zlacker

[return to "Why the Wuhan lab leak theory shouldn't be dismissed"]
1. hospad+aK1[view] [source] 2021-03-22 21:13:04
>>ruarai+(OP)
Like, so what?

Should we care a lot about the safety and security of places where dangerous infectious diseases are studied? sure!

I think we should care A LOT MORE about our [apparent total lack of] ability to quickly deploy effective public health responses to new infectious diseases (regardless of their source).

Maybe it was an accident at a sloppy lab, ok, so labs on the other side of the planet in sovereign countries we do not control might make mistakes. We should get better at responding fast to save lives.

Maybe it was a sinister bio-terrorism plot. We should get better at responding fast to save lives. Bio-terror/warfare plan looks a whole lot like a good public health plan IMO.

Maybe gasp it really was from bats or something. We should get better at responding fast to save lives. This stuff DOES happen.

Maybe s/.*/I don't care where it came from/g. We should get better at responding fast and saving lives (my opinion).

◧◩
2. dvt+dM1[view] [source] 2021-03-22 21:20:47
>>hospad+aK1
> We should get better at responding fast and saving lives (my opinion).

I think you're wrestling with a strawman here, no one's arguing the inverse. But in any investigation (arson, murder, etc.) the details do matter -- where, how, what weapon, when, and so on.

◧◩◪
3. michae+RM1[view] [source] 2021-03-22 21:24:08
>>dvt+dM1
Respectfully, there is still a sizeable contingent of the US population that thinks that the pandemic is "no worse than the annual flu" and that efforts to combat the pandemic are at best a wild over-reaction and at worst some kind of sinister plot by the government.
◧◩◪◨
4. tryone+NS1[view] [source] 2021-03-22 21:48:31
>>michae+RM1
The data clearly demonstrates at this point that the virus is indeed comparable to the flu, except with higher R value. This is also an implied strawman, that sizable contingent that you are alluding to is questioning whether the price of the lockdowns, and continued lockdowns, and approach to lockdowns, are worth the mitigation.

Clearly the virus is only a major issue for elderly and infirm patients, where the vast majority of people under the age of 30-40 present mildly or asymptomatically. And if that's indeed the case, then perhaps forcing the entire population to shelter in place for more than a year makes less sense than, say, recommending protective measures primarily for the vulnerable.

[go to top]