The Politics of Covid 19, mask wearing and the vaccination process

[Kurth]

They are willing to let poor people die for their ideology personal enrichment and power.

It's too wildly inconsistent to be an ideology.

But even that leaves me scratching my head. Assuming they don’t actually believe that COVID is a big Democrat hoax, how can a group of people that question/actively discourage vaccination in their base hope to retain or gain power? Unless I am misunderstanding, the people that are being hospitalized and dying from COVID now are almost entirely unvaccinated (greater than 99%). No matter how diabolical you are, I don’t see how you grow your power by espousing ideology that kills off your base.

If things keep going the way they are and the unvaccinated continue to play death lottery, aren’t these deaths going to start eating into the Trumpaloo base while largely leaving the Democratic base untouched (or, even growing if rational thought prevails and some start to see the death cult that the GOP has turned into)?

The GOP is setting things up so that they won't need to win the most votes to gain and retain power. Having a committed base that sees political conflict as life and death may be more important.

Ok. But even if they are all in on the “we’ll never win a popular vote again” game plan - even if they are all in on the “we’ll never win an election again because . . . FASCISM” — I don’t see how killing off your most loyal and fervent followers is a winning play.

They were much better off with the Dems are murdering babies and drinking their blood strategy.

[malchior]

They are willing to let poor people die for their ideology personal enrichment and power.

It's too wildly inconsistent to be an ideology.

But even that leaves me scratching my head. Assuming they don’t actually believe that COVID is a big Democrat hoax, how can a group of people that question/actively discourage vaccination in their base hope to retain or gain power? Unless I am misunderstanding, the people that are being hospitalized and dying from COVID now are almost entirely unvaccinated (greater than 99%). No matter how diabolical you are, I don’t see how you grow your power by espousing ideology that kills off your base.

If things keep going the way they are and the unvaccinated continue to play death lottery, aren’t these deaths going to start eating into the Trumpaloo base while largely leaving the Democratic base untouched (or, even growing if rational thought prevails and some start to see the death cult that the GOP has turned into)?

The GOP is setting things up so that they won't need to win the most votes to gain and retain power. Having a committed base that sees political conflict as life and death may be more important.

It's part this - they aren't dying in sufficient numbers to really change the math especially with the voter right's attacks. It is also part that
several of those people even when DYING FROM COVID express disbelief in COVID. It is mass delusion and indoctrination tied up in a political identity. They have these rubes completely tied up in an alternative universe. The truth doesn't matter anymore.

[El Guapo]

They are willing to let poor people die for their ideology personal enrichment and power.

It's too wildly inconsistent to be an ideology.

But even that leaves me scratching my head. Assuming they don’t actually believe that COVID is a big Democrat hoax, how can a group of people that question/actively discourage vaccination in their base hope to retain or gain power? Unless I am misunderstanding, the people that are being hospitalized and dying from COVID now are almost entirely unvaccinated (greater than 99%). No matter how diabolical you are, I don’t see how you grow your power by espousing ideology that kills off your base.

If things keep going the way they are and the unvaccinated continue to play death lottery, aren’t these deaths going to start eating into the Trumpaloo base while largely leaving the Democratic base untouched (or, even growing if rational thought prevails and some start to see the death cult that the GOP has turned into)?

The GOP is setting things up so that they won't need to win the most votes to gain and retain power. Having a committed base that sees political conflict as life and death may be more important.

It's part this - they aren't dying in sufficient numbers to really change the math especially with the voter right's attacks. It is also part that
several of those people even when DYING FROM COVID express disbelief in COVID. It is mass delusion and indoctrination tied up in a political identity. They have these rubes completely tied up in an alternative universe. The truth doesn't matter anymore.

Yeah, there is also a large degree to which they only have very loose control of the beast that they've unleashed.

[Zarathud]

They’ll convince their supporters that Biden was responsible for their health care, or it was Obamacare’s fault. Or the immigrants keep bringing in the plague. Post-Facebook messaging, truth doesn’t matter as much as confirming the audience’s bias.

[Kurth]

They are willing to let poor people die for their ideology personal enrichment and power.

It's too wildly inconsistent to be an ideology.

