TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

How the Anti-Vaccine Community Is Responding to Covid-19

34 点作者 kyle_morris_大约 5 年前

11 条评论

beefield大约 5 年前
There are a couple of other groups I would like to be interviewed as well.<p>- Economists who have bought into the crowding out theory. Are they consistent and still oppose government spending? [1]<p>- People&#x2F;corporations who have lobbied for and taken advantage of all kinds of loopholes in taxation as to avoid paying taxes and who think taxation is theft, and are now expecting government to pay them out from this mess. [2]<p>- The ones that vouch for strong IP and patent protection. Do they propose to not share any information between research groups and give them even longer patents to incentivize better innovation?<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.investopedia.com&#x2F;terms&#x2F;c&#x2F;crowdingouteffect.asp" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.investopedia.com&#x2F;terms&#x2F;c&#x2F;crowdingouteffect.asp</a> [2] I cite no examples. I am astonished if there is none, though.
评论 #22899774 未加载
评论 #22899552 未加载
Zenst大约 5 年前
One fair point &quot;Floyd said, “are talking about washing your hands, but why aren’t they talking about things you can do to boost your immune system like vitamin D?&quot;<p>Given that in some countries in the northern hemisphere we are seeing a disproportionate number of ethnic minorities deaths from this, the aspect that vitamin D or lack of, does seem to be a factor and certainly one in which such advice would do more good than any harm I can think of beyond stock pilers effect. Though lack of vitamin D is not something that is the prevail of any pigment, just more likely and given the data, I&#x27;m supprised that such advice is not more vocalised. Though for many it will be basic health knowledge akin to basic first aid, that many is not all.<p>For reference <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov&#x2F;pubmed&#x2F;1211435" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov&#x2F;pubmed&#x2F;1211435</a> <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.sky.com&#x2F;story&#x2F;coronavirus-review-to-be-launched-into-why-ethnic-minorities-worst-hit-by-covid-19-11974116" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.sky.com&#x2F;story&#x2F;coronavirus-review-to-be-launched...</a>
评论 #22900059 未加载
shezi大约 5 年前
In one word: predictably.
评论 #22901327 未加载
Invictus0大约 5 年前
It&#x27;s amazing how the avalanche of knowledge offered by the internet does nothing to counter even the tiniest seed of doubt planted in these people&#x27;s minds. Undoing the brainwashing is going to be one of the major challenges of our time.
评论 #22899777 未加载
toss1大约 5 年前
Often overlooked in commentary on anti-vaxxers, and by the anti-vaxxers themselves, is this:<p>Freeloading<p>The anti-vaxxers are freeloading on the herd immunity created and maintained by the smart people.<p>That herd immunity prevents the regular epidemics &amp; pandemics common before vaccines, when families often had 10 children to see a few survive to adulthood.<p>There is plenty deliberate ignorance of history, Dunning-Kruger Syndrome, and confirmation bias in their &#x27;arguments&#x27;, but the root seems to be a (likely) unconscious willingness to freeload on the benefits provided by others.<p>This is unfortunately coupled with a deliberate ignorance of and&#x2F;or willingness to deliberately endanger the small subset of people with bona-fide medical conditions that contraindicate vaccination, and so genuinely rely on the herd immunity to survive.<p>It is far past time to coddle this deliberate ignorance and freeloading. If anti-vaxxers want to stay that way, fine, but they need to choose and not be permitted poison the well - vaccination needs to be required for alk access to public buildings, schools, transport, etc.
评论 #22900304 未加载
评论 #22900111 未加载
lpah4all大约 5 年前
