"vaccine hesitancy" is not a helpful term

“vaccine hesitancy” is one of those very slanted phrases. it’s a sneaky marketing term to make it sound fearful or somehow timid or indecisive. no one wants to be “hesitant.” it’s a word freighted with negative connotation.

so it’s great for shaping image.

but is it really a fair or valid framing?

if these same college kids were asked to chug a beer and refused because they had to drive home, would we call them “budweiser hesitant”?

no. we’d praise their judgement and their ability to resist peer pressure.

so why the massive flip here? are these people hesitant or are they “seeing poor risk reward from taking an experimental vaccine with a significant side effect profile” because they are in an incredibly low risk category for covid?

this is a matter of real and reasonable debate and one of personal choice.

and no, their vax does not protect you in any meaningful way if you are vaxxed yourself. your risk is already so low that nothing they do matters.

stop turning your overblown atavistic fears into policy whereby you demand that people take undue medical risks so you’ll stop fretting. it’s anti-science and anti-social.

longtime gatopal™ and brown university (the gato alma mater) med school professor andrew bostom talks about it HERE.

moralizing is a terrible basis for health policy. it leads to bad outcomes and worse people in charge.

adding a political dimension just weaponizes it further and makes reasonable discussion or even rudimentary trust impossible.

the time for this childish name calling and talismanic superstition is over.

it’s time we got these hectoring karens out of power and out of our lives.

public health has not been at all what they told us it would be, has it?

learn the lesson well. you do NOT want to have to take this class again.