This is going to upset a lot of people on twitter but it's the right move imo.https://twitter.com/statnews/status/1368955031068815363 …
-
Show this thread
-
Here is the full guidance, take a look, it's all nicely laid out and I think more cautious than people may perceive. And don't yell at me about it, I don't work for the CDC. But I'm glad they're back on their game.https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/fully-vaccinated.html …
6 replies 20 retweets 101 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @notdred
What happens is lot of people seem to have a mental checkbox that move things from "misinformation" to "science" when the guidelines (if/when/finally) change. (Obviously, it wasn't that before, and reasonable disagreements may persist... But that's not how it operates usually).
2 replies 1 retweet 4 likes -
Internalized authority? I see the shift typically justified with "the science has changed", which is really weird when the CDC cites the same studies and observations that get denounced as insufficiently convincing.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
It's been a weird year, no? Sometimes, yep it is "science changed". But we've had a lot of things where that wasn't the case, really but an overblown reaction to the suggestion that the authorities were behind "the science". Then again, one doesn't expect what happened last year.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
(But then again lots of cranks around who think they are Galileo and "did I already email you my latest 350 page paper on quantum immunity?"). I get snake-oil PR pitches for anti-COVID stuff daily. It's been a weird year.
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.