But even that leaves me scratching my head. Assuming they don’t actually believe that COVID is a big Democrat hoax, how can a group of people that question/actively discourage vaccination in their base hope to retain or gain power? Unless I am misunderstanding, the people that are being hospitalized and dying from COVID now are almost entirely unvaccinated (greater than 99%). No matter how diabolical you are, I don’t see how you grow your power by espousing ideology that kills off your base.

If things keep going the way they are and the unvaccinated continue to play death lottery, aren’t these deaths going to start eating into the Trumpaloo base while largely leaving the Democratic base untouched (or, even growing if rational thought prevails and some start to see the death cult that the GOP has turned into)?

The GOP is setting things up so that they won't need to win the most votes to gain and retain power. Having a committed base that sees political conflict as life and death may be more important.

It's part this - they aren't dying in sufficient numbers to really change the math especially with the voter right's attacks. It is also part that
several of those people even when DYING FROM COVID express disbelief in COVID. It is mass delusion and indoctrination tied up in a political identity. They have these rubes completely tied up in an alternative universe. The truth doesn't matter anymore.

But if they're dead, who cares what they think? Unless you're at the Jim Jones death cult level, what's the point in promoting mass delusion and indoctrination in a base of supporters only to lead them to kill themselves off in significant numbers? How is that a winning strategy?

[malchior]

But if they're dead, who cares what they think? Unless you're at the Jim Jones death cult level, what's the point in promoting mass delusion and indoctrination in a base of supporters only to lead them to kill themselves off in significant numbers?

It isn't killing them in sufficient numbers to matter. Especially since it is will happen where the GOP has a lock. If it was killing their voters in sufficient quantities to matter...I suspect we'd be having a very different response.

How is that a winning strategy?

Like El Guapo said they are attempting to rig the game right now. A game that was already tilted in their favor via the Senate. But even if it might be rigged it isn't foolproof. They would love some volume of people to turn out. If they don't need to cheat that'd be great but they'll cheat if they need to. It isn't like these are good, ethical people we are talking about.

The winning strategy is to make them into victims - not of COVID which is fake or not a real danger to them - but victims of COVID restrictions or even the specter of return to restrictions might get people off the sidelines. They want the economy to be worse than it could be. They want people to be angrier and less trustful of Democratic led government. They want to enrage the people they've sucked into their alternate reality. That's the game. Any positive for the Democrats has to be subverted. Every negative accentuated. Flip the poles for GOP actions. This is what they are.

[Blackhawk]

If every COVID death was a Trumpupblican voter, then they'd have killed approximately one half of one percent of their followers in return for making the remainder fanatical. That's a huge bargain.

[pr0ner]

Los Angeles County is reimposing an indoor mask mandate at 11:59 PM on Saturday.

[Kurth]

But if they're dead, who cares what they think? Unless you're at the Jim Jones death cult level, what's the point in promoting mass delusion and indoctrination in a base of supporters only to lead them to kill themselves off in significant numbers?

It isn't killing them in sufficient numbers to matter. Especially since it is will happen where the GOP has a lock. If it was killing their voters in sufficient quantities to matter...I suspect we'd be having a very different response.

How is that a winning strategy?

Like El Guapo said they are attempting to rig the game right now. A game that was already tilted in their favor via the Senate. But even if it might be rigged it isn't foolproof. They would love some volume of people to turn out. If they don't need to cheat that'd be great but they'll cheat if they need to. It isn't like these are good, ethical people we are talking about.

The winning strategy is to make them into victims - not of COVID which is fake or not a real danger to them - but victims of COVID restrictions or even the specter of return to restrictions might get people off the sidelines. They want the economy to be worse than it could be. They want people to be angrier and less trustful of Democratic led government. They want to enrage the people they've sucked into their alternate reality. That's the game. Any positive for the Democrats has to be subverted. Every negative accentuated. Flip the poles for GOP actions. This is what they are.

Still not buying this for a few reasons:

(1) COVID may not be killing them in sufficient quantities to matter yet, but if things keep going as they appear and Trumpers continue to be anti-vaccination as a party line, shouldn’t we assume it’s only a matter of time?

(2) I get that deaths resulting from Trumpaloos playing the anti-vaccination death lottery are not likely to move the needle in some jurisdictions where the GOP has an absolute stranglehold, but what about the more borderline, purple states? I would think that loosing any appreciable number of voters in a state like GA or FL or PA or NC would certainly give them pause.

