Red Mosquito

Monkey_Driven wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

spike wrote:we can do things about; it's just too many people refuse to.

A twice vaccinated person died. What is it you think is going to make an actual difference in that scenario?

A vaccination rate in the region of more than 35 percent probably would have helped.

"My medicine only works if you take your medicine too"

You also implied this was in the "Delta hotbed". It's pretty obvious the OG vaccine isn't doing anything to prevent the spread of Covid21.

verb_to_trust wrote:

Monkey_Driven wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

spike wrote:we can do things about; it's just too many people refuse to.

A twice vaccinated person died. What is it you think is going to make an actual difference in that scenario?

A vaccination rate in the region of more than 35 percent probably would have helped.

"My medicine only works if you take your medicine too"

You also implied this was in the "Delta hotbed". It's pretty obvious the OG vaccine isn't doing anything to prevent the spread of Covid21.

you're oblivious. take another break.

verb_to_trust wrote:

macphisto wrote:I’m staying in my basement with two masks on until I see Biden on the TV in front of a MISSION ACCOMPLISHED banner. I’m not afraid to die, I’m afraid to live.

You getting your booster? The shot you took 6 months ago doesn't work anymore.

I get a shot every week. I rotate between Moderna, Pfizer, and J&J to give me the best chances.

spike wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

Monkey_Driven wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

spike wrote:we can do things about; it's just too many people refuse to.

A twice vaccinated person died. What is it you think is going to make an actual difference in that scenario?

A vaccination rate in the region of more than 35 percent probably would have helped.

"My medicine only works if you take your medicine too"

You also implied this was in the "Delta hotbed". It's pretty obvious the OG vaccine isn't doing anything to prevent the spread of Covid21.

you're oblivious. take another break.

You don't get to dictate shit to me, pal

macphisto wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

macphisto wrote:I’m staying in my basement with two masks on until I see Biden on the TV in front of a MISSION ACCOMPLISHED banner. I’m not afraid to die, I’m afraid to live.

You getting your booster? The shot you took 6 months ago doesn't work anymore.

I get a shot every week. I rotate between Moderna, Pfizer, and J&J to give me the best chances.

I'm on the subscription plan.

U.S. averaging 100,000 COVID-19 cases daily amid low vaccinations in hard-hit areas

Stickman wrote:
U.S. averaging 100,000 COVID-19 cases daily amid low vaccinations in hard-hit areas

What's the point of chipping in with negative news headlines and links constantly? The people that constantly shout about how stupid and pointless my posts are completely ignore that your account is just an aggregator of the most negative shit in the news. Must be a Canadian thing.

verb_to_trust wrote:

elliseamos wrote:"We can't do anything about this shit."

But what if we all tried real hard to agree on a few things that might help? No guarantees either way, so why not try?

Like what?

What are the two things you most vocally dismiss as not working? Let's start there.

cnn wrote:"I think we all have to recognize that with 164 million people who are vaccinated, we should expect tens of thousands, perhaps, of breakthrough infections," Walensky told CNN's Wolf Blitzer on Thursday.

"Those breakthrough infections have mild illness. They are staying out of the hospital. They are not dying, and I think that that's the most important thing to understand," Walensky added.

"The most important thing to understand" is demonstrably false at best and an intentional lie at worst, and that's a major problem.

Let's say 'tens of thousands' means 99,999 people, the highest number that is still 'tens'. That would mean the vaccines are 99.94% effective at preventing infection, which is far higher than any of the manufacturers have ever claimed and contrary to independant studies of peak immunity levels. It's only one CDC study that puts the number anywhere near that and the study was over before the Delta variant was common in the US. It's actually likely far worse as the CDC has intentionally stopped tracking breakthrough infections that don't require hospitalization. She should know this, it was her decision.

"Those breakthrough infections have mild illness. They are staying out of the hospital", again taking the manufacturer's numbers, the most likely to be biased in favor of the vaccine, Pfizer's is 96% effective at preventing hospitalization (at peak immunity). That's fucking phenomenal and is the possibly the best reason to get the vaccine, but that means on average 1 in 25 vaccinated who become infected people still need hospitalization, which contradicts what Walensky said.

No one is going to "trust the science" if the authoritative spokespeople contradict the actual science.

verb_to_trust wrote:

Stickman wrote:
U.S. averaging 100,000 COVID-19 cases daily amid low vaccinations in hard-hit areas

What's the point of chipping in with negative news headlines and links constantly? The people that constantly shout about how stupid and pointless my posts are completely ignore that your account is just an aggregator of the most negative shit in the news. Must be a Canadian thing.

This is literally your whole M.O. so let’s ask you…what’s the point of you being so negative?

Monkey_Driven wrote:A friend of my wife just lost her dad to this today. He was fully vaccinated, but living in the Delta hotbed of southwest Missouri. He was admitted to the hospital Tuesday.

Sorry to hear this md

Peeps wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

Stickman wrote:
U.S. averaging 100,000 COVID-19 cases daily amid low vaccinations in hard-hit areas

What's the point of chipping in with negative news headlines and links constantly? The people that constantly shout about how stupid and pointless my posts are completely ignore that your account is just an aggregator of the most negative shit in the news. Must be a Canadian thing.

This is literally your whole M.O. so let’s ask you…what’s the point of you being so negative?

I acknowledged as much but I don't weirdly link doomy news articles and headlines 90 percent of my posts. It's pointless. We all have access to that information. Get a real personality.

