Corona Virus Update

For once we kind of agree. There was a great deal unknown and a gigantic attempt to give people confidence that wasn't always there.

 

exactly. It can be a delicate line........providing information........and yet not creating panic.

 

I’m interested in more detail on the helplessness angle. Why would recommendations be made long term that are known to be incorrect and less effective than other known effective mitigation strategies? We intentionally favored less effective recommendations over more effective ones. It’s surrendering when you have the capacity to win.

 

I think we're referring to different things.

 

Oh. Ok. When you responded to my post I assumed you were referring to the content of my post.

 

I was but I was being more generalist than you.
You refer to people deliberately being given bad advice, which is an idea I don't subscribe to, therefore it is difficult for me to answer your specific point.

 

I’m just always curios why people will believe bureaucratic epidemiologists are profoundly stupid but can’t believe they have lied. Above we established that ANY competent epidemiologist or virologist knows influenza spreads pre and asymptomatically. Yet in your example they claim to not know this. This means they are lying and the advice they give based on that lie is also a lie.

My first post you responded to is the same thing. The CDC knew there was no N95 mask shortage by no later than the first of February 2021 (even though others seemed to know sooner), yet they lied and said there was a shortage up to September 10, 2021. Based on this lie they recommended AGAINST quality masks as other countries were mandating and supplying such masks. The CDC still has not recommended quality masks.

Again, even though the facts are clear, people will essentially call the CDC stupid, but can’t admit the CDC lied.

I don’t really care if one believes the CDC etc. is profoundly incompetent instead of dishonest. It does interest me why one is easy to accept without evidence and the other isn’t even though the evidence is conclusive. What I care about is people coming to realize if they want good health and safety that can only be achieved by critical thought and not swallowing whole what these clowns or liars tell us.

Taking incorrect information from these people has killed a lot of people. Whether it’s sheer unfathomable incompetence or deliberate disinformation doesn’t matter to the dead people. It only matters the information that killed them was incorrect and that correct information existed that could have saved their life. For us, the living, I believe we do need to get a handle on why the information we are given is incorrect. The problem needs solved and to solve a problem it must be correctly identified. I’ve been asking people around PF to change my mind with evidence the incorrect information is the product of profound incompetence and not dishonesty.

But so far I’ve been presented no such evidence. I’m open to any information regarding known facts about virology and when they were known. Dates of when incorrect information was given in relation to known correct information etc. I’m interested in why people choose incompetence over dishonesty as reason/excuse as well, but I’m much more interested in actual evidence it’s truly incompetence and not dishonesty.

 

Perhaps- both. There are of course many competent and responsible people in the fields of science and medicine, and they do often disagree. But that is different, and usually honest. I think the politicizing of this thing has changed all the rules for those in visible positions, because we now see many who should be the competent and responsible playing their role by political rules- and that invariably brings both incompetence and dishonesty into the picture. They have lost sight of the purpose and ethics of their profession.

 

I agree there are political games involved. But when we consider the same lies with the same excuses have come under two (publicly) diametrically opposed political factions that falls apart as a base explanation. Politicians attempt to score points but the same main lies have proliferated two very different administrations.

For example, if the recommendations against quality masks were political to make Trump look bad, why would the lie continue under Biden? In another thread I presented evidence Biden advised retailers like Amazon to sell N95 masks in the spring of 2021 in opposition to the request/advice by the CDC that Amazon should not sell them. The CDC has been steadfast and adamant in consistently telling the lie even when the politics change.

 

I'm quite happy to believe ANYONE can lie, but generally I need to see a reason for that to be the case before I point the finger. I can see no reason for the lies you describe.

Not forgetting I'm not in America so I haven't experienced this first hand. Can you offer any explanation as to what would be gained from such a lie?
Without some reason for these lies or extreme stupidity it is impossible for me to offer and real response, hence my desire not to. You yourself often claim you only speak of what you know.

 

This idea a lie can’t exist without a defined reason for the lie is foreign to me. I just encountered it on PF the other day but that member couldn’t explain where the idea comes from. A lie is false information given with the knowledge it’s false. Clearly I’ve established that in the examples I’ve given.

Trying to guess why an institution I have no formal involvement with is lying is counterproductive for three reasons. First, there’s no way to know and speculation isn’t helpful. Second, the reason doesn’t matter much does it? It’s like if I take $10,000 out of a bank vault that does not belong to me it doesn’t matter if I wanted it for hookers or for blow. Third, from experience I know the minute a motive is suggested, all the facts I’ve presented as evidence will be dismissed on the grounds I’m just positing a conspiracy theory. I’m looking for discussion and information, not fallacy.

I’m interested in discussing things that can be founded on evidence. A motive is speculation unless you or someone else has evidence for motivation. I do not. If you want to start a thread in the conspiracy theory subforum I’ll check it out, but I don’t have any interest in the facts I present here being dismissed with appeal to the stone fallacy.

 

There is a big difference between lying on a forum with little consequence and lying in public office with huge potential consequence.

