I just think we should drop the TERM all together. Because, frankly, if you were not watchful about a first vaccine against a corona virus ever with a new MOA that got trialled and approved in record speed then I'd think you just didn't understand much about drug development....
-
-
Replying to @BettinaRyll @gorskon
Having concerns and asking questions about
#COVID19 vaccines does not make one antivaccine. But there are antivaccine activists working to create and spread misinformation to those with concerns. Dropping the term may make them harder to point out.1 reply 0 retweets 8 likes -
Not warming those with questions and concerns about antivaccine activists can make them more easily victims of antivaccine efforts.
1 reply 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @doritmi @BettinaRyll
Also, antivaxxers are very good at falsely representing themselves as “not antivax” but rather just “concerned.” The difference is that antivaxxers are not reachable; the vaccine adverse are. That’s why it’s so important to distinguish between the two.
2 replies 1 retweet 20 likes -
Which it is *precisely* so important not to throw them all on to the same pile, take true concerns serious and not waste energy on the laggards. Accusing people of being ignorant is a poor educational strategy (but gets you the attention of more educated ones it seems ;-))
1 reply 1 retweet 1 like -
Replying to @BettinaRyll @doritmi
Argh! What have I been repeating over the last several Tweets but to emphasize that it’s important to differentiate between the two, as different approaches are required for each one?
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes -
-
Took some time it seems
it they could just stop ranting about PV laggards and start *focusing* on educating everyone else!!!1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @BettinaRyll @gorskon
The thing is, looking at the first tweet - and there may be background that I haven’t seen - your comments are probably not so directed at Dr. Gorski. For 15 years he has a public, free blog explaining science in ways accessible to lay people.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
And I suspect he’d be sympathetic to your point about needing to make science more accessible generally. His target, when he criticizes, are not the people with questions.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes
Exactly. I target the *sources* of disinformation that create the vaccine-averse, some of whom do ultimately go on to become antivaxxers.
-
-
This is exactly parallel to climate science. The Yale/GMU “Six Americas” framework includes “Dismissives” unlikely to ever be convinced (good communicators rately try, rather focus on other groups) ~real anti-vaxxers.https://climatecommunication.yale.edu/about/projects/global-warmings-six-americas/ …
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.