Bi_3 wrote:No one is going to "trust the science" if the authoritative spokespeople contradict the actual science.

I think the issue is the continued use of kettle logic to misinform as many people as possible. It works well enough for a significant enough amount of time to really hurt people. Look at the Tabacco play book. Worked the same for climate change. Worked well for the Trump Admin & there many grifts.

The thing about fretting over Wolf Blitzer’s words is, a Morning Consult poll came out three days ago showing that people who get their news from CNN are the most vaxxed of any news media consuming group (75%). To put that in perspective, 27% of people who watch Fox say they’ll never get vaccinated (down from 37% in the last few weeks, by the way), and another 10% “probably” won’t. 18% aren’t sure.

And here’s why some government outreach program, or the right media explanation on any network, isn’t going to solve this problem: the groups most likely to say they’ll never get vaccinated (30+%) or probably won’t (another 15-20%) were….people who say they get their news primarily from Facebook or Reddit. By and large, people whose media bubble is thoroughly contained and unbreachable.

Peeps wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

Stickman wrote:
U.S. averaging 100,000 COVID-19 cases daily amid low vaccinations in hard-hit areas

What's the point of chipping in with negative news headlines and links constantly? The people that constantly shout about how stupid and pointless my posts are completely ignore that your account is just an aggregator of the most negative shit in the news. Must be a Canadian thing.

This is literally your whole M.O. so let’s ask you…what’s the point of you being so negative?

For the millionth time: RM is the outlet for this side of (one’s) personality. Relax.

They want conformity Bam

elliseamos wrote:

Bi_3 wrote:No one is going to "trust the science" if the authoritative spokespeople contradict the actual science.

I think the issue is the continued use of kettle logic to misinform as many people as possible. It works well enough for a significant enough amount of time to really hurt people. Look at the Tabacco play book. Worked the same for climate change. Worked well for the Trump Admin & there many grifts.

I dont understand what you are going for here.

McParadigm wrote:The thing about fretting over Wolf Blitzer’s words is, a Morning Consult poll came out three days ago showing that people who get their news from CNN are the most vaxxed of any news media consuming group (75%). To put that in perspective, 27% of people who watch Fox say they’ll never get vaccinated (down from 37% in the last few weeks, by the way), and another 10% “probably” won’t. 18% aren’t sure.

And here’s why some government outreach program, or the right media explanation on any network, isn’t going to solve this problem: the groups most likely to say they’ll never get vaccinated (30+%) or probably won’t (another 15-20%) were….people who say they get their news primarily from Facebook or Reddit. By and large, people whose media bubble is thoroughly contained and unbreachable.

CDC Director Walensky's words, not Blitzer's, but I don't understand what you are going for here. Getting people vaccinated is not the only thing that matters and when she misstates the science (intentional or not), she feeds the 'CDC director lied on CNN, WuFlu, event 201, OMG soczialism' stories.

Bi_3 wrote:CDC Director Walensky's words, not Blitzer's, but I don't understand what you are going for here. Getting people vaccinated is not the only thing that matters and when she misstates the science (intentional or not), she feeds the 'CDC director lied on CNN, WuFlu, event 201, OMG soczialism' stories.

I'm saying that the people who are receptive to "CDC director lied on CNN OMG socialism" messaging are people who are not reachable by putting the right words together on CNN, full stop.

If simply witnessing the CDC being inconsistent or poorly spoken on CNN was a predicator to vaccine or science skepticism, then that skepticism would also be reflected in the CNN audience. They witnessed it. You yourself said, "no one is going to trust the science if (x)." And yet, most of the people who witnessed (x) do trust the science. Skepticism towards science or vaccination is not concentrated around that audience at all.

That skepticism is instead most heavily concentrated around an audience that lives inside a bubble created by media sources specifically built to amplify distrust, misunderstanding, and panic. Organizations willing to remove context, willing to misrepresent, and willing to simply deceive in order to maintain their narrative.

It's the same largely-online media bubble that had 34% of Americans convinced President Obama wasn't American. It's the same misinformation bubble that had 24% of Americans responding that the sentence "Democrats are part of a global cabal of Satan worshiping pedophiles" was either "mostly true" or "partially true." It's the same media bubble that had 30% of Americans convinced that Joe Biden stole the election. Or that had 44% of Republicans agreeing with the statement "Bill Gates wants to use vaccination to implant people with microchips." No conspiracy narrative, whether wildly divorced from reality or merely slightly deviated from it, can be bested so long as it has this media environment in which to thrive. It simply can't.

You cannot divorce the concentration of these disbeliefs....whether about the science of vaccination or about the presidency or any of it...from the messaging being consumed daily by the disbelievers. The idea that if anyone from the CDC said the right thing on CNN then the people currently receptive to misinformation would no longer be, is implausible to me.

OK sure, but when you go on TV and say things that are not true, that group can grow and being off by orders of magnitude is not "inconsistent", it's deceptive or ignorant, and those are may be worse as they call into question motive. Unless you mean inconsistent with the data and analysis, then it is. So don't give the bad faith actors what they want. It's that simple.

The reality is that the number of vaccinated people who get sick will be in the millions, but the death rate will be tiny compared to the unvaccinated, and boosters will make that rate even smaller. Just be honest about that. And if the CNN news watchers really are the more educated and thoughtful group, they will understand and be able to make more informed decisions for themselves and their families.

The CDC is only inconsistent when on CNN. Got it.