You may have seen that the CDC changed its guidance on CV-19 measures. This is both long overdue and hilarious in a way. The CDC claims it is making the changes because there are high levels of immunity, through infection and vaccination, that are limiting serious disease. But the CDC is just bowing to reality, Americans by and large have stopped paying attention, although there are a few nuts out there still militating for forced masking of school children, extensive quarantining and even lockdowns. The most interesting part of the revisions is that CDC is recognizing that there is no difference between a vaxed and unvaxed person’s risk of infection or transmission within a short time after vaccination. (CDC Guidance)
The revisions should have been released with an apology for all the misleading and just wrong advice or mandates that CDC issued over the last two and a half years. Anyone, anyone, who understood respiratory viruses knew that it was futile to attempt to suppress transmission. Yet CDC pushed measures that were incredibly damaging to the general public health and upended our social, educational and economic life. We are going to be attempting to ameliorate this damage for a decade and it will have a lifelong impact on a generation of young Americans.
While cutting back on the most aggressive suppression measures, the CDC still is recommending unproven measures like masking. Politically, and the CDC is highly politicized now, they are clearly walking a fine line between satisfying the nutso coronmonomaniacs and trying to let Americans return to normality and not have the epidemic be a factor in the upcoming elections. But voters should not forget what was done to their lives for absolutely no reason and with absolutely zero impact on the course of the epidemic.
Join the discussion 2 Comments
Too little, too late. Their credibility has been completely destroyed. What’s required now, like you said, is mass apologies, mass firings and trials for these clowns.
Not to mention “aggressive suppression measures” in the media about anything that didn’t fit the party line that day. Think back to all the alternatives and insights offered by serious people (Barrington) that got shouted down as misinformation and “not science” How many of these are turning out to be sounder medical and public health advice than what we got from the government. At least I had a front row seat with running commentary because of you and Dave Data. Thanks!