3 ms·

Because the vaccine makers have thousands of times more money and media power. A study is just a study. They'd fund multiple counter studies. Vaccines are a su

by fwungy 4y ago

Because the vaccine makers have thousands of times more money and media power. A study is just a study. They'd fund multiple counter studies. Vaccines are a subscription model business for pharma. Every time they get a new vaccine approved it's a potential market of 8 billion people that they don't have to wait for to get sick. People argue that pharma would actually make more money not selling flu vaccines, for example, because people would have to pay for more expensive treatments that would benefit them more, but that's illogical because most flu is treated with cheap otc meds at home. Vaccines are great, but people will lose faith in them if they get the impression that pharma is motivated by greed and not for doing good for humanity.

ithkuil 4y ago
But it's not about who has the most number of studies. It's about having a sufficient number of diverse studies that can be used to have a reasoned conversation about the topic instead of always ending spinning in circles with generic allegations linking one or two "papers" "proving" that "everybody is wrong!!". If everybody is wrong then it shouldn't be that hard to prove it. You don't need big pharma pockets. If in principle you can't find 500M people willing to invest $10 in a crowd funding campaign it means that the vaccine skeptics are actually a minority and why are we having this conversation? With 5 billion dollars you can find enough scientists to seriously research and rigorously destroy any bullshit that big pharma is selling to us! But it's not like this research output in itself would prove the anti vax point. It's not a quantity versus quantity, my word against your word mechanism. Once we have that body of well written papers, then we can have a next level discussion about it.
ithkuil 4y ago
As for the follow the money argument, what about this: most no vax people I know in my european country, are avid consumers of natural remedies of various sorts (not only homeopathy) They can easily spend way more than 80eu on various natural pills. Does it mean that the anti-vax movement is actually funded by the "Big Natura" complex?

by fwungy 4y ago

ithkuil 4y ago

But it's not about who has the most number of studies. It's about having a sufficient number of diverse studies that can be used to have a reasoned conversation about the topic instead of always ending spinning in circles with generic allegations linking one or two "papers" "proving" that "everybody is wrong!!". If everybody is wrong then it shouldn't be that hard to prove it. You don't need big pharma pockets. If in principle you can't find 500M people willing to invest $10 in a crowd funding campaign it means that the vaccine skeptics are actually a minority and why are we having this conversation? With 5 billion dollars you can find enough scientists to seriously research and rigorously destroy any bullshit that big pharma is selling to us! But it's not like this research output in itself would prove the anti vax point. It's not a quantity versus quantity, my word against your word mechanism. Once we have that body of well written papers, then we can have a next level discussion about it.

ithkuil 4y ago

As for the follow the money argument, what about this: most no vax people I know in my european country, are avid consumers of natural remedies of various sorts (not only homeopathy) They can easily spend way more than 80eu on various natural pills. Does it mean that the anti-vax movement is actually funded by the "Big Natura" complex?