(3) It’s also not just about deaths from non-vaccination. What about all the shit that’s less than death but still pretty high on the shit list? Hospitalization, death of a loved one or a friend or a co-worker, loss of wages/job due to sick time, etc., etc. All this stuff is sure to impact unvaccinated populations at a significantly higher rate - again, greater than 99% of COVID deaths are now among the unvaccinated. Shouldn’t the anti-vaccine GOP be concerned that even their crazy voters might have a change of heart when they have to endure some of this COVID related shit because they’ve all been listening to their political leaders and their anti-vaccine spin?

This still just doesn’t seem like a winning move, politically.

[raydude]

(3) It’s also not just about deaths from non-vaccination. What about all the shit that’s less than death but still pretty high on the shit list? Hospitalization, death of a loved one or a friend or a co-worker, loss of wages/job due to sick time, etc., etc. All this stuff is sure to impact unvaccinated populations at a significantly higher rate - again, greater than 99% of COVID deaths are now among the unvaccinated. Shouldn’t the anti-vaccine GOP be concerned that even their crazy voters might have a change of heart when they have to endure some of this COVID related shit because they’ve all been listening to their political leaders and their anti-vaccine spin?

This still just doesn’t seem like a winning move, politically.

Isn't there something in psychology that says part of the reason why people find it so hard to change their beliefs is that the brain is trying to protect itself? So say you're an anti-Covid-19 nut and you and your family all refuse the vaccine. The more your family members die off the more you dig into this belief that it can't be COVID-19. Why? Because to believe otherwise would be to believe your family died for fake news and some people can't handle that reality. So they go further into their unreality because their brain is like "Nope, I'm not gonna go there."

I have to wonder though - do we think that the GOP politicians are drinking the kool-aid or do we think that they are cynical and have vaccinated themselves and their families while supporting this "you can choose death if you want because of freedom!" routine? Maybe the way to go would be to repeatedly ask them if they've vaccinated themselves. And if they have, why aren't they supporting the call for their constituents to vaccinate?

[Kraken]

(1) COVID may not be killing them in sufficient quantities to matter yet, but if things keep going as they appear and Trumpers continue to be anti-vaccination as a party line, shouldn’t we assume it’s only a matter of time?

You know what's a matter of even less time? When a variant that can evade the vaccines evolves. We (humanity) have a narrow window of opportunity to contain the virus before it can do that, and they (MAGAts) are going to make sure we don't. Chaos and fear are integral to their brand.

[Smoove_B]

I have to wonder though - do we think that the GOP politicians are drinking the kool-aid or do we think that they are cynical and have vaccinated themselves and their families while supporting this "you can choose death if you want because of freedom!" routine?

I'm confident 95% of them have been vaccinated and won't admit it because it would look bad. Same with the personalities on Fox News and whatever other propaganda organizations exist (I can't keep up).

I think it's more what malchior has been saying, this is a way to mobilize against the left and all the things they want to take from the people that love America. They can't tell you to wear a mask! They can't tell you to vaccinate! Is this the America you want to live in? Where you don't have a choice over how to live your life?

Maybe the way to go would be to repeatedly ask them if they've vaccinated themselves. And if they have, why aren't they supporting the call for their constituents to vaccinate?

That's a HIPAA violation! Freedom! You can't ask me that!

[raydude]

(1) COVID may not be killing them in sufficient quantities to matter yet, but if things keep going as they appear and Trumpers continue to be anti-vaccination as a party line, shouldn’t we assume it’s only a matter of time?

You know what's a matter of even less time? When a variant that can evade the vaccines evolves. We (humanity) have a narrow window of opportunity to contain the virus before it can do that, and they (MAGAts) are going to make sure we don't. Chaos and fear are integral to their brand.

What's the endgame for a GOP politician in that scenario? To die in their sleep before that happens? Cause if that happens the virus won't care if you're a GOP politician or just average joe Trumper. Or is it truly just that the GOP can't think further than how they're stiggin it to the Libs in the next hour?

[malchior]

Still not buying this for a few reasons:

(1) COVID may not be killing them in sufficient quantities to matter yet, but if things keep going as they appear and Trumpers continue to be anti-vaccination as a party line, shouldn’t we assume it’s only a matter of time?

