12 ms·

Lol nobody touching this discussion with a however-long-you-can-think-of pole. At least not anymore. My contribution: I think we have been destroying trust sys

Lol nobody touching this discussion with a however-long-you-can-think-of pole. At least not anymore. My contribution: I think we have been destroying trust systematically for so long that people are losing their sanity. Finally it is time to rethink our foundations and stop coercing. Currently there are various things that take trust for granted and they will need to become a great deal more persuasive if they want to retain their status moving forward (examples include: governments, currrencies, science, etc. - basically central coordination built on a foundation of coercion, science was the last bastion but the "education system" has become a certification system).

jameshart 4y ago
What, with respect to vaccines, specifically, would you say has undermined trust? Was there some massive scandalous plague of side effects caused by a carelessly approved vaccine that I missed?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- robhunter 4y ago
  No, it's probably that the public was lead to believe the vaccines eliminated or materially & permanently reduced transmission of the virus.
  - Terretta 4y ago
    The pre-media-mangled epidemiology messaging early was never COVID zero, it was flatten curve and slow the spread, while messaging on vax was never bulletproof but reduction in personal outcome risk and lower prevalence. Politicized media and partisan pundits (both pro and online commenters) reduced nuance of vax research showing both R and outcomes effects to ‘it doesn’t work’ or ‘it makes you impervious’, both of which resulted in people ignoring other simple measures either from lack of faith or too much faith. From there, inevitable discussions like these threads.
  - jameshart 4y ago
    Right. Did they not? I mean, I'm pretty sure that before we had vaccines, we had much higher hospitalization and mortality rates, and now we have partial vaccine coverage, things are quite a lot better. Is it your position that vaccines shouldn't have been offered?
- junofan 4y ago
  Lots of people I know parrot “safe and effective” whenever testing positive. Turning an FDA-regulated phrase into a joke doesn’t bode well for future trust in government scientists.
  - jameshart 4y ago
    Lots of living, nonhospitalized people, who are catching a preventable disease because community vaccine uptake wasn't as high as it needed to be to really stamp out the disease... ... have somehow reached the conclusion that the vaccine which did them no harm whatsoever, and is responsible for their being likely to have a very mild case of the disease, was not safe or effective? Why on earth have they reached that conclusion?
    - internet_user 4y ago
      >which did them no harm whatsoever Astrazeneca was suspended in eighteen countries across three continents. Nordic countries pulled Moderna. "no harm"? really?
      - wizofaus 4y ago
        No significant number of people have died or suffered permanent harm from taking any covid vaccine that I'm aware of. Yes certain countries have at various times suspended distribution - the best explanation was concern that if any of these vaccines did end up killing people, it would destroy public trust to the point vaccination uptake would be massively reduced. But those very same vaccines are still being administered to 100s of millions of people. I think we'd know by now if they really were harmful.
        internet_user 4y ago
        False. We do know that they can cause harm. That's why they are either limited or outright banned for certain populations. Moderna remains banned in the Nordics for boys/men under 30. NHS does NOT give AZ boosters, only mRNA. NHS will not give AZ for those under 40, only mRNA. Follow the science below: [1] https://thl.fi/en/web/infectious-diseases-and-vaccinations/what-s-new/coronavirus-covid-19-latest-updates/vaccines-and-coronavirus/coronavirus-vaccinations-for-children-and-young-people https://thl.fi/en/web/infectious-diseases-and-vaccinations/w... [2] https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/coronavirus-vaccination/coronavirus-vaccine/ https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/coronavir...
