15/18 Here’s what we know abt Covid vaccines: they’re very safe. They have some anaphylactic reactions that have been well managed & caused no deaths. They’ve been extremely effective in clinical trials. We expect the same in real life. We don’t know if they prevent transmission.
-
Show this thread
-
16/18 The final italicized paragraphs in Leonhardt’s piece are pretty good messaging. And they ARE what public health experts are conveying. But they’re doing it smartly, relying on research about vaccine hesitancy & using evidence-based communication to build public trust.pic.twitter.com/2YshofKafS
3 replies 10 retweets 84 likesShow this thread -
17/18
@DLeonhardt, on the other hand, is undermining public health by framing his “trust how great the vaccine is” message in the context of claiming that experts aren’t being honest with the public. I genuinely don’t know a better way to give anti-vaccine advocacy oxygen.2 replies 9 retweets 93 likesShow this thread -
18/fin I’ll have a blog post at AHCJ coming soon on this bc I’m so frustrated w vaccine hot takes from journalists who lack experience & knowledge abt vaccine reporting. The stakes are high for irresponsible, ignorant reporting: harming public health.https://healthjournalism.org/blog/2019/03/writing-about-vaccine-hesitancy-theres-a-study-for-that/ …
1 reply 13 retweets 123 likesShow this thread -
adding 19/ I should add: the quotes from
@DrPaulOffit@ashishkjha@PeterHotez &@AaronRichterman are great. All are spot on & cld have been well used in a thoughtful article about how we're underselling the vaccine—in the hands of a reporter who understands the vaccine landscape.9 replies 4 retweets 99 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @tarahaelle @DrPaulOffit and
In reality, as it often is the case, it took someone outside the wagon circling mindset to write the very overdue article! This has been a problem since December and everytime I and others raised it, we got wagon-circling. With this mindset, we won’t learn anything. Tragic, tbh.
3 replies 0 retweets 15 likes -
Replying to @zeynep @tarahaelle and
Is it remotely conceivable that the people who disagree with you might be right or have any valid points? Or is it written in stone that you're right and the "wagon circlers" are wrong?
2 replies 0 retweets 18 likes -
I ask because it's difficult to think of an instance in which you haven't been absolutely certain you were right and immunologists/virologists/epidemiologists were wrong and some might view that as a red flag as to the soundness of your arguments.
1 reply 0 retweets 19 likes -
Experts of course can be wrong and should admit when we/they are. But if your through-line is that they're *always* wrong I think you are just undermining science more than anyone frankly and it comes across as very prior-driven rather than data-driven.
1 reply 2 retweets 19 likes -
Replying to @stgoldst @tarahaelle and
Who said they're always wrong? Plus, on things not in my direct field, I am obviously super duper cautious and thus my track record. But here we're talking about something directly in my field here, public sphere an communication. If we are deferring to expertise, I'm the expert.
4 replies 0 retweets 5 likes
Except I’m not so sure that you are “super duper cautious.”
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.