Ultimately, unelected leaders should be cognizant of their role. Are they furthering positive change or communication, or has their presence become an impediment? Sometimes the hardest thing is knowing when to step down. In this case, I think the answer is clear.
“Today, we face substantial rewards for compliance; if we comply with the government’s pandemic response measures (masking, distancing, lockdowns, and now the ever-increasing and nebulous vaccine rollout), we are granted the conditional privilege of reentrance into society; and the penalties for failing to comply? being bullied, shamed, excluded, cancelled, even fined or arrested.”
In our current safety culture-driven pandemic response, any risk of infection is deemed unacceptable, and those who highlight potential costs of mitigation measures are labeled irresponsible and dangerous. However, safety worship and building engineers might override old-fashioned common sense, but they can’t override our own biology.
A person who is convinced that making green tea causes it to rain isn’t going to be open-minded toward a lecture on atmospheric science and cloud formation. Similarly, based on the above examples, South Korea’s case increases are due to too much freedom, a virus caused 100,000 to die of drug overdoses, and the president can crush a pathogen with behavioral guidelines and mandates.
Scientists have lost any consistent standards for evidence appraisal. Non randomized data with dirty measures of exposure and unrealistic effect sizes should set off warning bells. Or, if you want to just believe in things, then go ahead, just believe in them, but don’t pretend you are following a consistent framework for evaluating evidence.