[tlogan]

If these mRNA vaccines had not been pushed or mandated, more people would probably think they are safe: there will be no need for any of these reviews.

But because they were pushed by the government, many people do not trust them. Sure, they were pushed and mandated for good reasons, but the problem is that a lot of people have already lost trust in the government.

That trust was not lost because of one big decision. It was lost through many small, unrelated government decisions that may not seem noticeable or measurable on their own, but over time, they build up.

I do not know how this trust can be rebuilt but definitely not by publishing more reviews.

[foltik]

I think it’s the opposite. The _distrust itself_ was pushed by those looking to stir up outrage, generate engagement, and turn it into votes.

Case in point: look at all the people who’ve now built their entire political identities atop this unfalsifiable distrust. They’d even distrust “stand further apart” if the wrong person said it.

> I do not know how this trust can be rebuilt but definitely not by publishing more reviews.

This is the crux. Outrage spreads way faster than the boring truth.

[atomicUpdate]

> They’d even distrust “stand further apart” if the wrong person said it.

They shouldn’t believe it no matter who says it. The entire concept of “social distancing” was completely made up and had no science behind it. It belongs in the same bucket of nonsense as “mask up between bites.”

[huijzer]

> unfalsifiable distrust

Well, I think it’s pretty clear for starters that politicians lie (and yes this holds for both left and right; although indeed some presidents more than others), and that this isn’t helping trust.

[BoingBoomTschak]

Riiight, distrust was "pushed" and is irrational. I guess having a working memory doesn't count? The Tuskegee syphilis study, or the contaminated blood scandals in Europe and Japan, etc... couldn't have anything to do with distrust towards the government's relation with public health, that's for kooks who aren't on the right side of history!

[krmboya]

One word, transparency. Being open about the research and outcomes. This is a situation good science communicators can help with.

Engage the skeptics in open debate and address their concerns, not censorship and embarking on cancellation campaigns.

However uncomfortable it seems, the median person in society isn't going to do a thorough literature review to make up their mind, they'll do it based on personal instincts.

[tlogan]

I think that can work if you narrow the issue only to medical advice.

But trust is also eroded by completely unrelated things, like “Iraq has WMDs” and other stories pushed by our governments. Or even the recent argument that we need ID to access the internet in order to “protect children.” Sure.

The key point is that for things like vaccines, people need to trust the goverment and the process. Most people are not going to read medical papers. They should rely on government health agencies to tell them what to do.

So when trust is damaged (even by unrelated government decisions), it affects how people respond to medical guidance too.

[krmboya]

I agree with your points. But governments around the world frequently demonstrate that they can be easily compromised.

That's why free speech is an important counterweight to political power.

I credit all those who openly spoke out against the Iraq forever war preventing similar wars since then.

[tomkarho]

Take the vax or lose your job. Two weeks to flatten the curve. You are killing grandma. "Lab leak" was a dirty word. The science has settled. A bloody live death count on the news.

It seemed that every conceivable way to pressure, force, guilt trip and coerce people into taking the CV was utilized during covid. Enough that no doubt many people are highly suspicious of any authority henceforth and no amount of research will sway them from that. The trust simply isn't there. Yet.

Time is the only cure.

[bsder]

> If these mRNA vaccines had not been pushed or mandated, more people would probably think they are safe: there will be no need for any of these reviews.

Hogwash. Wakefield predated anything Covid. And measles vaccines aren't mRNA and people would rather let their children die.

Had Trump and Co called the vaccine part of the second coming, people would be lining up at their churches to get them.

You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into.

[qsera]

> people would rather let their children die.

I see that your are yourself in a position you didn't reason you into.

[watwut]

There wad that kid that died of measles in America and later there was interview with parents. They said basically that. They would change nothing and rather have kid die then get vaccines.

At some point, you have to start believing what people say about themselves and their believes.

And second, yes that is attitude of political actors who spread fear of vaccines to get votes. Overall impact is exactly that and they know.

[qsera]

>They would change nothing..

But by this logic, this is exactly what pro-vax people advocate as well. If a child die right after vaccination, they will still advice people to vaccinate their other kids, because this was just an anomaly?

So are all the pro-vax people maintaining the attitude that they would rather have their kid die or suffer life long than NOT getting the vaccine?

The fallacy in your logic is that you think people reject vaccines because they think the diseases does not have the potential to be dangerous. They do not think that. It is the same reason why you can continue driving despite knowing that accidents can be fatal.

People take a chance, and sometimes they get unlucky. Does not mean that taking the chance was wrong. In the same way you are not wrong if you go out for a pleasure trip in a car and get in a fatal accident.

[watwut]

They did not said they were unlucky. They said that if they knew their kid will die without vaccine, they would still skip vaccine to protect the kid from bigger harm. They said that, not me. That is the problem here, you ignore what they are actually saying while twisting their position into much different and more palatable. It is consistent problem with right wing - insistence on ignoring what they say, push for and advocate, just so that we can pretend they are harmless.

> The fallacy in your logic is that you think people reject vaccines because they think the diseases does not have the potential to be dangerous. They do not think that.

