12 ms·

> Polls show that about 30 percent of the U.S. population is still reluctant to be vaccinated. That number is expected to improve but probably not enough. “It i

by lol768 5y ago

> Polls show that about 30 percent of the U.S. population is still reluctant to be vaccinated. That number is expected to improve but probably not enough. “It is theoretically possible that we could get to about 90 percent vaccination coverage, but not super likely, I would say,” said Marc Lipsitch, an epidemiologist at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health. This is really poor, positive vaccine sentiment in the UK has increased to 94% (late March) since December 2020 and actual take-up in my area isn't far off (about 91%). That's almost 1 in 3 people in the US who are reluctant to get vaccinated. Is this an education problem? Is there not a consistent minimum science curriculum for K-12 which covers pathogens, treatments and the history of vaccination programmes? Are there other factors that are relevant?

distribot 5y ago
Don't people who've been infected count toward the herd immunity. That ~30% of Americans. I know there's some overlap but if we can get to 70% of people vaccinated I think we'd be really close, no?
- ls612 5y ago
  Israel has 60% vaccinated and they have controlled the pandemic through that. The US probably has more natural immunity than them so overall I’d say we are in a decent position. The issue will be localized outbreaks in places with less vaccine coverage.
- HarryHirsch 5y ago
  There have been high-profile cases of re-infection in India, and the experience from Manaus tells the same story. Expecting herd immunity from letting the disease spread is wishful thinking.
  - thehappypm 5y ago
    It's important to understand why reinfection might not be such a big problem. First, the virus can only spread broadly with an R0 above 1. Even if some portion of the population is susceptible to reinfection (vaccinated or natural immunity), so far there's been little evidence that it's widespread. In a fully vaccinated population, the R0 will only reach above 1 if the virus is able to break through vaccines wholesale. Second, the vaccines seem to be highly effective at preventing serious cases, hospitalizations, and deaths, even in reinfected individuals.
  - ravi-delia 5y ago
    No matter what you'd see greatly reduced spread. Ideally everyone would be vaccinated, but it would be unwise to ignore the substantial overlap between antivax people and antimask people. Everything pushing R beneath 1 is a good thing that should be counted.
  - jeofken 5y ago
    There has been 70 cases and 3 deaths of reinfection worldwide [0]. If this source is not false, reinfection is negligible, and I am yet unconvinced herd immunity will not materialise [0] https://bnonews.com/index.php/2020/08/covid-19-reinfection-tracker/ https://bnonews.com/index.php/2020/08/covid-19-reinfection-t...
- klmadfejno 5y ago
  The flaw with these kinds of statements is that it assumes the 70% is uniformly distributed throughout a population. Obviously, if an entire town decides to avoid vaccination, it'll be vulnerable. Less obvious is if certain social circles don't get vaccinated such that things look geographically well mixed, but in terms of actual interaction patterns, not so much. Reinfection and new variants surviving in networks like this imply COVID will be around for a very long time.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
snypher 5y ago
Have you read any articles on this subject? There are many factors affecting someone's medical decisions. It's not as simple as some K-12 education plan. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_hesitancy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_hesitancy
_huayra_ 5y ago
If you want a deep dive on this, Peter Attia's last two guests on his podcast were great 1. https://peterattiamd.com/peterhotez3/ https://peterattiamd.com/peterhotez3/ Peter Hotez on the history of anti-vax 2. https://peterattiamd.com/pauloffit2/ https://peterattiamd.com/pauloffit2/ Paul Offit on the outlook for the coronavirus based on the current data
- caeril 5y ago
  I'm not sure "traditional" anti-vax history or ideology is particularly relevant to the specific matter of anti-covid-vax. The vast majority of those who eschew the current efforts have no problem with the TDAP vaccines, etc. It's almost entirely political, along with a mistrust of the experts and authorities who proclaimed, in March of last year, that masks are ineffective and that travel restrictions are racist.
SigmundA 5y ago
Yes from what I have seen its an education problem. The people I know who are reluctant have no clear idea how vaccines work or a good grasp of statistics. They generally seem to be ok with taking the risk of getting the virus but perceive a higher risk with taking a new vaccine even though the evidence is to the contrary. Most of these people are on the anti-vax, all natural, anti-gmo, wifi and microwaves cause cancer spectrum and it all comes from a lack of understanding the science and technology of modern life.
- nlft 5y ago
  I'd say that the resentment comes from having been screwed over in the past, like with Thalidomide. I'm not saying that the vaccines are unsafe, but the whole Corona Industry is suspect. Loads of ffp masks without actual certifications, ffp masks that are contaminated and have to be recalled, etc.
  - asdff 5y ago
    How many people are citing thalidomide vs. just reposting conspiracy theories like "china virus," though? These people's opinions don't come from caution after a careful analysis of literature or past events. It comes from reading clickbait online that plays into their psychology.
- nitrogen 5y ago
  Most of these people are on the anti-vax, all natural, anti-gmo, wifi and microwaves cause cancer spectrum Lumping all of the opposition into a single category and assuming they are all the same is both dehumanizing and counterproductive.
HarryHirsch 5y ago
Just look at the standoff between the teacher unions and the CDC. The unions take the side of their members who would rather stay away from the little asymptomatic sweethearts while the CDC takes the government's side and would like to have school going again so both parents can be back at work. If the government's messaging is that the economy takes precedence over individual safety, that's the priors that people work with when they evaluate vaccine safety.
