This article came out January 9th. The story is still up without the accurate info at @nytimes.
@WSJ broke down the actual timeline. Link here, details in screenshots below: google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.…
@WSJ broke down the actual timeline. Link here, details in screenshots below: google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.…
Oh. And if you were asking yourself “I wonder what the World Health Organization was doing about it at the time?” feast your eyes on their tweets. @WHO
From the Times piece that illuminates more than I’m sure the authors originally thought, particularly about @WHO:
@WHO, do you still stand by the idea that their handling of the coronavirus “demonstrates China’s increased capacity to manage new outbreaks”?
I’m no expert, but I would imagine it would be beneficial if China did this? Maybe even if they had done it in January, when this article seems to imply they could/should be able to?
I don’t think history will look kindly on this assumption.
Unrelated but I’m still waiting for an updated name for MERS, because surely it’s racist against a vulnerable group to call it Middle East Respiratory Syndrome, right?
Weird we aren’t talking about that as part of our definitely earnest and authentic race/virus discussion.
Weird we aren’t talking about that as part of our definitely earnest and authentic race/virus discussion.
Your reminder that these wet markets are back up and active. So only a matter of time before this happens again.
That the most prominent newspaper in America got this story so wrong - in no small part because of the consistent lies told by China - is one thing.
That they continue to report in a way that doesn’t reflect they’ve learned from the experience is putting lives at risk.
That they continue to report in a way that doesn’t reflect they’ve learned from the experience is putting lives at risk.
