@AbraarKaran @CDCDirector Wear whatever you want is not even remotely getting the "guidance" right, it's not guidance at all, it is lack of guidance.

@AbraarKaran@cdcddirector想穿什么就穿什么，这根本不是指导，而是缺乏指导。

@Jeff_McIntyre_ @LolaMotz @AbraarKaran No.
1. Panicking: nobody panicked (except industry lobbyists)
2. STAY HOME: many didn't
3. Close airports, schools, subways: only some schools, none of the others
4. Except HCW, essential workers, no one goes to work: many others did
5. Wear masks: no one did until months later

@杰夫·麦金太尔·洛拉莫茨·阿布拉卡兰号。
1.恐慌：没有人恐慌（行业说客除外）
2.呆在家里：很多人没有
3.关闭机场、学校、地铁：只关闭部分学校，其他学校不关闭
4.除了HCW这一基本工人外，没有人去上班：其他许多人去上班
5.戴口罩：几个月后才有人戴

@jklmd123 @celinegounder @CDCgov @CDCDirector @RWalensky @ErinBanco CDC caved to hospital lobbyists under the previous administration and then failed to correct it under this administration.
Unforgivable.
https://revealnews.org/article...

@jklmd123@celinegounder@CDCgov@cdcedirector@RWalensky@ErinBanco疾病预防控制中心向前一届政府的医院游说者屈服，但在本届政府下未能纠正。
不可原谅。
https://revealnews.org/article...

@wsbgnl @IHME_UW That's a weird writeup because 95% did appear very effective (as described) and 80% appears to do not all that much (not as described).

@wsbgnl@IHME_UW这是一篇奇怪的文章，因为95%的文章看起来非常有效（如前所述），而80%的文章似乎没有那么有效（如前所述）。

@JuliaRaifman @wsbgnl @IHME_UW https://twitter.com/AeonCoin/s...

@JuliaRaifman@wsbgnl@IHME_UWhttps://twitter.com/AeonCoin/s...

@wsbgnl @IHME_UW 95% is recently mentioned here:
https://twitter.com/IHME_UW/st...

@wsbgnl@IHME-u UW 95%最近在这里提到：
https://twitter.com/IHME_UW/st...

@aquiynoaqui @JuliaRaifman @wsbgnl @IHME_UW Their model does include excess deaths. Of course that doesn't mean its getting those right either.

@阿奎诺基@JuliaRaifman@wsbgnl@IHME_-UW他们的模型确实包括了过度死亡。当然，这也不意味着要把这些都做好。

@myrabatchelder @wsbgnl @IHME_UW https://twitter.com/AeonCoin/s...

@MyraBatcheld@wsbgnl@IHME UWhttps://twitter.com/AeonCoin/s...

@wsbgnl @IHME_UW They changed their goalposts on "masks" to 80%. It used to be 90% or 95% (I don't recall). 80% is a lot less effective.

@wsbgnl@IHME_UW他们将“面具”上的进球门柱改为80%。过去是90%或95%（我不记得了）。80%的效果要差得多。

@rn_wing @NathanMackBrown @nathaliejacoby1 You smart.

@rn_wing@NathanMackBrown@nathaliejacoby1你很聪明。

@NathanMackBrown 🙋
https://twitter.com/AeonCoin/s...

@纳森麦克布朗🙋
https://twitter.com/AeonCoin/s...

@Jeff_McIntyre_ @LolaMotz @AbraarKaran Not one thing on that list was done.

@Jeff_McIntyre_@LolaMotz@AbraarKaran清单上没有一件事完成。

@luckytran @gregggonsalves @chrischirp @IndependentSage @RealOzSAGE Federalism shouldn't be an obstacle to an independent group of experts giving transparent advice. Tribalism and free passes very much so. But then, nothing effective was organized in 2020 either, so 🤷

@luckytran@gregggonsalves@chrischirp@IndependentSage@realozzage联邦主义不应该成为一个独立专家组提供透明建议的障碍。部落主义和自由通行证非常重要。但是，2020年也没有组织任何有效的活动，所以🤷

@hjelle_brian (or at least not get worse)

@hjelle_brian（至少不会变得更糟）

@AbraarKaran @bidonkules @sinz54 That's A next step. Another next step would be CDC actually clearly recommending them instead of giving vague permission (which wasn't even needed).

@AbraarKaran@bidonkules@sinz54这是下一步。下一步是疾病预防控制中心实际上明确推荐他们，而不是给予模糊的许可（甚至不需要）。

@flowermusickids @denise_dewald @CDCgov CDC has already gone down the rabbit hole of an alternate reality inside the walls of a school where a close contact isn't a close contact.

@flowermusickids@denise_dewald@CDCgov CDC已经进入了另一个现实的兔子洞，在一所学校的墙上，亲密接触不是亲密接触。

@jaxD39 @michaelmina_lab SOME science said that. Even setting aside questions about the immunology and experimental data, behavioral science and policy making ALWAYS said it was a bad approach.
Public health needs to look beyond questions of INDIVIDUAL infection.

@jaxD39@michaelmina_实验室一些科学人士说。即使撇开免疫学和实验数据的问题不谈，行为科学和政策制定总是说这是一种糟糕的方法。
公共卫生需要超越个人感染的问题。

@Lloyd13682635 @SnarfMcSnarf @KimDotcom @elonmusk This (old, may be a bit inaccurate in details) explainer is fascinating
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

@Lloyd13682635@SnarfMcSnarf@KimDotcom@elonmusk这个（旧的，在细节上可能有点不准确）的解释很吸引人
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

@biannagolodryga @DAlperovitch Nobody ever answers this, but half the time these viral clips turn out to be years old and/or from somewhere else entirely.
I have no idea if that is the case here, but without sourcing and timestamp, it is useless.

@Bianagoldryga@DAlperovitch从来没有人回答过这个问题，但这些病毒片段有一半的时间是在几年前和/或完全来自其他地方。
我不知道这里的情况是否如此，但如果没有来源和时间戳，它是无用的。

@ShrikeTron It's not easy but during "wartime" conditions, which is essentially what this is for CDC, it's hardly extreme. There are plenty of jobs far harder than that.
CDC is poorly built and likely inappropriately staffed for crisis response. It is mostly a paper pushing research entity.

@ShrikeTron这并不容易，但在“战时”条件下，这基本上就是疾病预防控制中心的情况，这并不极端。还有很多工作比这更难做。
疾病预防控制中心的建设很差，可能在应对危机方面配备了不适当的人员。它主要是一个推动论文研究的实体。