G&M article' must read.

[jcpro]

Opinion: Vaccines are a tool, not a silver bullet. If we’d allowed more scientific debate, we would have realized this earlier

More than two years since COVID-19 emerged, our kit of solutions – and the mindset needed to use them – is too small. It’s time to listen to the science in a broader way

www.theglobeandmail.com

 

[Jenesis]

That is a LONG but informative read. Thank you.

 

[jcpro]

That is a LONG but informative read. Thank you.

It's not the article itself. The "conspiracy theorists" have known all of the points addressed in the article for some time, now. It's the fact that the G&M published it at all. 6 months ago this kind of opinion was a ticket to a wholesale ban.

 

[Valcazar]

Can't read it since firewall.
More than a little suspicious it is starting with fluvoxamine, I have the feeling it is going to try and spin a very specific story.

Maybe not. I'll catch it when I can read it properly.

 

[benstt]

It's not the article itself. The "conspiracy theorists" have known all of the points addressed in the article for some time, now. It's the fact that the G&M published it at all. 6 months ago this kind of opinion was a ticket to a wholesale ban.

No idea what you and that G&M author are thinking, but the G&M itself reported on emerging possible covid treatments, and it has been a constant discussion here alongside vaccines. If you are talking about the treatments that have not shown to be effective, and people keep pushing them in denial of the evidence, then sure, I can see people eventually cracking down on misinformation.

Promising treatments for COVID-19 advanced by Canadian scientists

Innovators hope to translate discoveries into commercial success

www.theglobeandmail.com

Quebec researchers find possible coronavirus treatment, but some remain skeptical

The data from a clinical trial has yet to be peer reviewed and some experts say more proof is needed

www.theglobeandmail.com

 

[basketcase]

No idea what you and that G&M author are thinking,...

Of course it's a guest opinion piece and not a news story.

The issue I have with their opinion is that despite what they are trying to claim, medical science has endlessly been investigating different treatments for covid and treatments that are shown to be effective are widely being used. Other 'treatments' like ivermectin haven't been shown to have an impact so they have been dismissed (and of course people are being criticized for using them for home treatments).

Seems the author can't distinguish between what scientists are studying and what the news chooses to report on.

 

[Valcazar]

Of course it's a guest opinion piece and not a news story.

The issue I have with their opinion is that despite what they are trying to claim, medical science has endlessly been investigating different treatments for covid and treatments that are shown to be effective are widely being used. Other 'treatments' like ivermectin haven't been shown to have an impact so they have been dismissed (and of course people are being criticized for using them for home treatments).

Seems the author can't distinguish between what scientists are studying and what the news chooses to report on.

This was my worry and first impression from the brief bit I saw before paywall.
Using the fluvoxamine story to pretend ivermectin should have been used.

There is a story that can be told about how politicians - desperate to tell a happy story of "getting back to normal" - ended up with a message that was basically "get the shot and then everything goes away", which was bad. The impressive early numbers of the vaccine probably made that seem like a decent bet, but in reality the vaccine as the key tool - but just one - in the arsenal should have been better communicated. At the same time, when you have an active counterforce trying to sabotage your message, ceding any ground to them feels dangerous.

The G&M piece might be properly nuanced and an interesting discussion, but my spidey-sense tingled early given the set up of the first few paragraphs.