I don't know if the best analytical approach is to approach these calculations using "normal rules" or straight forward logic. We are in a political and societal failure state. There is a lot of currency in the GOP by being crazier than the next guy - as long as you don't cross Trump or steal his limelight. And you can see it in poll data over and over where there are tons and tons of completely irrational beliefs and behaviors right now.

(2) I get that deaths resulting from Trumpaloos playing the anti-vaccination death lottery are not likely to move the needle in some jurisdictions where the GOP has an absolute stranglehold, but what about the more borderline, purple states? I would think that loosing any appreciable number of voters in a state like GA or FL or PA or NC would certainly give them pause.

Florida is probably going to gerrymander +1 to 3 seats in the House in a few weeks time in their favor when they redistrict. GA passed very targeted voting laws, etc. The House margin is 5 seats right now.

Looking at the landscape there are sane elements and the insane elements in the GOP. Yet they are all generally on the same train right now even if they are infighting a bit. In the end, they know what most realists know, they will almost certainly take the House next year just via gerrymandering. They'd probably take the House based on normative voting patterns that have held for over a 100 years. Yet they took out more electoral insurance via attacks on the vote. Looking further out they've positioned themselves to have loyalists ready to decertify lawful elections in 2024. The simple question is why are they going to worry about 5000 voters in NC or GA?

(3) It’s also not just about deaths from non-vaccination. What about all the shit that’s less than death but still pretty high on the shit list? Hospitalization, death of a loved one or a friend or a co-worker, loss of wages/job due to sick time, etc., etc. All this stuff is sure to impact unvaccinated populations at a significantly higher rate - again, greater than 99% of COVID deaths are now among the unvaccinated. Shouldn’t the anti-vaccine GOP be concerned that even their crazy voters might have a change of heart when they have to endure some of this COVID related shit because they’ve all been listening to their political leaders and their anti-vaccine spin?

Looking around, no they shouldn't be worried at all about it. Heck in a few months we might be hearing about how it's Biden's fault. McConnell is already trying to play that card in fact.

This still just doesn’t seem like a winning move, politically.

I hate to say it but I think we'll all find out that none of this stuff will matter when the counting is done next year. Americans have short memories to begin with even if the game was fair.

[malchior]

What's the endgame for a GOP politician in that scenario? To die in their sleep before that happens? Cause if that happens the virus won't care if you're a GOP politician or just average joe Trumper. Or is it truly just that the GOP can't think further than how they're stiggin it to the Libs in the next hour?

Ask Robespierre how the French revolution went for him.

[Kraken]

(1) COVID may not be killing them in sufficient quantities to matter yet, but if things keep going as they appear and Trumpers continue to be anti-vaccination as a party line, shouldn’t we assume it’s only a matter of time?

You know what's a matter of even less time? When a variant that can evade the vaccines evolves. We (humanity) have a narrow window of opportunity to contain the virus before it can do that, and they (MAGAts) are going to make sure we don't. Chaos and fear are integral to their brand.

What's the endgame for a GOP politician in that scenario? To die in their sleep before that happens? Cause if that happens the virus won't care if you're a GOP politician or just average joe Trumper. Or is it truly just that the GOP can't think further than how they're stiggin it to the Libs in the next hour?

I'm sure that most of the politicians are vaccinated. They mean to prolong the pandemic to prevent Democrats from claiming that they licked covid. Most GOP politicians won't really risk their own lives to do that, but they're fine with letting their constituents sacrifice for the cause.

I withdraw this argument if there's evidence that the vocal anti-vax Republicans really aren't vaccinated.

[Kurth]

(1) COVID may not be killing them in sufficient quantities to matter yet, but if things keep going as they appear and Trumpers continue to be anti-vaccination as a party line, shouldn’t we assume it’s only a matter of time?

You know what's a matter of even less time? When a variant that can evade the vaccines evolves. We (humanity) have a narrow window of opportunity to contain the virus before it can do that, and they (MAGAts) are going to make sure we don't. Chaos and fear are integral to their brand.

What's the endgame for a GOP politician in that scenario? To die in their sleep before that happens? Cause if that happens the virus won't care if you're a GOP politician or just average joe Trumper. Or is it truly just that the GOP can't think further than how they're stiggin it to the Libs in the next hour?

