The Uninformed, The Misinformed, and The Skeptical

[Kavik]

• Whenever I talk to people in the real world - be it about the news, history, a shared hobby - I am always surprised at how surface level their knowledge is (like keyboard enthusiasts at work who have never heard of anything besides Cherry switches). They have usually either never heard of something or know the "headline" with none of the details (e.g., MX Blues are for typing and MX Reds are for gaming). I consider these people "the uninformed". They may lean one way or another on a subject, but they don't know why they lean that direction.
  
  

People on the internet seem to have much more in-depth knowledge of their positions and can fall into the next two categories.

• This knowledge may be heavily biased or based on bad information, but it has substance. These I consider "the misinformed". They know why they believe something but only seek confirmation to their bias. There is usually no good faith effort.
  
  
• There is a third set of people who may be informed and misinformed, but they are ultimately trying to find the truth whether it be in the mainstream or not. These are "the skeptical". It is important to note that this does not make these people bad and it does not necessarily make them right or wrong (It's possible to be right for the wrong reasons and vice versa). Skepticism is good and should be encouraged if it is done in good faith, but it's not virtuous if it is unrelenting after being presented with good evidence one way or the other.

Several of my friends are against getting one of the vaccines. I thought they would fall into the "skeptical" category, so it would be a matter of answering some questions to allay their concerns, but I've realized they fall into the "uninformed" category. They have no concrete reasons to be against these vaccines outside of a couple headlines they heard, and they haven't taken the time to research anything. Their main concerns are "they're new", "I don't trust the government", and "I don't want to be forced to do something".

I have been skeptical myself, so I have done a lot of research into both sides of this thing. My goal in talking to them has been to ask them to think of specific questions and concerns that they can actually get answers to, and then to ponder what answers would satisfy those concerns. I have tried to answer some of those questions myself, which has been appreciated but not persuasive (yet?). Basically, they must be converted from uninformed to skeptical before being persuaded.


Some tips and talking points for the media and for individuals when talking to uninformed and skeptical folks:

• Do not treat people like idiots. You will never persuade anyone if you act superior or talk down to them. This includes the tone of your voice, demeanor, and phrasing.
• Do not conflate Covid-19 vaccine hesitant people with anti-vaxx people. Anti-vaxxers aren't hesitant; they outright won't take these vaccines ever (because obviously people who think all vaccines are bad will think these ones are bad too). Covid-19 vaccine hesitant people do not think the MMR vaccine causes autism; they are merely skeptical of the safety of these vaccines.
• To win over the Covid-19 vaccine hesitent group, stop censoring heterodoxical thoughts. Censorship simply makes things look suspicious. Also, saying "Extremely safe and effective" 100 million times in a row isn't convincing. Address their specific concerns, even if you think they are stupid. For example,
  -Is the spike protein itself toxic? No, the experiment was done on mice, and they inhaled the protein instead of receiving it in the blood.
  -If so, has free spike protein been observed in blood after vaccination? Yes, one report indicates spike protein enters the circulatory system after vaccination. The assay used to detect this is so sensitive it can pick up a single molecule. Ideally, the spike proteins stay attached to the cell walls of the cells that generated them until the immune system detects them, so they don't float around the bloodstream.
  -If so, are the levels enough to cause tissue or organ damage? Not likely given the large number of people vaccinated without organ damage. You will get more spike protein from natural infection anyway.
  -Why isn't Ivermectin being employed? This might be a big pharma coverup since the drug is not profitable, but, either way, you're not getting your hands on it in the US, so it's not an option unless your doctor prescribes it off-label or you eat parasite cream for horses.
  -Do these vaccines cause Antibody Dependent Enhancement? Not likely given the large number of people vaccinated who haven't become more ill than unvaccinated people.
  -Were fetal cells used in the vaccines? In a manner of speaking, yes. Cells grown in a lab that descended from human fetal cells were used in testing the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines. The Johnson and Johnson vaccine uses the same type of cells from a different line in the manufacturing process to reproduce the virus used as the viral vector. None of the vaccines actually contain these cells however.
  
• People advocate "boosting your immune system". Vaccines' entire purpose is to boost the immune system.
• If you think the current vaccines are unsafe, consider how much time or how many participants would be required for you to be satisfied that it's safe. Compare this to the timeline of other vaccine and drug trials.
• "The chance of catching SarsCov2 is 10%. If caught, the chance of death is 1%. So the overall chance of death is 0.1%. The absolute risk reduction isn't worth it." These numbers are no longer accurate with the Delta variant. Most likely, you WILL catch it at some point, given the dramatically higher transmissibility.
• No one ever said vaccines completely prevent infections. They are ~90% effective, meaning there's still a 10% chance of the already 10% chance of catching SarCOV2. 10% of 10% is 1%, so you are ten times less likely to catch it with a vaccine. It reduces the severity of infection if caught, but, even if we assumed it doesn't, the risk of death would be 1% of 10%, which is 0.1%. This is also assuming that you are the only person vaccinated. If others are vaccinated, then their ten fold reduction further reduces your chance. The fact that it's not 100% effective doesn't mean it's not useful. The Delta variant probably changes these numbers a bit unfortunately, but the point still stands.
• The only person you are hurting by "sticking it to the man" is yourself and your neighbors. The man doesn't even know you are sticking it to him. This isn't a political decision, despite how the news portrays it.
• The media and health authorities have done a really bad job communicating accurate information and being consistent. This ultimately doesn't affect whether the vaccines are a good decision or not.

