I disagree. Only if you misunderstand what those tests are for! And go against every possible sensible precaution. Plus, even with all their incomprehensible behavior, lots and lots of tests is the only reason this cluster isn’t out there sparking more.
-
-
I mean, in one sense there is no method that wouldn’t be a challenge with people this determine to create a catastrophic situation. Most normal people can be empowered with knowledge.
2 replies 8 retweets 36 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @michaelmina_lab
lots and lots of human beings act like this! the Notre Dame president isn't "determine[d] to create a catastrophic situation," etc. surely we can acknowledge the risk here while also saying the White House was wildly irresponsible - both can be true!
4 replies 2 retweets 11 likes -
You cannot draw any conclusions about how ordinary people would respond to a rapid-testing regime from the way this group of people has responded. These ppl were emotionally and ideologically invested in the idea that the virus was a trivial matter.
3 replies 1 retweet 17 likes -
so are millions of Americans who listen to those people
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Maybe not any more.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
we'll see
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
I think the real point is that anyone who listens to and believes Trump or Berenson about the virus isn’t taking precautions anyway. So it’s very unlikely that widespread rapid testing will make those people more reckless than they already are.
3 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @JamesSurowiecki @BrendanNyhan and
I think it’s reasonable to wonder if getting a negative test will make some people less cautious for a period than they otherwise would be. But I don’t think this group’s behavior is a good test of that hypothesis.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
I think it is not only possible to inform and empower ordinary people who are not this invested in denial, but are actually trying to manage risk (and that's how risk compensation is supposed to work). Tons of research now that maskers are *more* cautious otherwise, too.
1 reply 0 retweets 11 likes
Rather than risk compensation, taking a test may well function as a *reminder* of the risk—that's what we saw with masks. Many people stack and bundle mitigations, not exchange them out. That said, in this cluster, we're dealing with Lysenko, not risk management miscalculations.
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.