3 ms·

Yeah, this is why the pro-vaccine propaganda is insanely condescending: of course we (phd) know that vaccine are efficient to stop the disease, and we are not d

by mam3 5y ago

Yeah, this is why the pro-vaccine propaganda is insanely condescending: of course we (phd) know that vaccine are efficient to stop the disease, and we are not debating that. In most case we debating the right to refuse it (which is basically not the case anymore for example in france), and also the fact that for many young people, it's close to useless. Useless in the sense that the probability of having severe forms is suuuuuper low, and that the argument of 'limiting the spread to older/weaker people' is not so convincing since on the long term covid will end up spreading to the older/weaker people anyway if themselves don't vaccinate. SO we should focus the effort on convincing older/weaker to vaccinate and leave the Phds/young.

Traster 5y ago
The survey this report is based on asked if you would take the vaccine today. Your point about being forced is irrelevant to this question. What it’s finding is people with phds aren’t making that argument - they don’t want to take it themselves. Also you say you know the vaccine is efficient to stop the disease, but it’s close to useless “for many young people” but then you spend a paragraph arguing it isn’t.
- mam3 5y ago
  No one would take a vaccine which is still expérimental if it was not covid. Especially not the people who dont have consequence of it. Its normal young people dont want it. They only take it because they are forced somehow (mandatory masking and other stuff). The only debate worth it is how much you have to make it mandatory
  - Mordisquitos 5y ago
    > No one would take a vaccine which is still expérimental if it was not covid. While that may sound intuitively true, what does a vaccine "being experimental" actually mean objectively? For a vaccine to be experimental can mean many subtly different things depending on the context, and the currently deployed COVID-19 vaccines are only "experimental" with regards to the legal and customary fictions of the official procedures that are ordinarily in place for novel medications. These procedures have a reason to exist, of course, but they do not determine any objective fact about the reality of our current knowledge about these vaccines. To rest ones trust on these vaccines on them being officially "experimental" or not is to fall into the fallacy of reification.
    - mam3 5y ago
      > These procedures have a reason to exist, of course, but they do not determine any objective fact about the reality of our current knowledge about these vaccines. It's still in phase 2 or 3. it has to be beyond 4. The reason is that indeed, theses rules were put in place because it was "assessed" that this delay was necessary to proprely evaluate thre effects of drugs, based probably on past problems. As such ou "current konwledge about these vaccines" is incomplete
Mordisquitos 5y ago
However, in my social circles I have found that more educated people (some with PhDs) are more likely to want to be vaccinated, and less likely to display any hesitancy. Then again, it's not a representative sample as it's mostly people working in science or with PhDs in biology.
lucozade 5y ago
> SO we should focus the effort on convincing older/weaker to vaccinate and leave the Phds/young That was a perfectly reasonable argument when vaccine supply was limited and there was a huge number of older/weaker people needing vaccines. And that was, in fact, the approach that almost all countries took at the early stages of vaccine rollout. But it's not a good argument now. At least not in the countries with high uptake. As the vaccines aren't 100% effective, reducing transmissibility will save lives. Still. And it is absolutely true that the young are much less likely to get severely affected from catching COVID. And that, in a nutshell, is also likely to be the primary reason for lower uptake in the young. It doesn't affect them so they don't really care. It's an entirely rational approach, if somewhat selfish.
- mam3 5y ago
  But then you are walking on 50 years of ethics and clinical trial laws which are here for a reason... if it was not covid no one woukd take a vaccine that early. > It's an entirely rational approach, if somewhat selfish. The only selfish thing is older people who say "young people should take it to protect older people". Its like saying its selfish you dont work for me for free. My body my choice. Vaccine yourself if you want.
jollybean 5y ago
Stopping the spread to older people is a very useful thing. They will not 'end up getting it anyhow' this is a fallacy.

by mam3 5y ago

Traster 5y ago

The survey this report is based on asked if you would take the vaccine today. Your point about being forced is irrelevant to this question. What it’s finding is people with phds aren’t making that argument - they don’t want to take it themselves. Also you say you know the vaccine is efficient to stop the disease, but it’s close to useless “for many young people” but then you spend a paragraph arguing it isn’t.

mam3 5y ago
No one would take a vaccine which is still expérimental if it was not covid. Especially not the people who dont have consequence of it. Its normal young people dont want it. They only take it because they are forced somehow (mandatory masking and other stuff). The only debate worth it is how much you have to make it mandatory
- Mordisquitos 5y ago
  > No one would take a vaccine which is still expérimental if it was not covid. While that may sound intuitively true, what does a vaccine "being experimental" actually mean objectively? For a vaccine to be experimental can mean many subtly different things depending on the context, and the currently deployed COVID-19 vaccines are only "experimental" with regards to the legal and customary fictions of the official procedures that are ordinarily in place for novel medications. These procedures have a reason to exist, of course, but they do not determine any objective fact about the reality of our current knowledge about these vaccines. To rest ones trust on these vaccines on them being officially "experimental" or not is to fall into the fallacy of reification.
  - mam3 5y ago
    > These procedures have a reason to exist, of course, but they do not determine any objective fact about the reality of our current knowledge about these vaccines. It's still in phase 2 or 3. it has to be beyond 4. The reason is that indeed, theses rules were put in place because it was "assessed" that this delay was necessary to proprely evaluate thre effects of drugs, based probably on past problems. As such ou "current konwledge about these vaccines" is incomplete

Mordisquitos 5y ago

However, in my social circles I have found that more educated people (some with PhDs) are more likely to want to be vaccinated, and less likely to display any hesitancy. Then again, it's not a representative sample as it's mostly people working in science or with PhDs in biology.

lucozade 5y ago

> SO we should focus the effort on convincing older/weaker to vaccinate and leave the Phds/young That was a perfectly reasonable argument when vaccine supply was limited and there was a huge number of older/weaker people needing vaccines. And that was, in fact, the approach that almost all countries took at the early stages of vaccine rollout. But it's not a good argument now. At least not in the countries with high uptake. As the vaccines aren't 100% effective, reducing transmissibility will save lives. Still. And it is absolutely true that the young are much less likely to get severely affected from catching COVID. And that, in a nutshell, is also likely to be the primary reason for lower uptake in the young. It doesn't affect them so they don't really care. It's an entirely rational approach, if somewhat selfish.

mam3 5y ago
But then you are walking on 50 years of ethics and clinical trial laws which are here for a reason... if it was not covid no one woukd take a vaccine that early. > It's an entirely rational approach, if somewhat selfish. The only selfish thing is older people who say "young people should take it to protect older people". Its like saying its selfish you dont work for me for free. My body my choice. Vaccine yourself if you want.

jollybean 5y ago

Stopping the spread to older people is a very useful thing. They will not 'end up getting it anyhow' this is a fallacy.