Jump to content

Menu

The “vaccination divide” in the US


Quill
 Share

Recommended Posts

 

Just now, Muttichen1 said:

They say they recommend the vaccine for those 18 and up and they can't say whether or not children younger should be vaccinated until there is more information.

Did you even read the fact check your linked??? The only thing it disputes is that the WHO changed its position. The WHO has never recommended the vaccine for kids.

Yes, I read it. 

"Can say whether or not children younger should be vaccinated..." does not mean the same thing as "the WHO does not recommend." 

You do see that they're not the same thing, right? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Muttichen1 said:

I didn't say no one has gotten sick and died. Of course they have. But the chance of a young, healthy person getting seriously ill is very low. 

And how about the large number of americans that are not healthy, not young, etc? Isn't the best way to protect their lives to have as many people as possible be vaccinated, mask, etc?

It's not just the healthy people that matter. 

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

 

Yes, I read it. 

"Can say whether or not children younger should be vaccinated..." does not mean the same thing as "the WHO does not recommend." 

You do see that they're not the same thing, right? 

Look, I don't want to argue with you. Quill was trying to understand the vaccination divide and I wanted to give the perspective of a person who has thoughtfully decided against vaccinating.

Edited by Muttichen1
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And besides, citing the WHO about the COVID vaccine indicates searching for agreement. The WHO is the expert here but not about everything? 

The WHO comes out with some weird things. 

VERIFY: No, WHO is not banning "women of childbearing age" from drinking alcohol

Is the WHO always your source or expertise or just when you think it agrees with you? 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ktgrok said:

And how about the large number of americans that are not healthy, not young, etc? Isn't the best way to protect their lives to have as many people as possible be vaccinated, mask, etc?

It's not just the healthy people that matter. 

If they are vaccinated, they are protected against serious illness. There always will be people who are medically fragile and we'll do what we can to protect them. I'm not convinced in this case that me getting a vaccine is helpful. I will stay home if sick, etc.

Again, I know we disagrees. I just wanted to give a perspective from the other side.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Muttichen1 said:

Look, I don't want to argue with you. Quill was trying to understand the vaccination divide and I wanted to give the perspective of a person who has thoughtfully decided against vaccinating.

I'm editing this because it was unkind. 

 

Edited by Ordinary Shoes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

Don't want to argue either but I'm not sure how "thoughtful" your decision was when you misunderstand what the WHO advised given that you appeared to have relied on it. 

Also the WHO recommends that you get vaccinated and you didn't. So why listen to the WHO about children but not adults? 

 

Oh my goodness. I don't rely on the WHO. I randomly picked that as an example of something I read in conservative media and then backed it up with a primary source that contradicted your "fact check."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Muttichen1 said:

If they are vaccinated, they are protected against serious illness. There always will be people who are medically fragile and we'll do what we can to protect them. I'm not convinced in this case that me getting a vaccine is helpful. I will stay home if sick, etc.

Again, I know we disagrees. I just wanted to give a perspective from the other side.

But you said you were acting this way before the vaccine. And kids still can't be vaccinated - including "unhealthy" kids, of which I know several. Etc. A truly thoughtful approach includes thinking of them. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Muttichen1 said:

I did not read in the mainstream media that the WHO does not recommend the vaccine for kids under 18.

FWIW, I did read that, but it's also important to have context in mind when reading WHO recommendations. WHO is recommending for the entire world, often with a particular focus on the developing world, and there is an incredible shortage of vaccines in most of the world. It does not make sense to vaccinate under 18s in places that have only vaccinated 1% of their population due to lack of vaccine.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Muttichen1 said:

Oh my goodness. I don't rely on the WHO. I randomly picked that as an example of something I read in conservative media and then backed it up with a primary source that contradicted your "fact check."

No, it didn't contradict. Do you still not see that you're misinterpreting the WHO's guidance? 

You threw it out there as an example of how "biased" the "mainstream media" is but it actually showed that the mainstream media is more balanced that the sources you read. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, KSera said:

FWIW, I did read that, but it's also important to have context in mind when reading WHO recommendations. WHO is recommending for the entire world, often with a particular focus on the developing world, and there is an incredible shortage of vaccines in most of the world. It does not make sense to vaccinate under 18s in places that have only vaccinated 1% of their population due to lack of vaccine.

