Bari, in general I think this is a good post. However on a couple of things I think you need to dig a bit deeper and develop some nuance:
1. There are serious scientific questions/issues around vaccinating young people and children as well as vaccinating those who have already had COVID. I suggest you watch Darkhorse podcast 78 with Br…
Bari, in general I think this is a good post. However on a couple of things I think you need to dig a bit deeper and develop some nuance:
1. There are serious scientific questions/issues around vaccinating young people and children as well as vaccinating those who have already had COVID. I suggest you watch Darkhorse podcast 78 with Brett Weinstein and Heather Heyerling to bone up. Brett and Heather are both PhD evolutionary biologists who have spent considerable time and energy understanding these issues and trying to communicate them.
2. If one digs into the data about the current situation about India and normalize it with respect to population, the perspective is much less alarming than the media and the talking heads portray. Factor in the fact that India's healthcare system is chronically overloaded and unable to deal with much out of the ordinary and the picture changes even more. India needs help and we should help, but the perpetuating the current frenzy is the wrong way to go about it.
Leftist spend a lot on incitement of any kind : trolling, rioting, mob rule. that's how they are winning in destroying America- there is planned evil, and then true believers and useful idiots. It's part of their info war/psyop
You obviously haven't watched any of his podcasts if you believe that.
He has some very specific concerns about some of the covid vaccines and the deployment strategy being promulgated by the so called public health officials. If one listens to his points and does some follow up it becomes clear that people should think carefully about getting vaccinated against covid at this time.
Now both my wife and I are fully vaccinated and glad we are, however I am not about to second guess others that make an informed decision to wait on vaccination.
Again, it is not trolling to agree with the primary sentiment expressed in the original post. There is zero chance Bari is going to be like "hmmm... Maybe I should look into this guy, who says he's definitely not anti-vax" and then come out with a vaccine caution post. Your are trying to draw attention to your hobby horse at the expense of the broader discussion.
Bret and Heather and their children are more vaccinated than most Americans because their travels abroad have required it. While they both acknowledge that vaccines come with inherent risks (which is a fact), they believe that for most people the benefits outweigh the risks (which is where people start debating). They also have expressed concerns about the longterm safety of these new COVID vaccines...which is entirely legitimate given that there is no longterm data to demonstrate such safety.
Your comment is rather bizarre. Sounds like you are making things up to deflect attention from Bret and Heather's concerns.
I don't know what Twitter comment/thread you are citing so I can't speak to your claim about it. But if he is talking specifically about the COVID vaccine it isn't "anti-vax" to point out the hyperbole of safety claims for them given the dearth of longterm safety data. It is an indisputable fact that there is currently no way to assess the longterm safety of COVID vaccines.
If he is speaking about vaccines more broadly he still isn't wrong. In 2011 SCOTUS acknowledged that vaccines are "unavoidably unsafe" in a ruling that reaffirmed Pharma's liability protection, granted by the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. The bigger point is: Bret and Heather are not at all "anti-vax" in the widely accepted meaning of the term. They simply are willing to have a nuanced conversation about vaccines and public health that acknowledges the fact that for some people vaccines do pose a very serious risk—aka are "unsafe." The reason Congress passed the 1986 law was because vaccine injury lawsuits were threatening to bankrupt the manufacturers and so they were threatening to pull out of the market. The law was not created on the basis that all those injury claims were frivolous or fraudulent; the NCVIA was passed with the explicit recognition that vaccines are not safe for everyone, that some children would be destined to "take one for the team" in the name of protecting public health. There is a lot to debate about the claims in both directions, but that vaccines aren't totally safe isn't one of them.
"My kids are vaccinated. But I don’t believe vaccines are safe, or that we fully understand the risks."
At best, that is extremely misleading. We do understand the risks, and have now billions of data points about what those are, generally. We do know that the benefits far outweigh the risks. So does he, which is why he and his family are vaxxed.
Saying vaccines are unsafe is like saying seat belts are unsafe.
Honest conversations about the safety and usefulness of public health policies, be they vaccines, seatbelts, masks, lockdowns, etc., involve a discussion of both benefits and risks, which means the willingness to discuss facts and data whether they comfortably fit a preferred narrative or not. Like I said, I didn't see Bret's Twitter comment so I can't speak to it, but given what I've seen of him and what seems to be your inclination to argue in either/or terms, I suspect he was speaking to some nuance you don't—or don't care to—see.
Regardless, I do hope you have a good rest of your day (or night, if that's your time zone). Stay healthy.
Bari, in general I think this is a good post. However on a couple of things I think you need to dig a bit deeper and develop some nuance:
1. There are serious scientific questions/issues around vaccinating young people and children as well as vaccinating those who have already had COVID. I suggest you watch Darkhorse podcast 78 with Brett Weinstein and Heather Heyerling to bone up. Brett and Heather are both PhD evolutionary biologists who have spent considerable time and energy understanding these issues and trying to communicate them.
