You missed the main reason this happened in the first place! There was an emergency pandemic group (such as President Obama used to contain Ebola) and it was disbanded by TFG’s wild, winging it, WH. Not only did they not know that DOE is where the nukes are (acc. to Bannon), they disbanded and made unusable, large swaths of the Federal Government because Why not? They did not “get it” that Chinese nationals come to our national laboratories, and we go to theirs (in Wuhan) because SCIENCE! This was an entirely preventable epidemic. Inanity of the highest order made it happen. …Afterwards? Sure, all your discussions of people going crazy with fear? Good luck eradicating fear.
Thank you, I think we do need to do these studies so we can learn better what does and does not work, and what are the harms we need to balance even as we contemplate ways to avoid deaths in a future disease outbreak like this.
I found this a very important example of the profound effect of one's worldview on their response to emergencies. People must make logical arguments based on sparse data. They do so by unconsciously filling in the gaps -- so they can reach almost any conclusion they want, and change it quickly in response to influences of their community.
Dr. Prasad made a number of important points, including emphasizing the folly of the prolonged pandemic-related school closures, the questionable wisdom of vaccine mandates, and the unfortunate failure of vaccine manufacturers to study important aspects of their efficacy. However, his presentation seemed distorted and one-sided, Listing just a few examples:
1: Yes, the FBI and DOE believe (with moderate-low confidence) that Covid originated from lab escape, but the majority of the intelligence community believe that Covid came from a wild source, as does the large majority of the virology community.
2: Lack of statistical proof in several studies that masks were effective for reducing Covid spread does not prove that masks were NOT effective. In fact, there's strong empirical evidence for their efficacy, and Prasad's discounting of mechanistic reasoning (masks certainly block most virus-containing particles) seems disingenuous.
3: Collins and Fauci made several mistakes early in the pandemic, but treating them as criminals seems borderline dishonest. Arguing that as head of NIAID Fauci was inherently protected from criticism by virologists is quite a stretch; does Prasad really believe that a peer-reviewed grant proposal would be disqualified from funding because Fauci got mad at the investigator?
In summary, Prasad came off as a fluent debater, not primarily a seeker of truth, though when challenged by Mounk about specific events or facts, he provided accurate information.
The overarching question is whether we as a society can learn from both the successes and failures of our response to COVID. Societies that value loyalty and secrecy above all else do not learn from mistakes and failures because information is not shared and discussion is not free and open. What kind of society have we become?
Great conversation, Yascha. This format was much more informative -- and paradoxically, fairer -- to Dr. Prasad and his views than a speech or podcast by him alone would have been. Your questions served not only to highlight the holes in his reasoning, but where it was strong as well.
It's unfortunate that Dr. Prasad lets what appears to be a very personal animus against Dr. Anthony Fauci color his statements; you did a better job of getting him around this that he was able to do himself. The same for his insistence on the lab leak hypothesis: it was only under questioning that he was willing to state that his suspicions have not yet been proven. The same for the deleterious role that teachers' unions played in extending school closures to ridiculous extents. To his credit, Dr. Prasad owned up to both, but not without prodding.
As for the wisdom or lack of it of vaccination mandates, I think that to make any progress on that issue we need to get back to basics, which we seldom ever do in this discussion. The three great pillars of our faith in vaccination mandates are, antibiotics excepted, our three greatest public health triumphs of the past century: the conquest of smallpox, of polio, and of measles. I would find arguments against covid vaccination requirements more convincing if I heard some evidence that contrasted them with the results of those three epochal programs. Especially at a time when irrational objections to vaccination are eroding our longstanding and once thought irreversible progress against measles, that discussion has never been more important.
Before the pandemic several of the millennial children of my friends whom I had previously canceled me due to my support of Trump in 2016 not only un-canceled me, but they were red-pilled by their own experiences and observations of liberal-controlled government. Basically the light came on for what the enemies of Trump represented. One is a family that includes two previously highly-liberal sons and a single mother... both sons are brilliant and highly educated. The oldest son convinced his new wife, the daughter of friends that are more like family... I have photos on the wall of me holding her as an infant and carrying her on my shoulders on hikes as a toddler... moved to GB when Trump was elected. They are struggling now to stay in BG long enough for her to earn her dual citizenship. They are obsessed with moving back to the US, buying a house with some land in a red-state.
