5 ms·

> It’s believed that there are a good number of people who would prefer to take something like the Novavax vaccine over the less-established techniques like mRN

> It’s believed that there are a good number of people who would prefer to take something like the Novavax vaccine over the less-established techniques like mRNA and adenoviruses. I worry that all of the pro-vaccine propaganda and the attacks and dehumanization of people who chose not to get the vaccine (or people who merely questioned it) has resulted in people who won't listen to this at all and won't change their mind. The shaming of people who didn't want the vaccine just pushed people further from wanting the vaccine (and in many cases any vaccine) instead of trying to embrace them and make them feel comfortable taking it.

uberwindung 4y ago
“pro-vaccine propaganda” Wtf does that even mean ?
- jfengel 4y ago
  False equivalences are a staple of right wing discourse. Anything that contradicts antivax propaganda must be an equal and opposite propaganda. The idea that there might actually be a right and wrong answer, and that they are once again in the wrong, isn't permitted. Science is merely an opinion and anything you say must be propaganda. And just to predict the inevitable false equivalence: no, not everything the fringe left says is correct. But denying any science that doesn't fit the ideology is a mainstream position for the right, made into official party platform and repeated by politicians at the highest levels. There is no equivalent on the left.
- blub 4y ago
  In Europe pushing Coronavirus vaccines as a magic solution while downplaying potential (and later real) side-effects, defaming critics of one specific vaccine as anti-vaccine in general and cultivating an all-around attitude of suspicion and distrust towards those that criticized the measures enacted by the government. The latter is particularly insidious as can be seen also in the HN comments associating Coronavirus vaccine criticism with right-wing politics - which by the way is a normal and necessary part of the political spectrum.
phs318u 4y ago
I'm sorry but you lost me at "pro-vaccine propaganda". Where's the characterisation of all the obvious disinformation spreading on social media (and rage-maximising MSM) as "anti-vaccine propaganda"? You're implying bad faith on the part of those spreading a pro-vaccine message and are making it their fault for "not embracing" or making "them" "comfortable". The problem with that is how can I embrace someone who believes that vaccines cause autism? How can I make someone "comfortable" when they can't see their own cognitive dissonance for seeing their doctors as shills for big pharma on one hand (vaccines), but will happily listen to and take their advice when it comes to, say, broken bones. Do we need to do a better job of educating people about the fact that medicine, and "science" itself is not process of distinguishing black from white. Reality is imperfect and complexity is progressively discovered. Do we forego the imperfect now waiting for a perfect understanding of something? What happened to the Pareto principle, risk management approaches, and opportunity cost? I find it hard to feel like "embracing" people who take a mistake as evidence of conspiracy. Don't the voices pushing the anti-vax disinfo bullshit carry some responsibility for polarising people's views and turning opinions against medical authorities? Or are they absolved of responsibility?
- landemva 4y ago
  >> seeing their doctors as shills for big pharma on one hand (vaccines), but will ... take their advice when it comes to ... broken bones. Coronavirus mRNA human experiments are totally different than a broken bone. Like comparing a matchbox car with launching a Tesla car into space.
  - phs318u 4y ago
    Would you take the advice or medical specialists for a brain tumour? Or epilepsy? Or an immune system disorder? Where do you draw the line? And what makes you qualified to judge?
- blub 4y ago
  There were legitimate concerns around the new vaccine technologies from the beginning and those have proven correct - the trials missed both the AstraZeneca clotting and the mRNA heart inflammation. Those effects were then constantly downplayed in mass media as they became known and the people drawing attention to them were ridiculed on social media. I’ve had many discussions about the AZ vaccine on HN, having to link to the EMA report which was clearly showing that depending on age for some people the risk of death from Covid was similar to the risk of death from the AZ vaccine. On reddit I was shadow-banned after 1 single message mentioning the EMA report as a reply to someone claiming that AZ was perfectly safe and people were being paranoid. The mRNA heart inflammation was similarly dismissed both in the press and online even as many European countries were stopping use of Moderna for young people. Besides the two big ones, mRNA vaccines often cause lymph node swelling - which is painful and especially for women might be alarming as lumps are associated with breast cancer. My partner had this, with strong pain radiating in the chest and was so worried they had to go to the hospital to have it checked out. Nobody told us about this or other potential side effects. The so-called doctor which gave me my booster couldn’t even speak the local language properly. Finally there’s the fact that the vaccines put many people out of commission for several days. You see, there’s no need to talk about autism or 5G signals, because there’s enough real issues to be discussed. The problem is that many don’t want to have those discussions and would rather stick their head in the sand and pretend that vaccines are perfect and a universal cure.
jjeaff 4y ago
>I worry that all of the pro-vaccine propaganda You know, Occam's Razor leads me to believe that the anti-vax propaganda is actually more to blame for making people not want to take vaccines. But maybe you've hit on something here. Maybe the reason there are so many people out there that are pro-choice is simply because all the pro-lifers are trying to shame them. If the pro-life movement would just quiet down, there wouldn't be such division and so many abortions. But no, the pro-lifers have ruined it and are to blame for all those abortions.
- blub 4y ago
  There is no connection between vaccines and abortions and trying to bring these topics together is absurd and a waste of time. Furthermore access to abortions is a concern only in the US, Poland and I believe several other ultra-religious countries. Vaccines are a global concern, transcending countries and continents. OP’s worry is legitimate, but I’ll explain why in another reply, since your comment is off-topic and doesn’t deserve any extra attention.
  - Jcowell 4y ago
    I actually see a strong connection between abortions and vaccines, particularly an argument between body autonomy. The difference being of course that one only directly physically affects women and the other affecting more than 1 person.

