7 ms·

This is really sad as it will probably cause unnecessary children deaths down the road. I think public health authorities have serious soul-searching to do, th

by nnx 4y ago

This is really sad as it will probably cause unnecessary children deaths down the road. I think public health authorities have serious soul-searching to do, this outcome was clearly warned upon by a lot of doctors and paediatricians who seen first hand parents not understanding why those authorities were pushing so hard novel mrna covid-19 vaccines on healthy children that were basically not at risk from this disease.

hutzlibu 4y ago
Yeah, the push to vaccinate children was not for the children, but to protect the old. And what will likely happen now, is a stronger push for forced vaccinations, met by even more entrenching of the anti-vaxx crowd.
- realjhol 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - blumomo 4y ago
    Why in 2023 people still believe that C19 mRNA prevents infecting others? This myth has long been classified as wrong (unlike advertised in the beginning of its rollout)
    - knaik94 4y ago
      If you don't become infected, you can't infect others. The vaccine reduces the chances of you become sick with covid.
      - hutzlibu 4y ago
        https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2116597 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2116597 "Although vaccination still lowers the risk of infection, similar viral loads in vaccinated and unvaccinated persons who are infected with the delta variant call into question the degree to which vaccination prevents transmission." Not to dispute your claim, but to put it into context. But apart from that, I am out of this debate.
      - grjdiofgeriov 4y ago
        If you don't know you are infected, you increase the risk of infecting others. As we know, the primary effect of the various vaccines was to reduce the incidences of symptomatic covid. "Becoming sick with Covid" and "becoming infected with Covid" are very different things.
    - Avamander 4y ago
      It's just that the nuance is often ignored in the initial saying. Why do people try to debunk something out of a game of telephone instead on restoring the original information. Point has always been that people who are less ill, less severely ill, for a shorter duration, with fewer or no symptoms, have lower chances of infecting others. The urge to simplify is great but it causes these weird discussions like "does the vaccine prevent (all) infection" or like what we have here.
      - fdschoeneman 4y ago
        I understand why Biden, his administration, fauci and the CDC lied. The telephone game effect is real. And sometimes lies are well I intentioned, if stupid. But that doesn't change the fact that they all lied to us.
      - therealdrag0 4y ago
        Do you have a good source on the “less I’ll less duration less spread” angle. A friend was just arguing with me recently about how ineffectual the vaccine was. So a good nuanced source would be helpful.
      - Izkata 4y ago
        > Point has always been that people who are less ill, less severely ill, for a shorter duration, with fewer or no symptoms, have lower chances of infecting others. The most recent research on the types of antibodies the vaccines create vs natural infection are showing the opposite: it causes our bodies to treat the virus more like an allergy, reducing the symptoms while clearing the infection much slower. This gives more chance to infect others, not less.
    - yucky 4y ago
      > Why in 2023 people still believe that C19 mRNA prevents infecting others? Because the Director of the CDC and the President of the United States have both at several times made this claim publicly. The fact that we now know they were lying is why we're in this situation to begin with.
      - Izkata 4y ago
        > The fact that we now know Some of us knew they were lying from the start and had a very frustrating few years: Pfizer made no claims about infection/transmission, just symptoms, because they never tested for infection/transmission. That claim popped up out of nowhere a few months after the vaccines were available.
    - bryanlarsen 4y ago
      > Why in 2023 people still believe that C19 mRNA prevents infecting others? This myth has long been classified as wrong Because it does. Your chances of getting and spreading COVID for the 3 months after you get a vaccine drop dramatically.
  - maxerickson 4y ago
    The vaccines are less risky than infection for children even though the risks from infection are low. Are you somehow assuming that they aren't ever going to get infected?
    - hutzlibu 4y ago
      "The vaccines are less risky than infection for children" Can you back up that claim with long term studies?
      - maxerickson 4y ago
        I mean, you can't back up the converse with long terms studies either. Just infer the very reasonable "based on the information available". And it's not like the vaccines are a complete unknown. Making them work at all takes a huge level of understanding.
        hutzlibu 4y ago
