Vaccine Hesitancy

From iGeek
Jump to: navigation, search

Vaccine hesitancy is a problem caused by the media.

Give Control

If you want to make someone confident in the efficacy and safety of something and get the most people vaccinated, you would know the basics: People like control, so try to give them as much control as possible. A few will follow whatever you tell them, but the plurality of people are rational and need to be sold more than told. So if you want to get the most people to do something, you would do the following:

  1. Let them feel informed (sharing data)
  2. Instill trust by being transparent, consistent, and holding people accountable (Admit mistakes)
  3. Put lives above politics: never politicize or polarize the issue
  4. Follow the science
  5. Never mandate

All of those give people control over their lives. Breaking any or all of them, just makes the problems worse. The Biden Administration and the leftist media have chosen the exact opposite at every opportunity, then blamed others for non-compliance based on the consequences of their actions.

Let's break these down and offer examples:

Share information

Some people will be persuaded by force: do it or else. They will follow. But most people are rational -- they have to be reasoned with. If you are patronizing and tell them, "because I said so", they are not persuaded by that, and immediately suspicious of you and your motives. "What, you don't have a better argument than intimidation/bullying?" They need to come to it on their own -- not be forced into it, because you are convinced but unable to convince or persuade others.

The first thing to persuade them is to just give them the data, answer their questions, and let them come to the decision themselves. Here's all the risks of the disease, and here's the risks and complications of the vaccine. if the data is on your side, then offer it, and most people can get it.

Instead of doing that, from day 1, the CDC/WHO has lied and occluded data. They exaggerated the death rate, and contagion rate (R0), they denied the source of the infection was a Chinese Lab, they attacked anyone that offered therapeutics, or studies that didn't fit the political agenda of the far left (like the science against Masks, or the economics against lockdowns).

If you want to debate the merits of your case, you let the other side offer their best evidence/arguments, then you systematically refute them with the data we have (good and bad). Instead the media/social media censored the other side and attacked anyone that offered facts or evidence they didn't like. That makes the media's case look suspicious -- like they can't handle the truth.

The more people feel they are not fully informed (or not getting the whole picture), the leerier they will be about your agenda. If the truth is on your side, you're not afraid of the whole truth. And if you're afraid of the whole truth, then you're hiding something and not trustworthy. This gets to our next point.

Instill trust

Would you buy a car from a smarmy used car salesman with a rap sheet, and a history of lying? Well, that's every politician and government spokesperson in history.

Now throw on top that they get caught hiding something important from you. (Anything). If they hide one thing, a rational person will have to wonder what else they're hiding. So if they get caught hiding/lying once, they get a "danger" flag. If when confronted they admit a mistake, they can rebuild trust. If they get caught lying (distorting) five times -- any company/person they are associated with is tainted with the distrust they've instilled. Any agency that doesn't hold them accountable, is also suspect.

If they flip-flop on a position it's bad -- but recoverable. Own it, explain why, and give back control. "Hey, we made a mistake -- here's what the data said at the time, and what changed, and that's why we changed positions"... that earns an "Oh, OK... I guess I understand". But if they deny they did it, when you saw them do it, it is worse. "I never said that"... then when you show them they did, "well, yea I said that, but the science changed"... "Q: OK, what changed?"... "A: You don't need to know". Well fuck you, you slimy arrogant prick -- now I don't trust you.

Now, look at Fauci and Biden. Fauci lied, multiple times. You could argue some were honest mistakes... but the majority have evidence that they were more politically motivated: lethality, contagion rate, lockdowns, masks, Lab origins, funding gain-of-function, vaccines will never be out in time, school closures, vaccinating kids, shot mandates, etc. Fauci flip-flopped on everything, without offering why.

It doesn't matter if he's right, what matters is he lost the confidence. Thus if you stand behind him, you look untrustworthy too. If you fired Fauci and replaced him with a fresh face (clean start) that could explain WHY we did things, that would rebuild some trust that people are getting the whole truth and thus have more control. Maybe they were wrong? But as long as you are arm in arm with the Jeffrey Epstein of virology, you're splattered with the stain of your allies -- and they're not going to change their minds that you're not trustworthy. That's nobody's fault but Biden's bad leadership. (Biden would rather have a dishonest and untrustworthy political pawn, than risk putting up a trustworthy person that might not agree with his agenda).

Politicization / Polarization

As soon as you politicize or divide, you create us versus them. If you cared about human lives, then you'd never politicize a pandemic. Democrats and their media chose never letting an opportunity go to waste (to divide us). They valued politics over human lives, and then the hypocritical sanctimony made it worse.


