Adam, I appreciate this scientist contemplation of yours. I grew up, in a developing country (receiving USAID too at that time), looking to the US as a model and now this. Reading WaPo or even some of NYT you can feel the strong euphemism. I agree with your assessment on the status quo bias and we become complacent. Thank you Adam.
In a related issue concerning the potential rise of dictatorship in the U.S., praise goes to Canadians who are removing U.S. imports from store shelves.
Even if some tariffs turn out to be temporary, a line has been crossed. We now understand that when the United States signs an agreement—whether on trade or any other matter—the president may treat it as a mere suggestion, disregarding it at will. This revelation alone will cause significant long-term damage.
Yeah we don't seem to want to do the costly and sometimes dirty work necessary to protect ourselves from either pandemics or loss of freedoms. Everyone wants change but no one wants to change their behaviour themselves. Like asking for better ventilation in the workplace or stopping using products and services of companies who wholeheartedly support felons and rapists.
Interesting article. I have long noticed, and been puzzled by, this reluctance to adapt to a changing situation on an individual basis when people are diagnosed with a new disease. They proudly state that they won't give in to it, or won't let it change their lives. Sadly, they often have no choice. A very sad example is of a young man who liked swimming and continued to swim without a companion after being diagnosed with epilepsy. He had a seizure whilst swimming and died. The epilepsy did change his life and did stop him from swimming. If, after the diagnosis, he had stopped swimming, or made sure he only swam when with a companion who could watch him and save him if he had a seizure, he could still be alive today. I recognise that this kind of adaptation is hard, but I do think society in general puts pressure on people to carry on as if nothing has changed, even in the face of great changes.
While I agree there are many troubling aspect to Trump as a person, the record of other US presidents of various political hues may not be any better, like the wars in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, coups in Chile etc. etc. All of these were accompanied by censorship and manipulation of information, ie lies. Concerning Covid, the record of mathematical modelling. like the projections from Imperial College, was out by many orders of magnitude. Many of the policies adopted like masks, social distancing, school closures, lockdowns were taken without a sound evidence base, and probably did more harm than good. The countries that did the least, like Sweden, had a better outcome that those with a 'hard lockdown'.
It depends what you mean by 'sound evidence base' – waiting for large RCTs will always bias countries towards inaction (and unfortunately some have misinterpreted the results of RCTs that have been published, e.g. conflating 'no significant effect' in an underpowered trial with 'no effect'). I would agree that countries should get better at generating evidence in real-time (e.g. via use of rapid tests, nested studies and platform trials). Sweden had several inherent advantages for curbing transmission (more single occupancy households, good sick leave provision) which helped enabled suppression with lighter touch measures (although neighbouring countries had better overall outcomes) – the second half of 2020 showed that a 'light touch' approach failed to keep transmission down in other areas of Europe. It is difficult to predict behavioural responses to epidemic (especially as reactions more driven by media coverage than first-hand observation of disease, given short transmission timescale of COVID relative to delay from symptoms-to-severe disease). However, several modelling results have been misrepresented over the years (e.g. comparing a 'change nothing' scenario with an outcome where transmission was heavily suppressed with changes in social mixing).
Adam, I appreciate this scientist contemplation of yours. I grew up, in a developing country (receiving USAID too at that time), looking to the US as a model and now this. Reading WaPo or even some of NYT you can feel the strong euphemism. I agree with your assessment on the status quo bias and we become complacent. Thank you Adam.
Thank you
In a related issue concerning the potential rise of dictatorship in the U.S., praise goes to Canadians who are removing U.S. imports from store shelves.
Even if some tariffs turn out to be temporary, a line has been crossed. We now understand that when the United States signs an agreement—whether on trade or any other matter—the president may treat it as a mere suggestion, disregarding it at will. This revelation alone will cause significant long-term damage.
Yeah we don't seem to want to do the costly and sometimes dirty work necessary to protect ourselves from either pandemics or loss of freedoms. Everyone wants change but no one wants to change their behaviour themselves. Like asking for better ventilation in the workplace or stopping using products and services of companies who wholeheartedly support felons and rapists.
Interesting article. I have long noticed, and been puzzled by, this reluctance to adapt to a changing situation on an individual basis when people are diagnosed with a new disease. They proudly state that they won't give in to it, or won't let it change their lives. Sadly, they often have no choice. A very sad example is of a young man who liked swimming and continued to swim without a companion after being diagnosed with epilepsy. He had a seizure whilst swimming and died. The epilepsy did change his life and did stop him from swimming. If, after the diagnosis, he had stopped swimming, or made sure he only swam when with a companion who could watch him and save him if he had a seizure, he could still be alive today. I recognise that this kind of adaptation is hard, but I do think society in general puts pressure on people to carry on as if nothing has changed, even in the face of great changes.
While I agree there are many troubling aspect to Trump as a person, the record of other US presidents of various political hues may not be any better, like the wars in Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, coups in Chile etc. etc. All of these were accompanied by censorship and manipulation of information, ie lies. Concerning Covid, the record of mathematical modelling. like the projections from Imperial College, was out by many orders of magnitude. Many of the policies adopted like masks, social distancing, school closures, lockdowns were taken without a sound evidence base, and probably did more harm than good. The countries that did the least, like Sweden, had a better outcome that those with a 'hard lockdown'.
It depends what you mean by 'sound evidence base' – waiting for large RCTs will always bias countries towards inaction (and unfortunately some have misinterpreted the results of RCTs that have been published, e.g. conflating 'no significant effect' in an underpowered trial with 'no effect'). I would agree that countries should get better at generating evidence in real-time (e.g. via use of rapid tests, nested studies and platform trials). Sweden had several inherent advantages for curbing transmission (more single occupancy households, good sick leave provision) which helped enabled suppression with lighter touch measures (although neighbouring countries had better overall outcomes) – the second half of 2020 showed that a 'light touch' approach failed to keep transmission down in other areas of Europe. It is difficult to predict behavioural responses to epidemic (especially as reactions more driven by media coverage than first-hand observation of disease, given short transmission timescale of COVID relative to delay from symptoms-to-severe disease). However, several modelling results have been misrepresented over the years (e.g. comparing a 'change nothing' scenario with an outcome where transmission was heavily suppressed with changes in social mixing).
I suggest you read Paul Krugman's recent substack on "Sabotaging the Pax Americana". It is a good read on what the record of other US presidents.