True, but the language quoted from WHO specifically says the WHO is waiting for more info, not that the WHO is concerned about vax availability.

I don't know how old that WHO quote is though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quill wanted input about different views, but people expressing different views are being attacked.  Not sure what is the point of piling onto the one person who dared to try to explain a different view.

  • Like 16
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Muttichen1 said:

I didn't say no one has gotten sick and died. Of course they have. But the chance of a young, healthy person getting seriously ill is very low. 

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/young-unvaccinated-people-are-being-hospitalized-covid-19-delta-variant-n1273998

You are very fortunate if you did not know any young and healthy people who have gotten seriously ill due to Covid.

Edited by mathnerd
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Muttichen1 said:

It really is a risk/benefit analysis. Not everyone is afraid of covid.

I'm not vaccinated and have no plans to get the vaccine. I'm well educated (graduate degree), intellectually curious, and politically conservative. I read the New York Times every day and listen to NPR. I also read conservative news outlets and I feel they give me a me balanced perspective. For example, I did not read in the mainstream media that the WHO does not recommend the vaccine for kids under 18.

Most of my friends are like me, college educated, intellectual, and conservative. Those at high risk from covid happily got the vaccine as soon as it was available. Those who are at lower risk mostly have not gotten it, and no one is vaccinating kids under 16 or so.

What might make us different is that we have been living pretty much normally for over a year. We happily locked down in late March 2020 to keep hospitals from getting overwhelmed. When it was clear that wasn't happening, we loosened up. We've been having people over for meals in large groups since at least early May of last year. We went on vacation last summer with family from all over the country. I taught in person all year without masks.

While covid has not gone through my church, homeschool group, etc., I know MANY people who have had it. I don't know anyone young and healthy who had anything worse than a fever that hung on awhile. Most people had symptoms so mild they never would have thought of getting tested if someone in their family hadn't had an exposure. I know young, healthy people do sometimes get seriously ill, but that is rare. Driving to Walmart is more dangerous to me than covid.

Yes, the Delta variant is more contagious, but I haven't seen a shred of evidence that it's more serious.

I've made the risk calculation and I'd rather take my chances on covid than go get a shot that is likely to make me sick and that I'll probably need a booster for. 

I'm curious about this attitude, because isn't the main point of the vaccination -- if we're healthy and not elderly -- to keep it from spreading to those who are most vulnerable?  And although it's true that at least here in the US  most people who ARE vulnerable can get the vaccine and be protected, Covid can still find its way around and find those who are unvaccinated, so it lives on.  It lives on and can mutate, and spread to others who aren't able to tolerate the vaccine and are more vulnerable, or to others who are maybe traveling to visit family in India (for example) where vaccinations can't keep up and now they have a problem with children who are orphans as a result, etc.  It's bigger than just saying I don't need the vaccine because I'm healthy.

  • Like 8
  • Thanks 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Clemsondana said:

There's a data analyst that I read who has written that breaking this into a red/blue divide isn't the most informative way to capture what is happening.

Very interesting post, but I will say that I was left scratching my head in quite a few places until I remembered that the red/blue aligns to politics in the wrong way in America!

from wikipedia "political colour"

In the United States, the colour blue has been associated with the liberal Democratic Party since around the 2000 presidential election, when most of the major television networks used the same color scheme for the parties.[19][20] This makes the United States an exception to the general rule that blue represents conservative parties; the major conservative party in the United States, the Republican Party, uses red.

Edited by lewelma
  • Like 3
  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, lewelma said:

Very interesting post, but I will say that I was left scratching my head in quite a few places until I remembered that the red/blue aligns to politics the wrong way in America!

from wikipedia "political colour"

In the United States, the colour blue has been associated with the liberal Democratic Party since around the 2000 presidential election, when most of the major television networks used the same color scheme for the parties.[19][20] This makes the United States an exception to the general rule that blue represents conservative parties; the major conservative party in the United States, the Republican Party, uses red.

That always confuses me too lol. There was a song when I was younger- “Are you a true blue Tory”, and I always think of communism as represented by the color red.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't read the whole thread, so perhaps it has already be discussed. But can someone please explain to me why more conservative people are less likely to get the vaccine in the USA. What does being conservative have to do with vaccines?  Here in NZ, it is not political -- getting vaccinated has nothing to do with politics. We definitely have an antivax crowd, but in my experience, they are either hippies or part of the Brethren - so on completely opposite ends of the spectrum of politics.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My children understood the risk to them was minuscule. 3% of the population does not equal 3% of healthy 20 year olds. They chose to vaccinate to help others and because we believe we have a duty to be a help, not a hindrance. I definitely lean small gov't. I can't say Conservative because both the liberals and Conservatives have huge populist groups within them. I am NOT a populist and therefore can't be a Republican in their current condition. 

