This my friends is why you don’t put the lives of BILLIONS of people on hold out of fear of a new virus. It takes months or years to know/see things correct. As such, don’t turn the world on its head “as an abundance of caution.” Take reasonable measures until you know more.
For example, we know from years of data/studies that children need school; patients are helped with companions; the body/mind needs fresh air/diff scenes, and that unemployment leads to increased chance of suicides/ODs. You are insane to put life on hold, something NEVER done on
this scsle, because models which are based off of humans’ assumptions say so and so. Indeed, the early hosptial/ICU assumptions were way off to the dark side as studies now confirm and as I have warned mid-March. True, you can’t rely on my math but you can’t turn the world on its
head either based on new assumptions about a new thing. “Rather be safe than sorry” is good for reasonable measures in line with years of science and data. I asked someone with 30 years on the front line of medical care what protocol he would implement for Coronavirus. He said
“the first protocol is not to change protocol!” Exactly right! I mean, we know for decades that fresh air is good. At some point during Covid, it was the consensus that staying indoors helps protect against Covid so BILLIONS were told to stay indoors. Within weeks, the opinion
changed and that being out (with distancing) is a better way to AVOID getting ill. Why did you tell people to stay home based on the first study/opinion which goes against decades of accepted health advice? Are you CRAZY? Reallly, are you INSANE? cc @YosefRapaport
Then there is the question of credibility. @TheLancet pulled the hydroxychloroquine study because the authors “were unable to complete an independent audit of the data underpinning their analysis.” Why was it published in the first place without peer review? Well,
Scientists are humans. We all have blind spots and biases on policy. The rush was on to crush Trump on this, so THREE scientists saw what they wanted to see and wrote a garbage paper! Then the editors let it run without audit! Moral? Scientific reports are not so vaunted as some
want to make it to be, so don’t shut down debate by yelling SCIENCE and don’t turn the world upside down based on new studies especially when they go against long-standing studies. New studies can be a scam such as this or can simply he wrong as is with the staying in thing.
