What is your source for reliable COVID-19 Information?

The Centers for Disease Control? Public Health England? Canadian Public Health Service? European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control? World Health Organization? A politician? Television entertainers ?

There is no shortage of gullible, vulnerable people who are easily duped by incompetents who spread gross ignorance that, if taken seriously, can prove extremely harmful. Scoffing at a transmissible, highly contagious, potentially lethal disease has consequences.

This is a prime example of the insidious threat against which you would do well to take sensible precautions:

​

Sensible precaution:​

​

 

Australian government and ABC Australia

https://www.abc.net.au/news/story-streams/coronavirus/

SBS Australia has Covid information in different languages

https://www.sbs.com.au/language/coronavirus

 

There is no reliable source of information to be found on the subject. Such was demonstrated when the world health organization claimed the virus was not transmittable between humans, was not contagious, was not as serious as it actually is, and claimed travel restrictions with the nation of China simply were not needed.

 

Fox News is now facing intense scrutiny for its initial coverage of the coronavirus pandemic, irrefutable eaxamples of which are provided above.

A lawsuit filed in Washington is asking a state court to bar the network from sharing false information about the pandemic.

The Washington League for Increased Transparency and Ethics has filed a ten-page document, in which Fox News Corp., owner Rupert Murdoch, AT&T TV and Comcast were named as defendants.

The organization is seeking an injunction to prevent Fox News from “interfering with reasonable and necessary measures to contain the virus by publishing further false and deceptive content.”

 

Enlightened discretion is advised. Not all sources are equal. (E.g., WHO vs Fox News.) A Dr Fauci is a more trustworthy source than a reality-tv entertainer.

Obviously, no one source has a monopoly on truth and, if any source's information is updated and evolves based upon scientific data, it is superior to those that tout a line that is impervious to such evidence. Some sources are far more reputable than others. One safeguard is establishing the reliability of the science upon which information is based.
Reuters reviewed scientific studies published on the new coronavirus since the outbreak began. Of the 153 they identified, 92 were not peer-reviewed yet and some included outlandish and unverified claims.

 

You've kind of proven your point since your information is unreliable. The statement you're referring to obviously wasn't saying the virus couldn't be transmitted or even that it hadn't been. The statement was that the Chinese authorities had stated that there was no clear evidence that it has been transmitted between people yet (at that point in time). They could have been wrong, they could have even been lying but you should still at least keep your accusation accurate.

 

What "accusation", specifically, are you referencing?

If you enjoy the sampling of television entertainers provided in the initial post, I would suggest you bear in mind that they are dealing in fantasy, not reality.

Distinguishing between the two is vital.

 

“It’s not a question of if this will happen but when this will happen
and how many people in this country will have severe illnesses,
Disruption to everyday life might be severe.”
Director of the CDC's National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases
FEBRUARY 25, 2020
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/...-disruption-to-everyday-life-might-be-severe/​

It should be acknowledged that the ideological media performers at Fox who had been relentlessly spewing irresponsible lies concerning the pandemic belatedly flipped, en masse, predicated, presumably, upon the irresistible ubiquitous intrusion of irrefutable reality.

The older, less-educated demographic that finds entertainment value in Fox is especially vulnerable to COVID-19.

Before/After:

​

 

I rely on MSNBC for all my information. They don't tell you what's going on like FOX does. They will interview the source and let the person who knows tell you what's going on.

 

It wasn't directly related to your OP. I was referring to this statement specifically;

 

Ah. Thank you for the clarification.

In general, I would suggest that public health authorities are sources of reliable public health issues that are far superior to ideological media entertainers and self-promoting politicians. In all cases, a track record of providing accurate information and advice - revising it promptly when updated data is developed - is desirable.

 

I agree. The problem is that most people do see the raw information without it first being filtered through multiple other people. The politicians and media generate more eye-catching and appealing headlines than the NHS, CDC or WHO.

 

I saw that the governor of MN yesterday extended the shutdown until early May ignoring the CDC "model" predicting by Fall the deaths related to Wuhan virus count could be as high as 467 and citing his "models" predicting 20,000 deaths in that state.
So far there have been 39 deaths with the vast majority of them very elderly with underlying conditions in a State with 5-1/2 million residents. Despite the Minnesota roads being totally empty, there has been a spike in traffic accidents with the death count at 28 only 9 behind those recorded related to the Wuhan Virus.

 

For trumpers, the only answer is sean hannity.

 

If one derives one's information second- or third- hand, as most do, it then becomes essential to only trust in those sources that have earned our trust by having established a record of credibility. Extraneous political and ideological agendas abound, and can and do pervert and obstruct the imparting of scientific evidence. If a source has exposed such biases in the past, it is liable to infect its content with them now.

 

Even entertainer hannity has been forced, presumably by the preponderance of irrefutable data, to finally abandon his proliferating consummate bullshit regarding the pandemic.

 

Has he? I wouldn't know.

 

This one seems to have nailed it correctly,
speakers on please.
https://twitter.com/Beg1Girl/status/1247680635499687945

 

When did they say that? Got a link?

 

Despicable people, the lot of 'em.

 

Me, too. They air Cuomo's daily conference, and aside from Fauci and Brix, he's giving us better information than Trump's task force.