I'm sure that most of the politicians are vaccinated. They mean to prolong the pandemic to prevent Democrats from claiming that they licked covid. Most GOP politicians won't really risk their own lives to do that, but they're fine with letting their constituents sacrifice for the cause.

I withdraw this argument if there's evidence that the vocal anti-vax Republicans really aren't vaccinated.

I’ll do a fucking Death Nut Challenge if less than 95% of the anti-vax asshat political leaders and media personalities aren’t vaccinated themselves.

I still think it’s a losing proposition for them and a bridge too far. People have short memories, yes, but I think they do tend to remember (or not) when they or a loved one or a friend or a co-worker has died from a preventable virus we had a vaccine for but their tribe leaders told them not to take.

And while I get the psychology of doubling down when you’re wrong, I just can’t wrap my head around who else could possibly be to blame when the unvaccinated die off or are debilitated by COVID.

[Alefroth]

And while I get the psychology of doubling down when you’re wrong, I just can’t wrap my head around who else could possibly be to blame when the unvaccinated die off or are debilitated by COVID.

Did you miss the Ted Cruz video?

[malchior]

I still think it’s a losing proposition for them and a bridge too far. People have short memories, yes, but I think they do tend to remember (or not) when they or a loved one or a friend or a co-worker has died from a preventable virus we had a vaccine for but their tribe leaders told them not to take.

And while I get the psychology of doubling down when you’re wrong, I just can’t wrap my head around who else could possibly be to blame when the unvaccinated die off or are debilitated by COVID.

I'm not saying this is wrong. It might end up being right but I think if it ends up being wrong it might be because you just aren't for whatever reason accepting this aspect of the horror we face. What I see is that they are so twisted up in an alternate universe that what seems irrational to you has been normalized in that population. To my eyes, I've seen enough evidence that they have become a death cult centered around Trump. They are elevating Ashlii Babbit as some martyr. Health prevention measures are about control instead of saving lives. They are denying that the disease killing them is real up to their dying breaths. They ignore the graft that is rampant in the GOP and call it entrepreneurism. We have heaps of evidence that these people live in a fantastical misinformation bubble. Even if they get upset who knows if they'd even assign blame where it belongs.

And for me the reaction I am seeing from you feels a little surreal. Like a Lovecraft novel. Like I have seen the Shoggoth and you haven't and I'm trying to convince you something unbelievable is real. That said, I think that the danger is real. Just the last year has proved it likely real. They are still devoted to Trump despite everything he did. I also believe understanding this hard truth is key to decoding what likely paths are ahead of us. And I can get where you are coming from because it is hard to accept that it really is this bad. But unfortunately I think the odds they'll turn on them even for all this bad behavior is extremely low and this is a reality. And not to sugar coat it, the reaches of what is possible in these conditions are really, really bad.

[Zaxxon]

I’ll do a fucking Death Nut Challenge if less than 95% of the anti-vax asshat political leaders and media personalities aren’t vaccinated themselves.

I guarantee you that less than 95% of the anti-vax asshat political leaders and media personalities aren't vaccinated themselves.

So when do we get the challenge video?

[hepcat]

My antivax coworker told me the other day that I should never take vitamins on an empty stomach after she asked me if I take them (I do...daily). When I asked her where she got that information, she said "doctors".

I had to ask why she believed them on everything but vaccines.

...I didn't get an answer.

[LordMortis]

I'm confident 95% of them have been vaccinated and won't admit it because it would look bad. Same with the personalities on Fox News and whatever other propaganda organizations exist (I can't keep up).

I am not confident of this. Denial and belief are strong in the up and coming whatever they are calling themselves this year caucus. I am confident the vaccination status ts a larger than the US average of 40-55%. I am confident it is higher than the last stated goal of 70%. But the idea that less than 1 in 20 politicians/media outrage deniers haven't bought into AntiVax freedom seems a stretch to me. I can even see the likes of Hawsley and DeSantis and Paul and Abbott and Cruz all being the worst of the pond scum but the likes of Greene and Johnson?, They're the real deal.

[Smoove_B]

And you can see it in poll data over and over where there are tons and tons of completely irrational beliefs and behaviors right now.

