Re:Beware of Being “Right”
by grandmczeb on Saturday July 11, 2020 @03:32PM
(#23805105)
> In the early stages, the plan was to not create 100x demand for masks (I mean, there was going to be 10x no matter what) by suppressing public need for them, so as to get the PPE to medical workers.
Where was this stated officially? I see this repeated a lot, but it would be nice to have a primary source.
https://web.archive.org/web/20200331143006/https://www.cdc.g...
CDC at the end of March was saying:
> If you are NOT sick: You do not need to wear a facemask unless you are caring for someone who is sick (and they are not able to wear a facemask). Facemasks may be in short supply and they should be saved for caregivers.
Re:Beware of Being “Right”
by grandmczeb on Saturday July 11, 2020 @06:37PM
(#23806756)
I think I misunderstood the original comment. I interpreted it to mean that health agencies were deliberately understating the effectiveness of masks to reduce the number of people who wear them. I was more looking for a source on the "deliberately understating" part, but on re-read I don't think that's what the OP was saying.
I don't think I have seen an official source saying "we're deliberately understating the utility or masks, so that care givers can have the limited masks". Instead, there are a lot of communications where their utility was understated; and at least I assume that was a deliberate policy, because that's the most positive thing I can assume about their motives.
Climate, social change, technology, development, covid response etc..
Best example: Masks.
Do they help?
Probably somewhat, but possibly not. There was the very real concern overall that masks might give people a sense of confidence. Any 'reduction in hand-washing' would offset mask usage.
In the early stages, the plan was to not create 100x demand for masks (I mean, there was going to be 10x no matter what) by suppressing public need for them, so as to get the PPE to medical workers. (Not sure if that was the right move, but there's logic in it.)
Once the mask-making gears are moving into production, then the new perspective means 'masks can become more of a requirement for regular people'. So the equilibrium shifts, and then, 'as a whole, we should wear masks'. i.e. a 'new truth' to be propagated.
To any regular person sitting on the sidelines, it has to be confusing, and we should forgive people for being cynical that the press was screaming from day one 'don't use masks, you're not responsible enough and they need to go to doctors, they are in desperate short supply' to a few weeks later: 'wear a mask or you are an inconsiderate redneck'.
So 'new realities, create new 'truths'' in a way.
Even more nuanced 'truthiness':
Right now on CNN you see these graphs of COVID 'spiking' again in America --> 'scary'.
But - when you look at the graph of deaths it tells a completely different story. Mostly, it's still going down with a little bump recently.
Have a look [1]
The 'more complicated truth' is that the US has been expanding testing a lot, and possibly different kinds of people are getting infected (younger?), more people are taking it, and the rate fatality is dropping.
So what is the 'truth' there? Can we blame CNN for showing a chart every day, when technically speaking its 'factual'? But in reality it doesn't really tell the whole story at all and is potentially misleading? Or what about the responsibility of mass media to err on the side of being conservative (small 'c') so as to promote positive behaviour, in that people need to 'feel' the pandemic is material, or they won't wear masks.
For those people with the intelligence, means, education and wherewithal, ok, it's possible to 'sift through' the headlines, but most aren't in a position to do that, they have 'real jobs, real lives, diapers to change' and so the 'truth' is always going to be in flux.
[1] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/ So it's often very complicated.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/