I want to document this abrupt shift in attitude because it's clear we're still in the throes of the manic feedback loop we fell into then. In less than two weeks in March, we shifted the ethical burden of the pandemic’s toll in way that thrust us all into moral panic.

1/ https://twitter.com/rak3re/status/1356083885868601347

Let’s go back to February 24, 2020. This was a time when you could still discuss containment measures in sensible terms of social and economic costs. “How much benefit does measure X provide for Y cost?” was then considered a reasonable framework. From The Atlantic. 2/

These were sensible questions, and we were not ashamed to ask them. Can we control this? To what extent can we mitigate it? What is the cost of mitigation? What is the optimal level of mitigation given the marginal costs? You would find these questions discussed in media. 3/

On February 27th, the NYT was still able to consider that there was a social cost too great to justify so drastic a measure as *temporarily* closing schools. They wisely note the tendency for officials to just “do something”, even if irrelevant or unhelpful. 4/

Marc Lipsitch was, then, convinced that 40-70% of the world would *inevitably* get covid. This is important. If an outcome is inevitable for a population, then it’s impossible for that population to bear responsibility for the outcome. 5/ https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2020/02/covid-vaccine/607000/

On March 2nd, officials like Lipsitch were still thinking small. Stay home if you’re sick! Cancel large gatherings!

Ten days later, everything was closed. Everywhere. We went from “stay home if you’re sick” to “stay home at all costs, all the time, sick or not”. In 10 days. 6/

What happened in those ten days? The moral burden of the pandemic’s outcome shifted as a global consensus (read: groupthink) began to emerge that China’s declining cases – after three months of uncontrolled spread – was explained entirely by its “draconian” measures. 7/

You see, finally, after two months China was able to get some control in Wuhan. Clearly their efforts had succeeded. China’s success was a beacon – one for us to aspire to! 8/

Desperate to project a sense of control, our political and PH establishment seized upon the idea that our fate was firmly in our own hands – like China’s! – further entrenching groupthink and creating the conditions for a feedback loop to develop absent any dissent. 9/

Of course, an increasingly anxious and panicked population bought in with no resistance, and thus, it became dogma. Science! No more questions. Feedback loop fully constructed. Close ranks. 10/

This was our point of no return. With our sense of control fully established, failure here indicated a failure of resolve. A moral failing. If we *could* stop the pandemic but fail, it can only be because we chose not to. This is how the moral burden shifted. 11/

From then on, all incentives – in media, culture, politics, the zeitgeist, anywhere and everywhere – were conditioned to encourage maximal concern and paranoia. The feedback loop – where my anxiety increases yours, and yours increases mine – took us to an escape velocity. 12/

Facts and nuances about vaccines, transmission, immunity, relative risk, became –and still are – only relevant insofar as they align with the incentives of the feedback loop. 13/

We are *still* in that doomloop (h/t @bergerbell), and we can’t break it. It’s why we can’t have honest conversations about schools, risk tolerance, cost/benefit, or any other reasonable point of discussion that was earnestly considered before March. 14/

I don’t know how a mania breaks -- it's all depressing and overwhelming to think about -- but I’m sure it includes understanding how it started. So that’s what I’ve got. /fin