The pandemic laid bare the real intent and agenda of the liberal Democrat ruling class. But more importantly, it provided an education to everyone that these are people that are hazards to the human condition when they dominate in political power.
Making policy mistakes that are explained by the unknown is excusable. Making policy mistakes that ignore what is known is not.
I can't understand why, when Prasad repeatedly said there was no justification to close schools because children were not endangered by the virus, Yascha did not point out the obvious fact that schools don't only have children; they have many adults: teachers, administrators, and other staff. This leads me to the conclusion that this is a fundamentally unserious conversation.
By the way, related to this, Rand Paul is going to finally take down the architect of this mess... Anthony Fauci... a hero of Democrat politics. The evidence is finally in Paul's hands and he is committed to justice as it relates to the cause of all that human death and harm.
Sicuramente per la sua posizione il dr. Prasad è un grande esperto nel suo campo, ma il tono generale del suo intervento sembra indurre a pensare che conosca poco o male la storia della medicina. Così mi sembra.
Caro signor Mounk, leggo sempre con interesse le sue interviste. Ho letto anche i suoi libri, ma questa volta sono rimasto sorpreso dal tono generale dell'intervista. Alcuni modelli matematici ( es Abba Gumel ) ( i numeri talora sono importanti ) dicono che se le misure restrittiive fossero state prese una o due settimane prima, avrebbero risparmiato centinaia di migliaia di vite. Mi in Naturalmente nella scienza, quindi anche in medicina, non vi sono verità assolute. Voglio anche ricordare, senza "spaccare il capello in due " sull' uso delle maschere e sul tipo di restrizioni più corrette, che i contrari all'uso delle maschere e alle restrizioni, in generale sono anche contrari ai vaccini. La storia, in particolare quella della medicina, non è cambiata, anche se dovrebbe essere maestra. Ma pochi la ascoltano.
You missed the main reason this happened in the first place! There was an emergency pandemic group (such as President Obama used to contain Ebola) and it was disbanded by TFG’s wild, winging it, WH. Not only did they not know that DOE is where the nukes are (acc. to Bannon), they disbanded and made unusable, large swaths of the Federal Government because Why not? They did not “get it” that Chinese nationals come to our national laboratories, and we go to theirs (in Wuhan) because SCIENCE! This was an entirely preventable epidemic. Inanity of the highest order made it happen. …Afterwards? Sure, all your discussions of people going crazy with fear? Good luck eradicating fear.
Thank you, I think we do need to do these studies so we can learn better what does and does not work, and what are the harms we need to balance even as we contemplate ways to avoid deaths in a future disease outbreak like this.
I found this a very important example of the profound effect of one's worldview on their response to emergencies. People must make logical arguments based on sparse data. They do so by unconsciously filling in the gaps -- so they can reach almost any conclusion they want, and change it quickly in response to influences of their community.
Trump telling governors that they had to say nice things about him to get aid is worth a mention. It didn't get one.
Dr. Prasad made a number of important points, including emphasizing the folly of the prolonged pandemic-related school closures, the questionable wisdom of vaccine mandates, and the unfortunate failure of vaccine manufacturers to study important aspects of their efficacy. However, his presentation seemed distorted and one-sided, Listing just a few examples:
1: Yes, the FBI and DOE believe (with moderate-low confidence) that Covid originated from lab escape, but the majority of the intelligence community believe that Covid came from a wild source, as does the large majority of the virology community.
2: Lack of statistical proof in several studies that masks were effective for reducing Covid spread does not prove that masks were NOT effective. In fact, there's strong empirical evidence for their efficacy, and Prasad's discounting of mechanistic reasoning (masks certainly block most virus-containing particles) seems disingenuous.
3: Collins and Fauci made several mistakes early in the pandemic, but treating them as criminals seems borderline dishonest. Arguing that as head of NIAID Fauci was inherently protected from criticism by virologists is quite a stretch; does Prasad really believe that a peer-reviewed grant proposal would be disqualified from funding because Fauci got mad at the investigator?
In summary, Prasad came off as a fluent debater, not primarily a seeker of truth, though when challenged by Mounk about specific events or facts, he provided accurate information.