  • They started by attacking Trump for lockdowns and over-reacting, then flip-flopped to not doing enough.
  • When Trump tried to instill calm by sharing the latest data on therapeutic (HCQ and other experimental treatments that were being worked on), they did everything they could to undermine him and public confidence.
  • When masks were shown as of dubious value, and we should focus on other things that would help more -- they undermined that.
  • When Trump said vaccines were coming in 6 months, they attacked that -- Democrats (including President and President of Vice, said they'd never take it if Trump won)
  1. When Vaccines were ready, they held them back until after the election
  2. When Vaccines launched under Trump, the left tried to take credit for them
  3. When there was a plan in place for distribution, they lied and said there wasn't
  4. When there were more options coming online (like AZ and other vaccines), and people were suspicious of mRNA -- the Democrats blocked the other choices in the U.S.
  5. When it was shown that minorities were resistant/suspicious the media attacked conservatives and blamed them for hesitancy
  6. When therapeutics and selective quarantine of the sick was working as well as trying to lock down the health, the media/left lied and tried to attack conservatives for not following
  7. When it was shown that Fauci was an untrusted political hack, the Democrats got more behind him
  8. When it was shown that mandates will alienate some and cause them to dig in, and they promised not to do it, they did it anyway

And so on. You want to turn groups against you? Divide us by groups, and condescend to the other group that they are idiots for non-compliance with your groups unsupported hypocritical and dishonest mandates. Polarize and politicize was guaranteed to increase suspicion and decrease vaccine rates. And Democrats did everything they could to maximize that polarization -- or they are just that stupid on human nature.

Follow the science

The science says that:

  • Natural immunity is better than vaccines
  • A negative test makes you safer than someone with a vaccine
  • An illegal immigrant or union worker with COVID is riskier to than a soldier, student or healthcare worker without a vaccine
  • Masks mandates (especially outdoors, and especially of children) had limited if any efficacy, and probably was counter-productive
  • Lockdowns of at-risk might help... Lockdowns of everyone is unsustainable and counter-productive
  • There were no known cases of transmission in planes, virtually none in gyms or restaurants
  • Therapeutics work, and don't need to be rationed.
  • The vaccinated are more probably spreaders than the unvaccinated (lowering their symptoms, increases the transmission)
  • We are not going to vaccinate our way to herd immunity -- places that are at 80%+ are still having outbreaks -- so 100% or 90% compliance not only isn't going to happen, even if it does, it won't stop COVID. We need to learn to live with COVID, not get to some mythical 99% vaccination that will still force us to learn to live with COVID.

And so on... knowing these truths, you could make reasonable science-based policies. But Biden admin and left chose the opposite at every opportunity. Are there exceptions to vaccine mandates (masks, travel, work) for people who have had COVID and thus have better immunity than the shot? Nope. Are they allowed to show they have a valid reason for avoiding the shot (allergic/reaction history), can they get around them with tests showing they are negative or have antibodies? The science says those should be reasonable concessions (that they have in Europe) -- but not in Biden's USSA: comply or else.

Of course, the science says Illegal immigrants are more risky (higher positive rate than the general public), and unions, Postal Workers, and others are as risky as everyone else. But the Biden administration makes exceptions based on allies/pandering -- and then tries to ruin the lives of groups that are more likely to have political opposition to him or his policies (like military, conservative employees, etc). That's not the science -- that's politics. And it's getting people killed.

The same, if you're reasonable you try to limit lifestyle as much as possible. Virtually no cases in gyms/restaurants? Open them up. Some states are getting good outcomes with Therapeutics and allowing outdoor activities -- follow them, don't attack them. Some areas don't have masks and have no significant difference in outcomes? Ignore them, or follow them -- do anything but attack them. (Focus your energy where it'll help more). And so on. In other words, do the opposite of Wrong-Way Biden.


If you know vaccine mandates will help with a few in the short term (the reluctant followers will give in to bullying), but that in the long term it'll convince many more that you're not trustworthy... especially when you promised not to do them, and are not demanding them... then a vaccine mandate is a way to kill people for your political agenda. Biden did that happily.

All mandates are the point where someone doesn't have any persuasive abilities, or data, or reason left, and they're saying, "because I said so!"... and that might work on sheep. But in America, we tend to throw tea in the harbor and tell you to fuck off. Biden either misjudged America completely -- or he is intentionally doing it because he wants to kill of his opposition: conservatives, rational people who don't follow blindly, individualist and non-conformists. One makes him stupid, the other makes him evil... and I'm not sure they are mutually exclusive and that he can't be both.


We know that some people will never trust a vaccine from liars. We know that others will avoid them from partisan hacks. We know others will never trust them when bullies try to force them. We know that some want to be informed, so Democrats tried to keep people in the dark and only give them filtered propaganda. We know that many will follow the science -- so the far left ignores the science, calls their political mandates science -- and wonders why anyone with a clue doesn't buy in. We know Biden and his leftist media (puppets or puppet masters) have done everything to make the American outcomes as poor as possible. And blame the other side for the consequences of their actions.

If you want an example of the kind of article that gets everything wrong, and does more harm than good, here's a hate piece that got me pissed off enough to write this rebuttal on why everything it says is basically wrong.


📚 References