- thrown_22 4y ago
- ekianjo 4y ago
  > What, with respect to vaccines, specifically, would you say has undermined trust? The constant lies about the so-called efficacy of the vaccines, and the fact that they are perfectly safe, when they aren't? And let's not forget the complete propaganda from the CDC/WHO as if they were the only ones allowed to talk about vaccines.
  - jameshart 4y ago
    No, you see, I get that you are an example of a person who doesn't trust the vaccines. But that doesn't explain why you don't trust them. You're using the fact that you believed a lot of anti-vaccine arguments as support for why you... chose to believe a lot of anti-vaccine arguments.
    - internet_user 4y ago
      Why did 18 countries pull Astrazeneca? Why did Nordics pull Moderna? Are they all populated exclusively by anti-vaxxers?
    - ekianjo 4y ago
      > You're using the fact that you believed a lot of anti-vaccine arguments as support for why you... chose to believe a lot of anti-vaccine arguments. I dont consider these shots to be "vaccines" (if those are vaccines than aspirin is a vaccine as well, words don't have any meaning anymore), so you can already drop the anti-vaccine etiquette.
- apostacy 4y ago
  So much of the handling of this pandemic has completely shattered my trust in our medical and scientific institutions. The debate about the actual medical benefits of the vaccine are almost irrelevant at this point.
  - jameshart 4y ago
    Specifically, what ‘shattered’ that trust? What did you need to see from those in power that would have maintained or built that trust?
    - robhunter 4y ago
      Differentiating between a hypotheses and facts Having transparent, open, equity-based discussions about costs & benefits Frequent, honest, humble admitting of mistakes
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
    - ifyoubuildit 4y ago
      Not op, but I recovered from covid shortly before vaccines were available, and then opted not to get the shots based on available data on reinfections. That decision has only seemed better supported as time has gone on, yet I still have to desperately avoid the topic in polite conversation if I don't want your average person to make all sorts of incorrect assumptions about me. There was also the risk to my livelihood from employer mandates. I would have to see them go back and say "hey, that wasn't a deplorable decision, and we're sorry for encouraging everyone to think terrible things about you for making it." I understand the noble lie argument, it just means that now I can't feel comfortable taking anything that comes out of public health at face value.
    - apostacy 4y ago
      > Specifically, what ‘shattered’ that trust? Doubling down on failed lockdown policy long after it was known to be ineffective and hurt more people than it helped. Profiteering off of the pandemic crisis. Rampant censorship of people who turned out be correct and were trying to warn us. If they knew that there was something wrong with the vaccine, I expect them to lie about it, and censor and coerce whistle blowers into silence. They have demonstrated their eagerness to do so over the last two years. So what good is the word of "the science" about how effective vaccines are? These are the same people that told us that we should trust the Chinese government. > What did you need to see from those in power that would have maintained or built that trust? Absolute transparency. Admitting that they made mistakes and committing to avoiding those mistakes in the future with meaningful policy changes. Reparations paid to those who were needlessly harmed by their mistakes. At the very least, something like the settlements from toxic waste dumping coverups would be a good start.
MrMan 4y ago
social media is the root of the problem. that is what destroys trust, not "science." we will only figure this out collectively after more genocides
- openfuture 4y ago
  I'm claiming science used to be more decentralized and that it is less so now. "What destroys trust?" is an abstract question, social media is a factor but not the only one.
- internet_user 4y ago
  No, what destroyed trust is utterly shameless lying by people who knew what they are saying is utter nonsense. and yet they kept at it for two years.

