➲ Home ➲ C-19 Archives
On critical thinking and behavioural changes
❦ I keep thinking about how COVID minimizers, anti-maskers, and anti-vaxxers keep saying that I must be brainwashed; that I’m completely close-minded, and that there’s no use in discussing the pandemic with me.
And I can’t help but think how monumentally wrong that actually is.
When the pandemic first started, we weren’t sure how it was spreading. Was it by droplets? Aerosols? Fomites?
We were told to wash our groceries and mail, to use hand sanitizer, to wear cloth masks, and to socially distance for our protection.
Guess what we did?
In absence of better information, we protected ourselves by wearing cloth masks, washing every potential fomite with soap and water or alcohol, and even changing our clothes whenever we got back from leaving the house.
Fast forward to a few months later, when I was able to look at the data and the contact-tracing coming out of China.
It became clear to me with this new data that COVID was spreading via aerosols.
I was able to change my mind about cloth masks because I had new data.
From this new data, I ordered N95 (FFP2) respirators for the entire family. This was at a time when no-one was recommending N95s yet.
Also around this time, it was announced that COVID wasn’t being spread via fomites (infectious objects)*. So we stopped washing our groceries and mail, and stopped changing our clothes every time we left the house.
* Fomite transmission occurs when viruses or bacteria that remain on surfaces cause infections.
When the vaccines came out, the data looked incredible.
95% efficacy rates in retirement-home communities?! A medical miracle!
So we all got the vaccines. We still weren’t sure if it protected against transmission, and so we continued to mask and social distance.
When we got our booster, the public health messaging in the US was telling us that our booster would protect us from both transmission and severe illness when infected with COVID – and on the rare chance that we did have a breakthrough infection, that it would be mild – and confer on us ‘hybrid immunity’.
They made the getting-infected-while-boosted thing sound like a net positive.
So, for the next few months, I increased my risk-taking significantly.
I flew across the country for a funeral, and I ate indoors at restaurants. I even dated for a bit.
But that’s when I started hearing about Long COVID. I learned that the vaccines don’t offer much protection against Long COVID, and the risk of developing it was between 5-15% per infection!
This was also when new data about the vaccines was being released...
It turned out that that ‘95% efficacy’ waned heavily after just 4-6 months.
So now we know the vaccines are short-lived, and only help protect you against severe COVID illness during the acute (initial, short-term) phase of the infection.
With this new data, I changed my behavior again.
I upgraded my N95 respirator to an N99, stopped eating indoors, bought HEPA filters for the house, and I started social-distancing again.
We continued to stay up-to-date with our boosters since my whole family is vulnerable – and the boosters still protect against severe illness.
Since then, all of the new data has been pretty much in agreement: that COVID is frightening, and should be avoided at all costs. This has only made me double my efforts to stay COVID-free (until the tragic day when I finally got infected, which has led me to develop Long COVID).
But even as new data continued to pour in showing that COVID was even worse than originally thought, I changed my behavior again by doubling my efforts to protect myself.
For example, when mask mandates ended, I upgraded from an N99 respirator to a FloMask elastomeric respirator.
This upgrade also had to do with the increased transmissibility of the newer Omicron variants. There was data coming in showing that N95s might not be sufficient (for sustained exposure) due to increased transmissibility, and higher viral load due to lack of mandates.
I’ve updated my position on this pandemic many times – sometimes in huge, paradigm-shifting ways, based entirely on the data I was presented with.
This also includes looking at the quality of data as well, since all data is not created equally.
I think a lot of people don’t get that last part: they haven’t been trained to critically analyze data, and assume that their limited data is the best simply because it supports their current argument.
They aren’t trained to change their position when presented with higher-quality data.
So when I reject their data, they think I must be close-minded when, in reality, my mind is open to any possibility as long as it is supported by data that’s been thoroughly analyzed and properly vetted.
And the reality is, all of the data released about COVID over the last year has painted an incredibly grim and scary picture of an out-of-control pandemic that is breaking almost every single one of our institutions at their foundations.
I’ve yet to see any credible evidence to support the idea that COVID is like a cold or the ’flu – or that it only affects the elderly and immunocompromised...
I believed this in 2020, however, because that’s what the data supported.
The data no longer supports this view, and so neither do I.
This doesn’t mean that reasonable people can't disagree with each other about the same data. Reasonable people disagree on the same evidence all the time. Sometimes many positions are reasonably viable based on the evidence (this happens in science all the time).
The issue is that I’ve yet to see a single COVID minimizer present a position that isn’t easily dismantled with proper analysis and critical thinking. Their evidence is often weak (at best), and lacking any sort of rigor or deep understanding of the scientific method.
Show me a position supported by proper evidence and I will readily change my mind.
I’ve already done it many times during this pandemic.
And will continue to do so as more things change and evolve, and new evidence is collected.
© 2023 Chris Alvino. ➲
C-19: Archives
Useful search tags:
air filtration / babies & children / body / brain / C19.Life / cancer / comment / dementia / economy / elders / excess deaths / exercise / flu / heart / history / hospitals / immunity / influenza / law / Lisa Iannattone / long covid / lungs / muscles / musculoskeletal / NHS / Noor Bari / PEM / parkinson’s / propaganda / reinfections / reproduction and pregnancy / resources / respirators / respiratory / risk / SARS(-CoV-1) / schools / solutions / transmission / universities / UVC / vaccines / variants / WHO / young adults / zoonosis




























