This is fascinating, the WHO's wrote a paper in 2019 on non-pharmaceutical methods for how to stop a pandemic.

With two months of the pandemic behind us, we can see from direct experience that it is hilariously, ridiculously off.

/1

https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/329438/9789241516839-eng.pdf?ua=1

Starting with the obvious, under "Not recommended in any circumstances", they have "quarantining".

Quarantining. How the fuck are you supposed to fight a pandemic without quarantining? It's arguably the alpha and the omega of pandemic-fighting.

Under any circumstances!

2/

Also under "Not recommended in any circumstances" we have:

- "contact tracing" which was a huge part of South Korea's ability to tame coronavirus.

- "Border Closures", the tactic to which Denmark and New Zealand largely accredit their succes at keeping cases low.

/3

The WHO only just decided that maybe the public should use masks. So, according to their guidelines, we've been "moderate" until now.

10 million jobs lost in the US, thousands dying, 3.5 billion people on lockdown and...moderate.

/4

Saying we should never use "Entry or Exit Screenings" (presumably temperature screenings) would fly against what kept Russia's caseload extremely low initially.

And why never use UV lights? I don't get the downside here.

A lot of these feel surprisingly arbitrary.

/5

One last point about masks - according to the WHO "School closures" and "Face masks for the public" both kick in at High.

So, theoretically, once we started closing schools we should have implemented masks as well. I guess they forgot to mention that.

/6

I have no idea why the WHO thinks that "modifying humidity" would be such a drag on society that they say never to do it.

But, I'm damn glad people learn by heuristics and not by listening to phony-scientist bureaucrats and their backwards, insane list.

#AbolishTheWHO

/6