Wayland said:
I feel like there is confusion about 'seasonality' in the article in that I think it doesn't have to start at EXACTLY the same time in the same place or different region. There can be multiple 'sweet spots' climate-wise that can trigger a wave.
The Southern U.S. went through summer 'seasonal' waves in both 2020 and 2021, but the 2021 wave occurred later in the summer. I don't think it is so much that the virus knows what the EXACT date is, so can kick off its cycle like "Oh it is July 1st, time to go!!". Weather isn't static year over year.
There is obviously a more complex series of environmental variables which trigger the cycle. I do think some of that is 'weather' (in a BROAD sense) dependent. If for some reason the optimal conditions didn't kick in until a few weeks later, so be it. But I do think there is a heavy climate component to these waves.
And just because conditions are seasonally stronger in the summer in the South, doesn't mean they aren't seasonally stronger in the winter in the North. We have different climate regions. Even looking back at Hope-Simpson, it isn't like his charts have universally seasonal wave and done. Some of the climate regions have slightly more erratic waves.
I guess my overall point is that I think media oversimplifies the term 'seasonality'. Seasonality is triggered by a complex number of variables (which IMO are more climate related than human factors but could certainly include both).
EDIT: I also strongly agree with Osterholm here "We've ascribed far too much human authority over the virus". Even if I am not his biggest fan.
I also like clear and direct communication about the limits of our understanding.
"...Since the Covid virus began spreading in late 2019, cases have often surged for about two months sometimes because of a variant, like Delta and then declined for about two months.Epidemiologists do not understand why."There's needed to be a lot more of that honesty throughout COVID. There's still so much we don't know about COVID but we now know vastly more than we did 18 months ago.
In PR, either admitting you don't know something, or acting like you do know with certainty when you don't, can both obviously negatively impact perceptions of your work. People want answers, but the want the
right answers.
That said, risking turning off some people by admitting you don't have all the answers is far preferable, because it doesn't poison the knowledge well down the road. Nobody should be faulted for not having all the answers in a highly fluid and rapidly evolving situation.
Acting like you've got all the answers when you don't makes some people wary of your advice forever.
I heard someone describe this one time that, with mass communication, the masses "want you to be sure, but need you to be right."
Seeming sure of something is only inspirational if you're not wrong about what you're seeming sure about.
For some LOL corollaries to this, check out the subreddit r/confidentlyincorrect. Some gems in there.
