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 …
-
Show this thread
-
If the WHO changes its definition of "aerosol" or whatever is involved here, hospitals and clinics claiming "compliance with WHO standards" as their outsourced brain might do a bunch of thoughtless things.
1 reply 0 retweets 12 likesShow this thread -
The solution really is more institutions taking responsibility for their own thinking, and taking cues from multiple sources. Like maybe follow the practices of 2 local prestigious hospitals with the WHO recommendations as tie-breaker.
2 replies 2 retweets 18 likesShow this thread
WHO recommendations should be thought of as publishing APIs, not human documents
0 replies
1 retweet
14 likes
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.