5 ms·

Hot take: delaying without completely suppressing this alerting is the best way to change people's minds about the benefits of preventive measures like vaccinat

Hot take: delaying without completely suppressing this alerting is the best way to change people's minds about the benefits of preventive measures like vaccination without massive loss of life.

Esophagus4 11mo ago
Meaning, let the outbreak get bad enough to remind people that vaccines are helpful?
- jojobas 11mo ago
  It could be that the only way to remind people is to get them to see some deaths or near-deaths first-hand.
  - Esophagus4 11mo ago
    Ah, I was thinking that’s what the argument was. To which I’d say… maybe? I was able to dig up this paper that showed 66% of the COVID unvaccinated regretted their decision after hospitalization. The rest were undeterred, even after hospitalization, mostly due to ideology and conspiracies. But the problem is that I wouldn’t be comfortable risking public health to prove 2/3 of a point to vaccine skeptics who should’ve known better anyway. The Hippocratic oath is to do no harm, and I wouldn’t want a loved one with a suppressed immune system or lung problems to get seriously sick because we let the disease spread by choice. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8950102/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8950102/
    - TheOtherHobbes 11mo ago
      The real vectors of disinformation are social media, and antivax deaths are downstream of that. But we don't have any kind of cultural immunity to the kind of propagandised and designed messaging that drives these campaigns. In the absence of that, learning through consequences - and coming in with the messaging after they happen - is the only thing that can make a difference.
      - Esophagus4 11mo ago
        > But we don't have any kind of cultural immunity to the kind of propagandised and designed messaging that drives these campaigns It seem like if we can find a vaccine for propaganda, we would get a lot of mileage out of it.
  - AlotOfReading 11mo ago
    I'm reminded of the M.A.D.D. campaigns to reduce drunk driving with faked crash scenes in front of schools. They would set up a crashed car with dummy "bodies" strewn (and even scattered blood/glass) across walkways where everyone could see them. I don't think it was a particularly effective tactic.
    - jojobas 11mo ago
      A fake crash is not be convincing, you distant cousin/neighbor/friend losing a child might be.
  - zdragnar 11mo ago
    The least vaccinated communities also tend to be the least visible. I suspect it wouldn't be terribly effective in the large.
    - jojobas 11mo ago
      They are visible from within. 3 kids in your kids' school die, you do something.
- pinkmuffinere 11mo ago
  I think that is what they meant. It is crazy, but there's some reasoning behind the crazy. And they did say it was a hot take.
  - Esophagus4 11mo ago
    That’s true, it was a hot take indeed. Hot as in, I’m feeling kind of feverish because I’m now sick because we let whooping cough spread to prove a point to people who get their medical information from Facebook.
    - TheOtherHobbes 11mo ago
      Think of it as vaccination, but cultural. Of course it's horrific. But it's a predictable outcome of antivax culture. When nothing else works, what are you supposed to do?
      - msandford 11mo ago
        I mean you could listen to the reasons that people who have lost trust in the institutions say they lost trust, and then try and rectify those reasons. But to do that is to admit that MAYBE the US govt didn't handle COVID perfectly. And that's a conversation many folks are unwilling to have. So this is the alternative we're left with. It's uglier this way for sure and will cause more suffering. Sucks.
        vkou 11mo ago
        > and then try and rectify those reasons. Those reasons are simple. People they trust are lying to them for monetary and political gain about a subject they personally know nothing about. That's it. That's all there is to it. --- > But to do that is to admit that MAYBE the US govt didn't handle COVID perfectly. My friend, antivax bullshit has been swelling long before COVID. Turns out there's way more money and power in peddling these people snake oil than something that will help their health. And secondly, whatever complaints you have about handling COVID, the vaccines for it were and are safe and effective, but no amount of evidence will ever convince them.
nyc_data_geek1 11mo ago
Get in loser, we're making Polio Great Again
yesco 11mo ago
A lot of anti-vaccination people are skeptics; they don't trust the information being given to them by authoritative sources. The government deliberately withholding information, especially if done with the intent you described, would, without question, reinforce their skepticism. So considering that, I suspect the loss of life would increase in the long run.

