Just spoke at length to people protesting #covid19 vaccine in teenagers. They held placards quoting MHRA death figures and asking why the media was complicit. Here is a little more on what came up
First, they did not know that most reporting systems such as VAERs are not analysed. They did not understand the need for covariate analysis and what the data actually means.
Secondly, they claimed that no doctor had said that myocarditis from the vaccine is less risky than from covid. Many did not know how covid kills people, or once again about how the data could be skewed. Their research appeared very one sided.
They argued that "gillick competency" was being used to "force" children to take the vaccine. They did not know what it was, why it exists and how it is assessed. When I explained it, they moved on quickly.
When I asked them if the risk of dying from the vaccine outweighs that of covid, the answers ranged from "yes" to "i dont know." None had read comparative data. Most quoted anecdote from "friends."
When I explained this, they began to talk about Andrew Wakefield, Michael Yeadon etc. When explaining the reasons the data made this mute, they began to talk about coincidences and doctors being paid.
When I explained that doctors did not get paid extra for vaccines, they seemed genuinely shocked, but receptive. When I asked why they thought doctors would go along with vaccines that they believe are so dangerous, they had no answer except more conspiracy
One fellow even began saying that covid was a shield to kill the elderly, to shut down work. I asked why any government would do this, and why doctors would go along with it, and was met with "we are just going in circles."
I explained the covid data.
I explained how variants worked.
I explained how the vaccines worked.
In explained how covariate analysis worked.
I spent a long time answering every question until they were satisfied.
I even posed the questions back to them with the new information. They could not counter it, but they would not be convinced. Everytime it came down to the same "too much coincidence."
These were good people. People who had done the research. They were polite, passionate and discursive. But they were trapped by fake information, and information they were not equipped to understand.
They needed to be shown all of the information, and to have had it explained. They needed to have felt heard. Some were very well informed, but mistaken in their inference, others were genuinely one step away from suggesting Lizard people.
But all of them cared about people. All felt they were doing the right thing. And i agree with them on one point, the government needed to do more to educate, support and explain. They needed to be consistent. And they needed to be honest.
In the end we all want the same thing. I am glad I talked to these people. They are like me. They want to do the best. The only difference is they have been misled, lied too and exploited by hacks.
Please do not harass them. Please do not blame them. My education is a privilege they have not been afforded. They do not lack intelligence, they lack being taught how to make sense of very complicated things, most of it hidden. What can we do, listen and talk.
The real problem here is feeling powerless, ignored and oppressed. This is how charlatans exploit people. This is how fascism begins. This is how people forget that their fellow humans are equal. We must help people understand.
Turn on GB news for Breakfast rage against the refugees with Katie Hopkins. Turn my kettle to 189 Fahrenheit and empty 4oz of coffee into my 3-hands width chuckle-brothers mug. It will be a good day in the mines.
Its 4 cubits past eleventy, and mandatory tea and national anthem break. We salute statue of Moggmentum and pay pride tax. Lunch of carrot and a crown pint. In afternoon we get ready for book inspection, no forrin names. Ride daily bus home.
Radio tuned to Priti Patel reading list of dissident children as red-faced men spittle in displaced rage from their failed marriages. Dinner is wetherspoons fine british slurry. 8pm curfew apart from drinkers, got to level up. Rishi sunak patrols westminster to check.
Looking forward to 'more British shows on TV. I have a few pitches:
'Queues and views.'
Piers Morgan interviews people in the Greggs queue about controversial political issues and then storms out. Celebrity guests include Johnny Vegas and Larry the Cat
The ghost of Maggie Thatcher invades the homes of pensioners and ensures they are not drinking PG tips. Episode one includes Judi Dench performing an exorcism. Music provided by Ed Sheeran.
'Priti Patel; Refugee roundup'
A documentary series follows the beleaguered home secretary as she teams up with the 'Clandestine threat commander' to chase asylum seekers with a large net. Sponsored by Wetherspoons. Music by Morrisey.
Hope this helps clear it up (some good explanation here)
- Pleb
Alot of it has been "we have a natural immunity to covid 19." This is only true, as per above, if we have been infected with it. We don't have a natural immunity without exposure, just the ability to develop it. And not all immunity is total.
Someone referring to the acute phase response (i.e the initial non-specific response, fever etc) is referring to part of the immune response, but the term "natural immunity" refers to this priming process as explained above. In covid 19,acute phase response is not enough for many
We did an incredible job getting to the final, scenes not seen for a generation. A diverse team championing what England aspires to be, a progressive collective moving toward a shared goal. Each earning more than their keep.
I applaud each of them, but special mention must go to @BukayoSaka87 , @MarcusRashford, and @Sanchooo10 who have not only represented a community of people under duress from common people and elites alike, but shown that ascendence to greatness is individual.
Reading the words of @GarethSouthgate from earlier this year, it is clear that the @England team is very much forward-thinking in tackling #racism and he, himself, a great and empathetic leader, is forthright in tackling, against potential anger, this great cause.
How to deal with pseudoscience in health: right vs wrong.
Wrong: thats charlatan bullshit and you are being manipulated.
Right: I see this is important to you and lets discuss it, and after I will support your choice. Tell me..
Alot of pseudoscience, especially in health, relies on linking superficially plausible ideas together to create a mechanism to address a need. The individual components of the mechanism may be believable, or have some romantic or mystic notion that appeals to us..
For example in homeopathy, "like treats like" has a romantic appeal, and can seem intuitive in a "test or train the system" view, and does work in vaccines (ish,) but actually has no evidence as working for most things. It is the idea that holds appeal, not evidence.