I think the issue is that we focused on singular comms and not the additive nature of risk reduction. @samhorwich’s point is spot on too. In an effort to make the comms easy, it can be very specific and fails to explain the reasoning behind it.
-
-
Replying to @SaskiaPopescu @zeynep and
Having 20% of the population actively rebelling against comms and actions that prevent transmission makes the job much harder.
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @jeremychrysler @SaskiaPopescu and
It sure does. Which is why using straightforward, specific terminology to communicate recommendations is essential to providing clear, comprehensible guidance.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @angie_rasmussen @jeremychrysler and
This was
@GovMurphy on Nov 11, regarding dining bubbles. It is still the guidance.. they are "allowed." While it's not a recommendation to go, it is imo sending the wrong message about ventilation, and I'm sure he consulted with PHP, but this messaging is not goodpic.twitter.com/8RJfnlXYSq
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @misguidedsoul7 @angie_rasmussen and
Yep. Terrible. But hard to blame political authorities and the public when public health authorities have botched the communication part. People following the right scientists on Twitter may get it, but not so for the public.
5 replies 3 retweets 23 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @misguidedsoul7 and
I live in CT & I listen to Cuomo & Lamont daily updates. Both emphasize mask wearing & often make it sound like masks alone are enough. I’ve told teacher friends to add air purifiers to class rooms & they all say that’s not in guidance but lots of cleaning of surfaces is.
2 replies 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @cbr160 @misguidedsoul7 and
Yeah same pretty much everywhere. Terrible failure.
2 replies 1 retweet 5 likes -
Just pointing out that improving ventilation is not the same thing as using air purifiers. I'm not against mandating purifiers in schools, because they have many benefits beyond Covid, but if you're asking people to follow the science this is not evidence-based
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @samhorwich @zeynep and
I would love to see a nicely done RCT on air purifiers in schools, not just for Covid but other respiratory illnesses, but some experimental studies would be needed to make such a sweeping requirement
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @samhorwich @cbr160 and
There are prior studies (not in this pandemic, unfortunately and I would have liked some, too) and there is other evidence! Plus as you say, HEPA is good for a other reasons as well and hence a recommendation is reasonable and evidence-based though open windows is better.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
It is also not that expensive—in context—and generally a positive given the broad health benefits that seem pretty-well established. Don't get me wrong, I'd have really *loved* an RCT in this pandemic as well, but that's not the only kind of evidence needed for recommendations.
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.