Hot take: delaying without completely suppressing this alerting is the best way to change people's minds about the benefits of preventive measures like vaccination without massive loss of life.

Esophagus4 11mo ago

Meaning, let the outbreak get bad enough to remind people that vaccines are helpful?

jojobas 11mo ago
It could be that the only way to remind people is to get them to see some deaths or near-deaths first-hand.
- Esophagus4 11mo ago
  Ah, I was thinking that’s what the argument was. To which I’d say… maybe? I was able to dig up this paper that showed 66% of the COVID unvaccinated regretted their decision after hospitalization. The rest were undeterred, even after hospitalization, mostly due to ideology and conspiracies. But the problem is that I wouldn’t be comfortable risking public health to prove 2/3 of a point to vaccine skeptics who should’ve known better anyway. The Hippocratic oath is to do no harm, and I wouldn’t want a loved one with a suppressed immune system or lung problems to get seriously sick because we let the disease spread by choice. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8950102/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8950102/
  - TheOtherHobbes 11mo ago
    The real vectors of disinformation are social media, and antivax deaths are downstream of that. But we don't have any kind of cultural immunity to the kind of propagandised and designed messaging that drives these campaigns. In the absence of that, learning through consequences - and coming in with the messaging after they happen - is the only thing that can make a difference.
    - Esophagus4 11mo ago
      > But we don't have any kind of cultural immunity to the kind of propagandised and designed messaging that drives these campaigns It seem like if we can find a vaccine for propaganda, we would get a lot of mileage out of it.
- AlotOfReading 11mo ago
  I'm reminded of the M.A.D.D. campaigns to reduce drunk driving with faked crash scenes in front of schools. They would set up a crashed car with dummy "bodies" strewn (and even scattered blood/glass) across walkways where everyone could see them. I don't think it was a particularly effective tactic.
  - jojobas 11mo ago
    A fake crash is not be convincing, you distant cousin/neighbor/friend losing a child might be.
- zdragnar 11mo ago
  The least vaccinated communities also tend to be the least visible. I suspect it wouldn't be terribly effective in the large.
  - jojobas 11mo ago
    They are visible from within. 3 kids in your kids' school die, you do something.
pinkmuffinere 11mo ago
I think that is what they meant. It is crazy, but there's some reasoning behind the crazy. And they did say it was a hot take.
- Esophagus4 11mo ago
  That’s true, it was a hot take indeed. Hot as in, I’m feeling kind of feverish because I’m now sick because we let whooping cough spread to prove a point to people who get their medical information from Facebook.
  - TheOtherHobbes 11mo ago
    Think of it as vaccination, but cultural. Of course it's horrific. But it's a predictable outcome of antivax culture. When nothing else works, what are you supposed to do?
    - msandford 11mo ago
      I mean you could listen to the reasons that people who have lost trust in the institutions say they lost trust, and then try and rectify those reasons. But to do that is to admit that MAYBE the US govt didn't handle COVID perfectly. And that's a conversation many folks are unwilling to have. So this is the alternative we're left with. It's uglier this way for sure and will cause more suffering. Sucks.
      - vkou 11mo ago
        > and then try and rectify those reasons. Those reasons are simple. People they trust are lying to them for monetary and political gain about a subject they personally know nothing about. That's it. That's all there is to it. --- > But to do that is to admit that MAYBE the US govt didn't handle COVID perfectly. My friend, antivax bullshit has been swelling long before COVID. Turns out there's way more money and power in peddling these people snake oil than something that will help their health. And secondly, whatever complaints you have about handling COVID, the vaccines for it were and are safe and effective, but no amount of evidence will ever convince them.

nyc_data_geek1 11mo ago

Get in loser, we're making Polio Great Again

yesco 11mo ago

A lot of anti-vaccination people are skeptics; they don't trust the information being given to them by authoritative sources. The government deliberately withholding information, especially if done with the intent you described, would, without question, reinforce their skepticism. So considering that, I suspect the loss of life would increase in the long run.