Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

who is of course, infallible, never taken out of context, and never misrepresented. he said something you didn't understand once, and therefore everybody who says something you don't want to hear must be wrong.

did I cover everything?



So, do we trust the director of the CDC now or not?

What exactly didn't I understand?

https://web.archive.org/web/20210402002315/https://www.msnbc... <- full transcript, just in case

quote:

> And we have -- we can kind of almost see the end. We`re vaccinating so very fast, our data from the CDC today suggests, you know, that vaccinated people do not carry the virus, don`t get sick, and that it`s not just in the clinical trials but it`s also in real world data.

What exactly is misunderstood, taken out of context and misrepresented here?

The skeptics, who didn't trust the science, didn't trust the "do not carry the virus, don't get sick,..." quote, were right again.

I'm not saying that everyone is always wrong, i'm saying that you should blindly trust someone, because of science. Especially if they were incorrect previously. Remember the calculations of how many more vaccinations and infections are needed to reach herd immunity? Well... good luck with trusting that science too.

NOT trusting is the basis of all science, even if people don't trust the things you don't want to hear.... and especially if it turns out that they were correct. Blocking/banning/censoring those people is the same as banning non-believers in smoke smoke enemas 200 years ago.


> What exactly didn't I understand?

The difference between casual human conversation on a late night panel show and the strict precise statements in actual papers.

The educated with real world exposure to weed eradication, stock control,. past use of vaccines, etc didn't take the "do not carry the virus, don't get sick,..." absolutely literally as if it was deified bible quote either.

They heard that as saying given the data to hand right now (context) that data suggests (qualifier) that the vaccinated aren't carrying the virus nor getting sick (in contrast to those unvaccinated .. as in there is a visible stark difference).

A chat on a late panel show IS NOT "the science" and a paper on the stats coming back from trials would use actual percents, p-values, etc and make it clear.




Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: