[DocSavage87]

I often feel like those who support Atlas or champion views not in the mainstream (e.g., masks don't really work, we can get herd immunity by letting virus rip without major loss of life by "protecting the vulnerable") fall back on philosophical straw men arguments or cherry-pick particular decisions as as exemplars of "don't follow science."

Take this quote from the blog: "Scientists can help define these trade-offs, but scientists have no special ability to speak about values on behalf of all citizens. In other words, science is necessary but not sufficient to deal with COVID-19. Thinking otherwise is a dangerous view that steals political power from people and gives it to scientists under false pretenses."

I hear a lot about "values", but the major conflicts in decisions don't really seem about values, they are about scientific facts.  A large part of the population still think (1) masks don't work and could possibly be harmful, and (2) COVID-19 is similar to the flu.  There is no way we agree on policy if we can't agree on the baseline facts, and if the "people" make decisions based on a fake reality, then they shouldn't be making the decision.  And that is especially true of the political leadership.  

Let's be clear: the doctors and scientists aren't the ones who have massively failed during this pandemic, it's been the political leadership.  If the political leadership had been mute, actually not making things worse, we'd have less death in this country.  So it's particularly galling to hear forum posts saying how the real problem is letting epidemiologists / scientists take over policy.  News flash: Scientists have never been in charge of the policy.  If they were, we'd have taken over factories for manufacturing PPE, rolled out brobdingnagian grants for parallel efforts on research & deployment of new tests (particularly rapid ones), prioritized opening K-6 significantly over bars and football stadiums, etc.  

Instead we have people who briefly heralded healthcare workers like they ordinarily adulate military personnel, and now won't even change their behavior though it puts the healthcare workers in harm's way.  What part of "follow the science" is packing airports and gathering groups from across the country in small indoor areas?

[DocSavage87]

I often feel like those who support Atlas or champion views not in the mainstream (e.g., masks don't really work, we can get herd immunity by letting virus rip without major loss of life by "protecting the vulnerable") fall back on philosophical straw men arguments or cherry-pick particular decisions as as exemplars of "don't follow science."

Take this quote from the blog: "Scientists can help define these trade-offs, but scientists have no special ability to speak about values on behalf of all citizens. In other words, science is necessary but not sufficient to deal with COVID-19. Thinking otherwise is a dangerous view that steals political power from people and gives it to scientists under false pretenses."

I hear a lot about "values", but the major conflicts in decisions don't really seem about values, they are about scientific facts.  A large part of the population still think (1) masks don't work and could possibly be harmful, and (2) COVID-19 is similar to the flu.  There is no way we agree on policy if we can't agree on the baseline facts, and if the "people" make decisions based on a fake reality, then they shouldn't be making the decision.  And that is especially true of the political leadership.  

Let's be clear: the doctors and scientists aren't the ones who have massively failed during this pandemic, it's been the political leadership.  If the political leadership had been mute, actually not making things worse, we'd have less death in this country.  So it's particularly galling to hear forum posts saying how the real problem is letting epidemiologists / scientists take over policy.  News flash: Scientists have never been in charge of the policy.  If they were, we'd have taken over factories for manufacturing PPE, rolled out brobdingnagian grants for parallel efforts on research & deployment of new tests (particularly rapid ones), prioritized opening K-6 significantly over bars and football stadiums, etc.  

Instead we have people who briefly heralded healthcare workers like they ordinarily adulate military personnel, and now won't even change their behavior though it puts the healthcare workers in harm's way.  What part of "follow the science" is packing airports and gathering groups from across the country in small indoor areas?