@rudyschwartz@dobbs.town @freemo
I've got one (on Covid): the long-running refusal to alter policies about vaccination that were justified by the initial very high effectiveness of the mRNA vaccines in actually preventing acquisition of Covid in a population mostly naive to the Covid antigens.
It's not about saving people from giving it to each other, because we're not checking that everyone's had a booster within 3-4 months, and after that the protective effect size is roughly zero.
It's not about immunity, because for about 3 months after you've had Covid you're supposed to wait to get vaccinated so you get a better memory response (sooner than that and the residual antibody levels from the infection are already too high)...but...if you have a vaccination requirement, that you're too Covid resistant doesn't count as being vaccinated even though you're now *actually* less likely to give it to anyone else.
There are some people (including one I know) who really can't/couldn't take the vaccine (on doctor's orders!--significant but not life-threatening side effects on the first dose, for instance) who were providing health care or education who basically had to sit on their hands, not helping people because of this.
In terms of actual death toll, it's nowhere near the huge and terrible number caused by right-wing anti-vax sentiments, but on the other hand, we do generally provide pretty large allowances for people to suffer the consequences of their own stupidity.
In terms of completely pointless disruption checking something that isn't relevant and occasionally causing bad outcomes, with absolutely zero redeeming features, this one ranks pretty high. Medicine says: this person shouldn't take a vaccine right now. Research says: they aren't a danger to others and depending on details not themselves either. Left wing scientitism-driven policy says: "science says you gotta vax, so you gotta vax".
As Freemo says, the nuance is important. People die when you get important nuances wrong.
(Aside: I'm worried that the use of ivermectin to treat terrible nematode diseases in humans will be hampered by all the rhetoric about ivermectin being just a "horse dewormer". It's a really important medicine for people, too! Just not for Covid!)
@rudyschwartz@dobbs.town @freemo
Oh, oh, I've got another!
Gotta mask (sometimes)! Okay, sure, the mathematics and viral particle transmission studies and the epidemiology on that are convincing enough. The Bangladesh study is good!
The Bangladesh study, which showed that cloth masks don't do much, but surgical masks help some. Coupled that with the viral blocking studies that show that N95 masks are waaay better than surgical masks--going from medical to N95 is a much bigger improvement than going from nothing to medical.
So, in high-density environments, we tell people to wear N95 masks. Right? That's the requirement, isn't it? Leftists? Please? Maybe for visitors to hospitals with vulnerable populations? Please??
No! "Wear a mask!" That's it. You can't have any more refinement than that. That's the science for the general public: wear a mask. (Obviously medical staff wear appropriate PPE, including well-fitted N95 masks when appropriate.)
Just once, I saw one attempt at doing something better: you have to take off your mask--even if it's an N95 mask!--and wear our hospital-supplied medical mask. I don't even.....
If you care enough to make someone put a piece of cloth over their face that barely does any good, supposedly for my safety, why won't you make the same person do something that *actually* helps a lot with my safety?!
