4 ms·

> However, it also worrying to see science take a backseat to politics. It's not politics directly, it's lying and all the "whoopsies". I live in slovenia, so

> However, it also worrying to see science take a backseat to politics. It's not politics directly, it's lying and all the "whoopsies". I live in slovenia, so there was no trump vs others here. When I got vaccinated we had four kinds of vaccines (J&J, astrazeneca, pfeizer and moderna... if you got vacicnated abroad, also sputnik). All those vaccines were said to prevent getting a symptomatic covid infection and also prevent the spread. Then slowly three out of those four got cancelled here, because they caused issues here and abroad and in case of J&J, even killed a young girl here. Every time one of them got removed, the rest were "completely safe"... first astrazeneca, but the others were good, then J&J killed a girl, but moderna and pfizer are safe, then moderna went away, but pfeizer was safe... it was just a matter of time when something "safe" was an "whoops, it's not safe, but the others are". Also the "prevent symptomatic infection and spread" was somehing stalined-away and "prevent severe illness" appeared. I understand the need for fast action, but most of the anti-covid measures (limited and forbidden stuff, also stuff that needed you to be vaccinated to do) were targeted towards young people... old people need a local grocery store and a doctor... young people need clubs, bars, restaurants, party locations etc. (not to mention in person schools). So young people, who generally didnt die in any significant numbers (compared to traffic accidents and suicides) got the most of the damage, and old people didn't need to get vaccinated at all, because the measures didn't affect them. Basically, the whole handling of covid, the lies, the wrong priorities, and the "whoopsies" have destroyed the trust in science, scientists and other authorities for many many years.

lazyasciiart 4y ago
Young people also need doctors and teachers and the entire infrastructure of society. Old people not only continue enjoying restaurants and social events but they are a significant percentage of those doctors and teachers and infrastructure workers. In Slovenia, specifically, 20% of the population is over 65. Let's say covid is dangerous if you are 55 or older. Oops, there goes 30% of doctors and 30% of teachers! That's OK, of course the medical system is robust and can handle a 30% drop in staff, the average GP only has 1500 patients already. Maybe losing 1/3 of staff will only take 1/4 of hospital beds out of service, so there are still 3 hospital beds per 1000 persons. Do you start to worry that they will not have a spare bed for young people in traffic accidents? Of course, it's possible some doctors under 55 have another condition, and will also stay home. And with most of the country still going to bars and schools, some of the medical staff will simply stop caring about any of you and quit. And because of all that socializing, the hospitalization numbers for younger adults will be far higher than they were under lockdown, with far fewer beds, and many more deaths.
- ajsnigrutin 4y ago
  I was saying that "stuff old people do" was not limited/forbidden for unvaccinated, while "stuff young people do" was. Mostly because old people don't do a lot (except for stay at home, socialize at other peoples homes, go to the store, doctor, pharmacy)... in turn, if an old person stayed unvaccinated, it did not affect their day-to-day life. Even cufew, after 21h/22h, old people are usually home then. But we did close bars, restaurants etc for unvaccinated, also clubs (somewhat understandable) but also stuff like outside playgrounds, basketball/football fields, etc. which was illogical to most. Curfew caused kids who would otherwise drink and party outside on benches in parks to move inside into small unventilated bedrooms and stay inside until morning. If we assume vaccines save lives, making them mandatory to get your pension (or atleast getting pension harder for unvaccinated), and left all the clubs open, we'd save more lives, than with closing the clubs and playgrounds and not affecting old people at all.
  - soundnote 4y ago
    Where I live, they forced bars to close if they were serving alcohol - you could serve mocktails and stay open all night. It's a wondrous germ, it knows what you're drinking. Meanwhile the restrictions on cafes where old people gather during the day were much more lenient. It's just nuts.
    - ajsnigrutin 4y ago
      Yup... alcohol for your hands when you enter... and no alcohol for your mouth when you're inside :)
chimprich 4y ago
> All those vaccines were said to prevent getting a symptomatic covid infection and also prevent the spread. Right, this is nonsense. You claim "lies", but you're parroting lies yourself and spreading dangerous misinformation. Let's have some sources to back up these extraordinary claims. Show us where medical authorities or the drug companies themselves ever claimed that the vaccines would "prevent getting a symptomatic covid infection" or "prevent the spread". The original data presented never showed that the vaccines would prevent symptomatic infections or completely prevent transmission.
- drno123 4y ago
  How do you interpret this, if not that the vaccines are 90% effective in preventing getting a covid infection, by CDC which is a medical authority? https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1262334 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1262334
  - chimprich 4y ago
    I interpret that as them being 90% effective in preventing symptomatic infection, for a specific period after vaccination, against the variants that were circulating at the time. That's not a lie: that's what the data showed. I don't believe that's been contradicted since. No one claimed they were perfect at preventing symptomatic infection. The ability of the vaccines to eliminate symptomatic infection reduced over time, but that's not because the authorities were lying about it. That's just the evolution of the virus and waning immunity.
    - ajsnigrutin 4y ago
      > DR. ROCHELLE WALENSKY, CDC DIRECTOR > And we have -- we can kind of almost see the end. We`re vaccinating so very fast, our data from the CDC today suggests, you know, that vaccinated people do not carry the virus, don`t get sick, and that it`s not just in the clinical trials but it`s also in real world data. https://web.archive.org/web/20210402002315/https://www.msnbc.com/transcripts/transcript-rachel-maddow-show-3-29-21-n1262442 https://web.archive.org/web/20210402002315/https://www.msnbc...