- anonAndOn 5y ago
  US education: Those asymptomatic sweethearts are largely languishing, at least the ones in part-time distance learning environments. This has not been the case for those kids that could afford to attend private schools as many have been attending classes at school for most/all of the entire school year. So you've got private school kids on track and public school kids with stunted academic development because why, exactly?
  - edmundsauto 5y ago
    Because the teachers, who often feel that they are not paid enough for the regular job, don’t feel safe? I don’t get why this is so controversial - they don’t want to risk their health to teach your kids.
    - anonAndOn 5y ago
      It's controversial because teaching in person can be done safely as evidenced by thousands of private schools during the past school year. If teacher's unions were doing what's in the best interest for the kids, they would have largely returned to school at this point. However, it has become clear that what is best for the kids is second to what is comfortable for the teachers. If this obstruction to in-class instruction continues, the short-sightedness of this position will become readily apparent in the Fall as many families who have the means will go private (if they haven't already) thus depriving the schools of both tax dollars and the critically-important engaged families that support many of the extra/co-curricular amenities of public schools. Voucher Programs/charter schools/religious schools will all benefit to the detriment of public schools.
cltby 5y ago
> Is this an education problem? A number of reporters have gone out and talked to vaccine skeptics, e.g. [1]. They don't appear to be suffering from a deficit of knowledge or "false consciousness" or whatever. Their beliefs are reasonable and their preferences are internally consistent. [1] https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/05/the-people-who-wont-get-the-vaccine/618765/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/05/the-people...
minikites 5y ago
>Is there not a consistent minimum science curriculum for K-12 which covers pathogens, treatments and the history of vaccination programmes? There is not a consistent curriculum and there's a significant portion of the US population who believe anything that runs against "the experts" because they're mistrustful of education and the concept of expertise. It's the same reason we don't have a federal ID card because to them it's the Biblical "mark of the beast".
kossTKR 5y ago
I honestly think it's weird that more people aren't "sceptics", however stupid that word is in itself. I would gladly take the Pfizer/Moderna vaccine right this minute, but i also know of the terrible track records the pharmaindustry - there is so many shady examples to choose from it's incredible that anyone doubts how vulture-like that industry is, - also there was corruption the last time a pandemic hit: https://healthcare-in-europe.com/en/news/european-parliament-to-investigate-who-pandemic-scandal.html https://healthcare-in-europe.com/en/news/european-parliament... Besides that we are on completely uncharted territory scale wise and trial wise no matter what your perspective is.
- passivate 5y ago
  I work in biotech (vaccines), so we have some overlap with pharma, and none of what you said resonates with me. Sorry, but you're applying a pretty broad brush to millions of hardworking people in this industry that is completely unwarranted. As an aside, nobody I know is going to refuse life saving medication because 'pharma industry is bad'. The pharma industry is no different than any other industry. The vast majority of people are honest hardworking folks just doing their job, and you have a handful of assholes. As such, you have to look at things on a case by case basis. You can't reject the tech industry because Facebook did something bad. There are millions of criminals in the world, we don't reject humanity based on it. This is simply not a sustainable method of arriving at any sort of conclusion.
  - kossTKR 5y ago
    I don't disagree. Most people actually working with the actual science are good people - just as in tech. The problem comes from ruthless profit incentives, lobbying, marketing, investor pressure etc. Nowhere did i say that the everyone in the industry are bad people, my whole point was about history of shadiness. That's not controversial - again just as in the sector big-data / internet business that i work in. Anyone should be highly sceptical of any huge corporations. I find it very weird that there have literally been non stop scandals, and huge ones too, and still people get angry when people are sceptical of anything "big corp". Always be sceptical of anything with billions of dollars invested, armies of lawyers, PR departments that would shadow small governments etc.
_-david-_ 5y ago
>Is this an education problem? Is there not a consistent minimum science curriculum for K-12 which covers pathogens, treatments and the history of vaccination programmes? Are there other factors that are relevant? I think it is more complicated than just education. The general sentiment I hear from people is in the past we were told that once we get vaccinated we could return to normal. Now we are told we still need to wear a mask, socially distance, not go back to our offices, can't send our kids to school, etc. Many people figure if that is the case why bother taking the vaccine, especially since they haven't even been FDA approved and are using newer methods (mrna) without long term testing on the effects. Some scientists are saying we cannot return to normal until there are no new cases while also saying it will become seasonal and be with us forever. People are losing faith in the scientists because of their ever changing statements. It may be the wrong mentality but in my view it is understandable.
- aphextron 5y ago
  >People are losing faith in the scientists because of their ever changing statements. I'd say this perfectly illustrates the complete lack of understanding of how science works among the public. There is never one specific stance that will always be right and hold up to all scrutiny. It's just highly intelligent educated experts giving their best possible estimate based on current data. As the data evolves, so do the recommendations. People not understanding this is the root of the "experts know nothing" insanity.