The reason matters a lot to me. The reason you took $10,000 from the vault is obvious, its for personal gain, what that personal gain was doesn't matter. In the case you cite I see no gain at all, personal or otherwise. As far as I am concerned no one takes such risk of lying in public office without some sort of gain or reason. Therefore I judge it was not a lie but something else I have yet to discover.
I agree about conspiracy theories, there are so many around, but I do try to make the dots join up.
I remain unconvinced and on the side lines on this one.

 

It wasn’t lying on the forum it was another member saying the CDC couldn’t lie unless I could prove a motive for lying. I responded as here—a lie is a false statement made with the knowledge it’s false. It has no relevance to motive. The two are different subjects.

So to be clear, the CDC isn’t lying unless you or I can identify a motive? The fact they knowingly gave false information is irrelevant until we can prove why they would do so?

 

fine you win.

 

The only way I “win” is if people start making better decisions for themselves than the CDC makes for them. That’s the desired endpoint for me.

 

Well I hope you get that. But with no understanding or desire to understand the why's of the decisions it seems unlikely

 

I’m open to any evidence anyone can provide about the “why”. Unfortunately nobody has provided anything concrete.

 

don't think the CDC MAKES decisions for anyone. Their role is to provide the information as they know it...(and as it changes)...........and make recommendations. The CDC has to have credibility...... and lying deliberately would be unethical. It IS possible that they were pressured by certain politicians to provide selective information. ..But with peoples lives at stake........this would be really bad practice.

With the amount of disinformation floating around.......... the situation became unnecessarily confusing.

 

Would you please start here and follow the thread and my conversation with @dagosa and @CenterField on this subject before asserting the CDC doesn’t make decisions for people? They prevented retailers from selling surplus N95 masks to consumers for months after they were in surplus. That is making decisions for others. Anyway, please read that thread starting at the link and I’ll be happy to discuss this further. But you are likely unaware of most of the details of what the CDC actually did. I lay it all out with complete documentation in that thread.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?posts/1072983209/
The circumstances I outline were the same under both the Trump and Biden Administrations so let’s not get distracted by politics.

Forgot the link to this post as well. It’s important.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?posts/1072982994/

 

Absolutely, the CDC does make decisions for others. For example, they banned cruise ships from using US cities as port of call for several months. Until the CDC "recommends" a vaccine authorized or approved by the FDA, it can't be legally given to Americans. They certify masks through NIOSH (which is an agency that belongs to the CDC). If a mask does not pass the certification process, it can't be used in hazardous occupations. And so on and so forth. The CDC has many regulatory powers that have force of law under the Public Health Safety Act. CDC agents can even detain a person if the person is arriving to the USA or travelling between states, if they suspect the person of being a carrier of a dangerous disease. They can impose an eviction moratorium if they think that making people homeless will contribute to spreading a disease.

Read this, for example:

https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/R/R46758

 

Leaving only things that sound like conspiracy theories. I appreciate your problem.
Of course the answer could be something more subtle. Maybe they were concerned that there were not enough N95 masks for everyone and that if they advised folks to use them rumour would stop people from using less effective ones at all. Maybe they thought supply would not keep up with demand and it was better to have folks wear A mask than NO mask. I don't know.
One of the things my life has taught me is not to jump to conclusions before knowing all the facts, so often there is something you hadn't considered.

 

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. This is more what I’m looking for. I’m asking for information I don’t have.

I actually have considered that theory but the sheer numbers of masks in inventory and the massive production capacity already throttled back by early spring of 2021 just makes it untenable. We had domestic producers going bankrupt because the CDC was recommending against the product they were churning out and piling on shelves. I don’t know if you’ve followed the discussions in the thread I linked to above in post #7869 but the documentation is all in that thread. The potential to supply masks was massive but completely untapped.

So far in these discussions I’ve limited my comments to domestic US manufactured product. But Chinese N95s have also been in unlimited supply for months as the CDC was still recommending against their use.

Also, to seriously consider this scenario we have to believe the CDC took actions we had solid evidence for (that inferior masks will kill people) over the hypothetical without any evidence (that it may be detrimental to overall acceptance of masking). Basically that’s intentionally killing people knowing you will to avoid a hypothetical situation that may or may not harm someone. I guess that’s a possibility but theoretical itself.

 

Yes, I don't think my suggestions are necessarily correct. Indeed they probably aren't. Its just that I find them no less unbelievable than the idea that the CDC maliciously killed people for no apparent reason.

 

I don’t think anyone has claimed malicious killing for no reason. What is firmly established is the CDC did kill a lot of people by telling people to not use a readily available effective mitigation tool.

To benefit from this information all the individual has to do is acknowledge the information from the CDC can kill you and begin to make health decisions based on actual evidence instead of appealing to authority of an organization that has priorities above public and individual health.

As a society, if we want a CDC that has public and individual health as a priority we probably will have to determine what’s actually causing them to give advice not based on science or reality. Perhaps that isn’t what we want. Either way I’ll keep looking for answers.

 

This amounts to the same thing to me. I still find it easier to believe you've missed something than to believe the CDC made decision knowing they would kill people (Assuming they are at least as educated on the subject as you) for no reason.