My 74 year old mom (conservative) refuses to vaccinate because she is stubborn and angry about all the rules. She believes the vaccine is safe. She has a medical degree to boot but contrary. I let her know what my ER nurse related to me about overtime, being frazzled, and workers quitting. She says she doesn't go places and wouldn't go anywhere if sick. Mostly she sits at home and quilts all day long so 🤷

My step mom and Dad and in laws are uneducated. They believe it is unsafe and worry about long term effects. They are vulnerable to lies because they don't have the skills to vet sources etc. They are all over 65. They have guardianship over my little brother with Down Syndrome who is high risk. I'm hoping the doctor will bring it up at the next appointment. 🙏

 

I really see a difference between educated and uneducated in being able to navigate the media.

Edited by frogger
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m sure this is what @Clemsondana wanted to avoid, which is why she did not invite discourse on her post. 
 

Im genuinely interested in hearing what a thoughtful, knowledgeable, educated person thinks if they have decided not to get the covid vax, or not at present. 
 

Let’s cut out nit-picking on@Muttichen1 geez

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, SKL said:

I'm very aware of historical experimentation on AA, but this vax has huge uptake [considering how new it is] among most other races.  It's exactly the same vax given to everyone.  So that argument really doesn't make sense here.

Even Hispanics, who are more likely to be vax-resistent in general (and most of the anti-vax people on my facebook timeline are Hispanic), have exactly the same % uptake as non-Hispanics in my state.

I think I read that the confound here is actually availability/accessibility, rather than historical distrust.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, lewelma said:

I haven't read the whole thread, so perhaps it has already be discussed. But can someone please explain to me why more conservative people are less likely to get the vaccine in the USA. What does being conservative have to do with vaccines?  Here in NZ, it is not political -- getting vaccinated has nothing to do with politics. We definitely have an antivax crowd, but in my experience, they are either hippies or part of the Brethren - so on completely opposite ends of the spectrum of politics.

As with everything related to American politics, it's about Trump. Trump, who was vaccinated himself and probably deserves some credit for the vaccine itself - which is weird. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, mathnerd said:

I don't feel comfortable saying this, but this is the reason that we see the "vaccination divide", in my opinion. Saying so has not earned me any friends IRL 😉

 

It doesn't earn friends if that's the end of it, and the less educated are written off as selfish/ignorant en masse. 

Within a less educated cohort there WILL be a group of those who are merely hesitant, who need respectful and appropriate health education in order to encourage them to get vaccinated. 

Public health recognises social determinants like education level. But it can't be left there. The less educated deserve respectful health education, targeted at their needs, also. 

If the correlation is strong, there's a reason for it, and I'd suggest that it's a public health responsibility to respond to it. If rates are persistently low in any particular cohort, that's not just an individual problem, nor is the individual solely to blame. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

As with everything related to American politics, it's about Trump. Trump, who was vaccinated himself and probably deserves some credit for the vaccine itself - which is weird. 

Well, that is why I am so confused. Didn't Trump push really hard to get the vaccine made in record time?  Why in the world would he and his party not want to take credit for that and push for all Republicans to take advantage of the Republican vaccine?

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, lewelma said:

Well, that is why I am so confused. Didn't Trump push really hard to get the vaccine made in record time?  Why in the world would he and his party not want to take credit for that and push for all Republicans to take advantage of the Republican vaccine?

That's a good question. Honestly, I'm not sure where to even start with this. It's long and complicated. 

To be honest, it's about more than Trump. Science became part of the culture wars here, e.g. thinking evolution in schools. That laid the foundation for what's going on now. 

  • Like 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, lewelma said:

Well, that is why I am so confused. Didn't Trump push really hard to get the vaccine made in record time?  Why in the world would he and his party not want to take credit for that and push for all Republicans to take advantage of the Republican vaccine?

