Also, I've been fighting quackery for two decades and the antivax movement almost as long.
-
-
Replying to @gorskon @JDCBurnhil and
In a liberal democracy, taking the utilitarian position while ignoring or downplaying potential or real risks of harm is intellectually lazy and ethically lax. Being "PRO-vax" is like stating the sky is up. Of course it is. The trick is can U see and prevent the safety cracks?
5 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @noorchashm @gorskon and
As anyone who read Dr. Gorski’s post would see that that’s not his position, and that he considered your claims seriously in light of the risk, this isn’t helping you. https://respectfulinsolence.com/2021/01/29/noorchashm-spreading-fear-of-covid-19-vaccines-on-an-antivax-website/ … And pointing to deaths unrelated to vaccines is not finding a safety crack.
3 replies 1 retweet 17 likes -
By downplaying the likely risk I have delineated, U folks are acting very dangerously. Read my lips: It's a breach of SOC to vaccinate infected people. There are a lot of infected folks being vaccinated indiscriminately during this pandemic. We do not downplay safety!
5 replies 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @noorchashm @doritmi and
I think you're the only immunologist who has been participating here, Dr. Noorchashm, but I'm sure you know others. Do any or most of them agree with you?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @AJonSchultz @doritmi and
Most fear backlash because so many powerful guardians of the medical establishment are not willing to question vaccine safety lest they get defamed and destroyed. Any question about vaccine safety is like black magic. Very bizarre!
9 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @noorchashm @AJonSchultz and
And... you’re repeating YET ANOTHER antivax trope. This one odd a favorite among antivaxxers, that you “can’t question vaccines.” Is BS.
2 replies 0 retweets 12 likes -
Replying to @gorskon @noorchashm and
Reasonable concerns based on data and science are welcomed. “Concerns” based on an idée fixe with no data to support it and whose scientific plausibility is low, coupled with old well-known antivax tropes tend to be viewed much less charitably.https://respectfulinsolence.com/2021/02/05/dr-hooman-noorchashm-and-screenb4vaccine-revisited/ …
1 reply 4 retweets 16 likes -
Replying to @gorskon @AJonSchultz and
David, I saw this. I think it's verbose and intellectually lazy. But ok. U really should study the work of prominent Scripps Institute Cellular Immunologist, Michael Oldstone. My thinking as an immunologist is steeped in his seminal work. Check it out:https://www.cell.com/fulltext/0092-8674(91)90165-U …
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @noorchashm @gorskon and
Of course, judging from what I've seen of your intellectual abilities, I wouldn't be surprised if you don't see the connection. Remember, in this unprecedented pandemic we are treating with an unprecedented vaccine both real and prognosticated risks MUST be mitigated.
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Tsk, tsk. Not very “polite,” doctor, is that? Also, you’re stretching, as the papers that I cited suggest your concern has a very low plausibility based in basic science.
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.