4 ms·

Just to be clear, you're arguing against evidence based medicine and instead advocating for hasty generalization and jumping to conclusions based on the absence

Just to be clear, you're arguing against evidence based medicine and instead advocating for hasty generalization and jumping to conclusions based on the absence of evidence. Somewhere between our two points is an optimal middle ground. The holy grail of exclusively evidence based interventions is lofty no doubt, and we'll have to do the best with what we know right now, but to aim for anything less is quite difficult to defend.

handoflixue 5y ago
I can't fathom how you could misinterpret a post saying "there's a difference between evidence and peer reviewed academic standards" to conclude that I've abandoned the idea of evidence entirely. I don't need an academic, peer-reviewed study to tell me that using this site is safe. I don't need one to tell me that masks are safe. It's NICE to have such things, and I'm NOT opposed to them, but they are also NOT necessary for day-to-day reasoning. I do think we should continue vaccine trials, because we might uncover subtle risks. But until we do, we are in fact at a point where we can conclude that the vaccine is significantly safer than going unvaccinated. What we expect to find going forward is small refinements like "X group should prioritize Y vaccine", not "Y vaccine is in fact more dangerous than Covid"
- criticaltinker 5y ago
  You're attacking a straw man here, my original comment was about the lack of evidence for vaccine safety in certain understudied sub-populations. > we are in fact at a point where we can conclude that the vaccine is significantly safer than going unvaccinated You keep coming back to "vaccinated versus unvaccinated" rhetoric and using irrelevant logical reasoning to argue that we should hastily generalize safety results to these sub-populations without citing any scientific literature supporting your claim. The reality of the situation is a lot more complex, and it's obvious you're neglecting these nuances because for example, you fail to acknowledge how immunity acquired through natural infection is a major factor in the tradeoffs of vaccinating these understudied sub-populations. I'm open to further debate, but I won't continue responding if you continue to raise the same unsupported arguments.
  - handoflixue 5y ago
    > You [...] argue that we should hastily generalize safety results to these sub-populations I never argued for "hasty" or "generalization." Simple question: which sub-population are you talking about? Please exclude any sub-population where a statistically significant sample of vaccinated individuals already exists, unless your concern is limited solely to long-term side effects. If you are concerned about long-term side effects, please cite at least one scientific study explaining why you are concerned about that PARTICULAR sub-group being vulnerable to that PARTICULAR side effect - we wouldn't want to waste time if you can't cite any scientific literature supporting your claim (P.S. I've only made a single comment about vaccinated -vs- unvaccinated, so you might have me confused with someone else in this thread)
    - criticaltinker 5y ago
      Children and pregnant women are the two sub-populations I mentioned previously. > Given that COVID-19 disease is far milder in the majority of children than in adults, the risk–benefit of a pediatric SARS-CoV-2 vaccine must be carefully weighed [0] > The prognostic significance, long-term implications and mechanism of this myocardial injury needs to be studied further, especially as vaccination efforts are rolled out to younger children. [1] > While the safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy data for the 4 authorized vaccines are reassuring so far, none of these vaccines has been systematically studied in pregnant and breastfeeding people [2] > it is important to remain transparent about the lack of information, acknowledge concerns, and support those who decide to defer vaccination until more data are available [2] [0] SARS-CoV-2 vaccine testing and trials in the pediatric population: biologic, ethical, research, and implementation challenges (Feb 2021) https://www.nature.com/articles/s41390-021-01402-z https://www.nature.com/articles/s41390-021-01402-z [1] COVID-19 Vaccination-Associated Myocarditis in Adolescents (August 2021) https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/pediatrics/early/2021/08/12/peds.2021-053427.full.pdf https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/pediatrics/ea... [2] SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination During Pregnancy: A Complex Decision (April 2021) https://academic.oup.com/ofid/article/8/5/ofab180/6220034 https://academic.oup.com/ofid/article/8/5/ofab180/6220034
      - 5y ago

handoflixue 5y ago

I can't fathom how you could misinterpret a post saying "there's a difference between evidence and peer reviewed academic standards" to conclude that I've abandoned the idea of evidence entirely. I don't need an academic, peer-reviewed study to tell me that using this site is safe. I don't need one to tell me that masks are safe. It's NICE to have such things, and I'm NOT opposed to them, but they are also NOT necessary for day-to-day reasoning. I do think we should continue vaccine trials, because we might uncover subtle risks. But until we do, we are in fact at a point where we can conclude that the vaccine is significantly safer than going unvaccinated. What we expect to find going forward is small refinements like "X group should prioritize Y vaccine", not "Y vaccine is in fact more dangerous than Covid"

criticaltinker 5y ago
You're attacking a straw man here, my original comment was about the lack of evidence for vaccine safety in certain understudied sub-populations. > we are in fact at a point where we can conclude that the vaccine is significantly safer than going unvaccinated You keep coming back to "vaccinated versus unvaccinated" rhetoric and using irrelevant logical reasoning to argue that we should hastily generalize safety results to these sub-populations without citing any scientific literature supporting your claim. The reality of the situation is a lot more complex, and it's obvious you're neglecting these nuances because for example, you fail to acknowledge how immunity acquired through natural infection is a major factor in the tradeoffs of vaccinating these understudied sub-populations. I'm open to further debate, but I won't continue responding if you continue to raise the same unsupported arguments.
- handoflixue 5y ago
  > You [...] argue that we should hastily generalize safety results to these sub-populations I never argued for "hasty" or "generalization." Simple question: which sub-population are you talking about? Please exclude any sub-population where a statistically significant sample of vaccinated individuals already exists, unless your concern is limited solely to long-term side effects. If you are concerned about long-term side effects, please cite at least one scientific study explaining why you are concerned about that PARTICULAR sub-group being vulnerable to that PARTICULAR side effect - we wouldn't want to waste time if you can't cite any scientific literature supporting your claim (P.S. I've only made a single comment about vaccinated -vs- unvaccinated, so you might have me confused with someone else in this thread)
  - criticaltinker 5y ago
    Children and pregnant women are the two sub-populations I mentioned previously. > Given that COVID-19 disease is far milder in the majority of children than in adults, the risk–benefit of a pediatric SARS-CoV-2 vaccine must be carefully weighed [0] > The prognostic significance, long-term implications and mechanism of this myocardial injury needs to be studied further, especially as vaccination efforts are rolled out to younger children. [1] > While the safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy data for the 4 authorized vaccines are reassuring so far, none of these vaccines has been systematically studied in pregnant and breastfeeding people [2] > it is important to remain transparent about the lack of information, acknowledge concerns, and support those who decide to defer vaccination until more data are available [2] [0] SARS-CoV-2 vaccine testing and trials in the pediatric population: biologic, ethical, research, and implementation challenges (Feb 2021) https://www.nature.com/articles/s41390-021-01402-z https://www.nature.com/articles/s41390-021-01402-z [1] COVID-19 Vaccination-Associated Myocarditis in Adolescents (August 2021) https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/pediatrics/early/2021/08/12/peds.2021-053427.full.pdf https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/pediatrics/ea... [2] SARS-CoV-2 Vaccination During Pregnancy: A Complex Decision (April 2021) https://academic.oup.com/ofid/article/8/5/ofab180/6220034 https://academic.oup.com/ofid/article/8/5/ofab180/6220034
    - 5y ago