It is absolutely stunning to observe how the scientific community has reacted to the public health aspects of the pandemic. When the fog clears, one of the consequences of the pandemic will be public distrust in science and scientists.
-
What specifically do you mean, Martin? I mean apart from the retracted NEJM/Lancet papers, the cherry picking of evidence in top journals as if Science is non-objective, or the overly risk-averse (at the cost of economy) clinical reaction to "things we don't know", what else?
Many scientists without prior work on infectious disease outbreaks (+some with) have pushed for general population-wide #lockdown instead of minimizing mortality by isolating high-risk elderly while younger low-risk people build #HerdImmunity.https://www.spiked-online.com/2020/04/29/delaying-herd-immunity-is-costing-lives/ …
-
-
Americans really struggle to understand holistic concepts of social well-being and the social aspect of public health. In the United States, health care is medical, medical, medical. Deeply problematic.
-
This nails it. Everything is clinical.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This is true and that’s a great writeup. One key issue is that in many countries it’s hard to separate young from old. They live in multi generation households and immunocompromised elders are in the same place. That’s the logical challenge.
-
This can't be a larger challenge than subjecting whole populations to very long-term suppression strategies that have no known end.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This would be a very bad strategy. Probably you also don’t know what Spiked is, or its history. Have a look at the Wikipedia article:https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiked_(magazine) …
-
So the source means everything in it, even if written by a professor from Harvard, is silly? Bias much? Even the likes of Lancet and NEJM are busy publishing “peer reviewed” studies based on stupid methodology and fake data (later retracted).
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
This argument would hold weight if we could count on Trump n Co to handle walking and chewing gum at the same time. Science is not in a vacuum. And it certainly doesn't make the decisions right now. C-
-
Just for my curiosity, what would be the walking and chewing gum? Please explain the analogy. Glib stuff is cute but not insightful.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Whatever a scientist’s position all policy decisions made by politicians. They may cite “science led” but decisions have been inherently political. As far as I’m aware extent/duration of immune response & mutability of SARS-CoV-2 is unknown - unless you have evidence otherwise.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I know of no 'scientists' who would entertain or suggest a herd-immunity approach for a coronavirus such as Covid-19. Only with an effective vaccine would that be an acceptable goal. The herd-immunity debacle was rooted in political-ideology which saw high mortality 'acceptable'
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- Show replies
New conversation -
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.