07-14-2020, 09:50 PM
As if there weren't enough to worry about, I've been hearing stories of people deliberately giving false information to contact tracers: "they have no right to know where I've been or what I've been up to."
Sigh.
In these early stages of novel disease outbreak, there is never sufficient data. Real-time science is like pathfinding, trying one avenue and being willing to back up and redirect when routes don't pan out. To those who don't understand how science works, this can seem untrustworthy. And finally, there are political factors, such as the WHO bending a bit to make China look good, or putting out conclusive-sounding statements based on lack of data one way or another. If the virus spreads too quickly, it's up to public health officers to make calculated decisions based on some data and lots of trusted anecdotal patterns. And of course those decisions are usually politically unpalatable.
Early, cautious action is better than inaction because there's "not enough data." Look at New Zealand. They didn't wait for "sufficient" data to take action. And now they have sports and bars and normal lives.
Sigh.
In these early stages of novel disease outbreak, there is never sufficient data. Real-time science is like pathfinding, trying one avenue and being willing to back up and redirect when routes don't pan out. To those who don't understand how science works, this can seem untrustworthy. And finally, there are political factors, such as the WHO bending a bit to make China look good, or putting out conclusive-sounding statements based on lack of data one way or another. If the virus spreads too quickly, it's up to public health officers to make calculated decisions based on some data and lots of trusted anecdotal patterns. And of course those decisions are usually politically unpalatable.
Early, cautious action is better than inaction because there's "not enough data." Look at New Zealand. They didn't wait for "sufficient" data to take action. And now they have sports and bars and normal lives.