ikuo
@DataDrivenMD The way mass media was so quick to declare reinfection "unlikely"/"rare" just goes to show how they were committed to minimizing/denial from the start & never actually cared about science.
As a layperson, knowing that the "novel coronavirus" was a *coronavirus* & that the common cold was also a coronavirus, it made more sense to assume reinfection was possible until proven otherwise, esp. when people explicitly compared it to cold/flu, which you can obviously get multiple times.
Jorge Caballero, MD
The great thing about being the self-appointed "paper of record" is that you get to write your own revisionist history that completely ignores the role your editors and reporters played in minimizing the threat of COVID— time, and time, and time, and time again
Jorge Caballero, MD
And for the record, there's no real debate among reasonable experts: multiple COVID infections are bad. To the extent that there's *any* reasonable disagreement among experts it's over a very narrow range of extreme badness— from more likely to suffer permanent damage to vital organs (lungs, heart, kidneys, brain) ➡️ more likely to end up dead. I wouldn't want anyone to get the impression that "you'll be perfectly fine" is part of the debate because it most definitely is not.
Jorge Caballero, MD
I'll never forget how, in July-ish 2020 a (different) NYT reporter publicly admonished me on Twitter for suggesting that her article was misinforming the public by arguing that COVID reinfections were improbable. I pushed back w/ evidence showing COVID reinfections were already taking place but that the CDC wasn't tracking on the data. She doubled-down. A few months later, I was proven right. She won some kind of journalism prize for her COVID stuff. Anywho, better late than never, NYT ⤵️
０７６萌ＳＮＳ is a social network, courtesy of ０７６. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-beta0, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All ０７６萌ＳＮＳ content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.