Little thread on the "We'll be fine, it will be my turn soon" narrative. When I express frustration and the snail pace of vaccine rollout, people will often say "I am fine, I'll be happy to let HCW, the vulnerable etc go first". Some reasons why I resist this narrative 1/
First, it is not at all clear that we are fine. We, as a society, are not fine. We have tried to make the best of it, but it's clear that the roll in human lives, economy, happiness and flourishing, mental health etc is huge and this will only stop when the pandemic ends 2/
So why have we grown all complacent so close to the finish line? Why should we accept that although states and countries have had *months and months* to plan this fall so behind their own targets? I mean, the fact that vaccines are coming wasn't exactly a surprise! 3/
Also, if you vaccinate at a snail's pace you are not helping the vulnerable because the risk becomes bigger that mutations arise that make vaccinations less effective. The more the virus goes rampant, the more mutations. We are as Macron put it indeed at war 4/
I dislike war metaphors. But this is apt. We're in an arms race with the virus, which will evade our attempts to squash it through social distancing (by becoming more contagious cf UK) and by vaccines (variants that make vaccines ineffective). To win we must control the virus 5/
Why aren't we pulling out all the stops? Literally anything that kills >3000 Americans a day, say, a terrorist cell, a war by a hostile enemy, would be met by strong and decisive force, would be met with a thoughtful plan. Not so this virus. 6/
As I'm writing the state I live in is still determining the order of priorities of who will be vaccinated. At the point I'm writing the UK would need 6 years or so to get everyone vaccinated. This is a complete joke, an utter failure. 7/
Also, will people low on the priority list be fine? Since numbers have become numbing anecdotes. A friend's ex-husband, a coach in his early 40s very fit and healthy, no co-morbidities died of the virus back in April 8/
A friend of mine, a woman in her early forties with no comorbidities, got ill back in April and is still in bed most of the day with long Covid. A husband of another friend, early fifties, he did have some comorbidities but would be low on list still, also died recently. 9/
So, many of us are basically doing our own lockdown and pausing our lives. I know, the odds of actually dying or developing long covid are small. But even with vaccines there (3 effective ones as we speak!!) we either have to lock down or risk becoming ill 10/
Ok, I know. People will tell you "Don't live in fear", "Don't let the virus control your life", and many just don't (cf. uncontrolled spread of virus). Even so, we have an alternative to playing viral Russian roulette, and that's these effective vaccines 11/
A couple of more things (sorry for interruption...toilet upstairs overflowed and amateur plumbing not going well).
The best we can do for everyone, including the vulnerable, is to roll out these vaccines ASAP, to do all in our power to do it quickly 12/
For one thing, if you're going to determine a vaccine line then you'll miss things, e.g., how communities of color are disproportionately affected (lots of the vaccine line discussion now centers on age and who counts as an essential worker) 13/
Also the "I'll be fine, I'm happy at the back of the line" is individually noble but it hides a certain assumption about being invulnerable. A friend who has long Covid since April told me it took her a long time to realize that she is now disabled 14/
Also, the fact that we're not even seriously considering a serious rollout of vaccinations for children speaks volumes. Why don't we do this? Covid-19 has been a scour upon humanity, we must step up our game to eradicate it 15/
Just think. As of September 2020 airlines received US $ 58 billion from the US March CARES act. More is coming.

Compare: as of December 14, Operation Warp speed spend US $12.4 Billion on Vaccines. 16/
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P…
I'm letting it sink in that airlines received several times more money in bailouts (58 billion USD in March) compared to vaccine development (12.4 billion USD in Dec).
Newsflash: those airlines will only become self-sufficient when people will fly again! 17/
We had this hope, always a few months ahead that life would return back to normal. Problem is, without vaccines, it's really unsure how far normal lies. See this pic showing what a big impact vaccines can make science.sciencemag.org/content/356/63… 18/
Anyway, I'm hoping we can step up our game real soon, and globally. You can keep on arguing about the minutiae of who should come first, but at the rate of >3000 people dying, it overall needs to go faster. That should absolutely top priority. /end
PS: to see it in perspective, here's a handy bar chart of select federal initiatives. You can see this and you know that governments are not pulling out all the stops to end the pandemic. I mean, it's less than 3x than what was spent on the US/Mexico wall!