At this point, it may be too late to persuade the hesitant folks to get vaccinated since the mRNA vaccines take a month and a half to be fully effective and the Janssen one is hard to find (at least in my area) (and many consider it sub-par). NOVAVAX is too far down the pipe to be a viable alternative, even though it looks like the most promising vaccine overall for those concerned with side effects and the newness of the mRNA and Viral Vector technology.

[tp4tissue]

The death rate is much higher than that. We have significant undercounting. (USA)

We are likely beyond 1million deaths in america, assuming 200 million infected, that's a 0.5% death rate. which is enormous.   And this is the wide estimate.  The CDC estimates around 83 million infected, which would make the death rate 1.2%.

Under existing conditions, it only took 1 year for the virus to Mutate into Delta which has up to 1250x viral load.

What happens in another year?  There is still the 3rd world with very little vaccine availability. The mutation will continue.

[Kavik]

The death rate is much higher than that. We have significant undercounting. (USA)

We are likely beyond 1million deaths in america, assuming 200 million infected, that's a 0.5% death rate. which is enormous.   And this is the wide estimate.  The CDC estimates around 83 million infected, which would make the death rate 1.2%.

Under existing conditions, it only took 1 year for the virus to Mutate into Delta which has up to 1250x viral load.

What happens in another year?  There is still the 3rd world with very little vaccine availability. The mutation will continue.

Yeah, I initially had a little burb at the top of my post saying my numbers were probably outdated at this point since I'd been writing bits of this over the past few weeks, but the post was already really long, so I omitted that. Edit: Actually, I did state those numbers are different with Delta on the individual bullets, but I didn't look up the new stats.

In my county, the mortality rate was 1.08% according to the health department's stat tracker, but that only counts up to February of this year (no idea why the stat tracker is that out of date), but when I do the math on the latest numbers myself, it's 1.44%. The next largest county is 1.5%.

I may be wrong here, but the good news about mutations, from what I've heard, is that they are somewhat naturally limited. Since the vaccines target the spike protein, as long as it doesn't mutate too much, the vaccines will still provide protection, and that protein can only mutate so much until it can't bind to the ACE2 receptor. If it can't bind, it can't replicate, so those mutations naturally select themselves out. Vaccinated people who get breakthrough infections would presumably develop antibodies to the other proteins in the virus, boosting their immunity to whatever future variants may come. I don't actually know anything about science, so I'm could be totally wrong about that.

But anyway, there's only so much we can do as individuals, and one of those things is talking sense into other individuals in a kind and logical way. You can't win everyone over, but I hope my thoughts above can at least win some over. As bad as it is, recognize that most folks don't care about the rest of the world and see this as their choice and their choice only. Individual rights come with individual duties, but no one is taught that anymore. You have to meet them where they are.

[kurplop]

Excellent assessment, Kavik. I would only add that I think it would help to recognize that those who have already had Covid have protection which, from what I’ve heard, is at least as good as the vaccine.

I’ve talked to several people who haven’t gotten the vaccine.  Most don’t trust those in authority because of many of the points you have made.

[tp4tissue]

I may be wrong here, but the good news about mutations, from what I've heard, is that they are somewhat naturally limited. Since the vaccines target the spike protein, as long as it doesn't mutate too much, the vaccines will still provide protection, and that protein can only mutate so much until it can't bind to the ACE2 receptor. If it can't bind, it can't replicate, so those mutations naturally select themselves out. Vaccinated people who get breakthrough infections would presumably develop antibodies to the other proteins in the virus, boosting their immunity to whatever future variants may come. I don't actually know anything about science, so I'm could be totally wrong about that.

I've read something along those lines as well, but the thing about mutations is , it's always Surprise I'm a Ninja.

You give the virus enough petri-dishes, it's going to Ninjafy.  This roll-out is currently not working quickly enough to limit the dishes.


I thought a bit more about the -heterodoxic censorship- from your OP.  I do not believe the talk it out approach is the right solution.

As much as I dislike the fact that modern society has social classes, it does. The class boundary also sets the quantity and quality of education.  A large portion of the population is NOT GIVEN enough proper programming to have an opinion on important matters. 

