My god people.
C’mon Claire. FB was my go-to source for all science, political, daily news, and astrological information. This marks the very first time I’ve ever seen need to question what I see on there…
That’s a good object lesson though. When you mix responder bias with self-reporting, then add a pinch of lack-of-verification, and garnish with an axe-to-grind, that’s quite a toxic brew.
Well, to be fair Claire, the doctorate level of vaccine hesitancy is still quite high…
On a related note, what is your take on the views expressed by Robert W. Malone? I’ve read the Atlantic article, which overall seems quite fair, but does tend to be somewhat guilty of using the same old tired trick of guilt-by-association, when often important contributors appear on marginal platforms for the simple reason that many in the legacy media don’t want to hear from them.
I do think that there are many who cling to the forlorn hope that the current vaccines will be effective in significantly reducing case numbers (when it is becoming increasing apparent that they only cut numbers by about a third and lead to a less truncated curve). I am somewhat more wary of his claims about evolutionary pressures caused by vaccines, especially given that the Delta variant emerged in India. The alternate hypothesis is that the current evolutionary paths of the virus is yet more inferential evidence of a lab leak origin.
Of course, the main point should be that it bloody well drastically reduces hospitalisations and deaths!
But what is your take on his arguments?
Although quite bright and an adequate researcher, I lack the scientific expertise to make sound judgements.