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Helen De Cruz

Helen De Cruz Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Helenreflects

29 Dec 20
Some philosophers whose work I read in 2020 that I didn't really know before
Wang Yangming (1472–1529), neo-Confucian Chinese philosopher and general
Jane Addams (1860-1935), American social reformer and pragmatist
Pyotr Kropotkin (1842-1921), Russian anarchist. 1/
I think an interesting thread that unites all of them, though they lived and worked in different times and places, is the notion that we are all interconnected and interdependent. It's such an important insight, as we are all experiencing now 2/
And yet, most western societies do not have the notion of interdependence in what Mary Midgley would call their "philosophical plumbing". Western societies still have the weird belief that technology alone (vaccines, green tech etc) will bail us out of any problems 3/
Read 15 tweets
29 Dec 20
Reading Kropotkin (1903, Mutual Aid, ch on the medieval city) sing the praises of the Medieval free city, of the principles of cooperation, localism, independence and interdependence enjoyed by its citizens, lamenting the nation state building of 16th century 1/
He thinks guilds are a natural and spontaneous way for people to organize themselves. Guilds respond "to a deeply inrooted want of human nature ; and it embodied all the attributes which the State appropriated later on for its bureaucracy and police, and much more than that." 2/
Contrast Kropotkin's sunny view of guilds with more negative appraisals, e.g., Adam Smith "People of the same trade seldom meet together, even for merriment and diversion, but the conversation ends in a conspiracy against the public, or in some contrivance to raise prices" 3/
Read 6 tweets
16 Dec 20
In these crunch talks on Brexit, it's really disappointing to see how both the UK and EU are so eager to have bratwurst, cheese, and car parts move about freely while blithely putting up barriers against people moving, e.g.,
politico.eu/article/uk-unl… 1/
I am not talking only about immigration though that has had huge benefits, I am also talking about collaborations such as student exchange programs and scientific collaborations such as Horizon 2020. The UK has *hugely* benefited from this and yet... nothing 2/
Why deprioritize people? The free movement of people is even in line with the free market orthodoxy. If your prospective employer wants you and you want to work for them, why should governments be interfering and putting loads of red tape and deterrents? 3/
Read 9 tweets
9 Dec 20
I have some thoughts about this piece by Michael Gerson.
Background (disclosure): I'm not American, I live in the US, I'm a Christian, and as an academic, I have lots of non-religious friends.
My perspective on this is as an insider-outsider 1/
washingtonpost.com/opinions/promi…
So, as is generally known Christianity in the US has been declining at a rapid pace. See this Pew forum report (from Oct 2019). Note, the decline is now also notable among Evangelicals. But 2 factors have further accelerated the decline 2/

pewforum.org/2019/10/17/in-…
1. The pandemic. It will have huge effects due to permanent closure of churches, but also solidifying decline in attendance, see e.g., here churchanswers.com/blog/five-type… 3/
Read 20 tweets
7 Dec 20
Been thinking again of the no-deal threat about Brexit. One problem is lack of democratic oversight--something already hinted at by Rousseau. Rousseau thought representative democracy is a layer too many, and favored direct democracy 1/
Now I know many people have been drawing the opposite conclusion re Brexit, namely: referendums don't work, people don't know what they vote for etc. But I'm not sure that's right. Maybe direct democracy does work provided people get input all the way, whereas now ... 2/
You basically had one vote in June 2016, then elected representatives clearly failed to do their work. Then people, frustrated, voted again in 2017 and then again in 2019, but in none of those votes could they directly influence the Brexit process 3/
Read 6 tweets
7 Dec 20
Am thinking of Queen's Gambit, Ep 5 where Harry Beltik offers to help Beth Harmon with chess. He admits freely he is not as good as she is, yet still thinks she can learn from him, and she does. This often happens: we learn from our epistemic inferiors. But how? Short thread 1/
A lot of the debate on disagreement focuses on your epistemic peers - people who are in an equally good epistemic position (e.g., in terms of evidence or skill) as you are and you disagree with. Such disagreement counts as higher-order evidence 2/
But what with people who know more than you? Should you always listen to your epistemic superiors? L Zagzebski has an argument to this effect: if A is your epistemic superior in domain D, you should just always defer to A because you're more likely to get it right then 3/
Read 16 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!