zlacker

>>lazycr+(OP)
The WHO is a useless organization. For political reasons, it will be necessary to engage, but hopefully US authorities will not treat it as an information source.

The US should use its own primary sources in future to evaluate disease spread. China will lie to the WHO and the WHO will protect it.

But to know the truth, we should use our modern equivalents of Key Hole. There is no truth but that which you have examined yourself.

>>renewi+17
I watched the WHO press briefings in about the first month.

If the Western world would have done what the WHO advised at the time, we all more or less would have a COVID stuation like the Chinese have for some time.

>>the-du+6b
Could you elaborate on what that situation is?

>>katbyt+Oc
Mask early, serious lockdown as soon as it becomes serious, and don’t end lockdowns before numbers are way low. We masked late, put lockdowns in place late if at all, and ended them way too early, which means that some countries went through several ones. And we’re not through yet.

That said, I don’t share the optimism of the parent poster. This would be a heavy burden in terms of freedom and human rights for a result that is far from certain. There have been some resurgences, the extent of which is of course unknown because the truth would be damageable to China. And there is no knowing whether the next variant would start it all over again, in which it would be back to square one.

>>kergon+Dd
>> If the Western world would have done what the WHO advised at the time, we all more or less would have a COVID stuation like the Chinese have for some time.

> Mask early

Are we living in the same timeline?

https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1243972193169616898 https://twitter.com/UNGeneva/status/1244661916535930886 https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1234095938555260929 https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1234871709091667969 https://twitter.com/WHO/status/1234619007841525764

>>the847+Zg
Right, yes, that was early March. The guidelines evolved as more information became available and they released new advice in early April, which is far from ideal but better than a lot of governments reactions.

Their official stance before that was rigorous test, isolate, and trace, which was not done seriously anywhere outside China.

>>kergon+3j
I was in China during the initial lockdown that started in late January/early February. The instructions from the government were clear from day one: stay home as much as possible, wear a mask when you go out, wash your hands when you get home, open your windows and keep your place well-ventilated. All that advice holds true today, just as it held true for SARS, MERS and other similar viruses.

I feel like the reporting from the WHO was deliberately sub-par for political reasons. For example the vacillating on masks - everyone knew that masks helped, but the WHO tried to be on the fence about it because some countries were experiencing shortages. Another example of the WHO playing politics was when they neglected to publish the advice not to trust folk remedies, since that would have gone against a Chinese government campaign to try softly promote TCM, perhaps as a form of psychological comfort to the hundreds of millions stuck in lockdown.

Living through corona has helped me to realize that successful public health policy isn't just about giving everyone the raw facts, it's also about managing people's morale and trying to influence their behavior through propaganda. I think the WHO tried to do this, but it wasn't universally successful.