        I know, that is my point. Parenting is a juggling of risks. "based on the information available" And the information avaiable is confusing and partly contradictory. I know that many researchers advised against child vaccination, because of the unknowns and the low risk for the children from the disease in the first place. "Making them work at all takes a huge level of understanding." It does, but it would be news to me, that the immune system is completely understood. Even less the immune system and long term effects of a immune system that is developing. It was cutting edge research and to my understanding it was more of: this might work. And it did and unlike the anti vaxx crowd told us, apparently we did not die from it, nor were there mass severe long term damages to be found. But there was damage, some likely did in fact die from the vaccines and so it is not a 100% clear obvious decision. It might have been for you, that is allright and it was allright for me, but for my infant children I did not feel like making that experiment.
        realjhol 4y ago
        Completely agree. Also we who were called "anti-vax", were not actually anti vaccine. We were just skeptical that these vaccines were all they were cracked up to be, and wanted choice an freedom to make our own decisions without coercion. To call us anti-vax was a deliberate smear and a straw-man, of our (now vindicated) concerns.
Mountain_Skies 4y ago
It's difficult for the soulless to soul-search, and all too many who lead us here are soulless sociopaths. Beyond the loss of confidence from the public, many of my friends who work at the CDC, and have been there their entire careers, have lost faith in both the organization and its leaders. I expect the CDC will experience a lot of brain drain and loss of institutional knowledge now that the rank-and-file have had to confront what has been going on since even before the pandemic. Even worse it that they'll likely be replaced by those who are uncurious true believers that won't question anything, giving the sociopaths in charge even more power.
- dennis_jeeves1 4y ago
  Excellent observations. As a general rule this is how most organizations devolve. With private organizations they tend to self annihilate by not making profits. But with the government it devolves into totalitarianism.
watwut 4y ago
No, it is fault of those who push against vaccines super hard for political reasons. It is absurd to blame anyone else at the point where we are. There are groups who are intentionally trying to convince people to not vaccinate. When people listen to them, it is theor fault.
- SangareEel 4y ago
  [flagged]
  - throw0101c 4y ago
    > It's the fault of those who push vaccines super hard for political reasons. > A vaccine we know doesn't prevent infection, transmission, sickness or death. This does not match reality. The more political right someone is, the more anti-vaxx someone is likely to me, the less likely they would get vaccinated; e.g., areas that lean more towards voting for Trump have higher COVID death rates: "COVID-19 Deaths Among Older Adults During the Delta Surge Were Higher in States with Lower Vaccination Rates" * https://www.kff.org/policy-watch/covid-19-deaths-among-older-adults-during-the-delta-surge-were-higher-in-states-with-lower-vaccination-rates/ https://www.kff.org/policy-watch/covid-19-deaths-among-older... "Pro-Trump counties now have far higher COVID death rates. Misinformation is to blame" * https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/12/05/1059828993/data-vaccine-misinformation-trump-counties-covid-death-rate https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/12/05/1059828... "The Changing Political Geography of COVID-19 Over the Last Two Years" * https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2022/03/03/the-changing-political-geography-of-covid-19-over-the-last-two-years/ https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2022/03/03/the-changing... "Covid death rates are higher among Republicans than Democrats, mounting evidence shows" * https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/covid-death-rates-higher-republicans-democrats-why-rcna50883 https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/covid-death-rates... "How Many Republicans Died Because the GOP Turned Against Vaccines?" * https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2022/12/covid-deaths-anti-vaccine-republican-voters/672575/ https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2022/12/covid-dea...
  - Nextgrid 4y ago
    > A vaccine we know doesn't prevent infection, transmission, sickness or death. The data doesn't support this. Of course you could say that the data has been tampered with, but so could be whatever data you use to "know" that the vaccine doesn't work. The vaccine could work better for sure (and maybe future ones will), but beggars can't be choosers and even if it was only 10% effective it would be better than nothing. > People who hate my children This reeks of paranoid/conspiracist craziness. Nobody "hates" your children, and if they did, they'd have much easier, cheaper and more effective ways to poison and kill them than vaccines. If a government wanted to kill people en-masse, why would they put the poison in something that arises concerns/suspicions such as vaccines or medicine instead of just putting it in the food supply chain or water supply which everyone consumes without a second thought?