Because "Covid is no big deal and just the flu" was the message they pushed for months and months, and that the conservative media keep touting. 
It's a totally bizarre situation how the health scientists were discredited and certain people believed every crap their chosen leader told them.
Yes, it would have been a fantastic PR opportunity to highlight that, "yay, we pushed for the vaccine development and we did it and now we can crush Covid" - if they hadn't downplayed Covid the entire time and indoctrinated their followers with the message that it's no.big.deal.

  • Like 14
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

I think I read that the confound here is actually availability/accessibility, rather than historical distrust.

I assume by "here" you mean in Australia.  I am sure that's the case now, but it may be interesting to see if that continues once availability ceases to be an issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

As with everything related to American politics, it's about Trump. Trump, who was vaccinated himself and probably deserves some credit for the vaccine.

 

 

Just now, lewelma said:

Well, that is why I am so confused. Didn't Trump push really hard to get the vaccine made in record time?  Why in the world would he and his party not want to take credit for that and push for all Republicans to take advantage of the Republican vaccine?

I don't think it has anything to with Trump specifically. They are conservative in nature which means by definition slow to change. 

My step mom said, "I like Trump but warp speed on a vaccine? No thank you." 

I do think Trump made use of and rode a wave of anger so to speak. He was the product of things like talk radio. I guess if you ride a wave of anger don't expect the wave to just be congenial and helpful to society. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, SKL said:

I assume by "here" you mean in Australia.  I am sure that's the case now, but it may be interesting to see if that continues once availability ceases to be an issue.

Sorry, I was unclear. 

I meant that I have read the confound there, the US, in regard to uptake by race, is that availability and accessibility is also an issue. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Ordinary Shoes said:

That's a good question. Honestly, I'm not sure where to even start with this. It's long and complicated. 

To be honest, it's about more than Trump. Science became part of the culture wars here, e.g. thinking evolution in schools. That laid the foundation for what's going on now. 

We are about ready to ramp up vaccination to the whole population here (we are finishing the comorbidity people in the next week). It will be interesting to see how the news and advertising plays out.  The government has already said that it will remove misinformation whether it is in the news or in ads, so please report it when you see it. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, lewelma said:

I haven't read the whole thread, so perhaps it has already be discussed. But can someone please explain to me why more conservative people are less likely to get the vaccine in the USA. What does being conservative have to do with vaccines?  Here in NZ, it is not political -- getting vaccinated has nothing to do with politics. We definitely have an antivax crowd, but in my experience, they are either hippies or part of the Brethren - so on completely opposite ends of the spectrum of politics.

I don’t know if this is true elsewhere, and it may well not be, but here is how the progression went near me - 

It’s just like the flu

Covid is a hoax being perpetrated to bring down President Trump

Hydroxychloroquine is a miracle cure that is being suppressed

The numbers of people dying are being exaggerated and the hospitals are getting pay outs for saying it’s Covid

Ivermectin is a miracle cure that is being suppressed 

The vaccinations aren’t really vaccinations, are experimental, cause infertility, interfere with other unvaccinated women’s menstrual cycles through shedding, and will cause those who got them to die because of antibody dependent enhancement 

I may have those slightly out of order, but those things have all been put forward by conservative Christians I know, and some conservative non-Christians, but I mostly know the Christian variety here. I’m a conservative Christian myself, but through extensive research have found the previously stated positions to be difficult to believe.

I have also heard a number of those things stated by family members of intubated, ventilated unvaccinated Covid patients. 
 

ETA I missed out ‘it’s against my rights to make me wear a mask and they don’t work anyway’ - that should be pretty close up to the top, probably under the ‘it’s a hoax’ step.

Edited by TCB
  • Like 11
  • Thanks 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

As with everything related to American politics, it's about Trump. Trump, who was vaccinated himself and probably deserves some credit for the vaccine itself - which is weird. 

Trump was never anti-vax.  Hate him all you want, but he deserves a huge amount of credit for making the vaxes available ridiculously fast.  I remember the days when the libs were the anti-vax group because the vax was a Trump thing.  It's interesting how history gets re-written.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, regentrude said:

Because "Covid is no big deal and just the flu" was the message they pushed for months and months, 

right. I forgot about that. Things are just really different here.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

Within a less educated cohort there WILL be a group of those who are merely hesitant, who need respectful and appropriate health education in order to encourage them to get vaccinated. 

Public health recognises social determinants like education level. But it can't be left there. The less educated deserve respectful health education, targeted at their needs, also. 