  - cltby 5y ago
    The data didn't evolve, though. The only thing that ever changed was the political winds. Throughout this whole pandemic, experts have bent over backwards to defend and justify political decisions--and most humiliatingly, decisions that _directly_ contravene their prior advice. Two examples: - Experts encouraged the George Floyd protests because "racism is the real virus," despite their prior anti-protest stance. Given the apparent magnitude and seriousness of the problem, it's curious they only noticed in May 2020. - In Washington, there was a big battle around opening schools. Public health authorities insisted that this was a verrryyy fraught process that needed to be handled veeerrrryyy slowly and veerryyy carefully. In the middle of this, Gov. Jay Inslee suddenly demanded that the schools be opened in a matter of weeks. The authorities weren't perturbed in the least: after all, they suddenly claimed, "we've known all along that the risk to children is very manageable". Most people understand that mistakes happen, and they are generally forgiving when those mistakes are acknowledged and corrected. But it's plain to see that the sort of "expertise" that's being held up is deeply and pathologically broken.
2lwxxtj 5y ago
People in the US rightly don't trust the pharmaceutical industry or the government. They may not be able to pinpoint why, but when they look around they see that every year the people around them are more obese and have more chronic health conditions. They may not be able to tie those things together consciously, but it leaves the powerful subconscious feeling that the government and pharmaceutical industries do not want them to be healthy.
- Sohcahtoa82 5y ago
  I do think it's a bit ironic to choose not to get a vaccine because you don't trust Big Pharma. Because the alternative to the vaccine is putting yourself at risk for a deadly virus which can cost a lot of money to treat, which would give more money to Big Pharma. Generally, vaccines aren't in the best interests of pharmaceutical companies.
  - 2lwxxtj 5y ago
    It's not about not wanting to give money to them, it's about not wanting their products injected in to your body. The vast majority of people that get infected with the coronavirus do not get any pharmaceuticals put in to them whatsoever. >Generally, vaccines aren't in the best interests of pharmaceutical companies. Maybe they are, maybe they aren't. As far as I know, no one has done any long term (10+ year) studies to determine whether people that get vaccines end up using more pharmaceuticals than people that don't get vaccines.
- jgwil2 5y ago
  Not sure why you're being downvoted; this is exactly the mentality of many people. I don't even think it's subconscious necessarily: many people think this is a conspiracy to ensure profits for Big Pharma. EDIT: to be clear, I do not endorse such a view. I am merely stating that I have observed others espousing it.
beisner 5y ago
It's not an education problem. It's an ideology problem. A huge fraction of the country has basically lost all faith in public and academic institutions. In these polarized times, when many leaders that institution-skeptics listen to decided to make COVID a political issue in the ongoing culture war, listening to public health recommendations (including masking, vaccination) is akin to "letting the other side win". Earlier in the vaccine rollout, some minority populations were skeptical of the vaccine for more historically-grounded reasons (i.e. historical discrimination/abuses in the healthcare system), but that skepticism has faded dramatically [1] as more and more people get the vaccine. Only one group [2] has been pretty consistently unwilling to get the vaccine, and it's tightly coupled to the same ideological alignments that are dividing society in all political and social arenas. More education won't change deeply-held ideological beliefs. [1] https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/more-and-more-americans-say-theyll-get-vaccinated-but-its-still-unclear-just-how-many-will/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/more-and-more-americans... [2] https://morningconsult.com/2021/03/24/trump-covid-vaccine-republicans-poll/ https://morningconsult.com/2021/03/24/trump-covid-vaccine-re...
- thu2111 5y ago
  I don't think it was "institution skeptics" who made COVID a political issue. How many months did it take before academics were claiming that anti-lockdown protests were dangerous and must not happen but BLM protests were to be encouraged, because "systemic racism" is a public health issue? Not many. How many other academics condemned this blatant politicization of science? Not enough. Lockdowns don't work: US states that locked down hard have not seen different results from those that had far fewer restrictions. Sweden has been less impacted than the UK and many other European countries that locked down hard. Have academic institutions ever acknowledged that, or accepted that their predictions were wrong? They do not. The ones I've seen just claim anyone who disagrees with them is an ideologically motivated anti-science conspiracy theorist. These things are not the right way to re-assure people institutions are on top of things. They clearly are not.
  - arcticbull 5y ago
    Lockdown worked fine in New Zealand it not? The thing is, it’s something you have to commit to. You can’t just half ass it.
neither_color 5y ago
>Is this an education problem? Is there not a consistent minimum science curriculum for K-12 which covers pathogens, treatments and the history of vaccination programmes? Are there other factors that are relevant? It's not an education problem and while most comments I predict will consider that the main factor, I disagree and consider it a condescending take. We all learn about Louis Pasteur and successful eradications in the past. It's a cultural/philosophical problem. Right-leaning americans in general value a certain degree of autonomy over a guarantee of safety and if you coerce them "for their own good" they'll double down on whatever the opposite of what you're suggesting is. In the case of this pandemic, all of the mixed messaging regarding mask-wearing and other prevention measures poisoned the well in the first quarter of 2020, before the messaging became consistent by the summer. This turned a health debate into a struggle for rights: "We're all in this together" vs "99% let me take my chances". It's the same debate as 2A. For 2A absolutists, no statistic has come out that justifies giving up what's perceived as an inalienable right.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- MereInterest 5y ago
