30 ms·

Pfizer’s CEO hasn’t gotten Covid vaccine, saying he doesn’t want to cut in line

10 points by canofbars 6y ago

canofbars 6y ago
I'm sure we can spare one dose for him.
coldtea 6y ago
Yeah, I'm pretty sure that's his concern, not that he's worried about side effects... As if there's anything at stake cutting-in-line-wise if he takes one of the millions of vaccine doses. As if it's a kindey transplant...
PurpleFoxy 6y ago
Amazing how humble these bigwigs have become suddenly.
overallduka 6y ago
Why he is not "Trusting science!"? Such a denier
davismwfl 6y ago
I understand and can agree with the sentiment here in the comments but seriously he is screwed either way. If he doesn't take it people will say he doesn't trust his product, the science etc. If he does take it (or he and the exec team do) people will say, see just another rich guy getting his before the regular people do, taking advantage of the system. Or people will point to it as some sort of white privilege. I think he should've taken it and accepted the "privilege" criticism to show confidence in his product, but I recognize he was going to get slammed either way.
- bladderwart 6y ago
  One way to not get criticized either way is take the vaccine then afterwards purposefully mist themselves with COVID-19 that shows they risked themselves because they believe in the product so not showing privilege they will always have a huge medical team to fall back on I guess. Not saying they should but haven’t famous doctors tested on themselves by trying to get sick?
  - NonEUCitizen 6y ago
    Like how the SawStop inventor believes his product works: https://www.businessinsider.com/steve-gass-sawstop-demonstration-2013-5 https://www.businessinsider.com/steve-gass-sawstop-demonstra...
  - davismwfl 6y ago
    Even if he did he would still be criticized and be accused of "faking" the risk (e.g. he was sprayed with saline not COVID or whatever) by a not so small and very vocal group of people. And even if he did actually mist himself with COVID he'd also likely be criticized by the research and science community and potentially forced out of his position for taking that risk as the CEO of a publicly traded company. IMO -- his best bet was to not take it immediately, wait until front line health care workers have received their vaccine (e.g. in the U.S) and take his when consumers have access to it based on his age/risk profile. This way he can point to it and say, I didn't use my seat as CEO to take away from those who needed it most, but I got in line as soon as people my age/condition were allowed. Historically this will look good on paper, and the criticism of him wouldn't last longer than a couple of news cycles.
- paulie_a 6y ago
  Or he could just say nothing
  - detaro 6y ago
    headlines: "CEO of Pfizer refuses to discuss if he's taking the vaccine!11 (he totally already got it ahead of everyone else, cheating elites)" and "CEO of Pfizer refuses to discuss if he's taking the vaccine!11 (he obviously doesn't trust it)"

10 points by canofbars 6y ago

I'm sure we can spare one dose for him.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that's his concern, not that he's worried about side effects... As if there's anything at stake cutting-in-line-wise if he takes one of the millions of vaccine doses. As if it's a kindey transplant...

PurpleFoxy 6y ago

Amazing how humble these bigwigs have become suddenly.

overallduka 6y ago

Why he is not "Trusting science!"? Such a denier

davismwfl 6y ago

I understand and can agree with the sentiment here in the comments but seriously he is screwed either way. If he doesn't take it people will say he doesn't trust his product, the science etc. If he does take it (or he and the exec team do) people will say, see just another rich guy getting his before the regular people do, taking advantage of the system. Or people will point to it as some sort of white privilege. I think he should've taken it and accepted the "privilege" criticism to show confidence in his product, but I recognize he was going to get slammed either way.

bladderwart 6y ago
One way to not get criticized either way is take the vaccine then afterwards purposefully mist themselves with COVID-19 that shows they risked themselves because they believe in the product so not showing privilege they will always have a huge medical team to fall back on I guess. Not saying they should but haven’t famous doctors tested on themselves by trying to get sick?
- NonEUCitizen 6y ago
  Like how the SawStop inventor believes his product works: https://www.businessinsider.com/steve-gass-sawstop-demonstration-2013-5 https://www.businessinsider.com/steve-gass-sawstop-demonstra...
- davismwfl 6y ago
  Even if he did he would still be criticized and be accused of "faking" the risk (e.g. he was sprayed with saline not COVID or whatever) by a not so small and very vocal group of people. And even if he did actually mist himself with COVID he'd also likely be criticized by the research and science community and potentially forced out of his position for taking that risk as the CEO of a publicly traded company. IMO -- his best bet was to not take it immediately, wait until front line health care workers have received their vaccine (e.g. in the U.S) and take his when consumers have access to it based on his age/risk profile. This way he can point to it and say, I didn't use my seat as CEO to take away from those who needed it most, but I got in line as soon as people my age/condition were allowed. Historically this will look good on paper, and the criticism of him wouldn't last longer than a couple of news cycles.
paulie_a 6y ago
Or he could just say nothing
- detaro 6y ago
  headlines: "CEO of Pfizer refuses to discuss if he's taking the vaccine!11 (he totally already got it ahead of everyone else, cheating elites)" and "CEO of Pfizer refuses to discuss if he's taking the vaccine!11 (he obviously doesn't trust it)"