If you define the vaccination working as it stopping hospitalizations for a set amount of time.
Hurray, congrats, you won!!
But that's ridiculously short sighted.
The Vaccines are a money making scheme from their respective companies.
This is planned obsolescence within the vaccine, whether intentional or not.
But they certainly aren't going to stop it now that they see it makes them money.
Lets start from the beginning, the goal.
The Goal is either:
A. To eradicate Covid indefinitely.
or
B. To make Covid less dangerous to the point where it is no longer a deadly virus indefinitely.
This is not Working. It's a toothpicks and gum solution.
This is very short sighted and doesn't actually help.
Just like Antibiotics, Vaccinations can wane over recursive uses.
If we have to keep re-vaccinating, just like the flu vaccine, we may see the Covid Vaccines become less effective in general.
We need to keep looking at alternate options, and not blindly smearing alternate options as "Horse De-Wormer" or whatever because it also happens
to be an animal medicine.
if your assertion is that All Covid Science has ceased since the invention of a few vaccines then i would ask that you substantiate that assertion
The cultural and media reaction to immediately smear non-vaccine solutions as antivaxx.
Exhibit A. Ivermectin.
Prior to the media smears, Ivermectin was a common option for treating Yellow Fever. But because of
this "Horse De-Wormer" conflation, not only is Ivermectin nolonger a Covid Treatment, we will no doubt
see Yellow Fever on the rise soon.
We cannot be smearing other solutions because they're not the vaccine.
if you don't mean to assert that, you need to be more clear about what you actually mean. are you upset about science, or do you actually have a more nuanced concern about something like the mass media response to covid? cus i can agree that historically mass media does a comically horrendous job at interpreting and relaying scientific information to the general public, and in particular with covid i find the temptation of many people and media outlets to paint unvaccinated people dying in hospitals as evil/stupid rather than just misinformed and misled to be reprehensible
Media outlets being misinformed and mislead is stupid. They're supposed to be Journalists. If they're pushing ignorant and outright false
information of any kind, regardless as to why, it's stupid.
If it's intentional, then it's evil.
Either way, this is a complete stuff show. The Media has little accountability for anything.
editing to add thisi don't really agree with the spirit of what you're saying; it is absolutely possible for scientific knowledge to settle into a reliable consensus. science is, unlike what anti-science conspiratorial preachers would tell you, not constantly in a flux where all knowledge is a toss-up. in the case of covid certainly there's going to be a lot of research to be done for the next few decades, but i think my point still stands that the most important thing at the outset of the pandemic was to get any effective treatments out the and widely available. i think you are doing a disservice to yourself by entertaining the temptation to attribute political and sociological phenomenon surrounding covid to Science and not to the numerous complicated forces involved in responding to a pandemic. ultimately if your complaint is that better treatments aren't coming to shelves faster, or that covid cases are worse than they've ever been despite having supposedly effective prevention widely available, your beef probably more closely lies with a government that lacks the political will to fight covid with the same vigor as it did from the start and instead apparently feels satisfied placing the onus on Individual Responsibility™ (as usual) to fight the pandemic through vaccines
The reason science is never settled, is because people will always question it. They always should. Just because the science is very strongly backed on many long held
discoveries, doesn't mean they can't eventually be overturned.
Some of the strongest scientific discoveries have fundamental issues.
The Theory of Relativity has problems in its hypothesis that conflicts with Quantum Theory.
It's not impossible, nor should it be considered ridiculous, for long held beliefs in scientific discoveries to be either disproven or altered.
And I highly, highly doubt science involving recently experimental medical technologies and a very recent novel virus is going to be strong or well documented.
Even if it is part of a global event that everyone has had their eyes on.
We lack the advantage of time, we don't have 30-100 years worth of research, development, scientific discoveries and most importantly, separation from relevant cultural beliefs.
There is a stigma now, that questioning science of any vaccine will make you an anti-vaxxer and result in you being discredited just for that.
There was a stigma in pushing for the theory of evolution that you were a satanist and would result in you being discredited just for that.
We can't seem to step outside our personal biases and consider the facts, instead we have to stoop to names and othering.
Poll