Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

fda.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

371–380 of 1001 posts

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#371

Post by ipaddr »

rotexo wrote: post #267
michaelbuckbee wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recent came across a technique for having a more substantial discussion and it was to ask: "Well, what would it take for you to change your mind?" Not that this is a silver bullet that automatically leads to peace and harmony, but it's a step in the right direction.

That question might best be prefaced with “here’s what would change my mind… what about yours?” That formulation might come across as more curious and open rather than patronizing. Though I honestly don’t at all understand the mindset of people who don’t want the vaccine, so I have to admit this approach could quite easily still be offensive.

People are mostly worried about long term side effects. Including those who have the vaccine.

Understanding that base fear will help bridge the divide between groups.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#372

Post by seoaeu »

cies wrote: post #315
menduza23 wrote: post #186

Often people use the argument that this vaccine was really rushed and there could potentially be side effects to such a rushed vaccine. There is one example of this actually happening. Have a look at what happened with the pandermix vaccine: narcolepsy.org.uk/blog/important-ruling-pandemrix-case https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/nov/20/swine-flu-vacc...

It's stories like this --gov't makes out of court settlements and vaccine retracted-- that give a lot of credibility to those against/ hesitant towards vaccination. I'm in a low-risk group and see no use in getting vaccinated, especially since herd immunity is off the table and nearby ICUs are not overflowing. The media/pharma/politicians/bigtech are all passing out the same message: get the vaccine. Non of them high…

Because in places where lots of people think like you, the ICUs are overflowing?

I also think you underestimate how ANGRY people are that they spent 18 months in lockdown, only to have some anti-vaxers mess things up at the end. By this point, we shouldn't be talking about which areas do/don't have overflowing ICUs, we should be talking about which areas have hit milestones for number of days without a positive case!

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#373

Post by lostcolony »

antattack wrote: post #229
xyzzyz wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Replacing “unvaccinated” with “obese” here gives an argument for forcing obese people on diet against their will.

It's unamerican to force people to do something. However, smokers, for example, pay higher insurance premiums and alcohol is taxed higher.

The Supreme Court disagrees. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobson_v._Massachusetts

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#374

Post by daenz »

nathas wrote: post #307
daenz wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The counter that is commonly used against that is "well when it affects other people's health, then you don't get to choose." There are a lot of assumptions in that counterargument that people will hope you don't examine, for example, the assumption that the probability of a covid transmission ending in harm crosses the same probability threshold if, say, drunk driving ending in harm. I say it doesn't. And since the…

> the assumption that the probability of a covid transmission ending in harm crosses the same probability threshold if, say, drunk driving ending in harm. You do realize that drunk driving is illegal, right? Do you think drunk driving should be legal because it's "unlikely" to cause harm to others? > I say it doesn't. 628k confirmed deaths in the US from COVID. 37.8M confirmed infections. That's a death rate of 1.66%…

Yes I do realize that drunk driving is illegal and I support that. I think you are misunderstanding my post, which is about doing the science to determine the actual probabilities involved with having and transmitting covid, along with the probabilities of serious harm. Then after multiplying all of those probabilities, comparing it with drunk driving as a relative measure.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#375

Post by newacct583 »

version_five wrote: post #83
acdha wrote: post #6

I’m wondering what the odds are that people will pivot from “it’s experimental” to “it was rushed due to politics/greed”. I think a huge factor will be how many employers, colleges, etc. are now willing and legally able to require vaccination. It’s one thing to say you trust something you read on Facebook more than your doctor and quite another to walk away from a job because of it.

> I’m wondering what the odds are that people will pivot from “it’s experimental” to “it was rushed due to politics/greed”. No doubt this will be the case for some. So, you've found a logical flaw in people's stated reasons for not wanting a vaccine. How does that help anything? In these kinds of debates, the actual goals or beliefs of both sides often differ from what they say. For example, the government being able…

> For example, the government being able to tell you what to do, vs. it not. People end up locking in to trivialities like approval or some study, but they just obscure the real debate.

