Geeks, more than most, should be savvy about scientific progress.
Coronavirus is still very new. We're learning new things every day. eg Today it's risks from blood clots.
I'd only be worried if the experts (WHO, CDC) failed to update their position over time.
Aside: Retric's comment earlier about AIDS killing 770k every year reminded me how long it took to understand anything about HIV, much less cope. And all the senseless unnecessary misinformation and backlash which thwarted progress.
> People are stupid -- especially people who think they're smart contrarians.
Speak for yourself.
You might be in earnest, but you're behaving like a contrarian who thinks they know more than they do. "You have become the very thing you sought to destroy."
It's still misinformation, and it's specifically misinformation that makes the WHO complicit in 187,420 deaths and counting. There had been plenty of indications by that point that - even if human-to-human transmission had not yet been confirmed - it was still evidently spreading beyond people at ground zero.
That is, I ain't sure how you're able to read it as anything but a blanket declaration. The WHO outright said that there's no evidence of human-to-human transmission; this is an outright lie, given that the sheer number of people by that point who were hospitalized with the virus without ever having visited the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market would be, I would argue, evidence.
> When read [2] it's clear that it is not a blanket declaration not to wear masks.
No, but it's advice that - if followed - would make any asymptomatic carrier dangerous. The point of wearing masks is not to prevent yourself from being infected (no mask is sufficient for that), but rather to minimize the risk of you spreading SARS-CoV-2 to other people by breathing on them.
The WHO seems to have a chronic pattern of being one or more weeks behind the curve on its assessment of COVID-19 and the mitigation thereof. Needless to say, I trust them about as far as I can throw them (which is 0 meters, given the impossibility of throwing an entire organization), and that YouTube is putting them on any kind of authoritative pedestal despite these blatant missteps is ignorant of that behavioral pattern.
Apparently yes, given that it's a bit of a smoking gun. Namely because:
> the Huanan Seafood Market was suspected as a source of the virus but it could have come from somewhere else too.
It was (to my knowledge) the only suspected source for quite a while (up until the later discovery that the currently-known "patient zero" had no connection to it, and even then it's still considered ground zero for the outbreak). If there was any indication that "it could have come from somewhere else", and that "somewhere else" is evidently a place where even fewer patients in common visited ("evidently" because if it was a common factor it would've been mentioned instead of or alongside the seafood market, and yet... no such location was mentioned), then that serves as even stronger evidence that it's somehow spreading between humans, even if the mechanism is unknown.
If even a "random programmer" on Hacker News can point this out, then I strongly suspect there were a number of doctors and nurses and other personnel on the front lines who could have and did point this out, too.
Plus, China knew as early as 31 December that the "novel coronavirus" was related to SARS (leaking that info is what got Dr. Li Wenliang in trouble), which was already known to spread human-to-human. Seems like "it looks like SARS and probably has similar spreading mechanisms" would be a reasonable assumption when information is limited: better safe than sorry (and in this case, 180,000+ deaths later, "sorry" indeed). I obviously don't blame the WHO for the entirety of that (or even necessarily China; my government dragged its feet, too, like most governments), but the WHO is certainly not blameless, either, and that it continues to spread misinformation like how not everyone should be wearing masks doesn't leave a whole lot of room for me to give them the benefit of the doubt.
Yes, but the only suspect does not mean conclusive evidence.
>Plus, China knew as early as 31 December that the "novel coronavirus" was related to SARS (leaking that info is what got Dr. Li Wenliang in trouble),
This is untrue, Li Wenliang said it was SARS, and it's actually another virus. He did not know it was related to SARS but assumed it was SARS due to the symptoms.
edit: secondly he did not leak the information, he send it in a private chat to friends, one of whom leaked it.
That's... exactly my point. The evidence pointed in favor of human-to-human transmission specifically because there was no definitive common source.
> Li Wenliang said it was SARS
SARS-CoV-2 is literally a different strain of the virus that caused the original SARS (SARS-CoV; now called SARS-CoV-1). "It's SARS" is reasonably accurate (especially given the information available at the time), even if not quite specific; it's like calling Ebola, well, "Ebola" without knowing if it's specifically Zaire ebolavirus or Sudan ebolavirus or Reston ebolavirus or what have you. Regardless, if the public and Chinese authorities had treated it like how said authorities should've treated SARS two decades ago, the world would very likely be in a much better position than it is now. And likewise, if foreign governments (including my own) believed it to be SARS instead of just some weird flu, they might very well have restricted travel earlier and imposed stronger quarantines early instead of waiting until it was too late to be effective.
GP comment is a bit too categorical but it's not even a contested fact that WHO initially downplayed the epidemic, put out recommendations to keep borders open, and still continues to spread disinformation e.g. about not needing to wear masks.
I won't even say anything about the string of corruption allegations and ties to China.
And then the fact that WHO basically pretended Taiwan doesn't exist[1] and is clearly aligned with Chinese political interests over even its primary mission.
Giving absolute authority over 'truth' to an entity with such a shitty track record is insane.
[1]: https://twitter.com/studioincendo/status/1243909358133473285
The WHO has a list of medical guidance. I've yet to see anyone in this thread complain about any of the medical guidance the WHO has provided. The most relevant is likely this page: https://www.who.int/emergencies/diseases/novel-coronavirus-2.... None of this is controversial.
> put out recommendations to keep borders open
This is incorrect. The WHO recommended against banning travel from certain parts of the world. Completely closing you borders (to non-citizens) was not covered. You can read the WHO's actual statement[1], and it's well reasoned. The value of unrestricted travel for emergency equipment and personnel outweighs the value of restricted travel from certain areas. But short term restrictions are alright if necessary to build up infrastructure (iow, to flatten the curve temporarily).
> about not needing to wear masks.
They recommend against random everyday people using medical masks. Given the PPE shortage, this is not unreasonable advice. They defer to local authorities for more stringent recommendations.
> And then the fact that WHO basically pretended Taiwan doesn't exist
Does this impact their medical advice?
[1]: https://www.who.int/news-room/articles-detail/updated-who-re...
Meanwhile Youtube is going to take down videos claiming 5g caused the coronavirus, which are obviously wrong and obviously causing harm. And instead of looking at cases of obvious misinformation the policy targets, you would rather we go down a rabbit hole of idiosyncratic disputes about the the meaning of WHO statements, all while keeping up blatantly inaccurate misinformation.
Tying ourselves up in that frivolous debate would let misinformation flourish.
[3] https://www.vox.com/2020/1/23/21078325/wuhan-china-coronavir...