4 ms·
It's not that the information itself is threatening, but people will use the information in a destructive manner. I don't think it's a stretch to suggest that p
by pacerwpg 5y ago
It's not that the information itself is threatening, but people will use the information in a destructive manner. I don't think it's a stretch to suggest that people will likely die from people saying that people don't need to get vaccinated because people will say natural immunity is 'better'.
More context is almost always better.
- LurkingPenguin 5y ago> I don't think it's a stretch to suggest that people will likely die from people saying that people don't need to get vaccinated because people will say natural immunity is 'better'. In the US at least, vaccines have been widely available for months. You can literally get an appointment same day to receive the vaccine of your choice. 180 million people -- half the population -- are fully vaccinated. I don't think it's a stretch to conclude that at this point the people who have chosen not to get vaccinated are not going to be easily swayed. All of these people either a) know that COVID can be deadly and have decided to accept the risk, b) are so concerned/fearful about the vaccines that they will not consider them an option or c) are so crazy that no scientific data will influence their thinking. In this context, the "but if you get COVID you could die" responses that seem to be quickly posted every single time there's a study about the strength and durability of natural immunity are just strange to me.
- zamalek 5y ago> US [...] people who have chosen not to get vaccinated This is very true. However, I do know an otherwise reasonable American who was convicted not to vaccinate by her recent significant other. My family in South Africa, who are still in early-ish days of vaccination, have many friends who have listened to unvaccinated Americans. The kind of truth in this study can easily be misused to tell a lie. It doesn't hurt to add a footnote of reason.