As a society we also need to think about why it's OK to exclude kids from even the limited protections offered by occupational health and safety rules, even in places like schools where they are forced to be present. Kids should be *more* protected than an adult working in a steel mill, not less.

You can access the @natprot.bsky.social article via this link. I would be very interested in hearing feedback on this work @natureportfolio.bsky.social
🧪

rdcu.be/d3n6s

Yes! - that's a good metaphor. I'm sorry you have long covid.

What these criteria add up to is that the emergency phase may be over but we are still in a pandemic. NZ’s failure to acknowledge this fact doesn’t bode well for the work needed to build and maintain preparedness for future pandemic threats.

3/3

www.sciencemediacentre.co.nz/2024/11/28/l...

- unpredictable variant waves driven by ongoing viral evolution
- not showing seasonal patterns
- year-round baselines are still enough to cause heavy human & financial costs
- capabilities for damage (Long Covid) far beyond common cold coronaviruses or influenza

It's not a cold & not a flu.

2/

Just last month there were more cuts at ESR. That's the group of public servants who did a similar thing for us all regards the COVID pandemic.

These capabilities matter. We do not know when we might need them. Killing them off is just plain irresponsible.

We need to work together, in solidarity.

Very disappointing to see so little consideration of Long Covid in policy - it's a huge and consequential omission. Will be an important component of advice for the incoming Government.

Well, that is an essay! Final point is that I was an earlyish adopter of online forums (eg dnuk, 1990s doctors net) and these patterns were being endlessly repeated before the pandemic. I don't really like saying 'pick your battles' as it's not a battle, but certainly, 'pick your best time use'. 5/5

As for the influencers, no amount of evidence will change their stance because their position is now attached to their sense of self-worth. They'll have to navigate that one themselves, hopefully with the help of colleagues, but it's not a knowledge problem and sadly, rational debate can't help. 4/n

These people are powerful and in protecting themselves they're causing harm to the people they should be protecting. They may not mean to, but that's the result. Satire has a role here in highlighting nonsense reasoning that non-experts won't always be able to unpick straight away. 3/n

Those are important conversations and they're respectful & productive. But unfortunately some influential people attached their identities and reputations to particular points of view early on & the reputational cost of walking back is too high now, resulting in increasingly bad rationalisations.2/n

Thank you for explaining, I appreciate that and agree. And indeed I spend an enormous amount of offline time researching, writing, and talking about the risks and benefits of pandemic control, not only with colleagues but also with people who are questioning and challenging how things are done. 1/n

Yes. Alternatively, the disinformation tactic of throwing out multiple mutually incompatible arguments in the hope that one of them sticks (as in the two real-life examples in that post) is wholly in bad faith and deserves no consideration or respect.