Exhibit A:

Republicans' confidence in “science” is nearly 30 points lower than in 1975. Democrats are more confident in “science” than in 1975
Weird how this has become a culture war issue

[El Guapo]

Six Yankees test positive for COVID. At least some of them are 'breakthrough' infections of vaccinated people, including Aaron Judge (who traveled to Denver for the All Star game earlier this week). I *think* none of them are symptomatic to date, though the article isn't 100% clear on this.

[Kurth]

And you can see it in poll data over and over where there are tons and tons of completely irrational beliefs and behaviors right now.

Exhibit A:

Republicans' confidence in “science” is nearly 30 points lower than in 1975. Democrats are more confident in “science” than in 1975
Weird how this has become a culture war issue

Does anyone think that’s kind of a stupid question? “Are you confident in ‘science’?” What does that even mean? Science isn’t a monolith, and confidence is kind of an amorphous, nebulous concept without an anchor to a more concrete, specific thing.

[stessier]

I read it as being confident in the scientific method and the results that come from it - commonly called Science.

[Smoove_B]

"as an institution in America"

EDIT: It does beg for follow up questioning to see if there are layers to what someone will trust or believe in as it relates to "science", but as an opening salvo and a way to take the temperature? I don't see an issue with it.

[Kurth]

I’ll do a fucking Death Nut Challenge if less than 95% of the anti-vax asshat political leaders and media personalities aren’t vaccinated themselves.

I guarantee you that less than 95% of the anti-vax asshat political leaders and media personalities aren't vaccinated themselves.

So when do we get the challenge video?

I just cannot imagine that the Hawleys and Desantisis and Cawthorn and Ingrahams and Tucker Carlsons of the world are not vaccinated. Just no way. Maybe the Marjorie Taylor Greens, but I still see her as a major outlier.

But who knows? You don’t. Neither do I. So safe guarantee by me. Cause there’s no way in hell I’m ever doing the Death Nut Challenge after reading some of those reviews on amazon. My buddy who is the commissioner of our fantasy football league had proposed that as the penalty for coming in last place this year. Ahhhh . . . That’s a hard no!

[Kurth]

I read it as being confident in the scientific method and the results that come from it - commonly called Science.

The scientific method is one thing (not that I imagine any significant percentage of those taking the poll actually know what that is), but when you talk about “confidence in science,” there’s a shit ton to unpack there.

Are all branches and fields of science created equal? Let’s just take medicine, itself an incredibly broad field with innumerable sub-fields and branches. Are the respondents equally confident in the science that underlies our treatment of broken bones as they are with the science that supports novel cancer treatments? When we look at treatments and understanding of common ophthalmic diseases like cataracts or glaucoma and compare that to our understanding and treatment of GI diseases like Chron’s or UC or IBS, should we be as “confident” in one as we are in the other?

And what about scientists themselves? Are they all created equal?

And what are we expressing confidence in? Is it just their ability to solve the identified problem or question? I’m confident that scientists will be able to make tremendous advances in genetic manipulation in the near term. I’m less confident that they have thought through the moral, ethical and social impacts of some of those advances. In the same way, I’m confident epidemiologists can tell us measures we can take to avoid getting COVID-19. I’m less confident in their ability to assess the moral, ethical and societal implications of some of those measures.

I don’t mean to be pedantic, but I just think “Are you confident in science” is a really stupid question. It bugs me in the same way as all the people and all the yard signs that say “science is real” (full disclaimer, I have one of those signs in my yard).

Just seems like another question to break us into self-identified tribes. No room for nuance in this world.

[Zaxxon]

I’ll do a fucking Death Nut Challenge if less than 95% of the anti-vax asshat political leaders and media personalities aren’t vaccinated themselves.

I guarantee you that less than 95% of the anti-vax asshat political leaders and media personalities aren't vaccinated themselves.

So when do we get the challenge video?

I just cannot imagine that the Hawleys and Desantisis and Cawthorn and Ingrahams and Tucker Carlsons of the world are not vaccinated. Just no way. Maybe the Marjorie Taylor Greens, but I still see her as a major outlier.

But who knows? You don’t. Neither do I. So safe guarantee by me. Cause there’s no way in hell I’m ever doing the Death Nut Challenge after reading some of those reviews on amazon. My buddy who is the commissioner of our fantasy football league had proposed that as the penalty for coming in last place this year. Ahhhh . . . That’s a hard no!

