Thread by @c0nc0rdance

Any reductio ad absurdum analogies you can pick for denying the effectiveness of masks, distancing and social isolation will just remind you of the contrarian nature of big segments of the population.

Seatbelts
Helmets
Vaccines

There are/were movements against all of them.

In the late 1960's/early 70's when seatbelt laws spread across the country, there were protesters who would photograph themselves cutting out the seatbelts from new cars.
wpr.org/surprisingly-c…

In the battle for adoption, the more urgent the pressure, the more this small group will resist. It takes time, it takes concerted educational efforts, and persistence, not pressure, tend to be effective.

At least, if you have the luxury of decades. Which we don't.

Even the child-resistant lid, invented 1967 by Ontario physician, Dr. Charles Breault, has serious detractors with a framework of opposition.

"It's not 100% safe!"
"I don't have kids, why should I have to use these stupid lids!?"
"Is there even any evidence they work?"

Public health has been threading the needle between our collective rights to stop uncontrolled spread of disease and our individual right to act in our private lives however we like.

It's not always easy to agree on that balance, and therein lies the conflict.

A young Ralph Nader in 1965 wrote "Unsafe at Any Speed" that laid why carmakers resisted investing in automotive safety. Seatbelts were optional extras in some models, or could be deleted for a small refund in others.

They wanted it to be a luxury upsell: "fully loaded"

As a result of his advocacy, in 1966 Pres. LBJ signed National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act which created the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which set minimum standards of safety, taking the features from "luxury upsells" to basic expectations.