Of Freedom, Country and Vaccination

[dirkfansince1998]

We can go through the number of studies that were retracted, proven false or otherwise conducted improperly if you'd like.

So the peer review system actually works? I never said that the system was perfect but as of now it is the best option we have. We also have to be really specific and for that you would have to give some examples. One of the biggest problems of the current system is that it takes a lot of time. Some are also questioning the transparency. That´s actuallly something I had to experience myself. Anonymous reviews are still a big part of the publishing process in scientific journals. In a world of specialist research there are only a limited number of people that are qualified to review certain papers. Can be really frustrating
if you are trying to get a paper out and the only options for a peer review are people from a rivaling project.

I still wouldn´t replace the system but some changes are needed. Some journals tried the "parallel open peer review". Following the old process but also making the work available for the public. Problem in that case is predatory publishing. Some journals and media outlets simply don´t care about the quality of the work as long as they are the first to publish it.
For the public and mainstream media it is difficult to understand if a work is still in progress or a finished. Would be nice if they would do a better job to highlight it.

In the case of COVID we had a lot of things that were published even though the work was still the open review/discussion process. In many cases the first available data of studies was published. So we aren´t talking about right/wrong. We are talking about preliminary results. Published because any kind of information that is shared between researchers could help. Published because politicians needed the max amount of information to make decisions. And yes. Probably also published because some wanted the fame, more research founding or other private benefits.
Thankfully by now we are getting more and more "finished" (medical studies are rarely really finished) research.

We can start with the imperial college data model and move on from there.

That´s always an interesting talking point and even though you won´t like the way I phrase it I would call it a fallacy to say that projections like this are wrong. The mentioned models depend on given parameters. They are used to simulate the potential development of a pandemic. What a lot of people fail to acknowledge is that the parameters of the simulation aren´t comparable to the real life development because humans acted to prevent the simulated scenario. The simulations were based on a "no action taken scenario". With the best available data about the virus and human behaviour at that time.
Models like this lead to "flatten the curve" policies.  New models tried to account for the potential impact certain actions could have.

Calling this akin to the smallpox vaccine is ridiculous. 

I only pointed out that the legislation to enforce vaccine mandates exists and was upheld in front of the supreme court.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-long-hi...1631890699

The majority opinion, written by Justice John Marshall Harlan, asserted that “the liberty secured by the Constitution does not import an absolute right in each person to be at all times, and in all circumstances, wholly freed from restraint.” Quite the contrary. The Constitution rests upon “the fundamental principle of the social compact…that all shall be governed by certain laws for the protection, safety, prosperity and happiness of the people, and not for the profit, honor or private interests of any one man, family or class of men.”

we are not inclined to [uphold] the absolute rule that an adult must be vaccinated if it can be shown with reasonable certainty that [it] will seriously impair his health.” And he warned that vaccine mandates must not be implemented in “an arbitrary, unreasonable manner.” Only a public health emergency, as defined by the state legislature in consultation with medical experts, appeared to justify their use.

As of now this is still the go-to-authority when it comes to the vaccine mandates. Not up to me to decide if the the current pandemic justifies a mandate but based on this verdict they can be an option.