8 ms·

> Most importantly, Fast Grants didn’t change the vaccine timeline, and vaccines were clearly the most important component of the response. They are being real

> Most importantly, Fast Grants didn’t change the vaccine timeline, and vaccines were clearly the most important component of the response. They are being really intellectually honest here. One thing you couldn't apply for for Fast Grants was a media effort to convince people to take the vaccine. And speaking of the power of individuals, Robert De Niro (https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/moviesnow/la-et-mn-robert-de-niro-anti-vaccine-autism-movie-tribeca-20160325-story.html https://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/moviesnow/la-et...) and other A-Listers actively campaign against vaccines. Fauci said he wishes DiCaprio would endorse the vaccine - as Fast Grants said, pretty obvious - and of course DiCaprio hasn't, he thinks vaccines cause autism. Were there any institutions who were adversaries to vaccine adoption?

eloff 5y ago
What's disturbing is people taking health advice from celebrities instead of medical experts.
- nickthemagicman 5y ago
  What about taking health advice from the NEWS MEDIA.
  - eloff 5y ago
    Not recommended to take any kind of advice from the news media. It's not even recommended to consume much news media. The less you're exposed to that garbage, the better.
  - gpm 5y ago
    Screaming isn't necessary... Taking advice directly from the reporter is as ridiculous as taking advice from celebrities. Taking advice from the health officials/professionals the reporter is quoting... well as long as you trust the reporter to be quoting them accurately that's about as reasonable as taking advice directly from the health officials/professionals. Advice can roughly speaking be evaluated as [probability it was quoted correctly] * [probability you should be taking advice from that health official/professional]... (that's only rough, because you also have to account for reporters doing things like selectively quoting bad advice... but it's a reasonably first estimate)
    - wolverine876 5y ago
      > Taking advice directly from the reporter is as ridiculous as taking advice from celebrities. Agreed, though I don't see reporters offering health advice. They do what you say. Though a health reporter probably knows far more than a random famous person, having spent a career learning about health care and days/weeks/months studying the specific issues at hand. Look at the amount of research involved in a serious news publication - often many experts interviewed, studies reviewed, and that's just what made it into print.
- eloff 5y ago
  Did I actually get down voted by someone who believes the contrary? Is that possible for a rational individual to take that position?
ceilingcorner 5y ago
Your comment is misleading. DeNiro continued: “In the 15 years since the Tribeca Film Festival was founded, I have never asked for a film to be screened or gotten involved in the programming. However, this is very personal to me and my family and I want there to be a discussion, which is why we will be screening “Vaxxed.” I am not personally endorsing the film, nor am I anti-vaccination; I am only providing the opportunity for a conversation around the issue.”
- nickthemagicman 5y ago
  “Tribeca, as most film festivals, are about dialogue and discussion. Over the years we have presented many films from opposing sides of an issue. We are a forum, not a judge,” a spokeswoman said in a statement on behalf of the festival earlier this week. GOOD. If you're correct your viewpoint will stand up to dialogue.
  - ceilingcorner 5y ago
    Yeah, I don’t get the hostility. If an idea is bad, then let it be revealed as bad. Banning people just creates more conspiracy theorists.
  - jfengel 5y ago
    That seems like an odd thing for them to say, since they are judges. They "curate" the entries that come in, and then celebrity judges award prizes. They're not really a discussion forum. They're mostly about just showing things. They have some panels, but mostly any discussions kicked off by films are arranged by the attendees for themselves. There are truly unjuried festivals, but they're much less high profile because the quality will be very uneven. That's not what Tribeca is about at all. So I don't know why she would say that.
    - nickthemagicman 5y ago
      They are the people who run the show. I'm sure they know better than us!
nickthemagicman 5y ago
There's a difference between people who don't think vaccines are good as a whole...and people who question a rushed vaccine developed with no FDA oversight or testing by companies who have absolutely no liability if things go wrong for a disease that has 99.99% survival rate for most people. And then there are questions about it even WORKING fully and one still has to wear a mask and you can still be contagious and it may not protect against other strains! If that doesn't ring critical thinking bells in your brain then you're operating based on unquestioning BELIEF in the GOOD of the experts, gov't, and people in general which doesn't seem to always have worked out the best throughout history.
- cbsmith 5y ago
  > There's a difference between people who don't think vaccines are good as a whole...and people who question a rushed vaccine developed with no FDA oversight or testing by companies who have absolutely no liability if things go wrong for a disease that has 99.99% survival rate for most people. > > And then there are questions about it even WORKING fully and one still has to wear a mask and you can still be contagious and it may not protect against other strains! Yes, there's a difference between people who question vaccines as a whole and... a fabricated reality/false narrative. The survival rate is not 99.99%, and the outcomes for "survivors" are all too often debilitating. The demand on our healthcare infrastructure is potentially crippling, as we've seen. There has been FDA oversight... indeed the vast majority of the time from development to release of the vaccines in the US has been getting clearance from the FDA (you may recall the J&J vaccine was even paused by the FDA). ...and the liability shield is due to the never-ending unjustified legal claims that companies are invariably subjected to when they operate in this space. There's a difference between critical thinking bells and having your bell rung. ;-)
  - nickthemagicman 5y ago
    > Covid chance of death in general population (Deaths / US population): 100 - (600000/350 million) = 99.9982857143% survival rate > "Currently, no coronavirus vaccine is fully approved by the FDA, but three were given emergency use authorization by the agency" https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/coronavirus/are-covid-vaccines-fda-approved-heres-how-the-process-works-2/2524845/ https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/coronavirus/are-covid-vaccin... > The demand on our healthcare infrastructure is potentially crippling, as we've seen Completely false. Not a single hospital was crippled. Most of what you said is false information and the idea of a 'having my bell rung' appears to be a subtle violent threat! Such a rational critical thinking person you seem to be and the others like you! Best wishes sweetie!

