Do you believe in science?

[qubitasaurus]

Lol nice thing is you don't need to believe science. Nor should you, its not supposed to work like that. Instead you can go pull the research paper and read it. They're written in such a way that you can go through them and understand exactly what each claim means in terms of basic predicates, data and analysis that was used. At this stage it is not a claim or press headline but a bunch of hard facts that you can look at individually to decide if you believe the logic and the individual assertions. After you pull the paper you can go find the main review articles in the field. It can take a couple of days if youre unfamilar with the field, but you can usually get a feeling/understanding for each basic step in the argument. These you can check individually (but theyre almost never wrong) then you check the logic and edge cases (usually these are the lynch pin. If its going to break; youll break it here. This process is happening continuously, which ultimately is what causes most papers to get written to patch the edge cases. Typically this is how scientific theories evolve).

 

[LilAlex]

It can be very hard to know whom to trust; even more so as legacy media and Big Tech increasingly seem to apply censorship that is sharply partisan in their treatment of the pandemic. In addition, the algorithms of social media intentionally drive anxiety and division in an already divided populace in pursuit of clicks and advertising dollars.

This guy is not an anti-vaxxer; he is just a self-deluded apologist for all of them. He appears to be a physician and some are just awful. (Remember "only" 96% of physicians have been vaccinated.) His self-ID'ed demographic is the crux of the disinformation campaign. He does not even mention the concerted propaganda storm from FOX News (mostly) and the even kookier news outlets that has been crafted and cultivated for the express purpose of "owning the libs," -- the libs who think they know everything like how to end pandemics to which we have a superb vaccine. He seems to think it's a few FB friends who unknowingly amplify all of our doubt .

This is a sad, sad commentary that only serves to underscore the depths of this problem cooked up by a few and now perpetuated by nearly half the country. I am sick and tired of these witless souls who are single-handedly prolonging the pandemic while wailing, "When will it end?!?"

EDIT: I know @missy is not saying this -- this is a quote from her post

 

[missy]

This guy is not an anti-vaxxer; he is just a self-deluded apologist for all of them.

And the self deluded can be the most dangerous of them all.
They really believe their rhetoric.
And there will be/already are harmful consequences not just to themselves but to the well being of others.

 

[missy]

For the two who voted for choice 2 and 4 could you please explain your thinking. Thank you.

And for anyone who hasn't and doesn't plan on getting the vaccine (when given medical clearance to do so that is) my question is why are you more afraid of the vaccine than the actual virus?

 

[lovedogs]

Do you mean meta-analysis? This is a mathematically rigorous way to pool multiple under-powered studies thereby increasing sample size to the point that a hidden effect (or, just as important, a hidden lack of effect) may be found. There are spectacular meta-analyses that have led to important changes in care delivery.

I do not understand where your assessment of "totally crap" comes from.

When/if they are applied to terrible data -- as is often the case -- the outcome is usually not that informative. A well-done study is conducted with "effect size" (intervention will have big impact or small impact?) in mind so that the necessary "n" (study enrollment, in this case) can be achieved.

A study question that has led to multiple under-powered studies has likely not attracted the savviest trialists -- or else the effect size is very small and barely discernible. For questions affecting huge populations -- like blood pressure goal or aspirin after heart attack -- a miniscule but ultimately statistically significant effect can result in thousands of lives saved. (See: vaccines.)

Came here and was exhausted at the prospect of having to explain meta analysis. Thank you for doing it so clearly!

 

[Dancing Fire]

For the two who voted for choice 2 and 4 could you please explain your thinking. Thank you.

They wouldn't dare...

 

[missy]

They wouldn't dare...

If I believe strongly in something I am not afraid to state my reasons why. Of course if their reason is solely fear based then yes, I can understand whey they would be reluctant to come forward. That is why I made the poll an anonymous one as I wanted (and appreciate) honest answers. However, when I am passionate about an issue I am not hesitant to share my reasons. Whatever they may be. That is me of course and YMMV.

