The proper response to COVID isn't determined by science; it's a public health policy issue.

Science and data can tell us who is at risk and the magnitude of the risk. Science can tell us what is currently known about how to mitigate risk.

1/6

But the policy discussion must take into account both the benefits and the costs of the mitigation.

This is where we have gone completely off the rails with COVID. No discussion of the costs has been allowed, and the only goal has been "zero COVID."

2/6

This is unprecedented and is already resulting in a great deal of harm to public health and society.

The next time you see an article that tries to stoke fear about COVID, ask yourself whether it changes anything we know about the magnitude of the risks (especially by age).

3/6

At this point, that is VERY unlikely. We know what we need to know, and the proper course is to have open, public discussions about how to balance costs and benefits of various policies.

4/6

Shouting down people who oppose the "zero COVID" policies as "grandma-killers" is counterproductive and ignores all the other deaths that will result from those policies, not to mention damage to anyone who is at low risk for COVID but hurt by the policies.

5/6

We need MORE debate, not less. Stop being taken in by articles designed to shut down debate. Stop listening to those who shout "Science!" while turning their backs on everything we know about public health policy.

Demand public discussion of the costs of these policies.

6/6

Here's an example. "Everything he says is false." Oh? Is Redfield claiming the age stratification data TAKEN FROM THE CDC's SITE is false? Of course not. Nothing here changes what we ALREADY KNOW. It's just an ad hominem attack. https://twitter.com/JamesEKHildreth/status/1310648954149834755?s=20