We disagree on the unspoken missions of those agencies, I guess. From what I've seen, the unspoken mission is actually providing sinecures for political allies. Or have you forgotten about a worldwide pandemic that happened just a few short years back which revealed that the top priority of many authority figures in public health organizations was to make themselves look good and their opposition bad?

Why are so many people blind to the idea that the name and stated purpose of an organization can and many times do differ from the actual real-world outcomes that organization produces?

▲

bonsai_spool 8 hours ago | parent [-]

> Or have you forgotten about a worldwide pandemic that happened just a few short years back which revealed that the top priority of many authority figures in public health organizations was to make themselves look good and their opposition bad?

I don't remember this because it did not happen.

However, I do recall our own (Trump-run) CDC putting out ineffective testing materials, while the (admittedly Trump-supported) WHO made the testing resources the whole world, including the US, relied on in the first months of the pandemic.

▲

gottorf 7 hours ago | parent [-]

> I don't remember this because it did not happen.

There was a whole-of-government approach to silencing factually true statements about the pandemic because it either made officials look bad or Trump look good. There was a whole Supreme Court case around this that was sidestepped on grounds of standing, not on the facts of the case.

Anthony Fauci, a prominent NIH official who was the initial public face of the government's response to the pandemic, was revealed to have exhibited a significant lack of candor around the origins of Covid and his involvement in funding gain-of-function research. This was discovered by a House subcommittee formed by a Democratic majority and continued by a subsequent Republican majority.

	▲	bonsai_spool 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		>There was a whole-of-government approach to silencing factually true statements about the pandemic because it either made officials look bad or Trump look good. There was a whole Supreme Court case around this that was sidestepped on grounds of standing, not on the facts of the case. > Anthony Fauci, a prominent NIH official who was the initial public face of the government's response to the pandemic, was revealed to have exhibited a significant lack of candor around the origins of Covid and his involvement in funding gain-of-function research. This was discovered by a House subcommittee formed by a Democratic majority and continued by a subsequent Republican majority. These are very peculiar claims that I, despite very close following of factual news sources, have not seen. What are your sources for these claims?