There's the key point, right? That diversity fosters openness, facilitating the entrance, maintenance, and extinction of all sorts of wild-type rationale. Writing in stone an authority figure like the CDC, or Fauci, or [who|what]ever dampens that openness ... stunts our ability to reason. I spend a lot of energy denigrating the denial of expertise. But appeal to authority is arguably worse.
If Redfield or Azar suddenly announced a vaccine, the process is open enough that you could email the clinical trial PIs and find out whether you might trust it. Normalizing/unifying trust into any single app, org, or person will always be a mistake. On August 23, 2020 4:42:42 PM CDT, David Eric Smith <[email protected]> wrote: > >if Redfield is directing the CDC, and Azar is directing whatever he >directs, and a month before Election Day there is a declaration that >there is a vaccine available, I would not take it. In the earlier eras >of the CDC — say, when the public health officials of Taiwan came to >visit CDC to learn how to design a pandemic response, because it was >universally seen as the gold standard world-wide — I would probably >have taken it. I am told, through a friend who Is a working >epidemiologist within the agency, that both of them are regarded as >trouble, Redfield more through incapability than malice, Azar the more >typical trumpish combination of both. - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/ FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
