3167
submitted 1 year ago by Fissionami@lemmy.ml to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Abracadaniel@hexbear.net 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The NPR article also has no evidence for an earlier outbreak. They just report what the North's government stated, and add that the reader shouldn't believe them.

Sure they share a border with China, but China had COVID pretty well controlled for a significant portion of the pandemic. That combined with the DPRK's survival strategy of self-reliance make it seem plausible to me that they were clear of it until the vastly more contagious variant became dominant.

So far, there doesn't seem to be any evidence to the contrary.

[-] shinigamiookamiryuu@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

Let me ask you something for the sake of discussion. What do you consider evidence of an outbreak?

[-] Abracadaniel@hexbear.net 3 points 1 year ago

epistemology is a big topic and we're clearly operating on some contradictory premises/priors but I'll continue to engage in good faith.

I think I'd consider the following as evidence of an event: photos/video, eyewitness testimony, and measurement data; each provided with provenance/traceability through the entire chain of reporting. Each reporting agent's credibility on the topic plays a role in weighing the evidence.

Finally the believability (another big term) of the claim itself plays a important role in how much evidence is necessary for me to believe it. Here's where I put on my internet atheist hat and reference the "Sagan Standard": Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof and it's corollary: a claim asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

[-] shinigamiookamiryuu@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

The reason I asked is an outbreak is usually "in the shadows" until the community of medical professionals confirm it. And it's not this I intend to reference though, but the fact many would be quick to jump at one country falling under the definition but not another (as well as individual states, as different states handled it differently). However we define evidence (even witnesses are hard, many people will say people dying in front of you wouldn't be proof unless indicated by professionals), we'd have to apply it universally; the time period between the first suspected patient zero to the first confirmed case to the last confirmed case should be treated by the same rules in both countries, and in all countries. Depending on the standard, either you have both countries faring well or both countries not faring well.

Given North Korea is more private, that makes the latter the heavier choice, at least if you ask me.

this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2023
3167 points (98.3% liked)

Asklemmy

43859 readers
1613 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS