Blindly following the Science was a mistake we need to correct before the next pandemic

On the floor of every retail store and supermarket across the country are markers warning and guiding patrons to stand six feet apart. Schools couldn't open for two years because they did not have the capacity to distance kids six feet apart. There are even marks in the lab I run every six feet despite not lining up with any of the equipment people are supposed to use. All the result of well intention people just trying to follow the Science.

But what good is following the Science when the Science has absolutely no idea where it is going?

Former FDA Commissioner Dr Scott Gottlieb tells us where the 6 foot distancing policy came from (hint Science made it up).

Gottlieb: 'Nobody knows' origins of six-foot social-distancing recommendation

"Nobody knows where it came from. Most people assume that the six feet of distance, the recommendation for keeping six feet apart, comes out of some old studies related to flu, where droplets don't travel more than six feet," Gottlieb told Brennan. 

Gottlieb also said that the CDC's initial social-distancing recommendation was 10 feet.

"So the compromise was around six feet. Now imagine if that detail had leaked out. Everyone would have said, 'This is the White House politically interfering with the CDC's judgment.' The CDC said 10 feet, it should be 10 feet, but 10 feet was no more right than six feet and ultimately became three feet," Gottlieb said.

link

And once Science finally decided to do some research into the mater it took nearly six months (and a new, more acceptable administration) for the results from the research to make it into policy.

Gottlieb told host Margaret Brennan that the recommendation was arbitrary, saying that the Biden administration asked the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to change its guidelines from six feet to three feet in an effort to re-open schools last spring. 

"But when it became three feet, the basis for the CDC's decision to ultimately revise it from six to three feet was a study that they conducted the prior fall. So they changed it in the spring."

So how did Science fail us so spectacularly when we have been told to place so much of our confidence in it? The truth is the Science didn't fail us .... we simply are expecting to much from Science.

Former FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb said in a recent interview with CBS News that the CDC was never prepared to handle a crisis on the scale of COVID-19, and that the U.S. government suffered from "a failure of vision" since the start of the pandemic. The agency thought to be the gold standard for public health is better equipped for data analysis than decisive action, he said.

"I think it's very difficult for an agency to have this self-awareness that they don't have the capacity to respond the way they're being asked," Gottlieb said in an interview with Margaret Brennan, "And I think it's very difficult for an agency to self-organize differently in a setting of a crisis."

"They're not a logistical organization. CDC has a very retrospective mindset," Gottlieb said. "It's a high-science organization that does deep analytical analysis of data that's oftentimes out of sync to when the decisions need to get made."

link

In the larger interview transcript Gottlieb goes on to question the wisdom of placing unchecked leadership power into the hands of the scientific community. If we are going to come through the next pandemic better off than this one we are going to have to find ways to put Science into its proper place rather than simply follow it where ever it may go.

I think that the public health establishment as a whole has taken a hit in the setting of this pandemic. And this isn’t just a sort of Republican, Democrat, conservative, liberal thing. I think that there’s a lot of people around the country who feel that the advice they got from public health officials wasn’t precise, changed, wasn’t- wasn’t formulated in a way where it was sort of immutable, wasn’t carefully explained, wasn’t propagated in a way that it could be assimilated into people’s lives. You know, how do I wear a mask? What mask should I wear? When should I wear a mask? When not? And things changed. And so people were confused by it and lost confidence in it. And I think that there’s going to be- part of the dialogue we have around how do we prepare better for the next pandemic, I think, unfortunately, is going to also be a discussion of what role should public health agencies and public health officials play and how much should policymakers really be overseeing what they’re doing in the setting of a crisis? Should they really be in control?

link

 

As Gottlieb points out; Science is not equipt to lead ... so why are so many obsessed with following it?

Anyone who was unbiased and loves science read the numerous studies on masks and knew it would never work. They also saw from pictures of those dying, they were majority obese and unhealthy. Unfortunately there are not many of us who have a non feeble minded brain on this planet so the planet went mentally insane.

a reply to: dandandat2

Does this show where the information is coming from - RB -

Virus floats in the air. I seriously doubt 6 feet makes any difference, especially indoors where air circulation is low. Air is very well mixed indoors. 3 feet. 6 feet. 10 feet. Makes very little difference.

Blindly following the Science was a mistake we need to correct before the next pandemic

There was no science this time (always before)
Nothing but politician's speculations .