uberwindung 4y ago

“pro-vaccine propaganda” Wtf does that even mean ?

jfengel 4y ago
False equivalences are a staple of right wing discourse. Anything that contradicts antivax propaganda must be an equal and opposite propaganda. The idea that there might actually be a right and wrong answer, and that they are once again in the wrong, isn't permitted. Science is merely an opinion and anything you say must be propaganda. And just to predict the inevitable false equivalence: no, not everything the fringe left says is correct. But denying any science that doesn't fit the ideology is a mainstream position for the right, made into official party platform and repeated by politicians at the highest levels. There is no equivalent on the left.
blub 4y ago
In Europe pushing Coronavirus vaccines as a magic solution while downplaying potential (and later real) side-effects, defaming critics of one specific vaccine as anti-vaccine in general and cultivating an all-around attitude of suspicion and distrust towards those that criticized the measures enacted by the government. The latter is particularly insidious as can be seen also in the HN comments associating Coronavirus vaccine criticism with right-wing politics - which by the way is a normal and necessary part of the political spectrum.

phs318u 4y ago

I'm sorry but you lost me at "pro-vaccine propaganda". Where's the characterisation of all the obvious disinformation spreading on social media (and rage-maximising MSM) as "anti-vaccine propaganda"? You're implying bad faith on the part of those spreading a pro-vaccine message and are making it their fault for "not embracing" or making "them" "comfortable". The problem with that is how can I embrace someone who believes that vaccines cause autism? How can I make someone "comfortable" when they can't see their own cognitive dissonance for seeing their doctors as shills for big pharma on one hand (vaccines), but will happily listen to and take their advice when it comes to, say, broken bones. Do we need to do a better job of educating people about the fact that medicine, and "science" itself is not process of distinguishing black from white. Reality is imperfect and complexity is progressively discovered. Do we forego the imperfect now waiting for a perfect understanding of something? What happened to the Pareto principle, risk management approaches, and opportunity cost? I find it hard to feel like "embracing" people who take a mistake as evidence of conspiracy. Don't the voices pushing the anti-vax disinfo bullshit carry some responsibility for polarising people's views and turning opinions against medical authorities? Or are they absolved of responsibility?

landemva 4y ago
>> seeing their doctors as shills for big pharma on one hand (vaccines), but will ... take their advice when it comes to ... broken bones. Coronavirus mRNA human experiments are totally different than a broken bone. Like comparing a matchbox car with launching a Tesla car into space.
- phs318u 4y ago
  Would you take the advice or medical specialists for a brain tumour? Or epilepsy? Or an immune system disorder? Where do you draw the line? And what makes you qualified to judge?
blub 4y ago
There were legitimate concerns around the new vaccine technologies from the beginning and those have proven correct - the trials missed both the AstraZeneca clotting and the mRNA heart inflammation. Those effects were then constantly downplayed in mass media as they became known and the people drawing attention to them were ridiculed on social media. I’ve had many discussions about the AZ vaccine on HN, having to link to the EMA report which was clearly showing that depending on age for some people the risk of death from Covid was similar to the risk of death from the AZ vaccine. On reddit I was shadow-banned after 1 single message mentioning the EMA report as a reply to someone claiming that AZ was perfectly safe and people were being paranoid. The mRNA heart inflammation was similarly dismissed both in the press and online even as many European countries were stopping use of Moderna for young people. Besides the two big ones, mRNA vaccines often cause lymph node swelling - which is painful and especially for women might be alarming as lumps are associated with breast cancer. My partner had this, with strong pain radiating in the chest and was so worried they had to go to the hospital to have it checked out. Nobody told us about this or other potential side effects. The so-called doctor which gave me my booster couldn’t even speak the local language properly. Finally there’s the fact that the vaccines put many people out of commission for several days. You see, there’s no need to talk about autism or 5G signals, because there’s enough real issues to be discussed. The problem is that many don’t want to have those discussions and would rather stick their head in the sand and pretend that vaccines are perfect and a universal cure.

jjeaff 4y ago

>I worry that all of the pro-vaccine propaganda You know, Occam's Razor leads me to believe that the anti-vax propaganda is actually more to blame for making people not want to take vaccines. But maybe you've hit on something here. Maybe the reason there are so many people out there that are pro-choice is simply because all the pro-lifers are trying to shame them. If the pro-life movement would just quiet down, there wouldn't be such division and so many abortions. But no, the pro-lifers have ruined it and are to blame for all those abortions.

blub 4y ago
There is no connection between vaccines and abortions and trying to bring these topics together is absurd and a waste of time. Furthermore access to abortions is a concern only in the US, Poland and I believe several other ultra-religious countries. Vaccines are a global concern, transcending countries and continents. OP’s worry is legitimate, but I’ll explain why in another reply, since your comment is off-topic and doesn’t deserve any extra attention.
- Jcowell 4y ago
  I actually see a strong connection between abortions and vaccines, particularly an argument between body autonomy. The difference being of course that one only directly physically affects women and the other affecting more than 1 person.