(Even that macaque study had reduced viral loads but anyway). The current messaging is "we don't know" and it is widely interpreted as "they won't" because that's how it communicates—this has been a problem the whole pandemic. The "no evidence" statements need calibration.
December. After phase III data. I didn’t just get lucky. (Been accused of that but that would be a bit uncanny at this point). Besides it wasn’t just me! That’s too much credit. Also, I always said communicate expectations, not false certainty. I advocated for more NPIs in Dec.
-
-
you're missing my point. we give people advice based on data, not hunches. if you gave people advice before we had data, you were hurting, not helping. if your definition of MONTHS is.... since december? bless you.
-
there's a reason professional scientists who work on viruses are conservative about what we KNOW. the cost of being wrong is literal dead bodies. I think we gotta remember that and be a little more careful about our messaging.
- 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.