Pandemic advice from the WHO

[mtbc]

I had previously had a vaguely good impression of the World Health Organization. However, during this pandemic they have unpleasantly surprised me. In trying to understand how to protect myself from SARS-CoV-2 I have been keeping somewhat abreast of the preliminary research and it did not take long for multiple credible items of circumstantial evidence to emerge that widespread mask-wearing helps and that infection appears to follow indoor airflow. I would certainly understand some we're not sure caveats but it disappointed me to see how long it took the WHO to start to agree about masks and now they seem to be dragging their feet on airborne transmission. As somebody who dropped biology before finishing high school and whose professional focus is neither medical nor epidemiological, am I the one very plausibly mistaken about all this, should I have more faith? Otherwise, what is going on with the WHO? Are they hamstrung by what would be politically convenient for China and the US? Are they scared to make a best guess in a crisis situation? Should we be listening to some other organization instead?

Comments

[mtbc]

Thank you for explaining the timeline, I'd completely missed those details. Epic fail indeed, their credibility has to be one of the big casualties. I was probably distracted by wondering when the British government would finally start to agree that, yeah, masks would be a good idea! It wasn't until the second week of May that they came around to that thinking.

[shadowkat]

A lot of people missed it. It wasn't broadly broadcast. I only picked up on it for the following reasons: I watched NY1 every morning at 6:25 am prior to going to work and they were talking about it. Also they would talk about it when I checked the weather for the next day at night. And...I was watching the maps, and thinking okay, the thing has exploded in Italy, it's hit the West Coast, why doesn't NYC have any cases? (I work out of a major transportation hub in Queens, NY - and see international travelers daily, some of which were wearing masks. Also co-workers who had kids studying in Italy - those kids were being sent home. And they were cancelling family trips there. I knew people were traveling to and from Europe and NYC.)

So, I was looking at it a lot more closely than other people were. Plus I have a fascination with viruses going back to the 1990s. And, the back and forth between NY and the CDC was entertaining.

NY1 had a bet going on when the CDC would let NY test. Each day they'd report on it - with the Mayor announcing that no, CDC hadn't granted permission yet, but not to worry - they were hunting ways to do it without them. LOL!

Then when the Governor started doing his briefings? He would make snide remarks about the CDC and WHO and the Feds. It was subtle at first, when he needed their help. It's not subtle now. He's reminded the NY Times several times now in his briefings that the CDC wouldn't let them test and told them they were being silly.

[shadowkat]

Britain was faster on the masks than many of the US States were. While NY made it mandatory in April - a lot of people didn't get the memo in NY. We're still having fights on my neighborhood FB page about whether masks are mandatory, or just recommended. Mainly because the police aren't enforcing and see it as recommended (many of them are Trump supporters and think the President has to mandate it not the Governor). So the US Federal Government refuses to mandate masks, and merely recommends, and worse? The CDC gave contradictory information regarding masks early on to ensure essential workers got them first.

So the reason Britain has been able to contain it better than the US, is the US refuses to mandate masks across the board. Our idiot President won't wear one. And the VP didn't start putting on one until two weeks ago.