China delayed releasing coronavirus info, frustrating WHO

A few weeks coming out with a complete and accurate report, isn't noteworthy. Hasty publication of dubious drug regimens is likewise, not noteworthy. It's a confusing time, with internal medical resources restructuring to meet a new situation, who has ti

So what? The pandemic is a frustrating thing to deal with, ALL effective actions cannot happen at once.

China certainly did not stonewall at any time, but tried to give accurate and coherent information. Not all nations do that (and some aren't trying to). Bureaucracies are swift only in dealing with routine problems.

Did you really read the link?

whit3rd wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@googlegroups.com:

True of everything.

I have a button that says "Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once"

ive

The link says that China had sequenced the virus four times - in four separ ate institutions - before it released the data. The story makes it clear th at this was due to bureaucrats refusing to do anything risky in a very frau ght situation. They weren't so much stonewalling as paralysed by anxiety.

This isn't the political line that you want to peddle, but your passion for milking the situation for political advantage is perfectly transparent, an d somewhat self-defeating.

Yeah, but before that, I had experience in two or three bureaucracies. None that match China for size, though. Did you ever, within a bureaucracy, deal with a novel problem?

te:

ctive

arate institutions - before it released the data. The story makes it clear that this was due to bureaucrats refusing to do anything risky in a very fr aught situation. They weren't so much stonewalling as paralysed by anxiety.

or milking the situation for political advantage is perfectly transparent, and somewhat self-defeating.

In that case, we don't really need the World Health Organization. China ca n do it all for the World, in it's own way.

e:

rote:

fective

eparate institutions - before it released the data. The story makes it clea r that this was due to bureaucrats refusing to do anything risky in a very fraught situation. They weren't so much stonewalling as paralysed by anxiet y.

for milking the situation for political advantage is perfectly transparent , and somewhat self-defeating.

can do it all for the World, in it's own way.

That's just silly, even for you.

ote:

effective

separate institutions - before it released the data. The story makes it cl ear that this was due to bureaucrats refusing to do anything risky in a ver y fraught situation. They weren't so much stonewalling as paralysed by anxi ety.

on for milking the situation for political advantage is perfectly transpare nt, and somewhat self-defeating.

a can do it all for the World, in it's own way.

They did not report data timely, against rules of WHO.

If members don't follow the rules and spirit of the organization, the organ ization is meaningless.

We are withdrawing from WHO, should also from WTO and UN.

e:

L effective

ur separate institutions - before it released the data. The story makes it clear that this was due to bureaucrats refusing to do anything risky in a v ery fraught situation. They weren't so much stonewalling as paralysed by an xiety.

sion for milking the situation for political advantage is perfectly transpa rent, and somewhat self-defeating.

ina can do it all for the World, in it's own way.

They didn't report as fast as you think they should have. You've got the be nefit of hindsight. They faffed around for a week or so, which is what happ ens when you have an unprecedented situation which you have to explain to people with considerable political power, and not a lot of bvackground know ledge of health issues.

They could have done better, but they could also have done quite a bit wors e.

anization is meaningless.

They followed them, but not as fast as you'd have liked them to. There's no time schedule built into the rules.

Trump is grandstanding about WHO, and will probably change his mind soon. I t's a childish gesture, but he doesn't seem to know any better.

ote:

ALL effective

ive

four separate institutions - before it released the data. The story makes i t clear that this was due to bureaucrats refusing to do anything risky in a very fraught situation. They weren't so much stonewalling as paralysed by anxiety.

assion for milking the situation for political advantage is perfectly trans parent, and somewhat self-defeating.

China can do it all for the World, in it's own way.

benefit of hindsight. They faffed around for a week or so, which is what ha ppens when you have an unprecedented situation which you have to explain t o people with considerable political power, and not a lot of bvackground kn owledge of health issues.

rse.

rganization is meaningless.

no time schedule built into the rules.

They told the World it was not contagious when their own doctors said it wa s. They also arrested and silenced them. They went all over the world to buy up PPE meanwhile, knowing full well that the virus is dangerous and highly contagious.

How would you like to twist the facts?

e:

, ALL effective

give

in

n four separate institutions - before it released the data. The story makes it clear that this was due to bureaucrats refusing to do anything risky in a very fraught situation. They weren't so much stonewalling as paralysed b y anxiety.

passion for milking the situation for political advantage is perfectly tra nsparent, and somewhat self-defeating.