My point is that your guarantee is the opposite of your argument. They're virtually all vaccinated, meaning it is the case that less than 95% aren't vaccinated.

[malchior]

I don’t mean to be pedantic, but I just think “Are you confident in science” is a really stupid question. It bugs me in the same way as all the people and all the yard signs that say “science is real” (full disclaimer, I have one of those signs in my yard).

Just seems like another question to break us into self-identified tribes. No room for nuance in this world.

Isn't there value into seeing where those breaks are? I get your point that 'science' is vast as a topic but the question doesn't eliminate the possibility to dig in there. It isn't a definitive answer by itself. This type of polling is often about checking which way the wind is blowing and it adds some measure of weight to a lot of trends we see.

[Kurth]

I’ll do a fucking Death Nut Challenge if less than 95% of the anti-vax asshat political leaders and media personalities aren’t vaccinated themselves.

I guarantee you that less than 95% of the anti-vax asshat political leaders and media personalities aren't vaccinated themselves.

So when do we get the challenge video?

I just cannot imagine that the Hawleys and Desantisis and Cawthorn and Ingrahams and Tucker Carlsons of the world are not vaccinated. Just no way. Maybe the Marjorie Taylor Greens, but I still see her as a major outlier.

But who knows? You don’t. Neither do I. So safe guarantee by me. Cause there’s no way in hell I’m ever doing the Death Nut Challenge after reading some of those reviews on amazon. My buddy who is the commissioner of our fantasy football league had proposed that as the penalty for coming in last place this year. Ahhhh . . . That’s a hard no!

My point is that your guarantee is the opposite of your argument. They're virtually all vaccinated, meaning it is the case that less than 95% aren't vaccinated.

Fucking math.

Still not doing the challenge.

[wonderpug]

I don’t mean to be pedantic, but I just think “Are you confident in science” is a really stupid question. It bugs me in the same way as all the people and all the yard signs that say “science is real” (full disclaimer, I have one of those signs in my yard).

Just seems like another question to break us into self-identified tribes. No room for nuance in this world.

Isn't there value into seeing where those breaks are? I get your point that 'science' is vast as a topic but the question doesn't eliminate the possibility to dig in there. It isn't a definitive answer by itself. This type of polling is often about checking which way the wind is blowing and it adds some measure of weight to a lot of trends we see.

My gut feeling is that it feels like an extension of the "head to head" segments you see on a news show, where on the one side you have several experts who have had 12 years of education and 30 years of experience in their very specific field, and then on the other side you have Fran from BevMo who saw a thing on Facebook. You give both of these sides equal airtime and it appears as if there's a real debate as to which of the two is right. But no, everyone on the side with real experts is right, and the true debate is really just between some nuances between their stances.

So you get a poll like this that condenses all the complexity Kurth laid out of what "science" really means into a dumbed-down "grunt one if good, grunt twice if bad" decision. It makes it easier to throw the whole thing out. There's no room for "well the scientific method is sound, of course, but I have issues with how some publications pass themselves off as peer reviewed when in truth they...". No, it just keeps on making it easier for people to justify "GUH. SCIENCE BAD. ALL BAD. FACEBOOK NEWS FEED AGREE."

[Kurth]

I don’t mean to be pedantic, but I just think “Are you confident in science” is a really stupid question. It bugs me in the same way as all the people and all the yard signs that say “science is real” (full disclaimer, I have one of those signs in my yard).

Just seems like another question to break us into self-identified tribes. No room for nuance in this world.

Isn't there value into seeing where those breaks are? I get your point that 'science' is vast as a topic but the question doesn't eliminate the possibility to dig in there. It isn't a definitive answer by itself. This type of polling is often about checking which way the wind is blowing and it adds some measure of weight to a lot of trends we see.

Maybe. I guess if it’s unavoidable that we will inevitably break down into tribalism (or just exist there in a constant and unending state), it’s better to know how your tribe is doing in terms of numbers than not know.

But my concern is that the set up for this question, in and of itself, encourages a black/white world view. You’re either for science or you’re against it. Which is it? Isn’t there a risk that this kind of polling actually pushes us further into those camps?

