious symbolism attached to it. No one is ever yelled on by strangers for not having a seatbelt fastened. No one has a sticker on their facebook photo saying "proudly wearing my seatbelt".

- Seatbelts are "reversible", i.e. you don't wear them for life. You are not forced to have seatbelt mounting points implanted in your body. You cannot "un-vaccinate", though, if it ends up a bad decision.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#538

Post by hackingforfun » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 1:43 AM UTC

nradov wrote: post #510

hackingforfun wrote: post #473

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you make a good point here that someone can be pro-vaccine while being against a mandate. I hadn't thought of it that way. I don't really see many Republicans going out of their way recommending vaccines though, either. Trump got his in secret initially.

Sensor Mitch McConnell: "I’m glad to share that a few minutes ago, I received a booster vaccination for COVID-19." https://www.mcconnell.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2021/9/mcc... You can find plenty more similar statements by Republicans if you bother to look.

Thanks for sharing this. Looks like Senator John Cornyn and Senator Mitt Romney support the COVID vaccines, too [1]. Good to know.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/14/us/politics/gop-covid-vac...

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#539

Post by hn_throwaway_99 » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 1:44 AM UTC

psychlops wrote: post #299

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with you pretty much 100%. My anger is that, by not being truthful, I feel like health authorities played right into the hands of the conspiracy theorists and everyone trying to sow doubt that this is some big power grab.

Well, it's also a big power grab so that doesn't help.

A power grab by who? Mask manufacturers? People who don't like to look at lips? I am baffled by the belief that asking people to wear masks, in the middle of a pandemic, is a power grab by anyone.

If anything, an intervention that would make it safer to open up more businesses and public spaces should be seen as a great thing for reducing the power needed to shut these spaces in the first place.

Re: Covid lesson: trust the public with hard truths

#540

Post by kcplate » Wed, Oct 13, 2021, 1:45 AM UTC

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…

I think one of the best examples of the US government shooting itself in the foot during this pandemic was when it was released in the press that some in the CDC advocated to prioritize minorities for vaccination for social justice reasons.

A quick to market vaccine based on new technology, and some woke bureaucrat doesn’t seem to connect that that message would be heard as “they want to test it on us again”.