zlacker

>> 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+(OP)
Thank you for putting this stuff together. In the past, I did the same when people asked for "source?" for things like "Fauci and the HHS recommended against masking". After I go through the painful process of reacquiring each of the sources, these people disappear.

"Source?" is now the dual of the Gish Gallop strategy. It is a meta-rhetorical strategy to amplify work done by some perceived "opponent".

After all, for anyone who truly believes in sourced claims, they would say "I found these sources that do X. What have you found?" This is natural because they are more interested in the truth than in an argument against an "opponent".

So now I don't respond to disproportionate requests for work. I am glad you did, though. And looking through them, it's exactly as I remember: anti-mask advocacy.

>>the847+(OP)
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.

>>renewi+Y
I'll give credit to the WHO for not deleting their tweets. It would be even better if they offered a mea culpa explaining how they came to this position that was incorrect in hindsight. But not just disappearing things already is better than some others do.

>>kergon+42
Well, mask early may not have been the best choice of words then. Taiwan's reaction would qualify as early. And Taiwan is the thing that the WHO has been very conspicuously be silent about even when asked explicitly.

https://twitter.com/fu7371/status/1262786140777545728

>>the847+g3
I agree. They did not advise to mask early on (airborne transmission was still largely unproved around May, if I remember correctly).

In my mind it was ‘mask before the apparition of symptoms’, and I realise that my wording was not ideal in the context.

>>kergon+42
There was a concerted effort from government officials, bandwagon-joining academics (aided by journalists) in the West to downplay masking, and to ridicule and shame those who wore masks. Here is a Time article from eary March where it was described as the equivalent of “knocking on wood”. https://time.com/5794729/coronavirus-face-masks/

I am fairly certain that the US government reversed itself on masks before the WHO did (Wikipedia says WHO changed its advice in June).

Did it have to do with a lack of evidence, or was it a cynical ploy to preserve mask stocks for medical professionals? I recall it being the latter: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/17/opinion/coronavirus-face-...

>>kergon+42
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.

>>the847+(OP)
Most of those tweets were discouraging the use of masks for the purpose of protecting yourself from Covid. This still holds true today. At the time, a lot of people were hoarding masks, thinking it would protect themselves. Letting them continue wouldn't help control the spread, and probably would have increased the spread in hospitals.

I agree the fourth tweet has aged particularly terribly.

>>renewi+Y
> they disappear

https://help.archive.org/hc/en-us/articles/360001513491-Save...

:)

>>MrYell+Ga
Haha I mean the people disappear after firing off their "Source" calls. They're not really interested in sources. It's a technique to get you to waste your time.

The sources remain. Editing for clarity.