  The mixed messaging was because previous studies on influenza showed that the increased occurrence of touching one's face to adjust a mask outweighed the benefit of cloth masks. As covid-specific studies were done, it was found that masks were effective, and so the message changed. I agree that the well was poisoned in the first quarter of 2020, but strongly disagree as to the cause of that. Donald Trump publicly, repeatedly, and strongly downplayed the severity of the pandemic. He dismissed masks as something that he himself wouldn't wear. He continually said that the pandemic was a hoax that would magically disappear. He made public safety measures into a political issue, and the Republican party allowed it to happen.
  - johbjo 5y ago
    > it was found that masks were effective Citation for this would be helpful.
- 5y ago
minkzilla 5y ago
No I don’t think it’s education. I think it’s a mistrust of a system that has screwed people over for money many times in recent memory. Many healthcare workers originally said they weren’t willing to get the vaccine[0], people who are clearly educated, maybe not specifically about vaccines, but about medicine in general. [0] https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/nearly-40percent-of-healthcare-workers-are-not-likely-to-get-covid-vaccine/ar-BB1bx1Xf https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/nearly-40percent-of-hea...
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
dec0dedab0de 5y ago
Part of it is that many Americans loudly distrust the government, and other systems of power. This isn't all that irrational, because these institutions have routinely proven themselves to be untrustworty. Then there are people who are normally on board with vaccines, who are reluctant for covid because it is brand new. Just like any sysadmin worth their salt doesn't blindly install every update the moment they come out. If I didn't have a compromised immune system I probably would have waited at least another year before getting my shots. So sure, it's selfish, but its not stupid.
- fithisux 5y ago
  Even the vote during the elections is selfish. And in general stupid.
CountDrewku 5y ago
>This is really poor, positive vaccine sentiment in the UK has increased to 94% (late March) since December 2020 and actual take-up in my area isn't far off (about 91%). That's almost 1 in 3 people in the US who are reluctant to get vaccinated. Blame the media and hypocritical politicians who talk out both sides of their mouths. You can't expect the citizens to want the vaccine while simultaneously doing sensationalist stories on very rare side effects. Even Fauci and the CDC to be promoting the idea that the vaccine isn't that effective. Get the vaccine! You still have to wear masks, social distance, and effectively stay locked down! That's not making it sound like you think the vaccine is effective at all.... On top of that they seem to double down on more authoritarian rhetoric which just causes more distrust. News flash: vaccine passports and forced contact tracing don't make people think your intentions are altruistic.
- maxerickson 5y ago
  Maintaining other interventions reduces the overshoot and makes the pandemic go away faster, it isn't an assessment of the vaccines. (Vaccinated people wearing masks doesn't make a huge difference, but it reduces friction for places like stores to just require masks instead of trying to communicate and enforce a mixed policy)
  - CountDrewku 5y ago
    Not my point. I'm telling you that sort of rhetoric will produce an anti-vax response. It's a piss poor understanding of social reactions by the CDC/government. They will convince none of those people to get the vaccine if they continue on that path.
    - maxerickson 5y ago
      You can make the same argument for just about anything they say.
- Sohcahtoa82 5y ago
  > Even Fauci and the CDC to be promoting the idea that the vaccine isn't that effective. Get the vaccine! You still have to wear masks, social distance, and effectively stay locked down! This isn't because they don't trust the vaccines, it's because we haven't had enough time yet to figure out if vaccinated people can still actually spread the virus. So far, the data suggests no, but the CDC wants to play it safe.
auiya 5y ago
> Is this an education problem? Literally every problem we have in the US, stems from our piss-poor education. Every last one of them.
jgwil2 5y ago
I think a big part of it is how genuinely fucked up the US healthcare system is. This sows a lot of distrust towards all related industries, including the pharmaceutical industry. Not at all saying this is a true or justified belief, but from what I can gather many of the skeptics think this is a scam designed to profit Big Pharma. Others are equally disposed to distrust government in general. And on top of that you had a president who politicized the pandemic from the very beginning, meaning for many people there is simply no way for them to view the situation rationally or objectively.
rsynnott 5y ago
Antivax tendencies have become related to political identification in the US in a rather unusual way; I don't think this has really happened anywhere else. At the extreme, various polls show that about 50% of Republican men won't take the vaccine when offered. This is particularly dangerous because political identification in the US is highly regionalised, so there's a risk of pockets of permanently heavily under-vaccinated population.
stmfreak 5y ago
Ah yes, vaccine reluctance must only come from ignorance. Certainly not education or research into the side effects of vaccines and how these in particular affect people of younger ages with more risks than getting covid.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- eckmLJE 5y ago
  Genuinely curious about side effects of the covid vaccines, do you have sources for this?
  - mannanj 5y ago
    check out the vaers database. 3000 deaths already. you can sort by age group. middle-aged people who would otherwise have been fine with COVID (40's nurses) getting convulsions is certainly a lot worse compared to what people could get with COVID.
fithisux 5y ago
So people who get the vaccine are better educated? I really doubt.

