Important caveat from @DhruvKhullar: "we know for sure that the vaccines...prevent severe illness in almost all people who are inoculated...we’re not yet certain that the vaccines can prevent people from becoming infected or infecting others."https://www.newyorker.com/science/medical-dispatch/how-getting-vaccinated-will-and-wont-change-my-behavior …
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @michaelluo @DhruvKhullar
I like how the rest of the article makes the case I heard from every immunologists that I checked with that these vaccines almost certainly *will* dampen transmission, likely a lot, and lists some of the evidence we already have on how and why. That message isn't heard enough.
3 replies 11 retweets 89 likes -
Well, it's still an untested (yes the data may exist but still internally) hypothesis where the consequences of being publicly wrong could be extremely grave. Not something I think should be part of any messaging campaign.
2 replies 1 retweet 7 likes -
But what we have isn't silence on the topic or, better yet, "we are going to know more soon." The public is perfectly capable of understanding the correct message, which is that we have some idea and some data, but not enough to relax and will know more soon.
2 replies 2 retweets 18 likes -
Sure, the public can understand. I don't think people doing the messaging are particularly good at threading the needle.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
But we should. The alternative really damages credibility. So many ordinary people think we *know* the vaccine won't help with infectiousness while not a single immunologist I asked thinks that's actually the likely case, or even the current case, especially given existing data.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
I understand it's extremely frustrating to say wait for the data but sometimes the best course is really to wait for the data. We'll have it soon. I'd respectfully to other scientists suggest waiting for the data on this. If you speculate and you're wrong you can kill people.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
It's not at all frustrating to say wait for data. It's extremely frustrating that what's being communicated is not that at all. I'm advocating for a message that's based on existing data and lack thereof, accurately, future data we're waiting for, and the actual science.
-
-
What's being communicated is that "vaccine doesn't prevent infection" which is not the state of existing data, science, expectation or likelihood—and is now widely believed and has become an anti-vaxxing talking point. Treating the public like adults would go a long way to help.
0 replies 0 retweets 7 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.