5 ms·

"Researchers studying these complications also worry about undermining trust in COVID-19 vaccines." This is why no one trusts "institutions" anymore. The resea

"Researchers studying these complications also worry about undermining trust in COVID-19 vaccines." This is why no one trusts "institutions" anymore. The researches finding out if vaccines are dangerous should be focused on that single thing, not worried about how the results might be interpreted. In my opinion, THAT is what undermines trust.

elteto 3y ago
But it doesn't work like that because these studies do not produce binary Good/Bad results. Researchers worry because they know that the results, however inconclusive/preliminary they might be, will be weaponized for political causes.
classichasclass 3y ago
But the willfully obtuse or deceptive people who do demonstrably distort such results don't?
mensetmanusman 3y ago
It seems that everyone thinks information is dangerous these days. People just choose what information to be concerned about depending on their priors.
- NBJack 3y ago
  I mean, information is dangerous. The trick is are we willing to examine it for whether it is true, and if so challenge our preconceived notions, accept the ramifications to our life, culture, society, etc. I suspect the answer for many these days is 'no'; it is far easier to bucketize things and move on.
- Tagbert 3y ago
  Information is definitely dangerous when people distort it and use it for political ends. You can publish verified data and facts with a very clear cut analysis but it is so easy for someone to take parts of that, add some spin and maybe some fabrication and use it to push their agenda.
api 3y ago
It would be a lot easier if the information environment weren't loaded with bad faith actors who will seize upon any morsel they can to push an extreme narrative. The more bad faith discourse dominates, the more cautious and defensive institutions get. The more defensive institutions get, the more bad faith discourse dominates. If institutions apologize for having been wrong or lied in the past, that will only be used to strengthen the anti-institutional narrative. If they don't apologize, that will only be used to strengthen the anti-institutional narrative. There is no way out. We are in a death spiral. I guarantee this paper is going to instantly make the rounds in anti-vaxx camps and will be used to imply that vaccines cause everything from autism to the common cold. That will only cause researchers to be even more hesitant to publish anything actually concerning about vaccines, since they'll know that any doubt will be weaponized. That in turn will make people even more distrustful and more likely to trust quacks, ideologues, and lurid tabloid-style material.
- libsarenthuman 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - api 3y ago
    [flagged]
lepus 3y ago
They're trying to avoid the equivalent of "Researchers find out deep fried Twinkies are actually healthy for you!" types of messages being spread because of the sensitive nature of the topic. Careful communication of their findings is important so that they don't get blown out of proportion and misinterpreted.

elteto 3y ago

But it doesn't work like that because these studies do not produce binary Good/Bad results. Researchers worry because they know that the results, however inconclusive/preliminary they might be, will be weaponized for political causes.

classichasclass 3y ago

But the willfully obtuse or deceptive people who do demonstrably distort such results don't?

mensetmanusman 3y ago

It seems that everyone thinks information is dangerous these days. People just choose what information to be concerned about depending on their priors.

NBJack 3y ago
I mean, information is dangerous. The trick is are we willing to examine it for whether it is true, and if so challenge our preconceived notions, accept the ramifications to our life, culture, society, etc. I suspect the answer for many these days is 'no'; it is far easier to bucketize things and move on.
Tagbert 3y ago
Information is definitely dangerous when people distort it and use it for political ends. You can publish verified data and facts with a very clear cut analysis but it is so easy for someone to take parts of that, add some spin and maybe some fabrication and use it to push their agenda.

api 3y ago

It would be a lot easier if the information environment weren't loaded with bad faith actors who will seize upon any morsel they can to push an extreme narrative. The more bad faith discourse dominates, the more cautious and defensive institutions get. The more defensive institutions get, the more bad faith discourse dominates. If institutions apologize for having been wrong or lied in the past, that will only be used to strengthen the anti-institutional narrative. If they don't apologize, that will only be used to strengthen the anti-institutional narrative. There is no way out. We are in a death spiral. I guarantee this paper is going to instantly make the rounds in anti-vaxx camps and will be used to imply that vaccines cause everything from autism to the common cold. That will only cause researchers to be even more hesitant to publish anything actually concerning about vaccines, since they'll know that any doubt will be weaponized. That in turn will make people even more distrustful and more likely to trust quacks, ideologues, and lurid tabloid-style material.

libsarenthuman 3y ago
[flagged]
- api 3y ago
  [flagged]

lepus 3y ago

They're trying to avoid the equivalent of "Researchers find out deep fried Twinkies are actually healthy for you!" types of messages being spread because of the sensitive nature of the topic. Careful communication of their findings is important so that they don't get blown out of proportion and misinterpreted.