Hacker News Reader

Comment by SavantIdiot | Hacker News Reader

> if authorities hadn't lied about, say, masks or this stuff

When did authorities lie? The position on masks changed over time as data was acquired. Unless you mean when the FDA/CDC was worried about a run on masks, which they were right about.

But I think ascribing a malicious intent to that learning process is disingenuous.

The only people that have made literally malicious claims have been people on the far-right, which unfortunately are some authorities so I guess you're right about Trump and his bootlicks who intentionally lied for personal gain. And continue to do so.

View on HN

> Unless you mean when the FDA/CDC was worried about a run on masks, which they were right about.

Lying for what you believe to be a good reason is still lying.

The CDC literally cited mask scarcity for medical workers as a reason the public shouldn't get masks. The whole "CDC lied about masks being necessary" is bullshit. The difference between the CDC and the anti-vaxx crowd is the CDC makes decisions in the public interest and explains the rational behind their decision making.

>The CDC literally cited mask scarcity for medical workers as a reason the public shouldn't get masks.

As one of the reasons. They also (according to Time) gave the reason that they don't prevent you from getting Covid:

>The science, according to the CDC, says that surgical masks won’t stop the wearer from inhaling small airborne particles, which can cause infection.

>Doctors and health experts keep spreading the word. “Seriously people- STOP BUYING MASKS!” tweeted Dr. Jerome Adams, the U.S. Surgeon General, on Feb. 29. “They are NOT effective in preventing general public from catching #Coronavirus, but if healthcare providers can’t get them to care for sick patients, it puts them and our communities at risk!”

https://time.com/5794729/coronavirus-face-masks/

You're still being dishonest when you leave out that THE CDC SAID AT THE TIME THAT THEIR CURRENT RECOMMENDATIONS WERE BASED ON THE A AVAILABILITY OF MASKS TO MEDICAL WORKERS.

The CDC states what their rational is, they update their recommendations with new information, and they act in the public interest. Anti-vaxxers do none of those.

I don't think I left that out. I said "one of the reasons" the CDC gave was scarcity of masks for medical workers.

I also quoted "but if healthcare providers can’t get them to care for sick patients, it puts them and our communities at risk!"

So I don't think I was being dishonest.

Sibling commenter pointed out why this is wrong, but on a broader level, I don't understand the need to retcon the CDC's incompetence to score points against the anti-vaxxers. The anti-vaxx position is wrong whether or not the CDC is good at its job. The two questions are completely orthogonal.

> Unless you mean when the FDA/CDC was worried about a run on masks, which they were right about.

Were they? I imagine federal government has the power to expropriate and ration masks, if necessary. This is way better than lying and then making a surprised pikachu face "why don't they trust us?", no?

They don't want to open the flood gates on people expecting the government to do things to make their lives better.

Did you forget who the president was at the time? It took almost a year for him to think it was even real.

> When did authorities lie? The position on masks changed over time as data was acquired. Unless you mean when the FDA/CDC was worried about a run on masks, which they were right about.

The fact that they say it was intended to prevent a run on masks proves that it was a lie and they knew it was a lie, which is inherently malicious in my book.

They lied about masks. It's plain and simple.

The science on masks is not exactly new or bleeding edge.

You have to be unbelievably naive to accept that "the position changed".

They were usually very careful in the wording, saying no evidence outside of a medical setting for this type of virus. And mentioned it usually insane breath as conserving masks for medical workers.

It was manipulative and steering behavior, but in most cases I've seen not lying.

*in the same breath

> You have to be unbelievably naive to accept that "the position changed".

...or have a functioning knowledge of science. Your trail of anti-vax nonsense doesn't really serve you well in this modality.

What specifically was the lie told. This is what I'm confused about.

There was a point where it wasn't believed that asymptomatic infection was likely. In that case, wearing masks is less beneficial.

Here are a few to get you started: https://slate.com/technology/2021/07/noble-lies-covid-fauci-...

Your team allegiance is showing.

At least I'm on the right team, and didn't ignore it for a year and spread massive amounts of disinfo to this day.

Which side did you choose? Oh wait, I can smell it from here...

Did your sad little downvote make you feel better? sadflex

I'd put the whole censorship of debate and deplatforming dissenters in the left leaning media and tech companies. That made compliance very difficult for me personally as all trust was gone after that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com