[edmundsauto]

The risk of taking action was compared against the risk of not taking action. I imagine most scientists would have loved to have developed this vaccine 10+ years ago and done long term studies, but that wasn’t an option.

It may have been influenced by the bias for action, but the trade off was the death and disruption we saw in 2020-21, compared to a future risk that scientists projected as minimal.

It still seems like a solid decision to me. But if this research shows that millions die from increased myocarditis rates, I think it would have been a bad outcome. Still not sure if that would influence my perception to the process.

Making decisions under uncertainty is hard.

[dham]

> Making decisions under uncertainty is hard.

I don't blame rushing the vaccines at all. In fact, maybe we should have skipped more steps to get the vaccine to 70+ year olds or people who are obese faster. But let's just be honest, the risk profile for younger people just wasn't high. The data was clear very early on. That was even with underreported numbers. It should have never been mandated and if you were at a decent weight and under 40 you were never at that much of a risk, especially to say something like the flu.

[alvah]

Enforcing vaccination before it's possible to know the long-term effects, for all groups including those at low risk from Covid, was and is a terrible idea. Offering it to the elderly, obese and otherwise-at-risk, where there's a clear and obvious net benefit, was all that should have been done.

[edmundsauto]

I disagree. The information at the time was the vaccine was massively impactful at reducing spread. They got that part wrong, but the decision to require vaccination was rational IMO.

The decision didn't have a great result because the assumptions didn't hold. Good process, bad outcome.

(Not to mention that if everyone had actually just gotten the shot, we might have stalled the viral evolution into the delta + subsequent variants. My understanding is those mutations reduced vaccine transmission efficacy. If people hadn't turned public health into politics, we could have possibly avoided the endemic nature of the virus, which I think we can all agree would have been a far superior outcome versus where we are today.)

[alvah]

“Good process, bad outcome.”

And that is where I vehemently disagree. Bad process, bad outcome. Many people lied to make the information appear as you said. The incentives they had to lie should have a lot more scrutiny, rather than being shrugged off, and many of these people should be in jail.

[edmundsauto]

How did you differentiate lies from inherent complexities in public health communication in a novel situation?

[alvah]

I don't claim any special ability to differentiate lies from inherent complexities in public health communication in a novel situation. However, the claim in early 2021 that the vaccines were both safe and effective, before enough time had elapsed for either to be known, was a bit of a red flag. I don't think you needed much expertise in anything to have reached this conclusion.

I believed at the time (and still believe) the risk/reward ratio still favoured offering the vaccines to at-risk groups. Making it mandatory or de-facto mandatory for all was a colossal clusterfuck. It worked out well for big pharma though, but at what long-term cost?

[edmundsauto]

Isn't the road to hell paved with good intentions? Based on what I know about human nature, especially those who self-select into public health, it seems just as plausible they were overly optimistic. That's not a lie, which requires concrete knowledge that the opposite is true.

I didn't mean to suggest you had any special ability. I was just wondering how you reached that conclusion. Internet text boards are bad at tone, I apologize if it sounded attacking. But I think it's a wide gap between officials lied and someone had a different interpretation and did not exhibit as much caution as I prefer in my p.h. officials.

I am certain people lied about covid. I'm not certain that was the ph officials.