[stessier]

Are all branches and fields of science created equal? Let’s just take medicine, itself an incredibly broad field with innumerable sub-fields and branches. Are the respondents equally confident in the science that underlies our treatment of broken bones as they are with the science that supports novel cancer treatments? When we look at treatments and understanding of common ophthalmic diseases like cataracts or glaucoma and compare that to our understanding and treatment of GI diseases like Chron’s or UC or IBS, should we be as “confident” in one as we are in the other?

You are conflating Science with Results/Current Understanding. Yes, everyone should trust in the process of discovery and the methods we use to describe how good those processes are. That doesn't mean all the results/current understanding are equal.

And what about scientists themselves? Are they all created equal?

No, but that's not science and science gives us ways to evaluate the methods they use to come to a greater understanding of the word around us.

I’m less confident that they have thought through the moral, ethical and social impacts of some of those advances. In the same way, I’m confident epidemiologists can tell us measures we can take to avoid getting COVID-19. I’m less confident in their ability to assess the moral, ethical and societal implications of some of those measures.

None of that is science - not should it be. Each does have it's own field of study though.

Just seems like another question to break us into self-identified tribes. No room for nuance in this world.

I would suggest the tribes already exist. Just because the map maker outlines the continent doesn't mean he created it.

[Kurth]

Stessier- I’d argue that I’m not the one doing the conflating: I think many of the respondents probably are, though, and the stupid poll question “are you confident in science” isn’t doing anything to minimize that confusion.

[Smoove_B]

On the off chance you see friends/family/coworkers sharing the "masks are bad for kids" study from a few weeks ago on social media, it has officially been retracted:

The Research Letter, “Experimental Assessment of Carbon Dioxide Content in Inhaled Air With or Without Face Masks in Healthy Children: A Randomized Clinical Trial,” by Harald Walach, PhD, and colleagues published online in JAMA Pediatrics on June 30, 2021,1 is hereby retracted. Following publication, numerous scientific issues were raised regarding the study methodology, including concerns about the applicability of the device used for assessment of carbon dioxide levels in this study setting, and whether the measurements obtained accurately represented carbon dioxide content in inhaled air, as well as issues related to the validity of the study conclusions. In their invited responses to these and other concerns, the authors did not provide sufficiently convincing evidence to resolve these issues, as determined by editorial evaluation and additional scientific review. Given fundamental concerns about the study methodology, uncertainty regarding the validity of the findings and conclusions, and the potential public health implications, the editors have retracted this Research Letter.

Similar to the vaccine autism study, I'm fully expecting it will still be quoted for years as proof that masks are bad for kids.

[LordMortis]

I see an Unmask The Children lawn sign every time I drive home work. It raises my hackles just a little bit every time I see it.

[El Guapo]

On the off chance you see friends/family/coworkers sharing the "masks are bad for kids" study from a few weeks ago on social media, it has officially been retracted:

The Research Letter, “Experimental Assessment of Carbon Dioxide Content in Inhaled Air With or Without Face Masks in Healthy Children: A Randomized Clinical Trial,” by Harald Walach, PhD, and colleagues published online in JAMA Pediatrics on June 30, 2021,1 is hereby retracted. Following publication, numerous scientific issues were raised regarding the study methodology, including concerns about the applicability of the device used for assessment of carbon dioxide levels in this study setting, and whether the measurements obtained accurately represented carbon dioxide content in inhaled air, as well as issues related to the validity of the study conclusions. In their invited responses to these and other concerns, the authors did not provide sufficiently convincing evidence to resolve these issues, as determined by editorial evaluation and additional scientific review. Given fundamental concerns about the study methodology, uncertainty regarding the validity of the findings and conclusions, and the potential public health implications, the editors have retracted this Research Letter.

Similar to the vaccine autism study, I'm fully expecting it will still be quoted for years as proof that masks are bad for kids.

Do we know anything about how it got published? Not to be cynical, but I can't help but wonder with these things about whether activists get people to publish stuff like this with either the understanding that it'll get retracted or with indifference to that possibility, knowing that it'll provide people with something to circulate on FB that looks official.

[El Guapo]

I see an Unmask The Children lawn sign every time I drive home work. It raises my hackles just a little bit every time I see it.

A few weeks ago we saw an Unmask the Children bumper sticker, and I had to explain it to my baffled daughter.