by lol768 5y ago

distribot 5y ago

Don't people who've been infected count toward the herd immunity. That ~30% of Americans. I know there's some overlap but if we can get to 70% of people vaccinated I think we'd be really close, no?

ls612 5y ago
Israel has 60% vaccinated and they have controlled the pandemic through that. The US probably has more natural immunity than them so overall I’d say we are in a decent position. The issue will be localized outbreaks in places with less vaccine coverage.
HarryHirsch 5y ago
There have been high-profile cases of re-infection in India, and the experience from Manaus tells the same story. Expecting herd immunity from letting the disease spread is wishful thinking.
- thehappypm 5y ago
  It's important to understand why reinfection might not be such a big problem. First, the virus can only spread broadly with an R0 above 1. Even if some portion of the population is susceptible to reinfection (vaccinated or natural immunity), so far there's been little evidence that it's widespread. In a fully vaccinated population, the R0 will only reach above 1 if the virus is able to break through vaccines wholesale. Second, the vaccines seem to be highly effective at preventing serious cases, hospitalizations, and deaths, even in reinfected individuals.
- ravi-delia 5y ago
  No matter what you'd see greatly reduced spread. Ideally everyone would be vaccinated, but it would be unwise to ignore the substantial overlap between antivax people and antimask people. Everything pushing R beneath 1 is a good thing that should be counted.
- jeofken 5y ago
  There has been 70 cases and 3 deaths of reinfection worldwide [0]. If this source is not false, reinfection is negligible, and I am yet unconvinced herd immunity will not materialise [0] https://bnonews.com/index.php/2020/08/covid-19-reinfection-tracker/ https://bnonews.com/index.php/2020/08/covid-19-reinfection-t...
klmadfejno 5y ago
The flaw with these kinds of statements is that it assumes the 70% is uniformly distributed throughout a population. Obviously, if an entire town decides to avoid vaccination, it'll be vulnerable. Less obvious is if certain social circles don't get vaccinated such that things look geographically well mixed, but in terms of actual interaction patterns, not so much. Reinfection and new variants surviving in networks like this imply COVID will be around for a very long time.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

snypher 5y ago

Have you read any articles on this subject? There are many factors affecting someone's medical decisions. It's not as simple as some K-12 education plan. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_hesitancy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_hesitancy

_huayra_ 5y ago

If you want a deep dive on this, Peter Attia's last two guests on his podcast were great 1. https://peterattiamd.com/peterhotez3/ https://peterattiamd.com/peterhotez3/ Peter Hotez on the history of anti-vax 2. https://peterattiamd.com/pauloffit2/ https://peterattiamd.com/pauloffit2/ Paul Offit on the outlook for the coronavirus based on the current data

caeril 5y ago
I'm not sure "traditional" anti-vax history or ideology is particularly relevant to the specific matter of anti-covid-vax. The vast majority of those who eschew the current efforts have no problem with the TDAP vaccines, etc. It's almost entirely political, along with a mistrust of the experts and authorities who proclaimed, in March of last year, that masks are ineffective and that travel restrictions are racist.

SigmundA 5y ago

Yes from what I have seen its an education problem. The people I know who are reluctant have no clear idea how vaccines work or a good grasp of statistics. They generally seem to be ok with taking the risk of getting the virus but perceive a higher risk with taking a new vaccine even though the evidence is to the contrary. Most of these people are on the anti-vax, all natural, anti-gmo, wifi and microwaves cause cancer spectrum and it all comes from a lack of understanding the science and technology of modern life.

nlft 5y ago
I'd say that the resentment comes from having been screwed over in the past, like with Thalidomide. I'm not saying that the vaccines are unsafe, but the whole Corona Industry is suspect. Loads of ffp masks without actual certifications, ffp masks that are contaminated and have to be recalled, etc.
- asdff 5y ago
  How many people are citing thalidomide vs. just reposting conspiracy theories like "china virus," though? These people's opinions don't come from caution after a careful analysis of literature or past events. It comes from reading clickbait online that plays into their psychology.
nitrogen 5y ago
Most of these people are on the anti-vax, all natural, anti-gmo, wifi and microwaves cause cancer spectrum Lumping all of the opposition into a single category and assuming they are all the same is both dehumanizing and counterproductive.

