5 ms·

So your theory is they know how to make a vaccine that will last for life, but they didn't because it would make them less money? a) This would require global

So your theory is they know how to make a vaccine that will last for life, but they didn't because it would make them less money? a) This would require global collusion and conspiracy, since any vaccine maker who could make a durable vaccine would drive its competitors out of the market. b) This greatly overestimates, IMO, the capabilities of our biotech/pharma industry. It's an amazing and spectacular achievement that they were able to make working vaccines at all in a < 1 year time frame. They don't have any secret immunity-boosting technology in ther back pockets.

mrguyorama 5y ago
You're forgetting the most important point: c) There are several vaccines produced that DO provide lifetime or near lifetime immunity. Pfizer isn't making me get a new polio shot every year. If conspiracy theorists were to be believed, shouldn't we have an entire gamut of shots to take every fall instead of just the flu?
tablespoon 5y ago
c) It confuses an isolated incentive for action. That's an error that's super common in conspiracy-theory thinking: focus on one hypothesized incentive (out of many) that usually has nefarious undertones, assume that's the main or only incentive at play, and assume the party in question is successfully acting on that incentive.
NackerHughes 5y ago
>This would require global collusion and conspiracy No it wouldn't. It would only require incentive for profit. If a company makes a highly durable vaccine, its competitors wouldn't make very much money, but neither would the company itself. Less profit. Make a vaccine that wears off after a slightly longer time than your competitors, and you can claim to be the best product on the market while keeping your users coming back for more. Guaranteed ongoing revenue stream. 'Conspiracy' is a loaded term that is used solely to discredit the opposing argument.

mrguyorama 5y ago

You're forgetting the most important point: c) There are several vaccines produced that DO provide lifetime or near lifetime immunity. Pfizer isn't making me get a new polio shot every year. If conspiracy theorists were to be believed, shouldn't we have an entire gamut of shots to take every fall instead of just the flu?

tablespoon 5y ago

c) It confuses an isolated incentive for action. That's an error that's super common in conspiracy-theory thinking: focus on one hypothesized incentive (out of many) that usually has nefarious undertones, assume that's the main or only incentive at play, and assume the party in question is successfully acting on that incentive.

NackerHughes 5y ago

>This would require global collusion and conspiracy No it wouldn't. It would only require incentive for profit. If a company makes a highly durable vaccine, its competitors wouldn't make very much money, but neither would the company itself. Less profit. Make a vaccine that wears off after a slightly longer time than your competitors, and you can claim to be the best product on the market while keeping your users coming back for more. Guaranteed ongoing revenue stream. 'Conspiracy' is a loaded term that is used solely to discredit the opposing argument.