This is not an issue of human rights/ respect/ sovereignty.  Some segment of the population Must be Told What to Do. They can not be allowed to all make an identical mistake if it meant the death of everyone else.

It's not a matter of convincing them, we're past that point now, there isn't enough time.  Between life and liberty, we choose life. Only with life, can we explore liberty.    Give me liberty or death, that only sounds cool when you're about to win. But if you were about to LOSE,  AS IS THE CASE against Covid19,   we LOCK Liberty in a box, and wait till there is enough space to fight for it again.

[fohat.digs]

but they are ultimately trying to find the truth

I think that this can all be boiled down to something far more simple.

"Open-minded" people continually search for the best possible information to draw their conclusions from, and understand that "the truth" can be elusive and is probably not static. Likewise the information that helps to get you there, and that is why the scientific method is so valuable.

Now that hundreds of millions of people worldwide have received vaccines with overwhelmingly positive results and with vanishingly small incidence of negative reactions, most of the emotional phobias start to look pretty silly. With the virus mutating and being "re-born" all the arguments remain the same, only more urgent. But I don't think that, at this late date, there are many people who have sincere doubts, unless they have deliberately not been paying attention.

I think that there is a sizeable group of people that is essentially making a fetish out of anti-social, obstreperous, and self-destructive behavior.

[yui]

I think that there is a sizeable group of people that is essentially making a fetish out of anti-social, obstreperous, and self-destructive behavior.

i do not think it is a fetish, but a fortune, a few sell "alternatives" for absurd amount of money and makes tons of money that way, and of course will spread misinformation on vaccines etc...

[tp4tissue]

I think that there is a sizeable group of people that is essentially making a fetish out of anti-social, obstreperous, and self-destructive behavior.

i do not think it is a fetish, but a fortune, a few sell "alternatives" for absurd amount of money and makes tons of money that way, and of course will spread misinformation on vaccines etc...

You guys are not using the terms -fetish- and -fortune- correctly.

[yui]

I think that there is a sizeable group of people that is essentially making a fetish out of anti-social, obstreperous, and self-destructive behavior.

i do not think it is a fetish, but a fortune, a few sell "alternatives" for absurd amount of money and makes tons of money that way, and of course will spread misinformation on vaccines etc...

You guys are not using the terms -fetish- and -fortune- correctly.

what do you mean? i genuinely do do not understand you there.

[tp4tissue]

I think that there is a sizeable group of people that is essentially making a fetish out of anti-social, obstreperous, and self-destructive behavior.

i do not think it is a fetish, but a fortune, a few sell "alternatives" for absurd amount of money and makes tons of money that way, and of course will spread misinformation on vaccines etc...

You guys are not using the terms -fetish- and -fortune- correctly.

what do you mean? i genuinely do do not understand you there.

Me neither yui, me neither.

[fohat.digs]

makes tons of money that way

At the very beginning, Google finding a way to monetize clicks was lauded as a stroke of genius, but it turned dark very quickly.

After an appetite for inflammatory sensationalism was created, we now seem to be drowning in a bizarre sea. Calling it "misinformation" is validating it by implying that it is some twisted form of "alternative information" that could possibly be waiting for verification.

I would argue that conspiracy theories and outright falsehoods are not some sick form of entertainment, but rather are "quasi-legal" money-making actions that should be criminalized.

[yui]

I would argue that conspiracy theories and outright falsehoods are not some sick form of entertainment, but rather are "quasi-legal" money-making actions that should be criminalized.

the only problem with that is how do you keep governments from saying that any criticism of them is a falsehood and making it criminal to oppose any policies? welcome to your new dictatorship... governments are already reaching far in control of free speech, let's try to not give them more, any of them would dream of such a law being adopted.

[fohat.digs]

Tom Tomorrow always nails it.

[Kavik]

Aaaaaaand one of my friends and his wife caught it because they went on vacation to Florida.

And one of my coworkers in Florida is out sick today with "the flu".

It's impossible to reign people back in now that all restrictions have been lifted. No one cares now. I think the media and authorities have burnt through whatever capital they had with the population, so no one is taking it seriously anymore. In July, my county went from ~350 cases to ~2400 cases. Maybe I should just stop worrying about it since it's inevitable everyone will get it with an R₀ of 5-9 and the incidence of breakthrough cases.

I may be wrong here, but the good news about mutations, from what I've heard, is that they are somewhat naturally limited. Since the vaccines target the spike protein, as long as it doesn't mutate too much, the vaccines will still provide protection, and that protein can only mutate so much until it can't bind to the ACE2 receptor. If it can't bind, it can't replicate, so those mutations naturally select themselves out. Vaccinated people who get breakthrough infections would presumably develop antibodies to the other proteins in the virus, boosting their immunity to whatever future variants may come. I don't actually know anything about science, so I'm could be totally wrong about that.