HarryHirsch 5y ago

Just look at the standoff between the teacher unions and the CDC. The unions take the side of their members who would rather stay away from the little asymptomatic sweethearts while the CDC takes the government's side and would like to have school going again so both parents can be back at work. If the government's messaging is that the economy takes precedence over individual safety, that's the priors that people work with when they evaluate vaccine safety.

anonAndOn 5y ago
US education: Those asymptomatic sweethearts are largely languishing, at least the ones in part-time distance learning environments. This has not been the case for those kids that could afford to attend private schools as many have been attending classes at school for most/all of the entire school year. So you've got private school kids on track and public school kids with stunted academic development because why, exactly?
- edmundsauto 5y ago
  Because the teachers, who often feel that they are not paid enough for the regular job, don’t feel safe? I don’t get why this is so controversial - they don’t want to risk their health to teach your kids.
  - anonAndOn 5y ago
    It's controversial because teaching in person can be done safely as evidenced by thousands of private schools during the past school year. If teacher's unions were doing what's in the best interest for the kids, they would have largely returned to school at this point. However, it has become clear that what is best for the kids is second to what is comfortable for the teachers. If this obstruction to in-class instruction continues, the short-sightedness of this position will become readily apparent in the Fall as many families who have the means will go private (if they haven't already) thus depriving the schools of both tax dollars and the critically-important engaged families that support many of the extra/co-curricular amenities of public schools. Voucher Programs/charter schools/religious schools will all benefit to the detriment of public schools.

cltby 5y ago

> Is this an education problem? A number of reporters have gone out and talked to vaccine skeptics, e.g. [1]. They don't appear to be suffering from a deficit of knowledge or "false consciousness" or whatever. Their beliefs are reasonable and their preferences are internally consistent. [1] https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/05/the-people-who-wont-get-the-vaccine/618765/ https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/05/the-people...

minikites 5y ago

>Is there not a consistent minimum science curriculum for K-12 which covers pathogens, treatments and the history of vaccination programmes? There is not a consistent curriculum and there's a significant portion of the US population who believe anything that runs against "the experts" because they're mistrustful of education and the concept of expertise. It's the same reason we don't have a federal ID card because to them it's the Biblical "mark of the beast".

kossTKR 5y ago

I honestly think it's weird that more people aren't "sceptics", however stupid that word is in itself. I would gladly take the Pfizer/Moderna vaccine right this minute, but i also know of the terrible track records the pharmaindustry - there is so many shady examples to choose from it's incredible that anyone doubts how vulture-like that industry is, - also there was corruption the last time a pandemic hit: https://healthcare-in-europe.com/en/news/european-parliament-to-investigate-who-pandemic-scandal.html https://healthcare-in-europe.com/en/news/european-parliament... Besides that we are on completely uncharted territory scale wise and trial wise no matter what your perspective is.

passivate 5y ago
I work in biotech (vaccines), so we have some overlap with pharma, and none of what you said resonates with me. Sorry, but you're applying a pretty broad brush to millions of hardworking people in this industry that is completely unwarranted. As an aside, nobody I know is going to refuse life saving medication because 'pharma industry is bad'. The pharma industry is no different than any other industry. The vast majority of people are honest hardworking folks just doing their job, and you have a handful of assholes. As such, you have to look at things on a case by case basis. You can't reject the tech industry because Facebook did something bad. There are millions of criminals in the world, we don't reject humanity based on it. This is simply not a sustainable method of arriving at any sort of conclusion.
- kossTKR 5y ago
  I don't disagree. Most people actually working with the actual science are good people - just as in tech. The problem comes from ruthless profit incentives, lobbying, marketing, investor pressure etc. Nowhere did i say that the everyone in the industry are bad people, my whole point was about history of shadiness. That's not controversial - again just as in the sector big-data / internet business that i work in. Anyone should be highly sceptical of any huge corporations. I find it very weird that there have literally been non stop scandals, and huge ones too, and still people get angry when people are sceptical of anything "big corp". Always be sceptical of anything with billions of dollars invested, armies of lawyers, PR departments that would shadow small governments etc.

_-david-_ 5y ago

>Is this an education problem? Is there not a consistent minimum science curriculum for K-12 which covers pathogens, treatments and the history of vaccination programmes? Are there other factors that are relevant? I think it is more complicated than just education. The general sentiment I hear from people is in the past we were told that once we get vaccinated we could return to normal. Now we are told we still need to wear a mask, socially distance, not go back to our offices, can't send our kids to school, etc. Many people figure if that is the case why bother taking the vaccine, especially since they haven't even been FDA approved and are using newer methods (mrna) without long term testing on the effects. Some scientists are saying we cannot return to normal until there are no new cases while also saying it will become seasonal and be with us forever. People are losing faith in the scientists because of their ever changing statements. It may be the wrong mentality but in my view it is understandable.