jameshart 4y ago

What, with respect to vaccines, specifically, would you say has undermined trust? Was there some massive scandalous plague of side effects caused by a carelessly approved vaccine that I missed?

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
robhunter 4y ago
No, it's probably that the public was lead to believe the vaccines eliminated or materially & permanently reduced transmission of the virus.
- Terretta 4y ago
  The pre-media-mangled epidemiology messaging early was never COVID zero, it was flatten curve and slow the spread, while messaging on vax was never bulletproof but reduction in personal outcome risk and lower prevalence. Politicized media and partisan pundits (both pro and online commenters) reduced nuance of vax research showing both R and outcomes effects to ‘it doesn’t work’ or ‘it makes you impervious’, both of which resulted in people ignoring other simple measures either from lack of faith or too much faith. From there, inevitable discussions like these threads.
- jameshart 4y ago
  Right. Did they not? I mean, I'm pretty sure that before we had vaccines, we had much higher hospitalization and mortality rates, and now we have partial vaccine coverage, things are quite a lot better. Is it your position that vaccines shouldn't have been offered?
junofan 4y ago
Lots of people I know parrot “safe and effective” whenever testing positive. Turning an FDA-regulated phrase into a joke doesn’t bode well for future trust in government scientists.
- jameshart 4y ago
  Lots of living, nonhospitalized people, who are catching a preventable disease because community vaccine uptake wasn't as high as it needed to be to really stamp out the disease... ... have somehow reached the conclusion that the vaccine which did them no harm whatsoever, and is responsible for their being likely to have a very mild case of the disease, was not safe or effective? Why on earth have they reached that conclusion?
  - internet_user 4y ago
    >which did them no harm whatsoever Astrazeneca was suspended in eighteen countries across three continents. Nordic countries pulled Moderna. "no harm"? really?
    - wizofaus 4y ago
      No significant number of people have died or suffered permanent harm from taking any covid vaccine that I'm aware of. Yes certain countries have at various times suspended distribution - the best explanation was concern that if any of these vaccines did end up killing people, it would destroy public trust to the point vaccination uptake would be massively reduced. But those very same vaccines are still being administered to 100s of millions of people. I think we'd know by now if they really were harmful.
      - internet_user 4y ago
        False. We do know that they can cause harm. That's why they are either limited or outright banned for certain populations. Moderna remains banned in the Nordics for boys/men under 30. NHS does NOT give AZ boosters, only mRNA. NHS will not give AZ for those under 40, only mRNA. Follow the science below: [1] https://thl.fi/en/web/infectious-diseases-and-vaccinations/what-s-new/coronavirus-covid-19-latest-updates/vaccines-and-coronavirus/coronavirus-vaccinations-for-children-and-young-people https://thl.fi/en/web/infectious-diseases-and-vaccinations/w... [2] https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/coronavirus-vaccination/coronavirus-vaccine/ https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/coronavir...
thrown_22 4y ago
ekianjo 4y ago
> What, with respect to vaccines, specifically, would you say has undermined trust? The constant lies about the so-called efficacy of the vaccines, and the fact that they are perfectly safe, when they aren't? And let's not forget the complete propaganda from the CDC/WHO as if they were the only ones allowed to talk about vaccines.
- jameshart 4y ago
  No, you see, I get that you are an example of a person who doesn't trust the vaccines. But that doesn't explain why you don't trust them. You're using the fact that you believed a lot of anti-vaccine arguments as support for why you... chose to believe a lot of anti-vaccine arguments.
  - internet_user 4y ago
    Why did 18 countries pull Astrazeneca? Why did Nordics pull Moderna? Are they all populated exclusively by anti-vaxxers?
  - ekianjo 4y ago
    > You're using the fact that you believed a lot of anti-vaccine arguments as support for why you... chose to believe a lot of anti-vaccine arguments. I dont consider these shots to be "vaccines" (if those are vaccines than aspirin is a vaccine as well, words don't have any meaning anymore), so you can already drop the anti-vaccine etiquette.
apostacy 4y ago
So much of the handling of this pandemic has completely shattered my trust in our medical and scientific institutions. The debate about the actual medical benefits of the vaccine are almost irrelevant at this point.
- jameshart 4y ago
  Specifically, what ‘shattered’ that trust? What did you need to see from those in power that would have maintained or built that trust?
  - robhunter 4y ago
    Differentiating between a hypotheses and facts Having transparent, open, equity-based discussions about costs & benefits Frequent, honest, humble admitting of mistakes
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
  - ifyoubuildit 4y ago
    Not op, but I recovered from covid shortly before vaccines were available, and then opted not to get the shots based on available data on reinfections. That decision has only seemed better supported as time has gone on, yet I still have to desperately avoid the topic in polite conversation if I don't want your average person to make all sorts of incorrect assumptions about me. There was also the risk to my livelihood from employer mandates. I would have to see them go back and say "hey, that wasn't a deplorable decision, and we're sorry for encouraging everyone to think terrible things about you for making it." I understand the noble lie argument, it just means that now I can't feel comfortable taking anything that comes out of public health at face value.
  - apostacy 4y ago
    > Specifically, what ‘shattered’ that trust? Doubling down on failed lockdown policy long after it was known to be ineffective and hurt more people than it helped. Profiteering off of the pandemic crisis. Rampant censorship of people who turned out be correct and were trying to warn us. If they knew that there was something wrong with the vaccine, I expect them to lie about it, and censor and coerce whistle blowers into silence. They have demonstrated their eagerness to do so over the last two years. So what good is the word of "the science" about how effective vaccines are? These are the same people that told us that we should trust the Chinese government. > What did you need to see from those in power that would have maintained or built that trust? Absolute transparency. Admitting that they made mistakes and committing to avoiding those mistakes in the future with meaningful policy changes. Reparations paid to those who were needlessly harmed by their mistakes. At the very least, something like the settlements from toxic waste dumping coverups would be a good start.

MrMan 4y ago

social media is the root of the problem. that is what destroys trust, not "science." we will only figure this out collectively after more genocides

openfuture 4y ago
I'm claiming science used to be more decentralized and that it is less so now. "What destroys trust?" is an abstract question, social media is a factor but not the only one.
internet_user 4y ago
No, what destroyed trust is utterly shameless lying by people who knew what they are saying is utter nonsense. and yet they kept at it for two years.