Here I go mentioning the plague once again, so soon after I promised I was done... but my thoughts are more general than Covid-related.
Here is a key graf from today's "The Morning," a weekday e-newsletter from The New York Times. The lead article was trying to explain how the CDC came up with its advice for children at summer camps to wear masks all summer long.
"There does not seem to be much scientific reason that campers and counselors, or most other people, should wear a mask outdoors all summer. Telling them to do so is an example of extreme cation -- like staying out of the ocean to avoid sharks -- that seems to have a greater cost than benefit."
It turns out that the CDC relied on meta data to make this decision, and that led to ONE small study from Singapore leading them to say that there is less than a 10 percent chance of virus transmission outdoors, when the reality is something more like 0.1 percent.
My first thought for writers is that this a great reminder that "outliers" may be dramatic and get attention, but they should often be discounted when trying to make a sound decision or argument.
My second thought is that the CDC is doing no favors for anyone with its excessive caution. No one wants a kid to die or even become quite ill, so MAYBE we can see where someone in authority can defend requiring masks for summer camp participants.
But any thoughtful cost-benefit analysis would probably produce another set of recommendations.
Look, I WANT to trust the CDC and government more generally. By and large, I do trust local, state and federal leaders, particularly the unelected folks who simply want what is best for Americans. But I can certainly feel some sympathy for people who cannot find that level of trust.
This whole chaotic mess reminds me of how easy it is to LOSE reputation, or have it damaged. Regaining a reputation, on the other hand, will take loads of time and effort, and may not even be possible.
For some Americans, the CDC's reputation is in tatters. I honestly don't know how it gets it back.
No comments:
Post a Comment