DeaconBrews
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 27, 2011
- Messages
- 44,986
- Reaction score
- 3,146
There was an interesting article from the Times about this and not repeating the mistake of downplaying the use of masks. A big part of the "you don't need to wear a mask" opener in early virus times was a fear that normal folks would buy up the entire mask supply and threaten hospital safety. The actual result was that people leveraged that dishonesty into support for anti-masking. Experts knew masks would be effective, they just didn't know exactly how effective.
Now they are again being borderline dishonest in the messaging around the vaccine risk. The majority of articles say things like "it's still only 95% so you are at risk even after the vaccine, that after you're vaccinated you can still get, carry, and transmit the virus to others" or some spin off those two ideas. The goal is to ensure that in the early months of vaccine distribution everyone doesn't act like we're all good and stop wearing masks. They don't trust folks to get both shots and wait 3 weeks before green-lighting normal activities. But again the dishonesty is fueling distrust in the vaccines, a misunderstanding for how incredibly effective these vaccines are, and how critical it is for folks to get them as soon as possible.
They quoted a number of doctors who said things like, "Is it possible that someone who is a couple weeks past dose 2 to transmit the virus to someone? Technically, maybe. Have I ever heard of that happening in the entire history of viruses, vaccines, and modern disease prevention? No. Never."
as I said earlier, the main message needs to be "once you get the vaccine(s) and wait the appropriate time, you're not gonna get seriously ill."