They literally openly say that. Again and again and again. The above couple was saying something else in the interview, because the kid actually died. But if you actually listen to what anti-vaccine politicians and advocates say, they literally say that diseases don't have potential to be dangerous.

> But by this logic, this is exactly what pro-vax people advocate as well. If a child die right after vaccination, they will still advice people to vaccinate their other kids, because this was just an anomaly?

You can do that only if you are intent on twisting conversations and meanings into unrecognizable.

> Does not mean that taking the chance was wrong. In the same way you are not wrong if you go out for a pleasure trip in a car and get in a fatal accident.

You know what, sometimes it IS wrong to take the chance. Just like, if you race in a car in a place where you can kill bystanders and then die off it. Funny, people are quick to blame parents when 12 years old walk to school for not doing full surveillance, people blame parents for not having perfect control of kids socials, but somehow, blaming parents for refusing vaccination is a bridge too far.

[qsera]

> They said that if they knew their kid will die without vaccine, they would still skip vaccine to protect the kid from bigger harm..

They probably didn't. Because what is "bigger harm" than death?

>You can do that only if you are intent on twisting conversations and meanings into unrecognizable.

Eh..what?

[what]

Trump did tell people to get them? It was his opposition saying they wouldn’t trust a vaccine pushed out by Trump. You’ve basically rewritten history.

[s1artibartfast]

I dont think people's motivations are to kill their children, but the opposite. I think this is the starting point for developing cognitive empathy and an accurate model.

Again, trust is a huge factor here.

[katbyte]

I’m pretty sure it was lost via billions spent on a sustained propaganda campaign no country was willing to stand up to.

[guywhocodes]

No I don't think they are safe because I still suffer from the damage it did to my heart

[jancsika]

> I do not know how this trust can be rebuilt but definitely not by publishing more reviews.

Dear Previous Paragraph,

Couldn't many small published reviews which don't show a noticeable or measurable positive effect on their own build up over time to rebuild trust?

Sincerely, Your Reader

[Larrikin]

Hopefully at some point the do their own research people will kill themselves off, hopefully before they kill their own kids and family members.

[bananakilp]

What a depressing response.

If the “do their own research” people don’t manage to kill their kids and family through complete and utter idiocy, those kids and family will 99.99999% of the time continue their idiocy.

We should hope they manage to end their idiocy lineage.

[koonsolo]

And it all got a nice little push from Russian disinfo, who took the opportunity to discredit governments even more.

Why do you think all the anti-vaxxers all of a sudden got pro-Russian and anti-Ukraine? Coincidence?

[jasonvorhe]

Iraq had WMDs, Hamas beheaded babies and the Western public is completely immune of government-led psyops. Of course there's neither Nazis/Banderites/ultranationalists nor biolabs nor the most corrupt government on the european continent in Ukraine.

[koonsolo]

Who is paying for this psyops in Europe, and who is getting paid? Facts and references please.

[raincole]

> But because they were pushed by the government, many people do not trust them. Sure, they were pushed and mandated for good reasons, but the problem is that a lot of people have already lost trust in the government.

In the case of COVID, the effectiveness of vaccines was quite exaggerated at first[0]. That absolutely didn't help government rebuild the trust.

> I do not know how this trust can be rebuilt but definitely not by publishing more reviews.

At this point, quite sure more reviews will only trigger people's confirmation bias and make those who already don't trust vaccines trust them even less.

[0]: https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-business-health-governm...

[Krssst]

Vaccines were very effective against the first variant, and got less effective with later ones. People forget about the timeline. Article mentions the delta variant at which time vaccines were still very effective IIRC. There were some breakthrough cases as the article mentions but that's to be expected with anything short of 100% efficacy.

[whimsicalism]

> In the case of COVID, the effectiveness of vaccines was quite exaggerated at first[0]. [0]: https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-business-health-governm...

One's model of "statement made by the POTUS" should be more like 'statement made by mildly likeable (to some segment of the population) boomer dad who probably doesn't know what he is talking about.' It'd be a different thing if a public health official said something like this (and I don't know if they did, but I certainly wasn't left with the impression that it was impossible for me to get vaccinated and still get covid).

[bsder]

The Covid vaccines were and continue to be VERY effective at preventing you from winding up on ECMO.

Yes, you may still get Covid, but you don't die from drowning in your own body fluids anymore.

Of course, this only attends if you got the damn vaccine. All of the Covid deaths around me in the last couple years (7 deaths) were anti-vaxxers. But, hey, we know that reality has a well-known liberal bias.

[qsera]

> All of the Covid deaths around me in the last couple years (7 deaths)

Where exactly is this?

[atomicUpdate]

Apparently they live in a nursing home in 2020 still, because no one else is dying of covid anymore. Especially not young or healthy people within the last few years.

[mikeyouse]

Nearly 50,000 Americans died of Covid in 2024… and 20% of those were under 65 years old. It’s thankfully much better now than at the peak but tens of thousands of people are still dying..

[whimsicalism]

im no forever masker or anything, but this is false. we just now have to live with a slightly elevated death rate due to covid

[qsera]

>a slightly elevated death rate due to covid

Is that a fact? Do we now have a higher all cause mortality rate from pre-covid era?