A year ago my friend wouldn’t leave isolation until not pozzed took him three weeks.
Nate has been saying this for a while tho
He fumbles the ball running free at the two every time.
elaborate on that
He heads in the direction of the correct understanding (public health by definition is a field encompassing politics and always has been- it’s no surprise and it’s not a contradiction).
But instead he drops the ball and makes it sound like some form of hypocrisy that folks like Fauci have to try and message in a political way (not that we can’t question how effective that messaging was).
He will have ample time to pen his memoir from prison when President DeSantis and the republican congress lock him up.
https://twitter.com/draseemmalhotra/status/1608375881952628736?s=46&t=OMo4QST597cm8jaMW8jn-AM
Fucking moron
1 Like
Not anti-vax, but #1 with anti-vaxxers
2 Likes
Why post videos of morons?
1 Like
Whether you like it or not, antivaxxers and their followers are going to be an ongoing and likely worsening issue in the USA and worldwide. Knowing the shit they’re up to is important.
1 Like
I think he does exactly the opposite and criticizes people for not being political enough in their messaging.
Eg when the J&J vaccine was paused he said it was a huge mistake because it would increase vaccine skepticism and the evidence they were using to justify the pause was extremely thin. He was criticized by doctors/ epidemiologists for not understanding vaccines and being a dumb poll expert who was out of his lane but he was 100% right.
Hmm. Interesting, but I just can’t give him that much credit.
The problem is that Fauci is a non political bureaucrat though. Political decisions are for political appointees. It’s illegitimate for a career civil servant to try to “message” things in a way that advance his personally favored political outcome.
Belief in science. Don’t tell me what to think!
I don’t have a specific example in mind. I’m just pointing out that the (true) observation that public health is political leads directly away from the conclusion that we should “follow the experts” or defer to anyone with an MPH. Political decisions can’t be turned over to the civil service.
We rely in experts to guide political decisions all the time. Wars are political, should we therefore not listen to military experts in conducting a war? Anti-expert sentiment is stupid 99% of the time and useful 1% of the time.
1 Like
Probably something really sinister like not having people die of easily preventable diseases.
here’s the one that sticks out in my mind:
https://twitter.com/celinegounder/status/1382299663269761024
it turns out that studying public opinion translates really well into understanding how the public will react to vaccine policy changes! Much better than studying how the vaccine works at a molecular level translates into understanding public reaction to policy changes!
I would say we need experts to “inform” political decisions, not “guide” them. As Hume wrote, approximately:
For the scientists are to the politicians, as scouts, and spies, to range abroad, and find the way to the things desired :
1 Like