Hacker News Reader

Comment by dboreham | Hacker News Reader

> because it was not yet "proven" the virus was transmitted via aerosols

My recollection was that it was much worse. They definitively and aggressively said that it was _not_ transmitted via aerosols.

View on HN

This echos my partner’s experience (the treat covid in an icu). This was almost a year un with some plausible evidence and several countries saying they thought aerosol transmission was likely. Yet the key agencies and experts here were aggressively saying aerosol transmission was very unlikely.

The WHO disseminated the information that it was not transmissible at all.

"no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel #coronavirus"

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. These two statements don't say the same thing, although people do interpret it that way.

That logic works on the assumption of science and cooperation that we are all telling each other the truth so that everyone may benefit.

I posit that's not what happened, there was no absent evidence. The NHC knew full well that they had (another) SARS on their hands in January 2020, but lied to the WHO because they were directed by the party to suppress the findings for the usual reasons (don't rock the boat, save face on the global stage, keep the populace under control). The WHO took this false information and neglected to verify it before disseminating it, so they are complicit in the affair.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com