If the correlation is strong, there's a reason for it, and I'd suggest that it's a public health responsibility to respond to it. If rates are persistently low in any particular cohort, that's not just an individual problem, nor is the individual solely to blame. 

But people are not listening to public health educators. That's the crux of the issue here: they are considered "government", and are to be distrusted. The backlash against anything the local health departments try to do is unbelievable (people resigned because they and their families were threatened so much).
And how do you reach a person whose minister has convinced her the vaccine is "the mark of the beast"? 

  • Like 4
  • Sad 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

I meant that I have read the confound there, the US, in regard to uptake by race, is that availability and accessibility is also an issue. 

Not anymore. Vaccines are readily available and accessible now to anybody who wants them.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, lewelma said:

We are about ready to ramp up vaccination to the whole population here (we are finishing the comorbidity people in the next week). It will be interesting to see how the news and advertising plays out.  The government has already said that it will remove misinformation whether it is in the news or in ads, so please report it when you see it. 

Here in the USA, the government can't remove misinformation. Private companies like Facebook and Twitter can remove misinformation but not the government itself. 

And this is a huge problem. I know I was accused of nitpicking but we saw an example in this thread of misinformation about the WHO position on vaccinating children. 

That kind of misinformation has had a huge impact here. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, regentrude said:

But people are not listening to public health educators. That's the crux of the issue here: they are considered "government", and are to be distrusted. The backlash against anything the local health departments try to do is unbelievable (people resigned because they and their families were threatened so much).
And how do you reach a person whose minister has convinced her the vaccine is "the mark of the beast"? 

 

Within the less educated cohort, you're only trying to reach the hesitant - there's zero point trying to reach mark of the devil madness.

If the hesitant less educated aren't listening, the public health campaign is no good. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, regentrude said:

Because "Covid is no big deal and just the flu" was the message they pushed for months and months, and that the conservative media keep touting. 
It's a totally bizarre situation how the health scientists were discredited and certain people believed every crap their chosen leader told them.
Yes, it would have been a fantastic PR opportunity to highlight that, "yay, we pushed for the vaccine development and we did it and now we can crush Covid" - if they hadn't downplayed Covid the entire time and indoctrinated their followers with the message that it's no.big.deal.

And the democrats also downplayed Covid early on, accusing conservatives of being racist for thinking maybe we shouldn't import Covid too eagerly.  "Come to Chinatown and enjoy the New Year's parade" was the Democrat message.

  • Like 4
  • Confused 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TCB said:

I don’t know if this is true elsewhere, and it may well not be, but here is how the progression went near me - 

It’s just like the flu

Covid is a hoax being perpetrated to bring down President Trump

Hydroxychloroquine is a miracle cure that is being suppressed

The numbers of people dying are being exaggerated and the hospitals are getting pay outs for saying it’s Covid

Ivermectin is a miracle cure that is being suppressed 

The vaccinations aren’t really vaccinations, are experimental, cause infertility, interfere with other unvaccinated women’s menstrual cycles through shedding, and will cause those who got them to die because of antibody dependent enhancement 

I may have those slightly out of order, but those things have all been put forward by conservative Christians I know, and some conservative non-Christians, but I mostly know the Christian variety here. I’m a conservative Christian myself, but through extensive research have found the previously stated positions to be difficult to believe.

I have also heard a number of those things stated by family members of intubated, ventilated unvaccinated Covid patients. 

Conservatives in the USA are for supply side economics, free trade, traditional values, and individual freedom.  Where does anti science come into that?

I think you are saying that conservatives = antiscience = antivaccines.

I can understand conservatives = individual freedom = no mask wearing.

But I can't make sense of where the antiscience comes from.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Melissa Louise said:

Within the less educated cohort, you're only trying to reach the hesitant - there's zero point trying to reach mark of the devil madness.

If the hesitant less educated aren't listening, the public health campaign is no good. 

If certain segments of the population consume only one news channel and that news channel is full of misinformation, how do you get the information to them? 
What should public health officials try? Out of desperation, they're now trying to bribe folks by having lotteries.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Seasider too said:

It’s seen as an invasion of personal liberty by the government. A stance taken by (not all!) conservatives and conservative leaders. 
 

That’s the short answer, I’m sure others will add. 