by nnx 4y ago

hutzlibu 4y ago

Yeah, the push to vaccinate children was not for the children, but to protect the old. And what will likely happen now, is a stronger push for forced vaccinations, met by even more entrenching of the anti-vaxx crowd.

realjhol 4y ago
[flagged]
- blumomo 4y ago
  Why in 2023 people still believe that C19 mRNA prevents infecting others? This myth has long been classified as wrong (unlike advertised in the beginning of its rollout)
  - knaik94 4y ago
    If you don't become infected, you can't infect others. The vaccine reduces the chances of you become sick with covid.
    - hutzlibu 4y ago
      https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2116597 https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2116597 "Although vaccination still lowers the risk of infection, similar viral loads in vaccinated and unvaccinated persons who are infected with the delta variant call into question the degree to which vaccination prevents transmission." Not to dispute your claim, but to put it into context. But apart from that, I am out of this debate.
    - grjdiofgeriov 4y ago
      If you don't know you are infected, you increase the risk of infecting others. As we know, the primary effect of the various vaccines was to reduce the incidences of symptomatic covid. "Becoming sick with Covid" and "becoming infected with Covid" are very different things.
  - Avamander 4y ago
    It's just that the nuance is often ignored in the initial saying. Why do people try to debunk something out of a game of telephone instead on restoring the original information. Point has always been that people who are less ill, less severely ill, for a shorter duration, with fewer or no symptoms, have lower chances of infecting others. The urge to simplify is great but it causes these weird discussions like "does the vaccine prevent (all) infection" or like what we have here.
    - fdschoeneman 4y ago
      I understand why Biden, his administration, fauci and the CDC lied. The telephone game effect is real. And sometimes lies are well I intentioned, if stupid. But that doesn't change the fact that they all lied to us.
    - therealdrag0 4y ago
      Do you have a good source on the “less I’ll less duration less spread” angle. A friend was just arguing with me recently about how ineffectual the vaccine was. So a good nuanced source would be helpful.
    - Izkata 4y ago
      > Point has always been that people who are less ill, less severely ill, for a shorter duration, with fewer or no symptoms, have lower chances of infecting others. The most recent research on the types of antibodies the vaccines create vs natural infection are showing the opposite: it causes our bodies to treat the virus more like an allergy, reducing the symptoms while clearing the infection much slower. This gives more chance to infect others, not less.
  - yucky 4y ago
    > Why in 2023 people still believe that C19 mRNA prevents infecting others? Because the Director of the CDC and the President of the United States have both at several times made this claim publicly. The fact that we now know they were lying is why we're in this situation to begin with.
    - Izkata 4y ago
      > The fact that we now know Some of us knew they were lying from the start and had a very frustrating few years: Pfizer made no claims about infection/transmission, just symptoms, because they never tested for infection/transmission. That claim popped up out of nowhere a few months after the vaccines were available.
  - bryanlarsen 4y ago
    > Why in 2023 people still believe that C19 mRNA prevents infecting others? This myth has long been classified as wrong Because it does. Your chances of getting and spreading COVID for the 3 months after you get a vaccine drop dramatically.
- maxerickson 4y ago
  The vaccines are less risky than infection for children even though the risks from infection are low. Are you somehow assuming that they aren't ever going to get infected?
  - hutzlibu 4y ago
    "The vaccines are less risky than infection for children" Can you back up that claim with long term studies?
    - maxerickson 4y ago
      I mean, you can't back up the converse with long terms studies either. Just infer the very reasonable "based on the information available". And it's not like the vaccines are a complete unknown. Making them work at all takes a huge level of understanding.
      - hutzlibu 4y ago
        I know, that is my point. Parenting is a juggling of risks. "based on the information available" And the information avaiable is confusing and partly contradictory. I know that many researchers advised against child vaccination, because of the unknowns and the low risk for the children from the disease in the first place. "Making them work at all takes a huge level of understanding." It does, but it would be news to me, that the immune system is completely understood. Even less the immune system and long term effects of a immune system that is developing. It was cutting edge research and to my understanding it was more of: this might work. And it did and unlike the anti vaxx crowd told us, apparently we did not die from it, nor were there mass severe long term damages to be found. But there was damage, some likely did in fact die from the vaccines and so it is not a 100% clear obvious decision. It might have been for you, that is allright and it was allright for me, but for my infant children I did not feel like making that experiment.
        realjhol 4y ago
        Completely agree. Also we who were called "anti-vax", were not actually anti vaccine. We were just skeptical that these vaccines were all they were cracked up to be, and wanted choice an freedom to make our own decisions without coercion. To call us anti-vax was a deliberate smear and a straw-man, of our (now vindicated) concerns.

