Please read this consensus statement in Nature from last month. Lately, these common-sense recommendations are being framed as "hardline," "zero-COVID," "fringe," in the popular media and even by some from our own communities, but there is remarkable consensus among scientists on what we need to do, even if we do not want to listen. As a benchmark for our aspirations, this is a fine document. #COVID #publichealth

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-05398-2

A multinational Delphi consensus to end the COVID-19 public health threat - Nature

A diverse, multidisciplinary panel of 386 experts in COVID-19 response from 112 countries provides health and social policy actions to address inadequacies in the pandemic response and help to bring this public health threat to an end.

Nature

@gregggonsalves I’m not sure which of the recommendations you’re referring to because none of the top 10 fit the description you’ve given.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-022-05398-2/tables/8

Table 8 Ten highest ranked recommendations

@bans You'll have to explain because I think the top 10 are commonsense, sound ideas, and 400 scientists when allowed to vote in the privacy of their own offices came up with this. What are you issues here?

@gregggonsalves I wasn’t disputing that they are good policies recommendations. They certainly are common sense, sound recommendations.

I just don’t see anyone calling them fringe or covid-zero. They don’t seem controversial.

Maybe I’m missing something? Not trying to be argumentative, I promise!

@bans @gregggonsalves Gregg is alluding to a "thinkpiece" trend over the past week or so that have appeared in highly regarded US-based journalism institutions (like the New Yorker and the New York Times) that have painted people who think these things still need to be done as "the last holdouts" and such. They've all been well-written but completely disingenuous.
@gregggonsalves @IPEdmonton I, thankfully, missed that nonsense. Thanks for the info.