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

Ive ticked #1 even though i havn't had the jabs yet because im not eligible here yet as the vacine roll out is p*ss poor in this country but Gary did get his and is booked in for his 2nd and he beleaves in science (as i do)

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

Yes and I've got a vaccine booked but I'm not eligible to get it any sooner than the booking date!

I feel your pain sister
In the. Meantime please do everything you can to keep you and your family safe
im worried about you all over there

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

Ten percent of Americans don’t believe we landed on the moon, so in some ways the science skepticism/wacko conspiracy theories are maybe just par for the human course. What’s new though is the ability of social media to spread the crazy, and to have major news outlets doing so. Imagine if a newscaster had said the day after that the moon landing was staged. And did so not because they believed it, but because it was profitable to
do so.

In the words of Fox Mulder "i want to beleave "

I confess I do actually buy into a few ( seemingly to others wako) theories that are out there (and im not even American ) but anti vax is not one of them

 

[mellowyellowgirl]

I feel your pain sister
In the. Meantime please do everything you can to keep you and your family safe
im worried about you all over there

Haha I shop with a mask and a face shield.

I have people smiling and thanking me randomly because they think I'm a health worker. I feel terrible about that but it feels a lot safer with the shield so I wear it!

 

[Daisys and Diamonds]

Haha I shop with a mask and a face shield.

I have people smiling and thanking me randomly because they think I'm a health worker. I feel terrible about that but it feels a lot safer with the shield so I wear it!

Oh im very glad to read that
i have 3 of those sheilds but thankfully we have not had to use them

 

[dk168]

Yes to both, and I work in the pharmaceutical industry as a HCP since 1992!

DK

 

[AprilBaby]

They wouldn't dare...

You have given us about 25 reasons so far that have been debunked. I don’t think you really have a reason Except to brag you won’t get it.

 

[luv2sparkle]

I am vaccinated but I am skeptical about the need for some vaccinations. For instance, they heavily promote for teens to get the Menningitis B vaccine all the while saying it is very rare, but that one out of five of the super small percentage that do get it will have serious consequences to the disease but also that the vaccine will not stop everyone from getting it. There are vaccines that have thermisol and formaldehyde in them and I dont want even a tiny amount of that in my body. With each vaccine a person needs to weigh the pros and cons during non pandemic times. Covid was not a risk I was willing to take.

Not everything that is labeled science is 100 percent truth. So much changes with more knowledge. Many people have been given drugs approved by the FDA and they later found out it caused some great harm like DES being giving to pregnant mothers in the late 50's to early 60's and the daughters of those women have been found to have much more uterine cancers than normal. I remain skeptical. The science is changing with regards to the food that we eat and what is considered healthy and what is not. Science changes all the time so I don't think it is a bad thing to be skeptical.

 

[Dancing Fire]

I am vaccinated but I am skeptical about the need for some vaccinations. For instance, they heavily promote for teens to get the Menningitis B vaccine all the while saying it is very rare,

Yep I remember my DD#1 must be vaccinated for meningitis before she can start college in 2005 at the time she was only 17.

This might be a coincidence but she had problem conceiving she had to take a lot pills, then when she was pregnant during her 2nd trimester she had to go into ER b/c she was bleeding a lot one night. Her Dr. suggested that she should be bedridden till she gave birth, then after she gave birth she almost lost her life for none stop bleeding, in fact all the Dr.s and nurses were shocked why she didn't die that night. ...that's another story.

 

[kenny]

Just a little nit to pick ...
IMO instead of believing or understanding science, "accepting" science is the term I feel is best.

Nit #2 ... accepting the "scientific method" is even more bulletproof than just the term science.
As Karl points out not everything called science is groovy.

I accept the soundness of the scientific method itself, but understand that some people will try to use so called science to further their nefarious agenda.
So, instead of buyer beware it's reader beware.

Some folks poopoo science because it changes, is found to be wrong, or "can't make up its mind".
But that's because it welcomes being updated/corrected when new/better information comes to light.
I wouldn't have it any other way.