3 ms·
Thus the article in the NYT, by a Pulitzer prize winner no less, attempting to reconcile trust issues, ends up as a pile of randomly copy-pasted data. I'd say
by nbabitskiy 7y ago
Thus the article in the NYT, by a Pulitzer prize winner no less, attempting to reconcile trust issues, ends up as a pile of randomly copy-pasted data.
I'd say this communication has started on a wrong foot. If a reporter of a huge newspaper can't be arsed to get it right, what kind of trust can we have in underpaid, anonymous government clerks, responsible for both scientific evaluation and logistic execution of vaccination?
- yehosef 7y agoWelcome to the wacky-zany world of vaccines misinformation. Note - I don't claim anti-vaxxers don't have mistakes and misinformation - but it's coming for a different place. Anti-vaxxers are motivated by trying to save people from harm. Pro-vaxxers are motivated by trying to save people from harm and around $2000 per child (that complies with the vaccination schedule x3.5M children born in US each year.) The vaccine manufacturers make the money but there is "trickle-down-economics" where accomplices are duly rewarded (https://www.reuters.com/article/us-merck-gerberding/former-cdc-head-lands-vaccine-job-at-merck-idUSTRE5BK2K520091221 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-merck-gerberding/former-c...).