How much of their national attention do you think is coming from accidentally platforming them? It’s of course important to cover them but I wonder if context in articles like this are important as a social deterrent against this dangerous behavior?
-
-
-
Good question. Coverage may imply importance. The article is pretty negative but it’s kind of long. Would an antivaxer or anyone else read the whole thing? I don’t know.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It's eugenics by a different name.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Living alongside one of the longtime anti-vaccination hotspots (Ashland, Oregon), I don't think it's overstated, and I think it will get worse.
-
I'm sad to say I think you are correct.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
We lack the technology to fast track vaccine development, which takes 10-20 years. This type of vaccine can harm you upon reexposure. This same phenonenon occurred with the dangerous Dengue vaccine that killed a lot of children. https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2019/09/critics-alarmed-lack-interest-studying-children-put-risk-dengue-vaccine … https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0035421 …
-
"Younger children, especially those between 2 and 5 years of age, who did not have dengue antibodies prior to receiving the vaccine—so-called seronegatives—were at an increased risk of ending up in the hospital if they received the vaccine and then got dengue anyway".
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.