One of the most surreal things I've seen in the past year and a half are conservative pro-lifers holding "My Body My Choice" signs. I've always wondered (but never been able to ask) do they see the irony there? 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, regentrude said:

Not anymore. Vaccines are readily available and accessible now to anybody who wants them.

But that wasn't the case previously. 

Accessibility has different meanings to different people. If you can't take time off to get vaccinated, or stay home if you have bad side effects, that affects how accessible a vaccine is to you. 

Low income workers prioritise the money earned today - for survival reasons. 

Maybe there are campaigns to allow low income people paid time off? Not sure 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Melissa Louise said:

Sorry, I was unclear. 

I meant that I have read the confound there, the US, in regard to uptake by race, is that availability and accessibility is also an issue. 

Maybe it was 6+ months ago.  Now it is free and ridiculously accessible to anyone past their 12th birthday.  As most black Americans live in cities, physical distance isn't the reason either.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Ordinary Shoes said:

Here in the USA, the government can't remove misinformation. Private companies like Facebook and Twitter can remove misinformation but not the government itself. 

And this is a huge problem. I know I was accused of nitpicking but we saw an example in this thread of misinformation about the WHO position on vaccinating children. 

That kind of misinformation has had a huge impact here. 

We have freedom of speech here too, but I think that you aren't allowed to say stuff that hurts other people.  There is a name for that even in the USA, and it is banned. 

Here is the site that tells you where to dob in misinformation

https://www.cert.govt.nz/individuals/common-threats/covid-19-vaccine-scams/report-covid-19-vaccine-scams-or-misinformation/

"Stopping the spread of mis and disinformation about the COVID-19 vaccine will limit any potential confusion for New Zealanders and help them to make informed decisions about the vaccine.

If possible,

  • Send us the link of the website if the content is online.
  • If you see COVID-19 misinformation on social media, report it to the platform (for example, Facebook or Twitter).
  • If it is a physical item, such as a leaflet, email us a photograph and if possible details of where and how you received it.
  • Include when you received the item and where it came from."
Edited by lewelma
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, SKL said:

Trump was never anti-vax.  Hate him all you want, but he deserves a huge amount of credit for making the vaxes available ridiculously fast.  I remember the days when the libs were the anti-vax group because the vax was a Trump thing.  It's interesting how history gets re-written.

Do you have any idea how vaccines became so repugnant to conservatives, given how Trump did speed along development and was very positive about them before they were released? I think that is a very interesting thing.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, lewelma said:

Conservatives in the USA are for supply side economics, free trade, traditional values, and individual freedom.  Where does anti science come into that?

I think you are saying that conservatives = antiscience = antivaccines.

I can understand conservatives = individual freedom = no mask wearing.

But I can't make sense of where the antiscience comes from.

Because it doesn't. There is a huge uneducated populist group that is changing the Republican party. 

 

They are not free trade, nor for individual freedoms (ask a business who wants people to wear masks), and they know nothing of supply side economics.

 

There is a populist group on the left but the Democrats have been more successful and keeping them at bay, even if it takes cheating on the primaries.

  • Like 11
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, lewelma said:

Conservatives in the USA are for supply side economics, free trade, traditional values, and individual freedom.  Where does anti science come into that?

I think you are saying that conservatives = antiscience = antivaccines.

I can understand conservatives = individual freedom = no mask wearing.

But I can't make sense of where the antiscience comes from.

I don't think you can say today that conservatives are for those things you list. Part of Trumpism was a repudiation of supply side economics and free trade. Conservatism has changed. 

And individual freedom is also an area of change. Some of the Trumpy Christian intellectuals began to espouse "Common Good Conservatism." This does not necessarily fit with individual freedom. It means that government will do what is good for the people at the expense of the individual. It's usually seen WRT morality. Is it "good" if people have sex outside of marriage?" No, so it should be illegal. 

Odd that these folks failed miserably at their first opportunity to demonstrate common good conservatism. 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, regentrude said:

If certain segments of the population consume only one news channel and that news channel is full of misinformation, how do you get the information to them? 
What should public health officials try? Out of desperation, they're now trying to bribe folks by having lotteries.

I'm not a public health person, so I'm not exactly sure what options are open. I'd imagine local solutions for local issues could be optimal. 

I just know that public health is not a discipline that can or should write off a segment of the population for any reason. 

Can't reach a cohort? And it's important for public health that you do? It's not really an option to just write off Fox viewers, kwim?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...