[FRIAM] flu versus COVID

[glen∉ℂ]

Never ascribe malice (or governance by fear) when incompetence will suffice. -- paraphrased from some pithy archetype somewhere sometime.

I was totally with you until the last 2 paragraphs, though I haven't checked your facts. In my posts about "credibility", I tried to lay out the idea that someone like Fauci is NOT properly labeled [in]credible because of any single act/statement or even the truth status of one or several acts/statements. Credibility comes from consistent *care*, including revisiting things later and making attempts to abut or correct previous acts/statements.

Fauci shows such care. Therefore, Fauci is credible, even if he's made mistakes.

When you talk about ruling through fear, the real culprit is, as EricS pointed out, the political pressure on people like Fauci to render opinions *aligned* with some party line. To accuse Fauci of such in light of the recent news from Woodward's book and the pressure on CDC rank and file is disinformation. You're focus on the victim makes your post incredible disinformation, even if (or especially if) the first part of your post is factual. It's a typical abuse of facts to foster a false narrative.

But it's also important to realize we're all, always, susceptible to such faulty reasoning. Attempts to be diligent and correct in such is the source of credibility. I was once accused of being a spammer because I posted too much, even though my accuser admitted the *content* of my posts were on topic and not spam, the very volume was offensive to him. This is yet another example of normal people's small appetite for verbosity. Pithiness, pseudo-profound bullshit, and false narratives are all aspects of the same beast. It's impossible to harden ourselves to such risk without holing up in our echo-chamber dungeons, surrounded by others who've "jumped over the bar" to be included in our in-group.


On 9/12/20 7:44 AM, Prof David West wrote:
> Sloppy reporting, and sloppy pronouncements — yes, you Dr. Fauci — have contaminated the discussion about COVID and appropriate responses. Specifically with regard equating or improperly substituting IFR with CFR.
> 
> IFR = infection fatality rate
> CFR = case fatality rate
> 
> A "case"requires symptoms.
> 
> Seasonal flu has an IFR of 0.1% and a CFR of 2-3%
> 
> COVID has an IFR of 1.0% [initially WHO and CDC stated a higher percent] and a CFR of 2-3%
> 
> For whatever reason, Dr Fauci and other official statements have compared COVID's CFR to the flu's IFR to assert the "deadliness" of the disease and to justify draconian measures.
> 
> Naysayers, compare CFR to CFR to assert that COVID is no more deadly than the flu. They are correct. With the "TRUTH" on their side, they rail against the lock down.
> 
> There is a justification for social distancing and masks in the difference between IFR and IFR coupled with the higher infection rate of COVID and the flu( a lot of flu immunity exists), plus the "infectious phase" of 12 days (COVID) instead of 2 (flu).
> 
> In my opinion the "powers that be" have such a low opinion of the average intelligence of the populace that they misrepresent the data in order to scare the crap out of people in order to get them to comply with directives instead of making the reasonable and correct, but more nuanced and complicated, factual argument for their policies.
> 
> Governance by fear seems to be standard operating procedure these days. 9-11 yielded the TSA abomination (expensive, ineffective and annoying). Can't wait to see what COVID inflicts — especially with the talk of "forced vaccinations" I have heard bandied about.