Is government regulatory authority really the "real debate"? That too seems like an projected excuse, trivially proven by the fact that the same people who are most invested in the libertarian framing are the ones who believe a secret government agent has been working for the last four and a half years to extrajudiciously round up pedophiles and liberals.

I'm not saying that's what you think. Maybe you're a pure libertarian. But a whole ton of people on "your side" of this debate are quite clearly not serious about regulatory overreach.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#376

Post by xeromal »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #324
thepasswordis wrote: post #200

People don’t want to take the vaccine because others are trying to force them to. They would say “it’s not FDA approved!” not as the core of their hesitancy, but because they were trying to be appeal to pro-vax peoples decision making framework. I don’t think we should be able to require them to. To many of you here: imagine the Trump admin trying to require you to take the vaccine in November of last year. Cities wo…

> imagine the Trump admin trying to require you to take the vaccine in November of last year. Cities would have burned over it. I don't like "Imagine x doing y" arguments because it makes us insert our own biases on a hypothetical scenario that isn't the current reality.

But doing that is literally empathy, a useful skill.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#377

Post by [deleted] »

acdha wrote: post #6

I’m wondering what the odds are that people will pivot from “it’s experimental” to “it was rushed due to politics/greed”. I think a huge factor will be how many employers, colleges, etc. are now willing and legally able to require vaccination. It’s one thing to say you trust something you read on Facebook more than your doctor and quite another to walk away from a job because of it.

[deleted]

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#378

Post by clint »

seriousquestion wrote: post #344
thepasswordis wrote: post #200

People don’t want to take the vaccine because others are trying to force them to. They would say “it’s not FDA approved!” not as the core of their hesitancy, but because they were trying to be appeal to pro-vax peoples decision making framework. I don’t think we should be able to require them to. To many of you here: imagine the Trump admin trying to require you to take the vaccine in November of last year. Cities wo…

You don't even have to imagine. Kamala Harris: "But if Donald Trump tells us to take it, I’m not taking it." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-dAjCeMuXR0 The same thing was broadly expressed on twitter at the time too, she was far from alone in that sentiment.

This has got to be one of the dumber arguments I've seen made in the media and especially here.

Kamala was saying that if the only person telling her she should get vaccinated was Donald Trump, then no, she would not take it.

The (very clear) implication is that she would prefer that people who actually know what they are talking about (i.e. virologists, doctors, nurses, scientists, the FDA, the CDC, NIH...etc) recommends getting the vaccine, then she would get it enthusiastically.

Is this really too hard to understand or are you really trying to use this extremely flimsy argument to accuse her of hypocrisy?

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#379

Post by rootusrootus »

zamalek wrote: post #208
cbg0 wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More likely than not, they'll just move the goalposts farther and find a different excuse for not getting it.

We're having a vaccinated wedding. Unvaccinated/uninvited guests are now employing the base rate fallacy: "there are more breakthroughs than unvaccinated cases."

It sure is clear we don't teach statistics well enough in secondary school.

Re: FDA Approves First Covid-19 Vaccine

#380

Post by _dark_matter_ »

FunHearing3443 wrote: post #342
NineStarPoint wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because in cases like this, the choice they’re making with their body can be directly responsible for the hospitalization and death of other people in their vicinity. Vaccines aren’t fool proof, every person who doesn’t take the vaccine is an increased chance for those who did take the vaccine to get exposed to a breakthrough case. I know I wouldn’t want to work in person at any place that didn’t have a vaccine manda…

"Once vaccines are approved for children, I think people's options should be to either vaccinate their child or homeschool them" Alternative perspective, why should the unvaxed kids be forced into homeschooling? Maybe the parents of vaxed kids should be given the option of putting their vaxed kid in a school that has a mix of vaxed and unvaxed kids, or to homeschool? Given the general demographics of the unvaxed I'd…

Some communities will self-organize into highly-vaccinated and scarcely-vaccinated schools. My local schools, for example, will probably be highly vaccinated. A family member of mine is moving to Florida so their children do not have to wear masks in school - theirs will probably have a low vaccination rate.

As for the poor schools, you're right - we have to leave those open.

Post reply on HN