Vaccines are an absolutely revolutionary technology.<p>That said, mixing profit with essential medical technology is a recipe for failure.<p>The first way to make something more profitable is to cut costs.<p>What corners do these corps cut to up their margins? And how does that decrease health outcomes for some percent of the population?<p>The bottom-line is that no for-profit corp can be trusted with your health.<p>Vaccines must be developed and distributed by the government for the benefit of all human beings. Sure, we need to minimize cost but not to enrich the select few wealthy enough to be investors in the first place. If there is a surplus (profit), that money gets invested right back into R&amp;D. No pharma-bros needed or wanted.<p>I am pro-vaccine and anti-for-profit-corps.<p>Yes, my kids are vaxed for measles and a few others, but, no, I did not go in for the entire schedule, which is frankly insane. Just compare our vax schedule in America to what they do in Europe. It&#x27;s maybe 2x. And, yes, we will all get a Covid vax as soon as it is available.<p>But, remember, selling three of something (ETA: instead of two) that has a little margin gives you a 50% increase in profit. B-School types don&#x27;t care that that third dose might be too much; besides, they can find&#x2F;fund researchers to goal-seek safety for that extra 50%.<p>And, yes, vax is big business, just not as big as other meds.<p>And, yes, anti-vaxxers piss me off, too, the fucking anti-science morons. But people who trust for-profit corps with their health are stupid marks.
评论 #22899560 未加载
评论 #22902924 未加载
评论 #22899575 未加载
评论 #22899536 未加载
评论 #22899808 未加载
评论 #22900146 未加载
maxdo大约 5 年前
This planet will always have people who are always not happy with something. And don&#x27;t get me wrong it positive. Even stupid alarming vaccine campaigns caused better results evaluation. And since this is a liberal society where you can&#x27;t force people to stay at home even if it will cause death, oh well... this is the only way, someone should die without vaccine first.
评论 #22899453 未加载
评论 #22899490 未加载
评论 #22899647 未加载
wbhart大约 5 年前
This was an interesting read. The style of presentation is quite unique. The overall tone of the article is in favour of vaccination, but it nevertheless provides many exact quotes of antivaxxers and other conspiracy theorists, usually without trying to directly refute what they say.<p>It&#x27;s also well investigated, in the sense that caveats to the usual responses to antivaxxers are included.<p>I personally felt like I came away with a better understanding of what the conspiracy theorists are actually thinking&#x2F;claiming. I learned some interesting facts about various vaccination campaigns, and overall felt like I came away with more information than I came to the article with.<p>I&#x27;m interested to see where this style of journalism leads.
vearwhershuh大约 5 年前
Here is the pattern:<p>1) Establish a false dichotomy (&quot;All vaccines are good, all vaccines are bad&quot;)<p>2) Come up with a pithy slur for the other side (&quot;Antivaxx&quot;)<p>3) Emphasize the looniest people on the other side, ignore and hide the reasonable people on the other side.<p>4) Use this slur to browbeat moderates, the skeptical, the unsure and the open minded into silence.<p>It&#x27;s very effective.
评论 #22900013 未加载
评论 #22900082 未加载
评论 #22900062 未加载
评论 #22900041 未加载
bradleyy大约 5 年前
I can&#x27;t say as conflating antivaxxers with a pediatrician that recommends a delayed&#x2F;modified vaccine schedule is exactly productive. Delayed&#x2F;modified schedule isn&#x27;t to blame for measles. Pretty disingenuous, IMO.<p>For those who don&#x27;t know, there is a camp of people who believe that we&#x27;re getting vaccinations at way too fast a schedule. Yes, this includes doctors, like the aforementioned pediatrician.
评论 #22899543 未加载
评论 #22899537 未加载
评论 #22899496 未加载
评论 #22899484 未加载
评论 #22899607 未加载
评论 #22899617 未加载
评论 #22899489 未加载
peter_d_sherman大约 5 年前
Opinion: Forcing someone else to take a vaccine, if they don&#x27;t want to, or forcing someone else NOT to take a vaccine, if they do -- is no different than forcing a woman to take an abortion if she doesn&#x27;t want it, or forcing a woman NOT to take an abortion, if she does want it.<p>It&#x27;s no different than forcing a man to join the Military if he doesn&#x27;t want to join, or forcing the man NOT to join the Military, if he does want to join.<p>A future Constitution will explicitly support the right to be medicated&#x2F;vaccinated if one wishes to be, while conversely supporting the right NOT to be medicated&#x2F;vaccinated, if one does not.<p>Our current Constitution supports these rights, implicitly, via the 9th Amendment:<p>&quot;The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.&quot;<p>(Although, in an increasingly legislative and legalistic society, those rights may have to be asserted, asserted repeatedly, asserted to multiple people who are not aware of them, and asserted hard...)
评论 #22899608 未加载
评论 #22899566 未加载
评论 #22899516 未加载
评论 #22899523 未加载
评论 #22899665 未加载