Hacker News Reader

Comment by zug_zug | Hacker News Reader

I find it interesting and also confusing how invested random people on the internet are about the outcome of vaccination (which could theoretically cause an issue for a small percentage of the population), as opposed to say climate-denial (which will undisputably cause a much bigger issue for the entire population)

View on HN

No one has an investment in Polio that they would lie to protect. There are no Measles lobbyists.

I'm not saying it isn't a legitimate, serious issue. But the echo/amplification effect in some corners (i.e. primarily Reddit and HN) is really fascinating. Kind of a "I feel strongly about a thing, because so many people I interact with feel strongly about the thing" sort of thing.

Of all the worthy issues out there today, I'm not sure why Reddit and HN has fixated on this particular one to the extent that they have. But I'm fairly sure that validation-reward effect helps to ratchet up the intensity. You tend to receive a lot votes, likes, etc for commenting in agreement, and I suspect that feedback loop has an impact.

Once again, not speaking in opposition here (God forbid! Pitchforks down!). It's just interesting to watch classic "flash mob" and "moral panic" cycles play out in the new medium.

Maybe because there is nothing stupider than having people die from from preventable diseases due to bunk science?

Again, pitchforks down -- devil's advocate, but why is the topic not open for any discussion at all? Isn't that what defines a religion?

Deprogramming people from anti-vax lies is hard, it's impossible for everyone to be an expert on the immune system and to grasp the nuances of the policy issues involved. Uninformed layman level discussion of the issue spreads lethal memes.

Absolutely. I usually associate the mob mentality over goofy stuff with Reddit (e.g. being mad at some video game company over microtransactions).

I wish somebody could figure out how to channel that passion into the larger issues that face us today.

Preventing climate change or even fighting its effects goes against a way of life people can't imagine giving up. It's a much harder sell. And people hope for solutions where they don't have to change their ways. So while vaccination has a known, cheap, and widely accepted solution, there is no such thing for climate change. There is no easy fix. It will cost us dearly, one way or another.

The thing with vaccination is that it's a small thing that really improved our lives. It's what brings down child mortality a good notch with little effort. We can't allow misinforemd people to take this away from us. The parents that don't vaccinate their children not only endanger their children but other people as well. As long as we haven't eradicated a disease, we have to spend ressources on the vaccination.

Success story: Polio 2 is eradicated. And there's only two countries (Afghanistan and Pakistan) where Polio is still endemic. Once these contries are clear, we'll be able to sunset Polio vaccination worldwide.

So while I may deplore inactivity regarding climate change, I'm really happy we're eradicating diseases. And I'm happy people care about it.

Because lack of vaccination is a really easy problem to fix, via vaccination. Indeed we have already succeeded in doing this many times in history. So it’s stupider and more frustrating that these diseases are coming back.

By contrast combating climate change is a huge and complicated problem with or without climate deniers screwing things up.

Where most people who comment on HN live, deaths from climate change are a future possibility. Deaths from vaccine preventable illnesses are happening right now.

Also, solving climate change is a massive undertaking. Vaccines are a solved problem.

I'm invested because I'm planning on having a kid. For the first year of my next kid's life there is no vaccine that can protect him/her from disease, except everybody else getting vaccinated.

If I understand correctly, nursing can give some immunity.

Note well: I am not a doctor. I don't even play one on TV.

It is statistically significant, but it still isn't much: odds are against the baby who gets disease.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com