Why don’t some people want to get the vaccine | Hacker News Reader

Why don’t some people want to get the vaccine

theguardian.com

5 pointsnkurz12 comments

There would be fewer holdouts if anti-vaccine activism would not be a lucrative market for fraudsters. But ultimately this is natural selection. Civilization kept stupid people alive, now there is a counterweight against stupidity.

Sounds sociopathic, but beyond incentives selection processes shape the world the most, and we are grossly out of shape.

I wish people were content at thinking that they know better. Right now they try to coerce others to act like they do in many parts of the world.

Social Gentrification. You must all live by what I define as a good society and screw everyone in between.

This is just a laundry list of the usual anti-vaxxer "concerns". For example:

> On the other hand, the rapid process gave rise to questions about whether proper protocols had been followed and exacerbated concerns about how safe and effective the vaccines would be.

Notice the change in tense, "would be". Maybe in February of 2021 that was a concern, but by February 2022, there's so much vaccine in so many people that this particular concern is just laughable.

There's a second, larger flaw in what this article says: it gives all the agency to "progressives", the Biden administration, Fauci. Vaccine refusers are just tossed about by powerful forces they have no control over.

In short, this is just the usual mainstream media pandering.

> Maybe in February of 2021 that was a concern, but by February 2022, there's so much vaccine in so many people that this particular concern is just laughable.

The concern has never been that the vaccine has been tested in too few people. It's that it hasn't been tested for long enough. You can't make up for the rushed process with more test subjects, just like when baking, you can't halve the time by doubling the oven temperature.

Actually the time is not the factor. Number of people involved is. These vaccine trials were large but you could not find something more after just waiting when something you are looking for is very rare. Should we have tested the vaccines on millions of people before rolling them out? How is it different from just rolling it out? Do you think that the approval would not have been given if current issues would have been found?

> In short, this is just the usual mainstream media pandering.

Pandering to whom? I'd agree that it's a mostly a standard list, but I was surprised to find it in mainstream publication. I was impressed that the list was presented seemingly accurately and without much condescension. I felt that it was actually intended to explain why (some) anti-vaxxers act they way they do, rather than to make the audience feel superior. Along with recent NYT article like this one (https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/20/health/covid-cdc-data.htm...) I get the sense that there is a change in the media landscape that allows these articles to be published now.

I disagree. There is a reason why studies aren't available yet and why they always contain long term data which isn't available yet.

I am vaccinated but can acknowledge that being careful is probably prudent and a decision everyone has to make for themselves what they regard as a higher threat.

The information control around the topic will hopefully lead to people looking very closely at the studies yet to be released.

> Notice the change in tense, "would be". Maybe in February of 2021 that was a concern, but by February 2022, there's so much vaccine in so many people that this particular concern is just laughable.

But we are still learning new things about the vaccines. For example, the RKI (like the German CDC) changed its recommendations regarding vaccine administration only a couple of days ago. They are now recommending aspiration before injection for safety reasons, because new studies suggest a link between unwanted side effects and accidental intravenous injection. This recommendation comes after 200 million administered doses in Germany. Most other countries still don't make this recommendation.

https://youtu.be/NVXA9posslo

https://www.rki.de/DE/Content/Infekt/EpidBull/Archiv/2022/Au...

    The vaccine is to be injected only intramuscular (i.m.), 
    and in no case intradermal, subcutaneous, or intravenous.
    In animal models, direct intravenous injection of an mRNA vaccine has led to Myopericarditis (both clinically and histopathologically).
    Although inadvertent intravenous injections are rare during application of intramuscular vaccines, 
    aspiration of the needle is a sensible precaution when vaccinating against COVID-19 and can lead to increased safety.

> there's so much natural immunity in so many people that this particular concern is just laughable.

Ha ha. Tell that to the people who suffered through a Delta infection, and then got Omicron variant, because Delta infection did not confer immunity to Omicron, where vaccination did.

> because Delta infection did not confer immunity to Omicron, where vaccination did

Do you have a source for that?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com