“Evidence of benefit” is that the vaccine works and must be deployed in as many as possible, as quickly as possible. It’s prognostication of harm that needs to B tightly mitigated, as we aim to vaccinate ALL. Your blindness to this rational ethical stance is stunning. Cog diss!
-
-
Replying to @noorchashm
Nobody is arguing against reducing harm, so this tweet mischaracterized the criticism. The point is that the way you’re going about it can well cause harm. That’s apart from whether your hypothesis has validity.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @doritmi
50% of America is going to get vaccinated. 20-30% of America will not come hell or high water. 20-30% of America is "hesitant", because of safety concerns - their trust can be earned....But not by calling them stupid and blowing off their concerns. Tune in or tune out!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @noorchashm
When you dig up unrelated deaths and blame them on
#vaccines you work to create hesitancy. You are telling people the vaccines kill - with no basis. You actively try to scare people off vaccinating against#COVID19 and you create concerns. You’re hurting, not helping.2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @doritmi
Yes. Indiscriminate Vaccination of the infected, esp the elderly and frail with CV disease, is very highly likely to kill. Cog Diss and absent ethical reasoning kills unjustly. Careless or immoral utilitarianism kills too. History demonstrates this well.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @noorchashm
And yet, to show deaths you have to go dig up unrelated ones. There’s no evidence of widespread deaths in the scenario you think there will be. Don’t speak for morals when you misuse deaths to scare others off vaccinating.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @doritmi
Your "assumption" that it they are "unrelated" in order to advocate for your political position is FAR more dangerous in the patient harm space than my "hypothesis" that indiscriminate vaccination of the infected will harm the elderly and frail with CV disease in this class.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @noorchashm @doritmi
Because you position will not allow mitigation of harm, while mine will increase vigilance on the part of both practitioners and citizens. Your people's blindness to the safety position and concerns is the source of vaccine hesitancy in America - and in this pandemic.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @noorchashm
There is a lot of attention to vaccines safety, and there were already changes in recommendations in response to safety signals about allergies. The issue isn’t whether recommendations should change when there’s a safety issue, to protect a minority: they should. 1/2
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @doritmi
There is almost NO attention being paid to the most unusual aspect of this vaccine roll-out: That we we are doing it in the midst of an outbreak. So MANY are concurrently or recently infected. This poses an immunological risk upon indiscriminate vaccination. period!
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Except that there's no safety signal after 50 million doses in the US, and, no, it's not because @CDCgov and @US_FDA aren't looking for it, no matter how much you claim otherwise. Worse @RobertKennedyJr is still using you.https://respectfulinsolence.com/2021/02/17/misuse-of-the-vaers-database-by-antivaxxers-continues-cardiac-edition/ …
-
-
Replying to @gorskon @noorchashm and
David Gorski, MD, PhD Retweeted
Seriously, Dr. N, how is it that you keep using scare language like “indiscriminately vaccinated” while implying that’s dangerous with respect to
#COVIDVaccine? That’s EXACTLY the same language antivaxxers use to spread fear about vaccines? https://twitter.com/noorchashm/status/1363154646999699459 …David Gorski, MD, PhD added,
This Tweet is unavailable.0 replies 1 retweet 4 likesThanks. 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.