I've read something along those lines as well, but the thing about mutations is , it's always Surprise I'm a Ninja.

I thought a bit more about the -heterodoxic censorship- from your OP.  I do not believe the talk it out approach is the right solution.

You're right about variants; it's not really possible to predict which way they'll go.

Yeah, in this circumstance, I agree that that time has run out, but I more so mean that censorship just makes people more entrenched in their doubts because they think something is being hidden from them. The censored info gets out anyway. It would be easier to refute it out in the open. I do think there's still room for discussion regarding how to handle the pandemic as a whole since the previous strategy didn't work.

Excellent assessment, Kavik. I would only add that I think it would help to recognize that those who have already had Covid have protection which, from what I’ve heard, is at least as good as the vaccine.

I’ve talked to several people who haven’t gotten the vaccine.  Most don’t trust those in authority because of many of the points you have made.

Immunity from natural infection is something to consider. At worst, the existing antibodies would just attack the spike proteins from vaccination though, but it would likely act like a booster. One friend caught it a year ago and is still relying on those antibodies, but I'm not sure that's a smart choice given how long it's been. One possible advantage of immunity from natural infection is the possible generation of antibodies to proteins other than the spike.

[fohat.digs]

now that all restrictions have been lifted

When people ask me something I like to give nuanced answers and often employ qualifications such as "if - then".

It is a pet peeve of mine when they drop my qualifications and pretend that I made the statements unqualified.

Am I wrong in remembering that masking was only discontinued only for the fully vaccinated? My recollection is that when the CDC said that fully vaccinated people could drop their masks, suddenly almost "everyone" stopped masking even though only about half of the population is actually vaccinated.

Of course, how silly I am. Anti-social people appreciate opportunities to display anti-social behavior.

[Kavik]

now that all restrictions have been lifted

When people ask me something I like to give nuanced answers and often employ qualifications such as "if - then".

It is a pet peeve of mine when they drop my qualifications and pretend that I made the statements unqualified.

Am I wrong in remembering that masking was only discontinued only for the fully vaccinated? My recollection is that when the CDC said that fully vaccinated people could drop their masks, suddenly almost "everyone" stopped masking even though only about half of the population is actually vaccinated.

Of course, how silly I am. Anti-social people appreciate opportunities to display anti-social behavior.

You are not wrong, but that policy was doomed from the start. People who resist vaccines are the ones most likely not to wear a mask, so of course they would take advantage of that. Also, as my friend put it, wearing a mask at that point is like wearing "the scarlet letter" since it immediately identifies one as unvaccinated (his company asked for voluntary disclosure of vaccine status for mask removal, so one could assume this with certainty).

[fohat.digs]

wearing a mask at that point is like wearing "the scarlet letter"

I disagree. Think that there are lots of vaccinated people out there who never stopped wearing their masks.

[tp4tissue]

wearing a mask at that point is like wearing "the scarlet letter"

I disagree. Think that there are lots of vaccinated people out there who never stopped wearing their masks.

Tp4 likes wearing the mask,  Tp4 + mask = 35% more batman.

[Darthbaggins]

wearing a mask at that point is like wearing "the scarlet letter"

I disagree. Think that there are lots of vaccinated people out there who never stopped wearing their masks.

Where I am in GA, if I wear a mask inside stores I get people avoiding me while giving the "Stink Eye".  If I don't wear a mask I'm seen as normal and vaxxed. 

[noisyturtle]

'More unvaccinated adults in the United States view the coronavirus vaccine as a greater risk to their health than the disease caused by the virus itself, a poll found'

Social media is one of the biggest blunders and most dangerous modern human inventions. Never give stupid people a platform to congegat and reinforce their stupid opinions.

[tp4tissue]

'More unvaccinated adults in the United States view the coronavirus vaccine as a greater risk to their health than the disease caused by the virus itself, a poll found'

Social media is one of the biggest blunders and most dangerous modern human inventions. Never give stupid people a platform to congegat and reinforce their stupid opinions.

Why are they so stupid to begin with.

Social media didn't make them stupid,  Income inequality and deliberate education gap made them stupid, decisions which were out of their hands..

[fohat.digs]

deliberate education gap made them stupid

And Fox TV and far-right AM radio steered them in the wrong direction with smoke and mirrors.

[yui]

wearing a mask at that point is like wearing "the scarlet letter"

I disagree. Think that there are lots of vaccinated people out there who never stopped wearing their masks.

a bit late, sorry.
here there was talk of making masks only mandatory to unvaccinated peoples, but it never went through, still peoples do not wear masks and the obligation is not actually really enforced...
still i am fully vaccinated and wearing a mask all the time out of my house, given that there are vaccine resistant variant i feel that it is the only reasonable course of action.