I write to commend you on one of the more thoughtful blogs on COVID-19 that I have read. I’ve been modeling, and writing about, SARS-CoV-2 since March of 2020, and following the literature closely. Your assessment and practical advice seem spot on. Thank you.
I think my only criticism is your one sentence polemic about the FDA, the CDC, and WHO. While I don’t know anyone at the WHO, I have many colleagues at both the FDA and the CDC. The FDA and the CDC respect science, respect data, and respect regulations. They were villified under the previous administration, and are struggling to return to their scientific / public health roots under the current administration. I can confirm that the CDC website is again a source of useful information and guidance. I’m disappointed that it took the FDA so long to get vaccines into children. However, I also respect both agencies for following the rules, even if some of the rules are now outdated or need revision in the face of a public health crisis. An anti-vax / mask denying / “no worse than the flu” person could cherry pick this comment to discredit their efforts to promote vaccines, treatments, and public health. You might consider toning it down.
Having said that (more as an afterthought than anything else), I’ll send people to this page for clearly stated assessment and recommendations that are (otherwise) consistent with the ever emerging data.
I think no one is denying that good people with good intentions and ethics work at the FDA and CDC.
But I’m not sure where to go with that? Support them no matter what? What incentive would they have to improve if we took that approach?
Hopefully the kind of criticism here is valuable feedback about how their policies are playing out in the real world, even if it’s not optimized for charitability. There’s a lot of people with relevant experience and perspectives that feel unheard here, Tara Haelle (Zvi mentions elsewhere) is one excellent example. https://twitter.com/tarahaelle/status/1478531929351860225?s=20
I write to commend you on one of the more thoughtful blogs on COVID-19 that I have read. I’ve been modeling, and writing about, SARS-CoV-2 since March of 2020, and following the literature closely. Your assessment and practical advice seem spot on. Thank you.
I think my only criticism is your one sentence polemic about the FDA, the CDC, and WHO. While I don’t know anyone at the WHO, I have many colleagues at both the FDA and the CDC. The FDA and the CDC respect science, respect data, and respect regulations. They were villified under the previous administration, and are struggling to return to their scientific / public health roots under the current administration. I can confirm that the CDC website is again a source of useful information and guidance. I’m disappointed that it took the FDA so long to get vaccines into children. However, I also respect both agencies for following the rules, even if some of the rules are now outdated or need revision in the face of a public health crisis. An anti-vax / mask denying / “no worse than the flu” person could cherry pick this comment to discredit their efforts to promote vaccines, treatments, and public health. You might consider toning it down.
Having said that (more as an afterthought than anything else), I’ll send people to this page for clearly stated assessment and recommendations that are (otherwise) consistent with the ever emerging data.
I think no one is denying that good people with good intentions and ethics work at the FDA and CDC.
But I’m not sure where to go with that? Support them no matter what? What incentive would they have to improve if we took that approach?
Hopefully the kind of criticism here is valuable feedback about how their policies are playing out in the real world, even if it’s not optimized for charitability. There’s a lot of people with relevant experience and perspectives that feel unheard here, Tara Haelle (Zvi mentions elsewhere) is one excellent example. https://twitter.com/tarahaelle/status/1478531929351860225?s=20