How Can We Have Thoughtful, Productive Discussions on Vaccine Mandates?
Focusing on choice, and backing it up with scientific studies may be a good place to start.
(Editor’s note: I started this newsletter as a way to share thoughts and open dialogue on a number of topics. I apologize that it’s been vaccine mandate-centric so far, but it’s something that is vexing me on every level. I *will* write on other issues, but this one feels too important to ignore right now.)
I have been wracking my brain for the last several months about how so many people I know and love - people I believe to be intelligent and caring individuals - have gone along with the notion of COVID-19 vaccine mandates. I remember, in particular, a conversation I had with a friend of mine this spring. I had been reading about so-called vaccine passports in other countries, and I became incredibly alarmed at the notion. She agreed with me that it was a drastic measure, but didn’t think anything like that would come to the US. Then a few months later, just as Delta was beginning to rear its head stateside, we were discussing the fact that employers were starting to inquire about vaccination status. I expressed my sense of discomfort. She agreed that it “wasn’t their business” but also expressed being completely comfortable with employers asking.
Another friend and I discussed the idea of mandates and passports this summer, and she was whole-heartedly behind them. Knowing that she had unvaccinated family members, I asked if she thought it was okay for the people she loved to be excluded based on their vaccination status. She paused, only briefly, and then simply said, “I just feel better knowing I’m in a place where everyone is vaccinated.”
And just yesterday, I was lamenting to a family member about workplace vaccination policies. That conversation went something like this:
Me: I just don’t understand why they’re doing this. It is unreasonable and illogical.
Family member: Well they’re just trying to end this thing.
Me: How does this end it? Vaccinated people can still get and spread the virus.
FM: What? No they can’t.
Me: They absolutely can. That’s been proven.
FM: But they aren’t as likely to. So everyone needs to get vaccinated.
Me: There’s actually evidence that they may get and spread it just as efficiently as someone who has not been vaccinated.
FM: Well…(pregnant pause) it lowers the chance of the infection being severe.
Me: Yes. So that should be up to the individual. The current vaccines only offer an individual benefit. Not a public one. So how and why is that an employer’s business? It’s not at all a workplace issue, because these vaccines don’t stop the spread of COVID-19. It is purely a matter of individual choice and benefit.
FM: Oh…well…I don’t know.
Now, don’t get me wrong. I don’t think I “won” a debate here. Not at all. This family member sort of trailed off at this point and then changed the subject entirely.
But these conversations made me realize that a couple of things are at play here:
1) Pure and utter fear of the virus drives people to accept things they wouldn’t otherwise.
2) The mainstream narrative doesn’t publish or spend any time on the emerging and growing data that demonstrates these vaccines aren’t quite as effective as they were billed to be. In fact, they continue to push the idea that they are effective, even as breakthrough cases increase everywhere, including in highly visible people like the White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki. Because these are mainstream institutions, many will believe that whatever is shared here is from a “trusted source” and rubber-stamped by “the experts.”
3) People want to believe they are part of “doing the right thing” and number 2 has convinced them that mass vaccination is the right thing.
So how do we fix it?
I’m not sure I know how to undo the fear people have, since fear can snowball into a pretty irrational monster. And I think there’s nothing wrong with people wanting to “do the right thing,” but perhaps its possible to appeal to issue #2 first, to help them realize that the vaccines aren’t the magic bullet they were supposed to be, so then the “right thing” is letting people make their own choices, since the vaccines only confer a personal benefit.
All of these people are in the camp of “trust the experts.” Frankly so am I, except that I’m suspicious of anyone who thinks that all experts everywhere must be in perfect harmony on all issues surrounding a novel virus and vaccine that didn’t exist two years ago. Anyone who’s thinking clearly can see that we are constantly learning in real-time and data continues to come in.
So perhaps Issue number 2 can be dismantled by a steady, respectful stream of data, research, and review from truly expert sources. My mainstay for this has become The Brownstone Institute. They have several experts including virologists, epidemiologists, vaccine developers, practicing physicians and more on their roster of senior scholars. They don’t all agree in lock-step, but rather share and scrutinize the data, and suggest additional studies that need to be done to further clarify our understanding. They include Dr. Martin Kulldorff (who just left Harvard to join them full-time), and Dr. Jay Bhattacharya of Stanford who have been advocating for common sense measures like protecting the vulnerable and recognizing natural immunity among other things. And in case you missed it, the two of them penned this great opinion piece in Newsweek this month.
On the Brownstone site, under the Public Health section you will find a wealth of well-thought, reasoned articles and data. There are even tools to help you have conversations with people who have swallowed every drop of BS that the mainstream serves them.
One great example is this “autopsy” that dissects the oft-cited Israeli study on the superior nature of natural immunity, as well as the one the CDC recently published that says vaccines are superior. As Dr. Kulldorff rightly points out “both studies cannot be right,” and he walks us through how and why the Israeli study is more sound. So next time you’re met with “Well, the CDC study says…” you can educate them on why the study is flawed. (I wish like hell the Washington Post’s Leana Wen would consume Brownstone data. But I fear they may be lost on her anyway).
Of course you can browse for yourself, but these are some other incredibly useful articles you will find there:
122 Research Studies Affirm Naturally Acquired Immunity to Covid-19: Documented, Linked, and Quoted
21 Essential Studies That Raise Grave Doubts About Covid-19 Vaccine Mandates
And it looks like this one just came out today: Vaccine Mandates are Unethical
Perhaps I am naive in thinking that sharing thoughtful data will help. I fear I might be. I know in the case of the first friend I mentioned at the top of this post, she know longer has the bandwidth to discuss this with me. So she won’t even be receptive to the share. But I followed up with my family member by sharing links to some of the above. The jury is still out on whether that did anything. But I haven’t given up.
Have you had any success in having thoughtful, productive conversations with people who either passively or actively support the mandates? Have you been able to win them over? I’d love to know how.
I think there's a large body of reasonable people getting sick of some of the NPIs who do no agree with mandates or passports, but go along to get along. Only a small minority who are rabid passport / vaccine advocates. Part of the problem is political capture by pharma and media capture by politics / pharma.
I am at the point now where I think we fight fire with fire, and generate a greater fear than the one(s) already part of the zeitgeist. Mainly because I do not think rational, reasoned discourse is really going to shift the needle enough to get us off this death spiral of control by corrupt actors.
A lot of people have and continue to consume daily doses of MSM lies, half truths, and outright propaganda. Many are unreachable and in the face of new or differing information they turn away or become angry. It seems that it is easier to con some people than it is to convince them they have been conned.
For me it seems best to focus energy on those who know me enough and trust my judgement in other areas and to focus it on those who still have at least a bit of an open mind.