eloff 5y ago

What's disturbing is people taking health advice from celebrities instead of medical experts.

nickthemagicman 5y ago
What about taking health advice from the NEWS MEDIA.
- eloff 5y ago
  Not recommended to take any kind of advice from the news media. It's not even recommended to consume much news media. The less you're exposed to that garbage, the better.
- gpm 5y ago
  Screaming isn't necessary... Taking advice directly from the reporter is as ridiculous as taking advice from celebrities. Taking advice from the health officials/professionals the reporter is quoting... well as long as you trust the reporter to be quoting them accurately that's about as reasonable as taking advice directly from the health officials/professionals. Advice can roughly speaking be evaluated as [probability it was quoted correctly] * [probability you should be taking advice from that health official/professional]... (that's only rough, because you also have to account for reporters doing things like selectively quoting bad advice... but it's a reasonably first estimate)
  - wolverine876 5y ago
    > Taking advice directly from the reporter is as ridiculous as taking advice from celebrities. Agreed, though I don't see reporters offering health advice. They do what you say. Though a health reporter probably knows far more than a random famous person, having spent a career learning about health care and days/weeks/months studying the specific issues at hand. Look at the amount of research involved in a serious news publication - often many experts interviewed, studies reviewed, and that's just what made it into print.
eloff 5y ago
Did I actually get down voted by someone who believes the contrary? Is that possible for a rational individual to take that position?

ceilingcorner 5y ago

Your comment is misleading. DeNiro continued: “In the 15 years since the Tribeca Film Festival was founded, I have never asked for a film to be screened or gotten involved in the programming. However, this is very personal to me and my family and I want there to be a discussion, which is why we will be screening “Vaxxed.” I am not personally endorsing the film, nor am I anti-vaccination; I am only providing the opportunity for a conversation around the issue.”

nickthemagicman 5y ago
“Tribeca, as most film festivals, are about dialogue and discussion. Over the years we have presented many films from opposing sides of an issue. We are a forum, not a judge,” a spokeswoman said in a statement on behalf of the festival earlier this week. GOOD. If you're correct your viewpoint will stand up to dialogue.
- ceilingcorner 5y ago
  Yeah, I don’t get the hostility. If an idea is bad, then let it be revealed as bad. Banning people just creates more conspiracy theorists.
- jfengel 5y ago
  That seems like an odd thing for them to say, since they are judges. They "curate" the entries that come in, and then celebrity judges award prizes. They're not really a discussion forum. They're mostly about just showing things. They have some panels, but mostly any discussions kicked off by films are arranged by the attendees for themselves. There are truly unjuried festivals, but they're much less high profile because the quality will be very uneven. That's not what Tribeca is about at all. So I don't know why she would say that.
  - nickthemagicman 5y ago
    They are the people who run the show. I'm sure they know better than us!

nickthemagicman 5y ago

There's a difference between people who don't think vaccines are good as a whole...and people who question a rushed vaccine developed with no FDA oversight or testing by companies who have absolutely no liability if things go wrong for a disease that has 99.99% survival rate for most people. And then there are questions about it even WORKING fully and one still has to wear a mask and you can still be contagious and it may not protect against other strains! If that doesn't ring critical thinking bells in your brain then you're operating based on unquestioning BELIEF in the GOOD of the experts, gov't, and people in general which doesn't seem to always have worked out the best throughout history.

cbsmith 5y ago
> There's a difference between people who don't think vaccines are good as a whole...and people who question a rushed vaccine developed with no FDA oversight or testing by companies who have absolutely no liability if things go wrong for a disease that has 99.99% survival rate for most people. > > And then there are questions about it even WORKING fully and one still has to wear a mask and you can still be contagious and it may not protect against other strains! Yes, there's a difference between people who question vaccines as a whole and... a fabricated reality/false narrative. The survival rate is not 99.99%, and the outcomes for "survivors" are all too often debilitating. The demand on our healthcare infrastructure is potentially crippling, as we've seen. There has been FDA oversight... indeed the vast majority of the time from development to release of the vaccines in the US has been getting clearance from the FDA (you may recall the J&J vaccine was even paused by the FDA). ...and the liability shield is due to the never-ending unjustified legal claims that companies are invariably subjected to when they operate in this space. There's a difference between critical thinking bells and having your bell rung. ;-)
- nickthemagicman 5y ago
  > Covid chance of death in general population (Deaths / US population): 100 - (600000/350 million) = 99.9982857143% survival rate > "Currently, no coronavirus vaccine is fully approved by the FDA, but three were given emergency use authorization by the agency" https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/coronavirus/are-covid-vaccines-fda-approved-heres-how-the-process-works-2/2524845/ https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/coronavirus/are-covid-vaccin... > The demand on our healthcare infrastructure is potentially crippling, as we've seen Completely false. Not a single hospital was crippled. Most of what you said is false information and the idea of a 'having my bell rung' appears to be a subtle violent threat! Such a rational critical thinking person you seem to be and the others like you! Best wishes sweetie!