These were mostly not errors of fact. The experts weren’t wrong, they were uncertain: respectively about asymptomatic spread, airborne transmission and benefits of a second dose (no clinical trial showing improved efficacy).
yeah i think you’re just totally wrong about this. that’s like criticizing a physicist for getting math wrong, and then defending them by saying — this is math, this is the domain of mathematicians. they are necessarily intimately tied, and it is a mistake to divide it so finely
-
-
No, it isn’t. You’re conflating different fields of study. You’ve been accusing epidemiologists of making mistakes, but it turns out your bête noir is Angela Rasmussen, a virologist. Only you won’t tell me what paper of hers you object to.
-
wow, listen, maybe it’s because i don’t want to get goaded into fights.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
As an aside, there does seem to be some disagreement between at least one virologist and one epidemiologist on this issue. Interesting interview discussing their two perspectives:https://www.microbe.tv/twiv/twiv-792/
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
