Imagine being the PHO of a province and not once explicitly warning the public about this risk. Now imagine being a PH doctor in the same province and defending this. In a clear-cut decision between loyalty and ethics, what do you choose @michaelschwandt.bsky.social?

@michaelschwandt.bsky.social, Matt is also a far better communicator of the issue than I and he digs into its roots here. A highly recommended read. Given the evidence at the time, it seems reasonable to conclude DBH’s dissemination of misinformation here is modelled on EBM.

Yes, we have video evidence of the manipulation of science by WHO leadership (the note). Which, of course, was followed shortly by this misinformation. This points to the crux of my argument > blind faith in institutional leadership is dangerous. A lack of accountability even more so.

Ok, but can you then defend her on these 3 points? I don’t think we can discount these a just “things that were said”. This is the primary voice of authority of BCPH. These words (and lack thereof) have real consequences.

More to the point, was the knowledge of physicists / aerosol scientists respected and incorporated into practice? We know the answer to this question. I shared it before, but will again just in case it was missed.

Another day, more evidence @michaelschwandt.bsky.social Although you claim (without evidence) that Dr. Henry warned the public of airborne spread, we do know empirically as of Apr 2023 that she never once warned of LC. Can you explain the policy behind this?

www.wsj.com/health/welln...

The same care.