2. If one digs into the data about the current situation about India and normalize it with respect to population, the perspective is much less alarming than the media and the talking heads portray. Factor in the fact that India's healthcare system is chronically overloaded and unable to deal with much out of the ordinary and the picture changes even more. India needs help and we should help, but the perpetuating the current frenzy is the wrong way to go about it.
One could also argue that young people in America are saving lives by giving up their vaccine doses so older people in other countries can have therm.
Not at this point.
I just did. Do you think the US will endlessly pile up unused vaccine?
Weinstein has spent considerable time and energy promulgating anti-vax propaganda.
Troll
This is the only substack I sub to that routinely attracts trolls. Who pays money to be a troll?
It's not trolling to point out anti-vax nonsense on a thread that is literally titled "believe science, get vaccinated".
Leftist spend a lot on incitement of any kind : trolling, rioting, mob rule. that's how they are winning in destroying America- there is planned evil, and then true believers and useful idiots. It's part of their info war/psyop
You obviously haven't watched any of his podcasts if you believe that.
He has some very specific concerns about some of the covid vaccines and the deployment strategy being promulgated by the so called public health officials. If one listens to his points and does some follow up it becomes clear that people should think carefully about getting vaccinated against covid at this time.
Now both my wife and I are fully vaccinated and glad we are, however I am not about to second guess others that make an informed decision to wait on vaccination.
He broadly believes vaccines are unsafe. That is the anti-vax position, belied my hundreds of millions of data points to the contrary.
Others here have called you a Troll. I have tried to give you the benefit of the doubt, but you sir are a PUTZ!
Again, it is not trolling to agree with the primary sentiment expressed in the original post. There is zero chance Bari is going to be like "hmmm... Maybe I should look into this guy, who says he's definitely not anti-vax" and then come out with a vaccine caution post. Your are trying to draw attention to your hobby horse at the expense of the broader discussion.
That, sir, is what trolling is.
You are also a waste of space.
How every conversation with an anti-vaxxer goes.
AV: Are we sure vaccines are safe? Here's a two-hour video from a guy who's a real free thinker!
Me: That guy has no credibility and there are about 100 sources debunking his theories.
AV: You're an idiot buttface!
Bret and Heather and their children are more vaccinated than most Americans because their travels abroad have required it. While they both acknowledge that vaccines come with inherent risks (which is a fact), they believe that for most people the benefits outweigh the risks (which is where people start debating). They also have expressed concerns about the longterm safety of these new COVID vaccines...which is entirely legitimate given that there is no longterm data to demonstrate such safety.
Your comment is rather bizarre. Sounds like you are making things up to deflect attention from Bret and Heather's concerns.
He explicitly says he believes vaccines are unsafe. That's his word. It's right there on Twitter.
I don't know what Twitter comment/thread you are citing so I can't speak to your claim about it. But if he is talking specifically about the COVID vaccine it isn't "anti-vax" to point out the hyperbole of safety claims for them given the dearth of longterm safety data. It is an indisputable fact that there is currently no way to assess the longterm safety of COVID vaccines.
If he is speaking about vaccines more broadly he still isn't wrong. In 2011 SCOTUS acknowledged that vaccines are "unavoidably unsafe" in a ruling that reaffirmed Pharma's liability protection, granted by the 1986 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act. The bigger point is: Bret and Heather are not at all "anti-vax" in the widely accepted meaning of the term. They simply are willing to have a nuanced conversation about vaccines and public health that acknowledges the fact that for some people vaccines do pose a very serious risk—aka are "unsafe." The reason Congress passed the 1986 law was because vaccine injury lawsuits were threatening to bankrupt the manufacturers and so they were threatening to pull out of the market. The law was not created on the basis that all those injury claims were frivolous or fraudulent; the NCVIA was passed with the explicit recognition that vaccines are not safe for everyone, that some children would be destined to "take one for the team" in the name of protecting public health. There is a lot to debate about the claims in both directions, but that vaccines aren't totally safe isn't one of them.
"My kids are vaccinated. But I don’t believe vaccines are safe, or that we fully understand the risks."
At best, that is extremely misleading. We do understand the risks, and have now billions of data points about what those are, generally. We do know that the benefits far outweigh the risks. So does he, which is why he and his family are vaxxed.
Saying vaccines are unsafe is like saying seat belts are unsafe.
Honest conversations about the safety and usefulness of public health policies, be they vaccines, seatbelts, masks, lockdowns, etc., involve a discussion of both benefits and risks, which means the willingness to discuss facts and data whether they comfortably fit a preferred narrative or not. Like I said, I didn't see Bret's Twitter comment so I can't speak to it, but given what I've seen of him and what seems to be your inclination to argue in either/or terms, I suspect he was speaking to some nuance you don't—or don't care to—see.
Regardless, I do hope you have a good rest of your day (or night, if that's your time zone). Stay healthy.