Are you an epidemiologist? Physician specializing in blood and/or respiratory diseases?
Failing that, have you scoured the available literature with a completely open mind, and can summarize the arguments ranging from taking this incredibly seriously to blowing it off as just a "flu?"
Or have you seen one or two essays that seem persuasive, and quote the studies that happen to support the argument the author's wish to make? And are now passing that cherry-picked information around as if no other information exists?
Science is not a "narrative," and describing it as such makes me deeply suspicious that you do not take this subject seriously. You pushing a point of view that is not the consensus amongst people who actually consider all of the data, and supporting it with one essay that happens to say what you want to hear... That is a narrative.
I agree about credential-shaming, however, note my second paragraph, which was "failing that , did you..."
I feel the same thing about programming. Do you have an education? Failing that, are you experienced with and do you follow the practices accepted by the industry?
Likewise, I also point out that not doing a thorough review of the literature, but only reviewing part of the literature is a bad practice when arguing against the consensus reached by people who review all of the literature and data.
It was totally up to the author of that comment to say, "Yes, I am an epidemiologist." Or to say, "No I'm not, but I subscribe to the following journals and have read 82 results, here they are."
Nobody needs to have credentials for anything in my book, but if someone doesn't have them, the onus is really on them to show that they reached their conclusion via method and rigour.
Otherwise, they are really, REALLY vulnerable to unconscious bias, which means that I am not willing to give their conclusion much weight, even if it seems supported by the results they choose to cite.
First, that was not what they said. They do help but it was said don’t buy N95 cus supply shortages. That’s fixed now, so point 2) Things change. Data changes. Why is changing your mind and admitting mistakes a sin now? I’m not a lemming.
I think that’s the real issue here, an inability to accept change or recognize nuance
We have enough problems dealing with the noise without the ignorant and uninformed jumping in with their convenient hot-takes. I _am_ going to credential-shame them, because this is not a time when we need to listen to idiots and amateurs -- it is time for those people to sit down and shut up.
Tons of people here have backgrounds in maths, statistics and so on. There's enough data available out there that I'm sure plenty of HN commentators can make informed posts on this subject.
"I'm sure plenty of HN commentators can make informed posts on this subject."
So am I, that's why I come here.
But again, when you're an "Amateur X," when you break from the "Professional X" consensus, the onus is on you to show that you reached your conclusion with method and rigour.
Failing that, have you scoured the available literature with a completely open mind, and can summarize the arguments ranging from taking this incredibly seriously to blowing it off as just a "flu?"
Or have you seen one or two essays that seem persuasive, and quote the studies that happen to support the argument the author's wish to make? And are now passing that cherry-picked information around as if no other information exists?
Science is not a "narrative," and describing it as such makes me deeply suspicious that you do not take this subject seriously. You pushing a point of view that is not the consensus amongst people who actually consider all of the data, and supporting it with one essay that happens to say what you want to hear... That is a narrative.