Also Fauci shooting-down lab-origin theories in public, while his private emails – still heavily redacted! – imply contemporaneous discussion of such an origin as a serious possibility.

Also Fauci misestimating a vaccine as at least a year and half away.

Also Fauci helping to fluff Trump's lowball estimates of the pandemic ending by summer 2020 with "more like the 60k" dead. (Only off by 12x, and still growing!)

Also Fauci overclaiming the rushed EUA 3wk/4wk mRNA vax dose spacings as 'optimal' & important not-to-delay... when precedent from other vaccines was that 8wks or longer is better for stronger & more durable immunity. (Data from other countries with wiser spacing has now confirmed, as true experts would have expected, that longer spacing is better. So the insistence of Fauci/CDC on rushed 2nd doses now leaving vaccinated Americans with more, and more severe, breakthrough infections.)

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/fauci

Everything Fauci's said, at every phase of this pandemic, has been optimized not to save lives or be truthful, but to excuse whatever actions, or inactions, the federal government has taken as "the best possible at the time". The doctor schtick, plus the gravelly NYC accent, is a powerful combo. There's a reason he's the highest-paid employee in the whole federal government!

This confuses me. If the claim that masks "don't work" caused folks to distrust public health authorities, then why are many of the folks who claim to distrust those PH authorities refusing to wear masks?

> If the claim that masks "don't work" caused folks to distrust public health authorities

I would say it is more the contradictory messaging that caused the distrust, than the initial claim that masks do not work.

And so, if I say "gravity does not exist" and then turn around and say that the effect we call "gravity" accelerates matter at 9.8 meters per second per second, that means "the effect we call gravity" doesn't exist?

That's a strange way to look at it, IMHO.

Then you go and claim that magnetism does not exist, I will probably not believe you.

>Then you go and claim that magnetism does not exist, I will probably not believe you.

Fair enough. Now apply that reasoning to my original statement.

If public health authorities claim that masks don't work, and that's a lie, then they say they do, that's a lie too?

That's the root of my confusion. Given that those two statements are not just mutually exclusive, but also completely contradictory, they obviously can't both be false.

And as many folks call out the statement about masks not working as a lie, how does it follow that those same people refuse to wear masks because they "distrust" the messenger.

If the messenger is lying about "masks not working," how is it reasonable to reject wearing masks because they lied about masks not working?

The problem is it is not just the health officials, you have the media and politicians also all trying to play doctor but also not following their own advice.

And it does not matter that it is only a couple people that have done so, due to the way people group those couple are all it takes.

To look at an older example of this: Look at how the religious right community is treated when it comes to morals. You probably don't believe them. Why? Not because Sally and John in Minnesota or even the most of the people in the leadership. No, you don't believe them because that one guy who was caught solicitating gay sex in the airport. Or the one guy who was cheating on his wife.

That's not really a good example, IMHO.

Especially since, as far as "morals" are concerned, despite the fact that many folks in one labeled "group" or another may espouse certain behaviors as "moral" or "immoral," morality isn't a team sport.

Rather, each individual makes their own moral choices when situations that require such decisions are presented to them.

The moral choices that individuals make are an individual thing. As such, attempting to paint any group with a broad brush like that is foolhardy at best and nasty and hateful at worst.

I evaluate people based on their individual actions, not some made-up group label. You must have me confused with somebody else.

I'm not really sure where you get the idea that I'm painting with a broad brush, or vilifying anyone. I expressed my confusion about why a specific set of people who assert that "the government lied when they said masks didn't work," then refuse to wear masks.

It doesn't make sense, as it's logically inconsistent, as the claims are diametrically opposed to the behavior.

And the argument that such folks "don't trust the messenger" doesn't really hold water since the "messenger" has been on both sides of this particular issue.

If you were to argue that people are taking a "don't fucking tell me what to do!" position, I would understand that better. I often take that position (not about masks, but in many other circumstances) myself.

But saying "they lied when they said masks don't work!" strongly signals that such an individual believes that masks do work. To then turn around and refuse to wear a mask seems like some heavy cognitive dissonance.

As such, is it a surprise that such behavior confuses me?

No, it means whether or not I believe it is unrelated to what you said, and I will instantly take any claims you make as suspect.

It would take weeks if not months to do something like that at the federal level, our government doesn't move fast.