4 ms·

> 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 eff

> 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.

josephcsible 6y ago
> the CDC wants to play it safe Isn't having a policy that significantly reduces the number of people who will take the vaccine the opposite of "playing it safe"?
- Sohcahtoa82 6y ago
  I would argue that anybody who thinks "Why bother getting the vaccine if I'll still have to stay locked down/masked/etc" probably would be avoiding the vaccine anyways, and this is just a convenient excuse.
  - josephcsible 6y ago
    Why do you think that? It's a risk-reward balance. Why wouldn't increasing the reward tip the scales?
    - ryandrake 6y ago
      At this point, we know there is close to zero risk to getting vaccinated. How much reward do we need to convince people to do it?
      - josephcsible 6y ago
        Right now, the reward is close to zero too. Basically the only things the CDC lets you do after being vaccinated are things you've been able to get away with the whole time anyway.
        Sohcahtoa82 6y ago
        Close to zero? You mean the likelihood of catching COVID dropping to nearly zero is worthless to you? Also, lockdowns are likely to continue until COVID numbers drop. COVID numbers won't drop until more people get vaccinated. The thought of "vaccines are pointless since you'll still have to mask" is extremely short-sighted.
        ryandrake 6y ago
        It's like "safer cars are pointless since you still have to wear your seat belt."
        josephcsible 6y ago
        But now you have the Prisoner's Dilemma working against you. If things won't go back to normal until 60% or 70% or 80% or 90% of people get the vaccine, and getting it yourself before then doesn't give you anything, the rational but selfish thing to do is say "I'll let everyone else get the vaccine but pass on it myself. I'll get the benefit of normality without the risk of side effects." As for this: > Close to zero? You mean the likelihood of catching COVID dropping to nearly zero is worthless to you? If someone has been offered the vaccine but chose not to get it, I think they would say yes to this.
CountDrewku 6y ago
>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. Not my point. I don't care what they actually think. I'm telling you how it's perceived by the citizens who are weary about receiving it. It looks bad and they really need a better PR department if they want more people to trust them.

josephcsible 6y ago

> the CDC wants to play it safe Isn't having a policy that significantly reduces the number of people who will take the vaccine the opposite of "playing it safe"?

Sohcahtoa82 6y ago
I would argue that anybody who thinks "Why bother getting the vaccine if I'll still have to stay locked down/masked/etc" probably would be avoiding the vaccine anyways, and this is just a convenient excuse.
- josephcsible 6y ago
  Why do you think that? It's a risk-reward balance. Why wouldn't increasing the reward tip the scales?
  - ryandrake 6y ago
    At this point, we know there is close to zero risk to getting vaccinated. How much reward do we need to convince people to do it?
    - josephcsible 6y ago
      Right now, the reward is close to zero too. Basically the only things the CDC lets you do after being vaccinated are things you've been able to get away with the whole time anyway.
      - Sohcahtoa82 6y ago
        Close to zero? You mean the likelihood of catching COVID dropping to nearly zero is worthless to you? Also, lockdowns are likely to continue until COVID numbers drop. COVID numbers won't drop until more people get vaccinated. The thought of "vaccines are pointless since you'll still have to mask" is extremely short-sighted.
        ryandrake 6y ago
        It's like "safer cars are pointless since you still have to wear your seat belt."
        josephcsible 6y ago
        But now you have the Prisoner's Dilemma working against you. If things won't go back to normal until 60% or 70% or 80% or 90% of people get the vaccine, and getting it yourself before then doesn't give you anything, the rational but selfish thing to do is say "I'll let everyone else get the vaccine but pass on it myself. I'll get the benefit of normality without the risk of side effects." As for this: > Close to zero? You mean the likelihood of catching COVID dropping to nearly zero is worthless to you? If someone has been offered the vaccine but chose not to get it, I think they would say yes to this.

CountDrewku 6y ago

>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. Not my point. I don't care what they actually think. I'm telling you how it's perceived by the citizens who are weary about receiving it. It looks bad and they really need a better PR department if they want more people to trust them.