zlacker

[return to "U.S. public health agencies aren't ‘following the science,’ officials say"]
1. theand+q3[view] [source] 2022-07-14 18:31:46
>>themgt+(OP)
> One CDC scientist told us about her shame and frustration about what happened to American children during the pandemic: “CDC failed to balance the risks of Covid with other risks that come from closing schools,” she said. “Learning loss, mental health exacerbations were obvious early on and those worsened as the guidance insisted on keeping schools virtual. CDC guidance worsened racial equity for generations to come. It failed this generation of children.”
◧◩
2. mc32+wR[view] [source] 2022-07-15 00:05:07
>>theand+q3
The worst part of the pandemic beside policies that would swing back and forth (which is kind of understandable if you're learning as you go) was the inability to have discussions about the pros and cons of shutdowns and other pandemic related policies.

Social media and mainstream media saw it fit to censor dissenting voices --not those of quacks, we can mostly all agree on minimizing the voices of quacks but shutting down medical professionals and medical academics and so on is very concerning.

The only people they allowed to be wrong about the pandemic were govt officials. They could get it wrong and right it as many times as necessary.

◧◩◪
3. s3r3ni+IU[view] [source] 2022-07-15 00:30:33
>>mc32+wR
> Social media and mainstream media saw it fit to censor dissenting voices --not those of quacks, we can mostly all agree on minimizing the voices of quacks but shutting down medical professionals and medical academics and so on is very concerning.

No I don't agree with censoring _any_ voices - precisely because of this issue. The decentralized market of ideas will address the "quacks" in the room, as I don't trust any central authority to do that for me.

If a centralized authority wields power in a way that creates negative consequences, you don't give them _more_ power, or just hope that they'll do the right thing.

◧◩◪◨
4. space_+CV[view] [source] 2022-07-15 00:38:48
>>s3r3ni+IU
Isn't twitter part of the market of ideas? The NYT ect? The idea that we could have an information ecosystem devoid of human judgement is new or at least not widespread before the internet. It was part of a utopian idea, not entirely different from the ethos powering say crypto that we could encode simple rules and the truth would filter to the top, but that isn't how the public square worked before the internet, quite the opposite, your ability to reach anyone outside your town was pretty dependent on a small handful of companies and those utopian thinkers never really managed to show the rules they came up with for how that information should be spread resulted in truth
[go to top]