The cognitive dissonance and abdication of agency is strong in this “forecast” from the @CDCgov.
Let’s unpack some of the design and wording choices in the article and graphs, and what we can really learn from them.
1. The idea of a “respiratory season” is now obviously outdated with millions of Americans infected with a severe respiratory virus (it’s even in the SARS NAME!) year-round.
2. To have a “forecast” with both good and bad scenarios covering all the contingencies without delineating likelihoods or causality isn’t really much of a forecast. It’s like saying “it’s rather going to rain or not rain tomorrow.” True, but not useful.
3. They show the summer and winter peaks as lower than the prior peaks with no convincing evidence as to why that might be.
4. They show next year’s spring lull in cases as lower than last year’s when recent trends since the relaxation of all pandemic emergency measures actually shows just the opposite trend.
5. And perhaps most importantly, they do not highlight at all that whether the summer and winter peaks are severe or not depends closely on the actions of their agency, our governments, and individuals in taking action to curb the pandemic. Their article gives the impression that whatever happens will happen, and there’s nothing we can do about it.
Fundamentally, this is just another example of the abandonment of their namesake mission to control the spread of disease.
The reality is that the worse outcomes are entirely preventable with action driven by stronger leadership.
if the @CDCgov clearly and unambiguously communicated and promoted new cleaner Indoor Air Quality standards that were enforced by federal state and local governments, with masking in surges with quality N95 respirators in healthcare and school settings there would be no “bad scenarios.”
Let’s unpack some of the design and wording choices in the article and graphs, and what we can really learn from them.
1. The idea of a “respiratory season” is now obviously outdated with millions of Americans infected with a severe respiratory virus (it’s even in the SARS NAME!) year-round.
2. To have a “forecast” with both good and bad scenarios covering all the contingencies without delineating likelihoods or causality isn’t really much of a forecast. It’s like saying “it’s rather going to rain or not rain tomorrow.” True, but not useful.
3. They show the summer and winter peaks as lower than the prior peaks with no convincing evidence as to why that might be.
4. They show next year’s spring lull in cases as lower than last year’s when recent trends since the relaxation of all pandemic emergency measures actually shows just the opposite trend.
5. And perhaps most importantly, they do not highlight at all that whether the summer and winter peaks are severe or not depends closely on the actions of their agency, our governments, and individuals in taking action to curb the pandemic. Their article gives the impression that whatever happens will happen, and there’s nothing we can do about it.
Fundamentally, this is just another example of the abandonment of their namesake mission to control the spread of disease.
The reality is that the worse outcomes are entirely preventable with action driven by stronger leadership.
if the @CDCgov clearly and unambiguously communicated and promoted new cleaner Indoor Air Quality standards that were enforced by federal state and local governments, with masking in surges with quality N95 respirators in healthcare and school settings there would be no “bad scenarios.”
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
