4 ms·

More precisely, "the other side" claims that we do not in fact know the vaccine is safe, and points to all the other times "the mainstream" side lied to us as r

More precisely, "the other side" claims that we do not in fact know the vaccine is safe, and points to all the other times "the mainstream" side lied to us as reasons to be skeptical: the US Surgeon-General told us "masks don't work", lying to manage supply, now they're critical; Biden said "get vaccinated, or wear a mask until you do", now the masks are going back on; Kamala Harris said she wouldn't take a Trump vaccine, now there's a big fight over mandates and passports; Fauci kept dangling a vaccine target just beyond what the country was tracking towards (there are articles where he's quoted as saying "I can nudge this up a bit"); Cuomo was hailed as some great leader despite sending covid-positive people into old people's homes (it was his sexual misconduct that finally sunk him). Hesitancy around covid vaccines isn't the antivax of the previous generation, and responding as if it was won't help anything. Actually having an honest conversation with the public that you're more likely better off with a vaccine is not an easy concept to communicate (as you correctly point out), but it would be a good first step in trying to rebuild that lost trust.

ineedasername 5y ago
It has definitely become partisan, but not all of it is inconsistent. For example Biden said "wear a mask until you do" before the massive rise of Delta and our knowledge that it causes breakthrough infection. Once we knew that, it made sense to start wearing masks again because we found out that vaccines will be less effective against Delta. Cuomo was held up as a great example when it looked like he had done a good job, but then when screwups were revealed opinions rightfully began to change. By all means let's point out the ridiculous partisan aspects of this debacle, or out & out screwups like initial mask guidance. But also recognize that in plenty of cases a change of stance is not partisan or contradictory, it's the rational response to new information.
- endgame 5y ago
  https://thezvi.wordpress.com/2021/01/07/22334/ https://thezvi.wordpress.com/2021/01/07/22334/ Cuomo has been known-terrible for a long time. --- https://unchartedterritories.tomaspueyo.com/p/delta-variant-everything-you-need https://unchartedterritories.tomaspueyo.com/p/delta-variant-... discusses "The Hammer and the Dance", an article published in March 2020, that correctly flagged the risk of mutations. https://twitter.com/WSJ/status/1368229958158610435 https://twitter.com/WSJ/status/1368229958158610435 https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-19-variant-in-brazil-overwhelms-local-hospitals-hits-younger-patients-11614705337?mod=e2tw https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-19-variant-in-brazil-over... WSJ, writing in March 2021: "countries such as Brazil risk becoming a breeding ground for potent versions of the virus that could render current Covid-19 vaccines less effective, public-health specialists warned." Biden's "wear a mask until you do" was in May - very irresponsible.
- jcims 5y ago
  >it's the rational response to new information The challenge is that guidance not regularly delivered with any caveats or margins of error. I think this is a mechanism to try to drive compliance up through a posture of confidence, but when the guidance ultimately flip-flops it just looks like either people are lying or they don't know what they are talking about.

ineedasername 5y ago

It has definitely become partisan, but not all of it is inconsistent. For example Biden said "wear a mask until you do" before the massive rise of Delta and our knowledge that it causes breakthrough infection. Once we knew that, it made sense to start wearing masks again because we found out that vaccines will be less effective against Delta. Cuomo was held up as a great example when it looked like he had done a good job, but then when screwups were revealed opinions rightfully began to change. By all means let's point out the ridiculous partisan aspects of this debacle, or out & out screwups like initial mask guidance. But also recognize that in plenty of cases a change of stance is not partisan or contradictory, it's the rational response to new information.

endgame 5y ago
https://thezvi.wordpress.com/2021/01/07/22334/ https://thezvi.wordpress.com/2021/01/07/22334/ Cuomo has been known-terrible for a long time. --- https://unchartedterritories.tomaspueyo.com/p/delta-variant-everything-you-need https://unchartedterritories.tomaspueyo.com/p/delta-variant-... discusses "The Hammer and the Dance", an article published in March 2020, that correctly flagged the risk of mutations. https://twitter.com/WSJ/status/1368229958158610435 https://twitter.com/WSJ/status/1368229958158610435 https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-19-variant-in-brazil-overwhelms-local-hospitals-hits-younger-patients-11614705337?mod=e2tw https://www.wsj.com/articles/covid-19-variant-in-brazil-over... WSJ, writing in March 2021: "countries such as Brazil risk becoming a breeding ground for potent versions of the virus that could render current Covid-19 vaccines less effective, public-health specialists warned." Biden's "wear a mask until you do" was in May - very irresponsible.
jcims 5y ago
>it's the rational response to new information The challenge is that guidance not regularly delivered with any caveats or margins of error. I think this is a mechanism to try to drive compliance up through a posture of confidence, but when the guidance ultimately flip-flops it just looks like either people are lying or they don't know what they are talking about.