![]() I believe that in 2020, scientists and public health experts can only report the complete, unvarnished truth, as they believe it to be. Irrespective of your feelings in these specific cases, the core tension in both examples is whether we want scientific advisors and public health experts to report just the facts, as they see them, or do we want them to make the additional calculation of what the public would do with those facts, and use that to shape their comments, aiming to maximize the greater good? While he advised against community use, he later stressed he felt it was "fine." Fauci would later clarify that his words were chosen to prevent a run on masks - so that healthcare workers would get first priority - but some have used this interview to question his veracity. Critics would then point to this video as evidence that Fauci was dishonest however, a full look at the remarks suggests the comments were nuanced. This occurred in the absence of any substantive new mask studies. Later, of course, the public messaging would shift in support of universal cloth masks. Interviewer: But it can lead to a shortage of masks?įauci: Exactly, that's the point, it can lead to a shortage of masks for the people who really need it. The people who - when you look at the films of foreign countries and you see 85% of the people wearing masks, that's fine, that's fine, I am not against it if you want to do it, that's fine. But, when you think masks - you should think of healthcare providers needing them and people who are ill. ![]() ![]() ![]() Interviewer: And can you get some schmutz sorta staying inside there?įauci: Of course, of course. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |