ramblin_ag02 said:

---

https://amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/618765/

Fantastic and fair article from someone who is pro-Covid vaccine and completely baffled by the people who don't want a vaccine. The end is strategies to try and convince people, but up until that point it is a really honest and genuine desire to learn why people think this way.

The big takeaway for me was the anger generated by government pandemic policies. Masks and enforced quarantines were part of my life as a physician well before the pandemic. They weren't common or universal, but it wasn't weird to wear a mask to see sick people or to isolate a sick or exposed person to prevent spread of an illness. So all those measures seemed pretty standard and rational to me. I also never had to worry about my job. However, the scale of the measures for COVID started affecting millions of people and drastically changing their lives in negatives ways. So when the IFR estimation went from 10% to 0.2%, people became pissed off about the negative impacts to their life. Now they don't trust and won't follow any recommendation as it is all just interpreted as more tyrannical overreach.

I don't agree with that perspective, but at least it makes some sense to me now

---

The_Fox said:

---

A 0.2% IFR justifies virtually nothing that was done by the government. Nothing.

---

The_Fox said:

---

ramblin_ag02 said:

---

https://amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/618765/

Fantastic and fair article from someone who is pro-Covid vaccine and completely baffled by the people who don't want a vaccine. The end is strategies to try and convince people, but up until that point it is a really honest and genuine desire to learn why people think this way.

The big takeaway for me was the anger generated by government pandemic policies. Masks and enforced quarantines were part of my life as a physician well before the pandemic. They weren't common or universal, but it wasn't weird to wear a mask to see sick people or to isolate a sick or exposed person to prevent spread of an illness. So all those measures seemed pretty standard and rational to me. I also never had to worry about my job. However, the scale of the measures for COVID started affecting millions of people and drastically changing their lives in negatives ways. So when the IFR estimation went from 10% to 0.2%, people became pissed off about the negative impacts to their life. Now they don't trust and won't follow any recommendation as it is all just interpreted as more tyrannical overreach.

I don't agree with that perspective, but at least it makes some sense to me now

---

A 0.2% IFR justifies virtually nothing that was done by the government. Nothing.

---

traxter said:

---

The_Fox said:

---

ramblin_ag02 said:

---

https://amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/618765/

Fantastic and fair article from someone who is pro-Covid vaccine and completely baffled by the people who don't want a vaccine. The end is strategies to try and convince people, but up until that point it is a really honest and genuine desire to learn why people think this way.

The big takeaway for me was the anger generated by government pandemic policies. Masks and enforced quarantines were part of my life as a physician well before the pandemic. They weren't common or universal, but it wasn't weird to wear a mask to see sick people or to isolate a sick or exposed person to prevent spread of an illness. So all those measures seemed pretty standard and rational to me. I also never had to worry about my job. However, the scale of the measures for COVID started affecting millions of people and drastically changing their lives in negatives ways. So when the IFR estimation went from 10% to 0.2%, people became pissed off about the negative impacts to their life. Now they don't trust and won't follow any recommendation as it is all just interpreted as more tyrannical overreach.

I don't agree with that perspective, but at least it makes some sense to me now

---

A 0.2% IFR justifies virtually nothing that was done by the government. Nothing.

---

Is IFR the only thing that matters?

To use an extreme example to illustrate my point, what if the IFR was 0% but hospitalization rates were twice as high? Would any mitigation measures be justified then?

The unique thing about this virus was its ability to spread rapidly and quickly make a large chunk of the population require medical interventions that they could only get at a hospital.

---

fightingfarmer09 said:

---

traxter said:

---

The_Fox said:

---

ramblin_ag02 said:

---

https://amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/618765/

Fantastic and fair article from someone who is pro-Covid vaccine and completely baffled by the people who don't want a vaccine. The end is strategies to try and convince people, but up until that point it is a really honest and genuine desire to learn why people think this way.

The big takeaway for me was the anger generated by government pandemic policies. Masks and enforced quarantines were part of my life as a physician well before the pandemic. They weren't common or universal, but it wasn't weird to wear a mask to see sick people or to isolate a sick or exposed person to prevent spread of an illness. So all those measures seemed pretty standard and rational to me. I also never had to worry about my job. However, the scale of the measures for COVID started affecting millions of people and drastically changing their lives in negatives ways. So when the IFR estimation went from 10% to 0.2%, people became pissed off about the negative impacts to their life. Now they don't trust and won't follow any recommendation as it is all just interpreted as more tyrannical overreach.

I don't agree with that perspective, but at least it makes some sense to me now

---

A 0.2% IFR justifies virtually nothing that was done by the government. Nothing.

---

Is IFR the only thing that matters?

To use an extreme example to illustrate my point, what if the IFR was 0% but hospitalization rates were twice as high? Would any mitigation measures be justified then?

The unique thing about this virus was its ability to spread rapidly and quickly make a large chunk of the population require medical interventions that they could only get at a hospital.

---

This is debatable as well. Nothing shows it more contagious than other similar viruses and the hospitalization rates are wildly over estimated by the general public.


From The NY Times.

---

traxter said:

---

The_Fox said:

---

ramblin_ag02 said:

---

https://amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/618765/

Fantastic and fair article from someone who is pro-Covid vaccine and completely baffled by the people who don't want a vaccine. The end is strategies to try and convince people, but up until that point it is a really honest and genuine desire to learn why people think this way.

The big takeaway for me was the anger generated by government pandemic policies. Masks and enforced quarantines were part of my life as a physician well before the pandemic. They weren't common or universal, but it wasn't weird to wear a mask to see sick people or to isolate a sick or exposed person to prevent spread of an illness. So all those measures seemed pretty standard and rational to me. I also never had to worry about my job. However, the scale of the measures for COVID started affecting millions of people and drastically changing their lives in negatives ways. So when the IFR estimation went from 10% to 0.2%, people became pissed off about the negative impacts to their life. Now they don't trust and won't follow any recommendation as it is all just interpreted as more tyrannical overreach.

I don't agree with that perspective, but at least it makes some sense to me now

---

A 0.2% IFR justifies virtually nothing that was done by the government. Nothing.

---

Is IFR the only thing that matters?

To use an extreme example to illustrate my point, what if the IFR was 0% but hospitalization rates were twice as high? Would any mitigation measures be justified then?

The unique thing about this virus was its ability to spread rapidly and quickly make a large chunk of the population require medical interventions that they could only get at a hospital.

---

Quote:

---

I made this case to several no-vaxxers: Your grandparents, elderly neighbors, and immunocompromised friends will be safer if you're vaccinated, even if you've already been infected.

---

HumbleAg04 said:

---

The messaging from the idiots in charge has been awful since the beginning. Allowing political interest groups (looking at you teacher unions) to write the "scientific" guidance has been criminal.

If the vaccines work (I'm fully Pfizer'd up) then you should have no restrictions after vaccinated.

If you have antibodies you should NOT get the vaccine and have no restrictions.

If you want people to get vaccinated promote this information. People are easy, give them a goal to work towards.

Stop telling us to "follow the science" and ****ing publish some actual science. Set targets and actual metrics that don't constantly change. Publish KPIs we as a society need to hit to get back to normal.

Stop doing absolutely asinine things like responding to a "surge" in Michigan and promoting another lockdown opposed to increased vaccination availability.

This entire saga was about the election and now they don't know how to get back to normal society without everyone realizing people died, lost their livelihoods, and set back an entire generation of kids for no reason.

---

Shagga said:

---

Thank you for the time you have taken to post here. From the Atlantic article:

Quote:

---

I made this case to several no-vaxxers: Your grandparents, elderly neighbors, and immunocompromised friends will be safer if you're vaccinated, even if you've already been infected.

---

That was my exact conclusion, so I schedule!ed my appointment. But now several very close family members have announced that they "temporarily" can't be around me because I'll be "shedding spike proteins" that could cause excessive menstruation, miscarriages, and infertility. My jaw hit the floor - so now the anti-vaxxers have moved on to arguing that the vaccine will harm not just the recipient but also their loved ones? Have you run across articles from reputable sources addressing this one?

---

Shagga said:

---

Thanks. Here's something I found this morning but it is very long.

"The vaccinated are a danger to the unvaccinated because of shedding!": The latest COVID-19 antivaccine disinformation

By the way, are you familiar with this Dr. Gorski? Seems credible to me.

---

FrioAg 00 said:

---

Today in a townhall at a large Houston hospital system (and one of the largest employers in the city), the respectful question was asked "When this started you required us to take measures to flatten the curve and stop the hospitals from being overwhelmed. Now that risk has come and gone, but the measures are still in place. What is the goal now?"


First the CMO answered (paraphrased) "this disease and others are still present. And just look at what happened to the Flu this year - we used to have 50k deaths per year (nationally) and now we have almost none. How many are acceptable, I think that was too much"

Then the CEO, another doctor, compared it to Polio and said we have practically eradicated all Polio so the goal should be to eradicate this disease as well.


Unbelievable. This is the power of fascism in the name of "I know what's best for you, so you're better off surrendering your freedoms to me".

---

chimpanzee said:

---

FrioAg 00 said:

---

Today in a townhall at a large Houston hospital system (and one of the largest employers in the city), the respectful question was asked "When this started you required us to take measures to flatten the curve and stop the hospitals from being overwhelmed. Now that risk has come and gone, but the measures are still in place. What is the goal now?"


First the CMO answered (paraphrased) "this disease and others are still present. And just look at what happened to the Flu this year - we used to have 50k deaths per year (nationally) and now we have almost none. How many are acceptable, I think that was too much"

Then the CEO, another doctor, compared it to Polio and said we have practically eradicated all Polio so the goal should be to eradicate this disease as well.


Unbelievable. This is the power of fascism in the name of "I know what's best for you, so you're better off surrendering your freedoms to me".

---

This type of BS will dig trenches deeper.

That CMO is implying we did something to drop flu to zero and that is manifestly not the case, places that had no restrictions had the flu vanish same as here. People that are paid to know the truth and act accordingly are either willfully ignorant or are up to something else and trying to lie to us again. Both of these conditions have come to pass repeatedly throughout the past year.

People ask an honest question and they get high minded moralizing from people that are ignorant or lying. It is a wonder that anyone trusts them at all.

---