Don't agree fully with this WSJ piece, but I think it IS important that the COVID advisors should include folks who have been critical of lockdowns & other blunt response measures/ who think differently

Why include voices w/ whom we disagree?
[thread] https://www.wsj.com/articles/joe-bidens-lockdown-lobby-11605223647

Although it is easy to assert that all the choices a society makes in response to covid are #following the science, the truth is there is massive uncertainty here

No truly honest scientist can say I am 100% sure that doing x, y or z will yield the fewest lives or YLL lost

It is inherently only a semi-quantitative policy question with massive uncertainty bounds

it is akin to foreign policy or diplomacy

In such situations it is vital to get the input of folks who think differently

you may even overrule them ultimately, but they may point out blind spots you do not see.

When and how to issue mandates and lockdowns are unprecedented public policy

they are made in a volatile political climate

Having input of thoughtful, measured folks who have opposite ideas about the risks and harms of broad sweeping policy is necessary and helpful

They may temper how a plan is executed in a useful way