And just as many acknowledging the dangers of releasing wide ranges to date with so many unknowns.
I’m not saying it’s not a valid argument that people wanted this info.
I am saying that it was at least as valid a position to not do so with so many unknowns...they don’t even know if people can be reinfected with this virus yet.
I don’t believe it is bad communication to not release it to this point, but rather a valid choice they have been making.
The government has said they are releasing something next week, presumably because they are more comfortable with a few of the unknowns.
https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp...ot-predict-how-many-will-die-from-coronavirus
Who are the just as many acknowledging the dangers of releasing modelling and research that is guiding decisions?
If you are talking about the people on this forum, as opposed to the AMA, scientists and epidemiologists all over the country calling for this information, I'd say you just need to see the rioting and waves of panic being unleashed by the fearful populace of NZ when they released their highly technical papers on the subject, to know that we'll probably be OK.
If they are making policy decisions, they are comfortable enough with the range of outcomes to make those decisions, and in a democracy, we deserve to know the basis of major policy.
I hope they do release something next week.
The health minister saying no one can predict the number of deaths is fobbing this off (as were you with your 3000 to 400 000 quote earlier from the article). I'm not asking for a number of deaths, and neither is anyone else.
People want to see the modelling (the whole model, warts and all, with flaws) and the scientific research it is based on, and the strategy the government has taken based on that modelling and research.
I can see no valid reason for them not to have done this long before now. It makes it appear as if they don't have any idea what they are doing, or they are hiding something.
The same people who were happy to roast (rightly so) Shorten for his terrible lack of costings on some of his policy going in to an election, are now saying it is OK for political leaders in a democracy to not be transparent.
And even if it is a "valid" choice, it is still bad communication, because they needed to explain their reasoning behind not releasing this information much earlier, and clearly, rather than evade questions from the press.
