I had trouble with the “fact checking” in this article, and I’m not an advocate of any of the things that they “debunk”. The effort to stem overreaction is commendable, but “fact checking” like this is more pedantic than useful, I think. Complacency and panic are both bad things.
“There’s no evidence ‘high-dose’ Vitamin C can stop Coronavirus” — not specifically, but there is evidence (albeit not definitive) that it reduces the severity of viral infections, generally.
“It’s not a good idea to make your own hand sanitiser” because of the lack of emollients, apparently. So, add emollients.
“The government doesn’t recommend not shaking hands”, but it may be a prudent measure in the future.
“Children don’t need to be removed from schools”, but they may need to be in the future.
The more important thing with hand sanitizer is — alchohol is not great for your hands.
And it takes a bit to actually “sanitize” a virus.
Washing with soap and water works not because it kills the virus, but because it actually washes it down the drain. Use a mild ph-balanced soap, and you can do this many times a day without hurting your skin. I’ve started using moisturizer just because the constant washing is a bit irritating anyway (lubriderm)
"Fact checking" usually involves omitting salient facts that might change The Narrative that the writer is pushing, as we can see by your excellent points in response to the original article:
rightwingcrazy wrote -
“There’s no evidence ‘high-dose’ Vitamin C can stop Coronavirus” — not specifically, but there is evidence (albeit not definitive) that it reduces the severity of viral infections, generally.
“It’s not a good idea to make your own hand sanitiser” because of the lack of emollients, apparently. So, add emollients.
“The government doesn’t recommend not shaking hands”, but it may be a prudent measure in the future.
“Children don’t need to be removed from schools”, but they may need to be in the future.