4 ms·

These concerns and warnings are coming from the scientific literature - from experts at top institutions in the world. Your dismissal of them is completely unsu

These concerns and warnings are coming from the scientific literature - from experts at top institutions in the world. Your dismissal of them is completely unsupported.

civilized 5y ago
I am not dismissing them. On the contrary, every post I have made takes pains to distinguish between the legitimate analysis and claims in the scientific papers you have cited (e.g. that vaccine escape is worthy of concern) and your unwarranted, irresponsible inferences from them (i.e. that mandatory vaccination is a public health risk - especially stated with such a definitive air of authority, followed by a flurry of citations that simply don't say that). At best we can say that vaccination programs are not without risks. But this is true of many, many legitimate public health measures, and it is deeply misleading to single out one of them as a "public health risk" on this basis. If we apply such a lax standard of labeling consistently, then not doing a compulsory mass vaccination program is also a public health risk, for reasons that are now extremely obvious if they weren't already. You have misattributed too many strawman positions to me at this point. You are either unable or unwilling to engage in good faith and this may have to be the end of my interactions with you.
- criticaltinker 5y ago
  It doesn't make sense to me how you can admit that "vaccine escape is worthy of concern" (which is an understatement at best), but then say it's "deeply misleading" to call it a public health risk. Yes you're right that none of the citations literally say "this is a public health risk" - but is it really an "inference" to say that viral resistance driven by mass vaccination poses a risk? We clearly disagree so we needn't go on longer - but FWIW I can't help but feel as though you've been downplaying the significance of these risks with very little supporting evidence, other than your own logical reasoning and accusation of misinformation. I do appreciate you conveying your opinions in a respectable manner.
  - civilized 5y ago
    Thank you. I appreciate you bringing these legitimate concerns to light and I hope there is open debate about all costs and benefits of mass vaccination. The lack of public discourse from a position of humility and curiosity has led to many bad decisions during this pandemic, IMO. That said, public health requires the analysis of all costs and benefits using a consistent, logical methodology. We need to be very clear about the inferences supported and not supported by our evidence. Saying that mass vaccination carries the risk of vaccine escape is very different from saying that mass vaccination is a public health risk.

These concerns and warnings are coming from the scientific literature - from experts at top institutions in the world. Your dismissal of them is completely unsupported.

civilized 5y ago

I am not dismissing them. On the contrary, every post I have made takes pains to distinguish between the legitimate analysis and claims in the scientific papers you have cited (e.g. that vaccine escape is worthy of concern) and your unwarranted, irresponsible inferences from them (i.e. that mandatory vaccination is a public health risk - especially stated with such a definitive air of authority, followed by a flurry of citations that simply don't say that). At best we can say that vaccination programs are not without risks. But this is true of many, many legitimate public health measures, and it is deeply misleading to single out one of them as a "public health risk" on this basis. If we apply such a lax standard of labeling consistently, then not doing a compulsory mass vaccination program is also a public health risk, for reasons that are now extremely obvious if they weren't already. You have misattributed too many strawman positions to me at this point. You are either unable or unwilling to engage in good faith and this may have to be the end of my interactions with you.

criticaltinker 5y ago
It doesn't make sense to me how you can admit that "vaccine escape is worthy of concern" (which is an understatement at best), but then say it's "deeply misleading" to call it a public health risk. Yes you're right that none of the citations literally say "this is a public health risk" - but is it really an "inference" to say that viral resistance driven by mass vaccination poses a risk? We clearly disagree so we needn't go on longer - but FWIW I can't help but feel as though you've been downplaying the significance of these risks with very little supporting evidence, other than your own logical reasoning and accusation of misinformation. I do appreciate you conveying your opinions in a respectable manner.
- civilized 5y ago
  Thank you. I appreciate you bringing these legitimate concerns to light and I hope there is open debate about all costs and benefits of mass vaccination. The lack of public discourse from a position of humility and curiosity has led to many bad decisions during this pandemic, IMO. That said, public health requires the analysis of all costs and benefits using a consistent, logical methodology. We need to be very clear about the inferences supported and not supported by our evidence. Saying that mass vaccination carries the risk of vaccine escape is very different from saying that mass vaccination is a public health risk.