3 ms·

I think you should be lauding our society's ability to swarm a problem and massively increase efficiency/remove red tape to fulfill a common purpose rather than

I think you should be lauding our society's ability to swarm a problem and massively increase efficiency/remove red tape to fulfill a common purpose rather than resting on how things were done before (when things were "normal") as to what is suppose to happen. We're suppose to be able to do things like this in order to save ourselves. Imagine if COVID was deadlier, had a higher R-naught, etc. Would you still be advocating for "taking it slow"? If hundreds of thousands were dying per day should we still be waiting years for a vaccine?

chrsig 5y ago
I don't think anyone is arguing against having removed the red tape for covid. The same risk:reward doesn't exist for herpes though.
robbedpeter 5y ago
Applauding their efforts but retaining a critical eye for the usual long term safety considerations are not mutually exclusive. You can also laud the mrna vaccines and be critical of the obscene profits being made. In fact, you can also promote vaccinating as widely as possible, and at the same time harshly condemn the politicization of medicine, the creation of second class citizens, and the nonsense power games being fought that seem to exclusively benefit massive corporations that fund political campaigns.
glogla 5y ago
Now if we could do that with climate change.
sterlind 5y ago
I wonder how things would have turned out if COVID had different properties. With COVID, some people shrugged it off like a mild cold, while others were in the ICU with multiple organ failure. Risk factors tilt the odds but on the whole, the virus is weirdly random. This leads to people having wildly different personal experiences - someone knows a 60-year old who caught COVID and recovered with chicken soup, while someone else knows a family whose children were orphaned by the loss of their young, healthy parents. That randomness is fuel on the fire for partisan divides. I think even with a 10% CFR, there'd be droves of vaccine skeptics, unless the virus hits people with more or less uniform symptoms. ...or maybe it even has nothing to do with lethality at all, look at the ebola vaccine rollouts in Africa.

chrsig 5y ago

I don't think anyone is arguing against having removed the red tape for covid. The same risk:reward doesn't exist for herpes though.

robbedpeter 5y ago

Applauding their efforts but retaining a critical eye for the usual long term safety considerations are not mutually exclusive. You can also laud the mrna vaccines and be critical of the obscene profits being made. In fact, you can also promote vaccinating as widely as possible, and at the same time harshly condemn the politicization of medicine, the creation of second class citizens, and the nonsense power games being fought that seem to exclusively benefit massive corporations that fund political campaigns.

glogla 5y ago

Now if we could do that with climate change.

sterlind 5y ago

I wonder how things would have turned out if COVID had different properties. With COVID, some people shrugged it off like a mild cold, while others were in the ICU with multiple organ failure. Risk factors tilt the odds but on the whole, the virus is weirdly random. This leads to people having wildly different personal experiences - someone knows a 60-year old who caught COVID and recovered with chicken soup, while someone else knows a family whose children were orphaned by the loss of their young, healthy parents. That randomness is fuel on the fire for partisan divides. I think even with a 10% CFR, there'd be droves of vaccine skeptics, unless the virus hits people with more or less uniform symptoms. ...or maybe it even has nothing to do with lethality at all, look at the ebola vaccine rollouts in Africa.