They flunked this pandemic response miserably. I have no problem with people keeping three feet apart in stores, heck, even six feet is ok. Because it will lead to less spreading of lots of diseases, the kids were passing things back and forth in school before the pandemic hit, lots of kids were losing time from school. There should be better air infultration systems in the halls to pull the air up and they could install heat exchangers and bring in fresh air heated by air leaving the building. They are doing this in some schools that are getting pandemic money to help with this. Cripes, the bars used to be so packed that crabs could jump from person to person when I was eighteen to thirty years old.

Science is a methodology, not a destination.

Anytime you hear someone say "the science", you should already know that an agenda is in play.

I've noticed that a lot of folks here have a problem with "science"

Science is the reason you're able to make your threads stating that science is dumb.

Jesus did not create your computer. Or the internet. Science did.

originally posted by: canucks555
I've noticed that a lot of folks here have a problem with "science"

Science is the reason you're able to make your threads stating that science is dumb.

Jesus did not create your computer. Or the internet. Science did.

How is your post relivent to the topic of the former FDA director bringing to our attention the fact that our over reliance on the scientific community during the covid pandemic lead to issues that could have been avoided? That we will need better checks on the scientific community in the future if we want to fair better during the next pandemic?

Who said Science was dumb? And who invoked religion? For my own part I am electrical engineer who also happens to be atheistic ... I really on science everyday and don't give religion a single thought. But that doesn't stop me from critical thought on the OP subject.

However I believe your reaction to this thread exemplifies the issue with so many people being overly obsessed with the science surrounding the pandemic. Your knee-jerk reaction to defend the failures of the science is almost religious in its own right.

Until we have something better to replace it with, it's what we've got.

Do you have a replacement in mind? Anarchy, perhaps?

originally posted by: canucks555
I've noticed that a lot of folks here have a problem with "science"

Science is the reason you're able to make your threads stating that science is dumb.

Jesus did not create your computer. Or the internet. Science did.

I have no problem with science as long as it is not used to deceive us into believing something not true. I like real science and real science would never say that the mRNA vaccines are perfectly safe and effective. How could they have known they were effective in the trials before they were approved for emergency use....they touted a year of protection yet in six months they lost most of their protective ability even for serious disease progression. Read the report and after four months it dropped to under seventy six percent and rapidly declines after that, especially in the Pfizer vaccine but not as quick in the Moderna in the first four months.

It is not science that is the problem, it is the misuse of scientific evidence that is the problem. It is improper parameters they set for the research that is the problem....that is not real science. I read the evidence and the evidence DOES NOT say what they are saying it says.

originally posted by: GravitySucks
Until we have something better to replace it with, it's what we've got.

Do you have a replacement in mind? Anarchy, perhaps?

Why is it an all or nothing proposition?

I don't think the former FDA Commissioner Dr Scott Gottlieb is suggesting we replace the scientific community all together and replace it with anarchy.

It sounds to me that he is suggesting that the scientific community is not equipt to lead during a pandemic; that we need civic leaders to lead and the scientific community to be a voice at their table.

originally posted by: dandandat2

originally posted by: GravitySucks
Until we have something better to replace it with, it's what we've got.

Do you have a replacement in mind? Anarchy, perhaps?

Why is it an all or nothing proposition?

I don't think the former FDA Commissioner Dr Scott Gottlieb is suggesting we replace the scientific community all together and replace it with anarchy.

It sounds to me that he is suggesting that the scientific community is not equipt to lead during a pandemic; that we need civic leaders to lead and the scientific community to be a voice at their table.

You're right. It's not an all or nothing proposition. Perhaps typing that was over hyperbolic. However, far too many people have swung so far, they believe in and trust no one and nothing, not their physicians, not the government, not the medical organizations amd agencies, not the science, not the media. Worse, they see them as the enemy and this as a conspiracy of epidemic proportions.

We'd be hard pressed to find out what they do believe. That's dangerous. IMO

originally posted by: TauPhiLambda
Virus floats in the air. I seriously doubt 6 feet makes any difference, especially indoors where air circulation is low. Air is very well mixed indoors. 3 feet. 6 feet. 10 feet. Makes very little difference.

Restaurant owners and managers enjoy helping us (patrons) make fun of the state's (Illinois) stupid masking requirements.

We have to walk to our table in a mask, then we take it off when sitting down at the table. The table is surrounded by many of tables filled with patrons not wearing masks, because everyone is eating, drinking, talking, or all 3.

People who are afraid of bugs, germs, bacteria, etc., don't eat out....or they shouldn't.