The overarching question is whether we as a society can learn from both the successes and failures of our response to COVID. Societies that value loyalty and secrecy above all else do not learn from mistakes and failures because information is not shared and discussion is not free and open. What kind of society have we become?
Great conversation, Yascha. This format was much more informative -- and paradoxically, fairer -- to Dr. Prasad and his views than a speech or podcast by him alone would have been. Your questions served not only to highlight the holes in his reasoning, but where it was strong as well.
It's unfortunate that Dr. Prasad lets what appears to be a very personal animus against Dr. Anthony Fauci color his statements; you did a better job of getting him around this that he was able to do himself. The same for his insistence on the lab leak hypothesis: it was only under questioning that he was willing to state that his suspicions have not yet been proven. The same for the deleterious role that teachers' unions played in extending school closures to ridiculous extents. To his credit, Dr. Prasad owned up to both, but not without prodding.
As for the wisdom or lack of it of vaccination mandates, I think that to make any progress on that issue we need to get back to basics, which we seldom ever do in this discussion. The three great pillars of our faith in vaccination mandates are, antibiotics excepted, our three greatest public health triumphs of the past century: the conquest of smallpox, of polio, and of measles. I would find arguments against covid vaccination requirements more convincing if I heard some evidence that contrasted them with the results of those three epochal programs. Especially at a time when irrational objections to vaccination are eroding our longstanding and once thought irreversible progress against measles, that discussion has never been more important.
Before the pandemic several of the millennial children of my friends whom I had previously canceled me due to my support of Trump in 2016 not only un-canceled me, but they were red-pilled by their own experiences and observations of liberal-controlled government. Basically the light came on for what the enemies of Trump represented. One is a family that includes two previously highly-liberal sons and a single mother... both sons are brilliant and highly educated. The oldest son convinced his new wife, the daughter of friends that are more like family... I have photos on the wall of me holding her as an infant and carrying her on my shoulders on hikes as a toddler... moved to GB when Trump was elected. They are struggling now to stay in BG long enough for her to earn her dual citizenship. They are obsessed with moving back to the US, buying a house with some land in a red-state.
The pandemic laid bare the real intent and agenda of the liberal Democrat ruling class. But more importantly, it provided an education to everyone that these are people that are hazards to the human condition when they dominate in political power.
Making policy mistakes that are explained by the unknown is excusable. Making policy mistakes that ignore what is known is not.
I can't understand why, when Prasad repeatedly said there was no justification to close schools because children were not endangered by the virus, Yascha did not point out the obvious fact that schools don't only have children; they have many adults: teachers, administrators, and other staff. This leads me to the conclusion that this is a fundamentally unserious conversation.
By the way, related to this, Rand Paul is going to finally take down the architect of this mess... Anthony Fauci... a hero of Democrat politics. The evidence is finally in Paul's hands and he is committed to justice as it relates to the cause of all that human death and harm.
Here’s the guy who was there: https://wapo.st/3Q3Kfbk
Here’s one citation (on dissolving the response team) https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump-ap-top-news-virus-outbreak-barack-obama-public-health-ce014d94b64e98b7203b873e56f80e9a
Sicuramente per la sua posizione il dr. Prasad è un grande esperto nel suo campo, ma il tono generale del suo intervento sembra indurre a pensare che conosca poco o male la storia della medicina. Così mi sembra.
Caro signor Mounk, leggo sempre con interesse le sue interviste. Ho letto anche i suoi libri, ma questa volta sono rimasto sorpreso dal tono generale dell'intervista. Alcuni modelli matematici ( es Abba Gumel ) ( i numeri talora sono importanti ) dicono che se le misure restrittiive fossero state prese una o due settimane prima, avrebbero risparmiato centinaia di migliaia di vite. Mi in Naturalmente nella scienza, quindi anche in medicina, non vi sono verità assolute. Voglio anche ricordare, senza "spaccare il capello in due " sull' uso delle maschere e sul tipo di restrizioni più corrette, che i contrari all'uso delle maschere e alle restrizioni, in generale sono anche contrari ai vaccini. La storia, in particolare quella della medicina, non è cambiata, anche se dovrebbe essere maestra. Ma pochi la ascoltano.
Cordiali saluti
Romeo Budrovich
I forgot to mention that Prasad also made an important point about the dangers of censorship, as displayed during the pandemic.