Mountain_Skies 4y ago

It's difficult for the soulless to soul-search, and all too many who lead us here are soulless sociopaths. Beyond the loss of confidence from the public, many of my friends who work at the CDC, and have been there their entire careers, have lost faith in both the organization and its leaders. I expect the CDC will experience a lot of brain drain and loss of institutional knowledge now that the rank-and-file have had to confront what has been going on since even before the pandemic. Even worse it that they'll likely be replaced by those who are uncurious true believers that won't question anything, giving the sociopaths in charge even more power.

dennis_jeeves1 4y ago
Excellent observations. As a general rule this is how most organizations devolve. With private organizations they tend to self annihilate by not making profits. But with the government it devolves into totalitarianism.

watwut 4y ago

No, it is fault of those who push against vaccines super hard for political reasons. It is absurd to blame anyone else at the point where we are. There are groups who are intentionally trying to convince people to not vaccinate. When people listen to them, it is theor fault.

SangareEel 4y ago
[flagged]
- throw0101c 4y ago
  > It's the fault of those who push vaccines super hard for political reasons. > A vaccine we know doesn't prevent infection, transmission, sickness or death. This does not match reality. The more political right someone is, the more anti-vaxx someone is likely to me, the less likely they would get vaccinated; e.g., areas that lean more towards voting for Trump have higher COVID death rates: "COVID-19 Deaths Among Older Adults During the Delta Surge Were Higher in States with Lower Vaccination Rates" * https://www.kff.org/policy-watch/covid-19-deaths-among-older-adults-during-the-delta-surge-were-higher-in-states-with-lower-vaccination-rates/ https://www.kff.org/policy-watch/covid-19-deaths-among-older... "Pro-Trump counties now have far higher COVID death rates. Misinformation is to blame" * https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/12/05/1059828993/data-vaccine-misinformation-trump-counties-covid-death-rate https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2021/12/05/1059828... "The Changing Political Geography of COVID-19 Over the Last Two Years" * https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2022/03/03/the-changing-political-geography-of-covid-19-over-the-last-two-years/ https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2022/03/03/the-changing... "Covid death rates are higher among Republicans than Democrats, mounting evidence shows" * https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/covid-death-rates-higher-republicans-democrats-why-rcna50883 https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/covid-death-rates... "How Many Republicans Died Because the GOP Turned Against Vaccines?" * https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2022/12/covid-deaths-anti-vaccine-republican-voters/672575/ https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2022/12/covid-dea...
- Nextgrid 4y ago
  > A vaccine we know doesn't prevent infection, transmission, sickness or death. The data doesn't support this. Of course you could say that the data has been tampered with, but so could be whatever data you use to "know" that the vaccine doesn't work. The vaccine could work better for sure (and maybe future ones will), but beggars can't be choosers and even if it was only 10% effective it would be better than nothing. > People who hate my children This reeks of paranoid/conspiracist craziness. Nobody "hates" your children, and if they did, they'd have much easier, cheaper and more effective ways to poison and kill them than vaccines. If a government wanted to kill people en-masse, why would they put the poison in something that arises concerns/suspicions such as vaccines or medicine instead of just putting it in the food supply chain or water supply which everyone consumes without a second thought?