5 ms·

> As GP states, they engaged in "noble lies" in order to drive vaccine adoption. Can you point out what was in your opinion the best example of what you descri

by fivea 4y ago

> As GP states, they engaged in "noble lies" in order to drive vaccine adoption. Can you point out what was in your opinion the best example of what you described as "noble lie"? I've seen people throwing baseless accusations by misrepresenting basic guidances, such as how avoiding scarcity of personal safety equipment like latex gloves and surgical masks in hospitals was distorted into "first they state masks don't work but now they flipflop into arguing they do". Thus, to avoid personal subjective takes and keep this discussion on the facts, what exactly do you see as the best example of this "noble lie"?

disambiguation 4y ago
Natural immunity works. It's settled science, and has been for some time. Many countries acknowledge it as a valid alternative to the vaccine. But not the USA. There has been no change in policy. Not even a public acknowledgment, let alone an apology for getting it wrong. Is this out of ignorance? malice? Neither, it's simply pragmatic. Reliably testing for prior infections at population scale would be really slow, expensive, and faulty. Further there's no real downside to vaccinating someone with a prior infection (slightly higher incidence of side effects notwithstanding). Further, people will lose the urgency to get the vaccine if they think they have antibodies. Monolithic policy is cheaper than nuanced policy, and monolithic policy only works if its dead simple. So, better to have everyone believe the vaccine is the one and only solution than to actually concern themselves with the truth. There are also many examples of "verbatim" lies, such as these: https://www.businessinsider.com/who-says-no-evidence-coronavirus-vaccine-prevent-transmissions-2020-12 https://www.businessinsider.com/who-says-no-evidence-coronav... > Moderna's chief medical officer, Tal Zaks, said last month that he believed it was likely the vaccine would prevent transmission but warned that there was not yet "sufficient evidence" of it. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/01/health/coronavirus-vaccine-walensky.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/01/health/coronavirus-vaccin... > The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Thursday walked back controversial comments made by its director, Dr. Rochelle P. Walensky, suggesting that people who are vaccinated against the coronavirus never become infected or transmit the virus to others.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- fivea 4y ago
  > Natural immunity works. It's settled science, and has been for some time. What exactly do you mean by "works"? I mean, it's well established that those who contract COVID and didn't died from it will have a good immunity response for subsequent infections. But that is not the point of a vaccine, is it? The point of the vaccine is that it trains your immune system to fight an infection without undergoing the risk of a real infection. So that the odds you die from COVID are lower, if not residual. Consequently, we see the bulk of all deaths from COVID comprised of unvaccinated individuals. But other than all the dead, those who survive a COVID infection do end up with an immune system that is able to handle COVID. Is that what you mean by "Natural immunity works"? That if you ignore all those unvaccinated people who died then the ones that lived through a COVID infection didn't died? Because the whole point of a vaccine is that people don't have to die from a preventable disease, isn't it?
  - disambiguation 4y ago
    Case in point: communicating nuance is hard when no one wants to hear it! Let me make it easy: 1. majority of infections happened pre-vaccine rollout. 2. we created a system that locked people out based on vaccine status. 3. the system should have included those with natural immunity. /q
    - fivea 4y ago
      > Case in point: communicating nuance is hard when no one wants to hear it! There is no nuance. The message couldn't be clearer: if you take the vaccine then the odds you'll die from COVID are way lower than if you do not. And reality does not lie: the bulk of COVID deaths come from unvaccinated people. https://www.factcheck.org/2022/04/scicheck-covid-19-data-comparing-vaccinated-vs-unvaccinated-continues-to-be-available-contrary-to-viral-posts/ https://www.factcheck.org/2022/04/scicheck-covid-19-data-com... Enough with all this misinformed or disinformed bullshit.

by fivea 4y ago

disambiguation 4y ago

Natural immunity works. It's settled science, and has been for some time. Many countries acknowledge it as a valid alternative to the vaccine. But not the USA. There has been no change in policy. Not even a public acknowledgment, let alone an apology for getting it wrong. Is this out of ignorance? malice? Neither, it's simply pragmatic. Reliably testing for prior infections at population scale would be really slow, expensive, and faulty. Further there's no real downside to vaccinating someone with a prior infection (slightly higher incidence of side effects notwithstanding). Further, people will lose the urgency to get the vaccine if they think they have antibodies. Monolithic policy is cheaper than nuanced policy, and monolithic policy only works if its dead simple. So, better to have everyone believe the vaccine is the one and only solution than to actually concern themselves with the truth. There are also many examples of "verbatim" lies, such as these: https://www.businessinsider.com/who-says-no-evidence-coronavirus-vaccine-prevent-transmissions-2020-12 https://www.businessinsider.com/who-says-no-evidence-coronav... > Moderna's chief medical officer, Tal Zaks, said last month that he believed it was likely the vaccine would prevent transmission but warned that there was not yet "sufficient evidence" of it. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/01/health/coronavirus-vaccine-walensky.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/01/health/coronavirus-vaccin... > The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Thursday walked back controversial comments made by its director, Dr. Rochelle P. Walensky, suggesting that people who are vaccinated against the coronavirus never become infected or transmit the virus to others.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
fivea 4y ago
> Natural immunity works. It's settled science, and has been for some time. What exactly do you mean by "works"? I mean, it's well established that those who contract COVID and didn't died from it will have a good immunity response for subsequent infections. But that is not the point of a vaccine, is it? The point of the vaccine is that it trains your immune system to fight an infection without undergoing the risk of a real infection. So that the odds you die from COVID are lower, if not residual. Consequently, we see the bulk of all deaths from COVID comprised of unvaccinated individuals. But other than all the dead, those who survive a COVID infection do end up with an immune system that is able to handle COVID. Is that what you mean by "Natural immunity works"? That if you ignore all those unvaccinated people who died then the ones that lived through a COVID infection didn't died? Because the whole point of a vaccine is that people don't have to die from a preventable disease, isn't it?
- disambiguation 4y ago
  Case in point: communicating nuance is hard when no one wants to hear it! Let me make it easy: 1. majority of infections happened pre-vaccine rollout. 2. we created a system that locked people out based on vaccine status. 3. the system should have included those with natural immunity. /q
  - fivea 4y ago
    > Case in point: communicating nuance is hard when no one wants to hear it! There is no nuance. The message couldn't be clearer: if you take the vaccine then the odds you'll die from COVID are way lower than if you do not. And reality does not lie: the bulk of COVID deaths come from unvaccinated people. https://www.factcheck.org/2022/04/scicheck-covid-19-data-comparing-vaccinated-vs-unvaccinated-continues-to-be-available-contrary-to-viral-posts/ https://www.factcheck.org/2022/04/scicheck-covid-19-data-com... Enough with all this misinformed or disinformed bullshit.