China can do it all for the World, in it's own way.

e benefit of hindsight. They faffed around for a week or so, which is what happens when you have an unprecedented situation which you have to explain to people with considerable political power, and not a lot of bvackground knowledge of health issues.

worse.

organization is meaningless.

s no time schedule built into the rules.

was.

Civil servants know better than to trust mere doctors.

They silenced the doctors who were trying to do an end run around the offic ial notification system. We've been over this before. The doctors weren't being punished for breaking security, but rather for taking more initiative than was compatible with their place in the pecking order.

hat the virus is dangerous and highly contagious.

I'll leave that to you - you are enthusiastic about presenting incomplete s ets of facts in a way that suits your politics.

ote:

th, ALL effective

to give

hat

ly in

in four separate institutions - before it released the data. The story mak es it clear that this was due to bureaucrats refusing to do anything risky in a very fraught situation. They weren't so much stonewalling as paralysed by anxiety.

ur passion for milking the situation for political advantage is perfectly t ransparent, and somewhat self-defeating.

n. China can do it all for the World, in it's own way.

the benefit of hindsight. They faffed around for a week or so, which is wha t happens when you have an unprecedented situation which you have to expla in to people with considerable political power, and not a lot of bvackgroun d knowledge of health issues.

t worse.

he organization is meaningless.

e's no time schedule built into the rules.

t was.

icial notification system. We've been over this before. The doctors weren' t being punished for breaking security, but rather for taking more initiati ve than was compatible with their place in the pecking order.

He only send messages to his friends and colleagues. Warning them to be ca reful. If that should be punished, most posters here should be made disapp eared.

te:

te:

te:

with, ALL effective

d to give

that

only in

- in four separate institutions - before it released the data. The story m akes it clear that this was due to bureaucrats refusing to do anything risk y in a very fraught situation. They weren't so much stonewalling as paralys ed by anxiety.

your passion for milking the situation for political advantage is perfectly transparent, and somewhat self-defeating.

ion. China can do it all for the World, in it's own way.

t the benefit of hindsight. They faffed around for a week or so, which is w hat happens when you have an unprecedented situation which you have to exp lain to people with considerable political power, and not a lot of bvackgro und knowledge of health issues.

bit worse.

the organization is meaningless.

ere's no time schedule built into the rules.

it was.

fficial notification system. We've been over this before. The doctors were n't being punished for breaking security, but rather for taking more initia tive than was compatible with their place in the pecking order.

careful. If that should be punished, most posters here should be made disa ppeared.

That was seen as doing an end run around the official notification system.

I'm not saying that the bureaucracy did the right thing in reacting negativ ely - far from it - but power hierarchies behave badly in perfectly predic table ways, and reading anything more into their bad behaviour than stupid dominance games is a waste of time.

China has that Ethiopian con artist executive director of WHO as their agen t. Anyone who can't see past that con is an idiot. I knew something was up immediately when WHO kept postponing announcing even the potential for this scourge to become a pandemic. If they can't or won't do the job, don't pay them. Trump must stop all payments to WHO immediately.

Yea, because cutting their budget is /really/ going to make it easier for them to do their job.

Trump's an idiot, as are his followers.

/If/ (I'm not saying it has or that it has not) the WHO failed to do as good a job as it could with Covid, or is failing to do a good job now, then the sensible response would be to figure out /why/, and deal with the problem.

A response that makes it as hard as possible for it to function well, with no upsides and no alternatives, is petty, vindictive, destructive and irrational.

Money, or withholding money, talks. I don't pay people who keep doing a terrible job; do you?

... which was a baseless accusation, childishly requiring that everything one wants must be provided NOW.

Says the Trump supporter? You certainly ARE paying him to do a terrible job.

He also defunded the US civil service (all of it) for a few weeks, for similarly insane reasons. His 'talk' didn't make any sense, the withholding didn't make any sense, then. This is a repeat, with WHO, of that debacle, for reasons that seem impossible to put into the kind of communication (words) that we all study in elementary school.

The "money talks' theory is useful to someone who hasn't got elementary language skills, or a convincing reason to give voice to. So which is it, is Trump being inarticulate, or irrational?

Whit3rd.... the not man of science always chooses the answer that aligns with the lefties