3 ms·

I think this is a very biased take on it. The vaccine was developed under Trump and he heavily promoted it over the summer of 2020 and into the election. He too

by yucky 5y ago

I think this is a very biased take on it. The vaccine was developed under Trump and he heavily promoted it over the summer of 2020 and into the election. He took credit for it so much that Kamala Harris said she was not interested in "a Trump vaccine"[1] during the lead up to the election. Oddly enough, I don't hear much criticism about that. Instead the focus is on what Trump said 6 months before that, when the virus was brand new. [1] https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/harrris-vaccine-i-would-not-trust-donald-trump-n1239422 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/harrris-vacci...

jfengel 5y ago
That's the focus because that's what his followers are still hearing. The FDA did its job, despite interference from the top, and everybody actually interested in science has accepted it. But decades of anti-science rhetoric have eroded that to the point that it's an article of faith -- including many supposedly science-oriented people here on HN -- that any piece of science that they don't like can be dismissed as untrustworthy.
- yucky 5y ago
  >The FDA did its job They did, and as part of their authorization they gave Pfizer until June 2025 to complete the long term testing on all the cases of myocarditis and pericarditis - https://www.fda.gov/media/151710/download https://www.fda.gov/media/151710/download So if the FDA says long term testing will not be complete until June of 2025, should we not take them at their word that long term testing is still needed?
  - jfengel 5y ago
    We should take at their word that it's stunningly obvious at this point that deaths from covid are vastly greater than deaths from myocarditis. So you do the thing that saves your own life, and incidentally helps everyone else, and then you can split all the hairs you want about the pharmaceutical testing in which you are suddenly an expert. Meantime I've got zero fucks to give for distraction tactics.

by yucky 5y ago

jfengel 5y ago

That's the focus because that's what his followers are still hearing. The FDA did its job, despite interference from the top, and everybody actually interested in science has accepted it. But decades of anti-science rhetoric have eroded that to the point that it's an article of faith -- including many supposedly science-oriented people here on HN -- that any piece of science that they don't like can be dismissed as untrustworthy.

yucky 5y ago
>The FDA did its job They did, and as part of their authorization they gave Pfizer until June 2025 to complete the long term testing on all the cases of myocarditis and pericarditis - https://www.fda.gov/media/151710/download https://www.fda.gov/media/151710/download So if the FDA says long term testing will not be complete until June of 2025, should we not take them at their word that long term testing is still needed?
- jfengel 5y ago
  We should take at their word that it's stunningly obvious at this point that deaths from covid are vastly greater than deaths from myocarditis. So you do the thing that saves your own life, and incidentally helps everyone else, and then you can split all the hairs you want about the pharmaceutical testing in which you are suddenly an expert. Meantime I've got zero fucks to give for distraction tactics.