There's this conversation of a few days ago.
KDKA Radio's Wendy Bell is talking to KDKA's fitness expert Aubrey Worek, though the discussion is not about exercise. It's about vaccines - specifically, the future Covid-19 vaccine and how the evil guv'ment is gonna be evil and force you to take it.
Wendy about 2 minutes in says (note: when I put the Wendy-words in quotation marks, it's Wendy doing her cutesy air-quote thing):
It's about what this government here in Pennsylvania (and you know everywhere else has their own) what they can do under an “emergency order to protect our safety” to you and your ability to choose for yourself.
And Wendy's guest says this:
I'm here to raise awareness of these forced vaccine laws. They're popping up in more and more states. And I want to make myself abundantly clear. I'm not fighting against vaccines. I'm happy that they're being developed but everyone should be given full information about this vaccine and allowed to make choice on whether to take it or not. So everyone that wants a vaccine should be able to get it. I appreciate the hard work that the medical community is doing towards this effort.
Here's the thing: whenever someone disavows an anti-vaccine position but adds "but everyone should
be given full information..." it's an anti-vaccine position.
Call it anti-vaxx lite. It's roughly analogous to the "Teach the controversy" argument of those looking to insert Intelligent Design/old Earth creationism into the nation's science curriculum.
Don't fall for it. Especially given the reasons given by Wendy's guest:
So what this does is it takes a lot of the power from the people by not giving them a choice. And really whether or not to take a vaccine is a highly personal choice.
The medical risks are well documented.
And Wendy reiterates the guv-ment threat:
Under “the guise of safety." And this is what we're going to have to do in order to reopen. You're going to have to roll up your sleeve and take it. That's horrifying.
Vaccines are risky and they're gonna force you to take them in order to reopen! Ee-ville!
Later, Wendy says:
So let me get this straight. So we have a virus that 99% of the people manage just fine. So what we're really doing is asking the many to take the risk when what we should be doing is taking all of that making a vaccine to prevent or protect the 1% who are the most fragile in this predicament. Am I wrong? What am I missing?
Wendy, I think you're missing a complete understanding of how/why vaccines are made.
Oh, and that "99% of the people manage just fine" is still a dangerous lie. Don't trust me?
Oh, and that "99% of the people manage just fine" is still a dangerous lie. Don't trust me?
Here's the NIH:
The current scientific literature documenting COVID-19 cases in the U.S. is scattered. But one large report from China, issued in late February, described roughly 44,000 people with confirmed cases of COVID-19. Although most had mild symptoms of the disease, nearly 20 percent were critically ill with lung injury that made breathing difficult. Among the critically ill, many experienced cardiomyopathy and catastrophic arrythmias, prompting a call for more research to study the outcomes and long-term health problems that many patients will face.
Lots of people will get through an infection with little more than bad memories of a few bad weeks. Others will have some permanent damage - you're continued touting of this "99% will be fine" is simply medically incorrect.
Another part of Wendy's anti-vaccine argument is based on her "misunderstanding" of vaccine production. Her guest lays out (with Wendy's approval) the argument here:
We're watching more and more mandates happen in 2020 and what a mandate really does is shift the risk. It forces someone else to take a risk. So therefore we're putting a majority of the population at risk of injury from a rushed vaccine. [Emphasis added.]
It's as if they don't understand the three phase process of testing vaccines. Or if they do, they're withholding that information from the public in order to scare them with guv'ment stories.
From the CDC:
Clinical development is a three-phase process. During Phase I, small groups of people receive the trial vaccine. In Phase II, the clinical study is expanded and vaccine is given to people who have characteristics (such as age and physical health) similar to those for whom the new vaccine is intended. In Phase III, the vaccine is given to thousands of people and tested for efficacy and safety.
Trust the science. Wendy Bell doesn't.
The real weird thing about the Angel of Death's argument here is how it meshes with her "herd immunity" argument.
She's on record touting herd-immunity as a defense against the virus - omitting the very human cost of such, "more than a half million" US deaths from the virus.
But a vaccine that's gone through the 3 phase process to test the its efficacy and safety is just too risky.
Does Wendy Bell understand anything about science? How many people are going to get sick because they think she's telling them the truth?
How is KDKA Radio OK with this?
