A point I think I've been missing. WHO's noble-lying is mainly aimed at institutions not individuals. Anything they say gets uncritically translated to practice by institutions following "WHO guidelines" so anything they say is closer to code than speechhttps://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/04/health/239-experts-with-1-big-claim-the-coronavirus-is-airborne.html …
-
-
WHO recommendations should be thought of as publishing APIs, not human documents
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It's an interesting thought experiment but doing such a thing seems equivalent to heresy in the current environment and is never going to happen at this rate is it? (Despite the WHO having an atrioucious track record getting anything right on Covid)
-
"heresy" is a great word for it... rigid reliance on hierarchy/authority in science and academia is giving us all the unintended consequences now
- 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.