I wouldn't trust Trump to tell me the time and day. I would inherently disbelieve him
Kamala Harris says she wouldn't trust Trump on safety of Covid vaccine before election
- Thread starter Dwarvenhobble
- Start date
USA
He can fire the guy who does and appoint someone unqualified to do it for him like he has for every other position in his administration. Why do we have a Trump donor who has never worked for the Post office running the Postal service? Why do we have a guy who spent his career fighting AGAINST the EPA in charge of it now? Why do we have a Trump Donor in charge of the Treasury Department? Why do we have a Trump supporter with no experience in housing in charge of HUD? Why do we have an Amway woman who has never worked in or been educated in a public school or educated about the public school system in charge of the Education department? Why did he have a self admitted foreign agent as his National security Advisor?
DO ANY of Trump's appointments that he gets along with have qualifications to even be able to do their jobs competently? No? That is exactly the point, they aren't supposed to. He just wants them to comply with whatever his whims of the day are depending on his mood. If he actually hired someone competent to do the jobs they would be forced to tell him they could not comply because his demands are unethical, illegal and counterproductive to being able to competently do their jobs.
Last edited:
You don't get how the world works.
Scientists don't have power to make these sorts of decisions. They work for companies run by businessmen, and governments run by politicians, and businessmen and politicians make big decisions. Nobody with real power will let a few highly-paid but organisationally low rank people in white coats tell them what they can and cannot do. Scientists don't have massive media machines to manipulate public opinion, the near-automatic loyalty of party memberships, strong influence amongst the socioeconomic elites, battalions of lawyers.
Usually scientists stick to the field that they are good at and that is it, and leave everything else that happens up to someone else. The investors, those controlling the companies are who call the shots. The narrative of "the evil scientist taking over the world" is a pretty absurd one when you look at reality. I am not as concerned about the major players in pharma trying to push something too soon, because they have much to gain for it being safe and effective, but too much to lose if something goes wrong in this case due to the sheer size of the spotlight on them right now to get this right. What I am concerned about however, is some noname company willing to take the money and run by pushing BS right now and Trump not understanding the difference between a credible company and some guy who tweeted him on twitter. There is huge risks of scams right now, Trump has already fallen for so many in the past like the $69 million NY ventilator contract from some guy who tweeted him who had never made or sold ventilators at all. The bunk rapid COVID tests he pushed to be approved. The millions of taxpayer dollars he blew while promoting hydroxychloroquine, Him taking Pandemic advice from the my pillow guy promoting homeopathic BS, It just goes on and on. I worry about him trying to bypass FDA and ordering some risky BS from another country that doesn't work because he wants it by a certain date no matter what and then setting back progress on distribution on our actual vaccines being tested right now. Trump doesn't understand how science works, he doesn't understand the difference between him just making something up and professionals actually doing rigorous testing. That is what makes him dangerous when he is determined to do something by a certain date regardless of what is safe or effective. All he cares about is his horse and pony show scam, not that it actually works.
Last edited:
and trust me Scientist can and well try to make sure the decisions being made aren't rushed etc unless they're literally forced off the projects etc.
Researchers working for these companies do not have as much say as you think they do. They literally have NO say, they are just paid to do their research, that is it and are under contract to not be able to discus it publicly in order to keep their jobs. It doesn't work the way you think it does.
Those working for universities generally have more say, but working for private pharmaceuticals means you are under a permanent gag order. Believe me, they have no issue enforcing it quite stringently. Remember when everyone was in an uproar about apple having access to swat teams to keep their product data safe? They have NOTHING on Pharma in this regard.
waaaaaat? What is the 'trouble' in this scenario? Not literally FAKING A CURE?
what?
How d'you explain all of the patently unscientific decisions that have already been taken by various governments claiming to follow the science?
Well, let's put it this way. My father was a research chemist. The team he was part of were working on a project for a cleaning product, and there was a problem with it that the formulation because it could damage some materials it would be used on. They told their company it needed to be fixed before release, and the company just released it anyway. Several months later, PR disaster.
One can take the opioid crisis. One of the drugs companies brought a new opioid medication to market, and the approval process runs through an advisory board. The advisory board rejected it for providing no advantage to current medications, and inappropriate given the crisis. It was approved anyway, because fuck the advisory board, a company wanted to make money and the government wanted to facilitate that.
So, that's the way it goes in reality. These sorts of trials run with the data kept up-to-date and analysed on the go, because they need to be able to observe problems as soon as they occur rather than wait until everything finishes and then doing one big analysis. This means anyone high up can demand the current data, and decide for themselves "looks okay, early release". A researcher can protest, and they can be roundly ignored.
US administrations have suppressed research by government agencies, shut down labs and fired scientists, withheld funding, and so on for political reasons. The current administration possibly more so than most. They would wave through a vaccine early for political reasons in the blink of an eye. What's the worst that could happen? If it's harmful, it won't be realised until after the election by which time the administration can have a 100% guaranteed four more years, even if they killed a few hundred people to swing it.
TBH, I'm skeptical of a Covid vaccine, period. IIRC, there's never been a vaccine for any Covid-type virus, and while the world is throwing money at it, I'm skeptical of any claims to a vaccine right now.
Not that this is exonerating Trump. Still waiting for Covid to just magically disappear one day, Donald.
Not that this is exonerating Trump. Still waiting for Covid to just magically disappear one day, Donald.
Many countries don't have explicit laws against cannibalism, either. It doesn't tell us that the laws can't be made, it tells us that there hasn't been need to make them.
I would not trust Trump on anything. But that is not an issue as there are lots of other, more trustworthy sources i could consult.
Now in general i would trust the FDA because. In this particular case, when it is super urgent and an election topic and Trump uses preassure to get an approval ? I am less sure. I would probably check what the agencies of other countries have to say as well.
Now in general i would trust the FDA because. In this particular case, when it is super urgent and an election topic and Trump uses preassure to get an approval ? I am less sure. I would probably check what the agencies of other countries have to say as well.
It's not a question of law, it's a question of medicine/technology.
Again, to my knowledge, no-one has ever made a Covid vaccine. There certainly would have been reasons to. But so far, we haven't.
I don't trust anything Trump says but I also don't assume that everything he says is wrong; if the CDC says it has a vaccine I'm not going to dispute that if Trump happens to agree with them.
- Apr 1, 2009
- 14,969
- 3,840
- 118
- Gender
- Whatever, just wash your hands.
Considering how much he lies about things. You should really assume anything he says is wrong.
Ultimately, there haven't.
About 10-20% of common cold cases are caused by coronaviruses, but it is not worth vaccinating against. Coronaviruses can also cause pneumonia, but again, there are so many potential causes of pneumonia that it is impractical to control with vaccines. Then there are some animal coronaviruses, but obviously that's of much lower interest. Recently, there's been SARS and MERS (which were effectively controlled and disappeared before a vaccine was developed) and now covid-19. Therefore, the main reason we don't have a coronavirus vaccine is that until now we've never really needed one enough to make it worthwhile developing.
This is going to piss off everyone here, but I'm not going to take the vaccine. It just looks like the companies are being pressured by potential billions and world leaders to pull out a vaccine before the election/end of the year. I worry that they are cutting too many corners that it could cause some side effects down the line. I have little trust in pharmaceutical companies after what happened with opioids. Until I see rich wankers and world leaders take the vaccine, then I "might" do it.
Watch Fauci take it, then take yours too. If it doesn't kill him, you will be fine.
* Reminds me of having to give the bear the shots at the clinic so the kids know they will be okay too.* XD