aphextron 5y ago
>People are losing faith in the scientists because of their ever changing statements. I'd say this perfectly illustrates the complete lack of understanding of how science works among the public. There is never one specific stance that will always be right and hold up to all scrutiny. It's just highly intelligent educated experts giving their best possible estimate based on current data. As the data evolves, so do the recommendations. People not understanding this is the root of the "experts know nothing" insanity.
- cltby 5y ago
  The data didn't evolve, though. The only thing that ever changed was the political winds. Throughout this whole pandemic, experts have bent over backwards to defend and justify political decisions--and most humiliatingly, decisions that _directly_ contravene their prior advice. Two examples: - Experts encouraged the George Floyd protests because "racism is the real virus," despite their prior anti-protest stance. Given the apparent magnitude and seriousness of the problem, it's curious they only noticed in May 2020. - In Washington, there was a big battle around opening schools. Public health authorities insisted that this was a verrryyy fraught process that needed to be handled veeerrrryyy slowly and veerryyy carefully. In the middle of this, Gov. Jay Inslee suddenly demanded that the schools be opened in a matter of weeks. The authorities weren't perturbed in the least: after all, they suddenly claimed, "we've known all along that the risk to children is very manageable". Most people understand that mistakes happen, and they are generally forgiving when those mistakes are acknowledged and corrected. But it's plain to see that the sort of "expertise" that's being held up is deeply and pathologically broken.

2lwxxtj 5y ago

People in the US rightly don't trust the pharmaceutical industry or the government. They may not be able to pinpoint why, but when they look around they see that every year the people around them are more obese and have more chronic health conditions. They may not be able to tie those things together consciously, but it leaves the powerful subconscious feeling that the government and pharmaceutical industries do not want them to be healthy.

Sohcahtoa82 5y ago
I do think it's a bit ironic to choose not to get a vaccine because you don't trust Big Pharma. Because the alternative to the vaccine is putting yourself at risk for a deadly virus which can cost a lot of money to treat, which would give more money to Big Pharma. Generally, vaccines aren't in the best interests of pharmaceutical companies.
- 2lwxxtj 5y ago
  It's not about not wanting to give money to them, it's about not wanting their products injected in to your body. The vast majority of people that get infected with the coronavirus do not get any pharmaceuticals put in to them whatsoever. >Generally, vaccines aren't in the best interests of pharmaceutical companies. Maybe they are, maybe they aren't. As far as I know, no one has done any long term (10+ year) studies to determine whether people that get vaccines end up using more pharmaceuticals than people that don't get vaccines.
jgwil2 5y ago
Not sure why you're being downvoted; this is exactly the mentality of many people. I don't even think it's subconscious necessarily: many people think this is a conspiracy to ensure profits for Big Pharma. EDIT: to be clear, I do not endorse such a view. I am merely stating that I have observed others espousing it.

beisner 5y ago

It's not an education problem. It's an ideology problem. A huge fraction of the country has basically lost all faith in public and academic institutions. In these polarized times, when many leaders that institution-skeptics listen to decided to make COVID a political issue in the ongoing culture war, listening to public health recommendations (including masking, vaccination) is akin to "letting the other side win". Earlier in the vaccine rollout, some minority populations were skeptical of the vaccine for more historically-grounded reasons (i.e. historical discrimination/abuses in the healthcare system), but that skepticism has faded dramatically [1] as more and more people get the vaccine. Only one group [2] has been pretty consistently unwilling to get the vaccine, and it's tightly coupled to the same ideological alignments that are dividing society in all political and social arenas. More education won't change deeply-held ideological beliefs. [1] https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/more-and-more-americans-say-theyll-get-vaccinated-but-its-still-unclear-just-how-many-will/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/more-and-more-americans... [2] https://morningconsult.com/2021/03/24/trump-covid-vaccine-republicans-poll/ https://morningconsult.com/2021/03/24/trump-covid-vaccine-re...

thu2111 5y ago
I don't think it was "institution skeptics" who made COVID a political issue. How many months did it take before academics were claiming that anti-lockdown protests were dangerous and must not happen but BLM protests were to be encouraged, because "systemic racism" is a public health issue? Not many. How many other academics condemned this blatant politicization of science? Not enough. Lockdowns don't work: US states that locked down hard have not seen different results from those that had far fewer restrictions. Sweden has been less impacted than the UK and many other European countries that locked down hard. Have academic institutions ever acknowledged that, or accepted that their predictions were wrong? They do not. The ones I've seen just claim anyone who disagrees with them is an ideologically motivated anti-science conspiracy theorist. These things are not the right way to re-assure people institutions are on top of things. They clearly are not.
- arcticbull 5y ago
  Lockdown worked fine in New Zealand it not? The thing is, it’s something you have to commit to. You can’t just half ass it.

neither_color 5y ago

>Is this an education problem? Is there not a consistent minimum science curriculum for K-12 which covers pathogens, treatments and the history of vaccination programmes? Are there other factors that are relevant? It's not an education problem and while most comments I predict will consider that the main factor, I disagree and consider it a condescending take. We all learn about Louis Pasteur and successful eradications in the past. It's a cultural/philosophical problem. Right-leaning americans in general value a certain degree of autonomy over a guarantee of safety and if you coerce them "for their own good" they'll double down on whatever the opposite of what you're suggesting is. In the case of this pandemic, all of the mixed messaging regarding mask-wearing and other prevention measures poisoned the well in the first quarter of 2020, before the messaging became consistent by the summer. This turned a health debate into a struggle for rights: "We're all in this together" vs "99% let me take my chances". It's the same debate as 2A. For 2A absolutists, no statistic has come out that justifies giving up what's perceived as an inalienable right.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
MereInterest 5y ago
The mixed messaging was because previous studies on influenza showed that the increased occurrence of touching one's face to adjust a mask outweighed the benefit of cloth masks. As covid-specific studies were done, it was found that masks were effective, and so the message changed. I agree that the well was poisoned in the first quarter of 2020, but strongly disagree as to the cause of that. Donald Trump publicly, repeatedly, and strongly downplayed the severity of the pandemic. He dismissed masks as something that he himself wouldn't wear. He continually said that the pandemic was a hoax that would magically disappear. He made public safety measures into a political issue, and the Republican party allowed it to happen.
- johbjo 5y ago
  > it was found that masks were effective Citation for this would be helpful.
5y ago

