Just to clarify your position - are all who decline a vaccination, for themselves or for their children, murderers? Or would you restrict your prison time and/or compliance at gun point sentences to those who actively promote anti-vaccine beliefs?
ok, if you two can give your feud a rest, here’s something from the news (NBC) tonight:
Not sure if this has been covered yet, but there was a poll on the ‘Mainstream Media’ tonight where 65% of Americans would be suspicious of a vaccine that was announced before the election, and would believe it to be “a treatment that was rushed for political gain.”
One comment was “Americans wouldn’t trust a vaccine that was announced by someone running for President.”
It’s very reasonable to look closely at the results of phase III trials (which compare large numbers of vaccinated people to those getting placebo, to determine efficacy and safety). It’s sensible to require assurances by public health/vaccine experts without an ax to grind, and not to depend on anything Trump says.
That’s essentially what Kamala Harris just advised.
I’m less impressed with this Biden comment (via Politico):
“Why do we think, God willing, when we get a vaccine — that is good, works — why do we think the public is gonna line up to be willing to take the injection?” Joe Biden asked on Wednesday. “We’ve lost so much confidence, the American people, in what’s said [by the Trump administration].”
Biden seems to be poisoning the well ahead of time.
Be wary, fine. The general public’s holding off on getting a brand new vaccine for a few months would be understandable, depending on what vaccine is approved and what the evidence shows. But condemning or encouraging refusal of a vaccine solely because it was approved during Trump’s presidency is not smart.
Those who actively promote anti-vaccine beliefs are mass murderers of children.
Considering that the people who will be certifying the vaccine are Trump toadies, that’s prudent.
Trump has already promised a vaccine by Nov. 1st. What do you think is the likelihood it will actually be effective and safe?
Certainly there will be some political appointees involved, but lots has to happen before it gets to that. It would mean many honorable scientists would need to be in on the fix for it to reach the public.
Stating the obvious observation that the well has been poisoned is not poisoning it.
Biden has not caused the widespread distrust of our institutions.
Biden has not hollowed them out, has not demonstrated a track record of bending allegedly independent agencies to his personal gains and interests, fired those who speak up. Biden is not responsible for the FDA announcing the possible use of a vaccine before phase 3 is complete just coincidentally in time to be news on election eve.
Biden is not the cause of that poll result.
There’s no question that Trump’s handling of the pandemic has been markedly deficient and his promotion of coronavirus remedies largely laughable and/or dangerously irresponsible.
That doesn’t excuse Biden’s comments helping create an atmosphere where people feel justified in automatically rejecting a coronavirus vaccine because it was announced before the election.
Kamala Harris had it right: be wary of a Trump-touted vaccine but listen to what qualified experts have to say.
Tempting as it is to many, politicizing vaccination is unacceptable.
I didn’t automatically reject the vaccine because it was announced before the election. I considered the source and the wholesale corruption and subjugation of numerous agencies including the FDA.
I just erased a response out of respect for the stated rules of this forum to try to steer from the political.
Rephrasing let’s agree that trust in the institutions and experts of the FDA, the CDC, heck the Justice Department, is critically important.
There are reasons that there is less trust in them as independent bodies with only our best interests in mind. Recognizing what those reasons are is critical to earning back the trust. Biden is 100% correct: that trust no longer exists in the minds of many now and without enough trust a new vaccine program is domed to fail. Pretending that the trust exists when it does not, denying that the problem of distrust exists, failing to identify and rectify the root cause of the problem, will allow the problem to grow. No mandate can make up for a widespread lack of trust. No pat statements of trust them are sufficient.
Moderator Note
Let’s take the political discussion (on both sides) to another thread in P&E. This goes for everyone.
Colibri
QZ Moderator
Moderator Note
Let’s take this discussion to another thread as well, either in GD or the Pit.
Colibri
QZ Moderator
This seems helpful:
Nine Pharma CEO’s issue joint pledge that their Covid-19 vaccines will not be rushed at the expense of safety.
It’s a little convenient that that pledge came out a few hours before they reported the first problem with one of the vaccines.
Yeah, let’s hope Big Pharma’s desire not to be sued is more powerful than Trump’s desire for a photo-op
Convenient, or proper? I’m reassured that they called a halt to reassess. At least someone is acting competently.
Convenient. They knew they were gonna have to do the halt, so they get some extra brownie points out of it by announcing the pledge first. “See, we told you we were serious about it!”
ThIs pledge is akin to a waiter serving and asking which customer had asked for the clean glass.
The fact that they have to state explicitly and publicly that they won’t cut corners on safety?
Why should that need to said? What would you think if your spouse out of the blue swore they weren’t cheating on you?
This is not something that should ever need be said if for no other reason there would an expectation that governmental authorities wouldn’t let them cut corners on safety.
I’m not anti-big pharma or a conspiracy theorist and I’m not reacting specifically to this snag. Part of the reason they needed to come out with that statement is because of Trump.
But it’s not just Trump who’s been blowing hopium about a vaccine up people’s asses for months. Some (not all) of the pharmas have been, and Oxford (not a pharma) has been bordering on deserving to get lumped in with the quacks. So part of it is their own fault, they should have said it months ago, not the same day they announce a halt.
Part of it is too many media chasing too many quotes from too many people. But the pharmas should show a little restraint.
And wait until the distribution shitshow starts. So the gov’t thinks they’re gonna have a vaccine shortly and not a peep about how they’re going to distribute it?
Can’t distribute PPE, but you think you’re gonna distribute RNA vaccines with no shelf life?
Since the OP asks about personal opinions, let’s move this to IMHO. My previous instructions from QZ are rescinded.
Colibri
QZ Moderator