lazyasciiart 4y ago

Young people also need doctors and teachers and the entire infrastructure of society. Old people not only continue enjoying restaurants and social events but they are a significant percentage of those doctors and teachers and infrastructure workers. In Slovenia, specifically, 20% of the population is over 65. Let's say covid is dangerous if you are 55 or older. Oops, there goes 30% of doctors and 30% of teachers! That's OK, of course the medical system is robust and can handle a 30% drop in staff, the average GP only has 1500 patients already. Maybe losing 1/3 of staff will only take 1/4 of hospital beds out of service, so there are still 3 hospital beds per 1000 persons. Do you start to worry that they will not have a spare bed for young people in traffic accidents? Of course, it's possible some doctors under 55 have another condition, and will also stay home. And with most of the country still going to bars and schools, some of the medical staff will simply stop caring about any of you and quit. And because of all that socializing, the hospitalization numbers for younger adults will be far higher than they were under lockdown, with far fewer beds, and many more deaths.

ajsnigrutin 4y ago
I was saying that "stuff old people do" was not limited/forbidden for unvaccinated, while "stuff young people do" was. Mostly because old people don't do a lot (except for stay at home, socialize at other peoples homes, go to the store, doctor, pharmacy)... in turn, if an old person stayed unvaccinated, it did not affect their day-to-day life. Even cufew, after 21h/22h, old people are usually home then. But we did close bars, restaurants etc for unvaccinated, also clubs (somewhat understandable) but also stuff like outside playgrounds, basketball/football fields, etc. which was illogical to most. Curfew caused kids who would otherwise drink and party outside on benches in parks to move inside into small unventilated bedrooms and stay inside until morning. If we assume vaccines save lives, making them mandatory to get your pension (or atleast getting pension harder for unvaccinated), and left all the clubs open, we'd save more lives, than with closing the clubs and playgrounds and not affecting old people at all.
- soundnote 4y ago
  Where I live, they forced bars to close if they were serving alcohol - you could serve mocktails and stay open all night. It's a wondrous germ, it knows what you're drinking. Meanwhile the restrictions on cafes where old people gather during the day were much more lenient. It's just nuts.
  - ajsnigrutin 4y ago
    Yup... alcohol for your hands when you enter... and no alcohol for your mouth when you're inside :)

chimprich 4y ago

> All those vaccines were said to prevent getting a symptomatic covid infection and also prevent the spread. Right, this is nonsense. You claim "lies", but you're parroting lies yourself and spreading dangerous misinformation. Let's have some sources to back up these extraordinary claims. Show us where medical authorities or the drug companies themselves ever claimed that the vaccines would "prevent getting a symptomatic covid infection" or "prevent the spread". The original data presented never showed that the vaccines would prevent symptomatic infections or completely prevent transmission.

drno123 4y ago
How do you interpret this, if not that the vaccines are 90% effective in preventing getting a covid infection, by CDC which is a medical authority? https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1262334 https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1262334
- chimprich 4y ago
  I interpret that as them being 90% effective in preventing symptomatic infection, for a specific period after vaccination, against the variants that were circulating at the time. That's not a lie: that's what the data showed. I don't believe that's been contradicted since. No one claimed they were perfect at preventing symptomatic infection. The ability of the vaccines to eliminate symptomatic infection reduced over time, but that's not because the authorities were lying about it. That's just the evolution of the virus and waning immunity.
  - ajsnigrutin 4y ago
    > DR. ROCHELLE WALENSKY, CDC DIRECTOR > And we have -- we can kind of almost see the end. We`re vaccinating so very fast, our data from the CDC today suggests, you know, that vaccinated people do not carry the virus, don`t get sick, and that it`s not just in the clinical trials but it`s also in real world data. https://web.archive.org/web/20210402002315/https://www.msnbc.com/transcripts/transcript-rachel-maddow-show-3-29-21-n1262442 https://web.archive.org/web/20210402002315/https://www.msnbc...