minkzilla 5y ago

No I don’t think it’s education. I think it’s a mistrust of a system that has screwed people over for money many times in recent memory. Many healthcare workers originally said they weren’t willing to get the vaccine[0], people who are clearly educated, maybe not specifically about vaccines, but about medicine in general. [0] https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/nearly-40percent-of-healthcare-workers-are-not-likely-to-get-covid-vaccine/ar-BB1bx1Xf https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/nearly-40percent-of-hea...

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

dec0dedab0de 5y ago

Part of it is that many Americans loudly distrust the government, and other systems of power. This isn't all that irrational, because these institutions have routinely proven themselves to be untrustworty. Then there are people who are normally on board with vaccines, who are reluctant for covid because it is brand new. Just like any sysadmin worth their salt doesn't blindly install every update the moment they come out. If I didn't have a compromised immune system I probably would have waited at least another year before getting my shots. So sure, it's selfish, but its not stupid.

fithisux 5y ago
Even the vote during the elections is selfish. And in general stupid.

CountDrewku 5y ago

>This is really poor, positive vaccine sentiment in the UK has increased to 94% (late March) since December 2020 and actual take-up in my area isn't far off (about 91%). That's almost 1 in 3 people in the US who are reluctant to get vaccinated. Blame the media and hypocritical politicians who talk out both sides of their mouths. You can't expect the citizens to want the vaccine while simultaneously doing sensationalist stories on very rare side effects. Even Fauci and the CDC to be promoting the idea that the vaccine isn't that effective. Get the vaccine! You still have to wear masks, social distance, and effectively stay locked down! That's not making it sound like you think the vaccine is effective at all.... On top of that they seem to double down on more authoritarian rhetoric which just causes more distrust. News flash: vaccine passports and forced contact tracing don't make people think your intentions are altruistic.

maxerickson 5y ago
Maintaining other interventions reduces the overshoot and makes the pandemic go away faster, it isn't an assessment of the vaccines. (Vaccinated people wearing masks doesn't make a huge difference, but it reduces friction for places like stores to just require masks instead of trying to communicate and enforce a mixed policy)
- CountDrewku 5y ago
  Not my point. I'm telling you that sort of rhetoric will produce an anti-vax response. It's a piss poor understanding of social reactions by the CDC/government. They will convince none of those people to get the vaccine if they continue on that path.
  - maxerickson 5y ago
    You can make the same argument for just about anything they say.
Sohcahtoa82 5y ago
> Even Fauci and the CDC to be promoting the idea that the vaccine isn't that effective. Get the vaccine! You still have to wear masks, social distance, and effectively stay locked down! This isn't because they don't trust the vaccines, it's because we haven't had enough time yet to figure out if vaccinated people can still actually spread the virus. So far, the data suggests no, but the CDC wants to play it safe.

auiya 5y ago

> Is this an education problem? Literally every problem we have in the US, stems from our piss-poor education. Every last one of them.

jgwil2 5y ago

I think a big part of it is how genuinely fucked up the US healthcare system is. This sows a lot of distrust towards all related industries, including the pharmaceutical industry. Not at all saying this is a true or justified belief, but from what I can gather many of the skeptics think this is a scam designed to profit Big Pharma. Others are equally disposed to distrust government in general. And on top of that you had a president who politicized the pandemic from the very beginning, meaning for many people there is simply no way for them to view the situation rationally or objectively.

rsynnott 5y ago

Antivax tendencies have become related to political identification in the US in a rather unusual way; I don't think this has really happened anywhere else. At the extreme, various polls show that about 50% of Republican men won't take the vaccine when offered. This is particularly dangerous because political identification in the US is highly regionalised, so there's a risk of pockets of permanently heavily under-vaccinated population.

stmfreak 5y ago

Ah yes, vaccine reluctance must only come from ignorance. Certainly not education or research into the side effects of vaccines and how these in particular affect people of younger ages with more risks than getting covid.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
eckmLJE 5y ago
Genuinely curious about side effects of the covid vaccines, do you have sources for this?
- mannanj 5y ago
  check out the vaers database. 3000 deaths already. you can sort by age group. middle-aged people who would otherwise have been fine with COVID (40's nurses) getting convulsions is certainly a lot worse compared to what people could get with COVID.

fithisux 5y ago

So people who get the vaccine are better educated? I really doubt.