vaccine refusal was higher among those with higher education, especially in high-income countries.
I imagine a huge factor in this is that people with high education in high-income countries both have a lot more medical autonomy and also that the risks of getting covid are much lower for them as they have much easier access to things like paxlovid that make getting covid a lot less scary.
I think you're finally making progress here -- what's the point of getting the COVID vaccine if you aren't an old abomination.
I don't want to get covid! And I haven't. Getting the vaccine has worked out great for me.
I think both the risks of getting covid and also the risks of the vaccine are in the low-mid level, but i ultimately think the risks of getting covid are higher. That's why I got the vaccine. I also have old parents who I helped take care of during quarantine and I didn't want to put them at risk by being more likely to transmit it to them. There are tons of reasons to get the vaccine.
I dont think the vaccine is no risk. There are clearly risks associated with it. There are also risks associated with being exposed to and getting covid. Its just weighing those two things against each other.
You were still able to catch COVID after taking the vaccine; moreover, you were still able to shed the virus and infect others.
Yes, but i am much less likely to do either! not having 100% efficacy doesn't mean it has 0% efficacy.
What do you think the number is then? Is it closer to 0% or is it closer to 100%. Because you've just made a big deal over the 70% number.
Because it's closer to zero percent.
well i think a 70% chance of not getting a disease and 70% of phds believing something are incomparable uses of '70%'
just because its the same number doesn't mean it has the same implications everywhere its used
if something has a 30% chance of killing me, I'm super concerned
if 30% of people think soda is gross i'm not very concerned.
You've just argued that near 1/4th of the most advanced degrees holders questioning something means it isn't big deal.
What do you think the number of people who "aren't hesitant" needs to be for something to be considered safe.
Would you fly in a plane where 75% of the people thought it was safe?
thats twisting my words somewhat.
i argued that 23% of the most advanced degree holders (not selected for relevant study) having hesitancy of a brand new technology didn't ultimately lead to my decision to not take the vaccine
It certainly wouldn't be enough information to make me not fly.
also its not 75% of people. its 75% of an incredibly small subset of people
This isn't fear of flying -- it's a question about standards.
Acceptable rates of risk.
I think general popluations hesitancy of something is not the best metric to determine if something is safe or not.
If the number is overwhelmingly concerning, then it is worth looking into it more based on that information, but ultimately i care the most about what experts in that field think.
So you've gone to trust the experts -- but again, the expert class is the most hesitant.
Do you not believe in the wisdom of crowds?
