4 ms·

Which bald face lies? Like ivermectin?

gadflyinyoureye 3y ago
Off the top of my head? The vaccines were sterilizing. Nope not at all. Mildly reduced the chance of transmission while sick. But Pfizer was “moving at the speed of science”. Another is that natural immunity was worse than getting the vaccine. I’m sure there’s more, but the comment Will be flagged so why bother?
- throw10920 3y ago
  I'm curious. Please email me (link in bio https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=throw10920 https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=throw10920). Also I suggest adding your (or an) email (or some other contact info) to your profile.
  - 15457345234 3y ago
    Just so you know, it's a bit creepy when someone makes a post on a contentious topic to immediately want to take the discussion offline and to request their PII. The more paranoid in the audience will take this type of behavior as evidence that lists are being kept of 'unbelievers' and that they are 'being silenced' etc etc etc. You know the type of thing. Just letting you know how this comes off.
- DinoDad13 3y ago
  Your comment was flagged for being full of shit. And you proved why.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
anon373839 3y ago
A few that come to mind: 1. Public health agencies originally stated that N95 respirators don’t work and require special fit training. This guidance vanished the moment respirators stopped being in short supply. 2. The public was repeatedly told the virus was not thought to be transmissible by airborne particles, even though there was evidence that it was. Similarly, well after fomite transmission had been ruled out, health agencies continued to preach hand-washing and surface disinfection. 3. Concerns that the vaccines might have serious side effects were blasted as anti-science lunacy. Later, the vaccines were proved to cause serious side effects in some people. 4. Any discussion of the lab leak theory was treated as radioactive. I could go on. What’s bothersome about these examples isn’t that the science was imperfect or evolving. It’s that the public were lied to, and were also told they should not dare question Science (with a capital S). When I read that scientific journals censor entire avenues of inquiry because the implications are undesirable, I wonder if real science even exists in politically sensitive fields.

Off the top of my head? The vaccines were sterilizing. Nope not at all. Mildly reduced the chance of transmission while sick. But Pfizer was “moving at the speed of science”. Another is that natural immunity was worse than getting the vaccine. I’m sure there’s more, but the comment Will be flagged so why bother?

throw10920 3y ago
I'm curious. Please email me (link in bio https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=throw10920 https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=throw10920). Also I suggest adding your (or an) email (or some other contact info) to your profile.
- 15457345234 3y ago
  Just so you know, it's a bit creepy when someone makes a post on a contentious topic to immediately want to take the discussion offline and to request their PII. The more paranoid in the audience will take this type of behavior as evidence that lists are being kept of 'unbelievers' and that they are 'being silenced' etc etc etc. You know the type of thing. Just letting you know how this comes off.
DinoDad13 3y ago
Your comment was flagged for being full of shit. And you proved why.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

anon373839 3y ago

A few that come to mind: 1. Public health agencies originally stated that N95 respirators don’t work and require special fit training. This guidance vanished the moment respirators stopped being in short supply. 2. The public was repeatedly told the virus was not thought to be transmissible by airborne particles, even though there was evidence that it was. Similarly, well after fomite transmission had been ruled out, health agencies continued to preach hand-washing and surface disinfection. 3. Concerns that the vaccines might have serious side effects were blasted as anti-science lunacy. Later, the vaccines were proved to cause serious side effects in some people. 4. Any discussion of the lab leak theory was treated as radioactive. I could go on. What’s bothersome about these examples isn’t that the science was imperfect or evolving. It’s that the public were lied to, and were also told they should not dare question Science (with a capital S). When I read that scientific journals censor entire avenues of inquiry because the implications are undesirable, I wonder if real science even exists in politically sensitive fields.