I don't disagree with any of those points. WHO decided to burn their credibility in order to try and keep masks available for healthcare workers. Okay, fine. But that credibility is actually burnt. They can't un-burn it.
As soon as it was apparent that they had ulterior motives by downplaying mask effectiveness, I wrote them off as a trustworthy source of data or advice.
And they sure as hell don't deserve to be the arbiter of scientific speech. By choosing to rely on WHO's advice, YouTube's credibility caught flame as well.
And how many people died from COVID because they received this message: "Masks aren't needed. WHO said so. Now they're backtracking because they want to control us."?
Whatever benefit WHO created for healthcare workers early on by lying about masks was probably more than offset by the harm they caused with that loss of public trust.
As soon as it was apparent that they had ulterior motives by downplaying mask effectiveness, I wrote them off as a trustworthy source of data or advice.
And they sure as hell don't deserve to be the arbiter of scientific speech. By choosing to rely on WHO's advice, YouTube's credibility caught flame as well.
And how many people died from COVID because they received this message: "Masks aren't needed. WHO said so. Now they're backtracking because they want to control us."?
Whatever benefit WHO created for healthcare workers early on by lying about masks was probably more than offset by the harm they caused with that loss of public trust.