(no title)
Jayschwa | 3 years ago
This is false historical revisionism. Biden[1], Fauci[2], and the media sold the public on the vaccine and justified mandates by saying it would stop the spread. Early skeptics were labeled as misinformed conspiracy theorists. It later became self-evident that the vaccine was less effective than originally thought (e.g. everyone I know who got vaccinated, including myself, still got infected). Only then did the goalposts move to "it makes infections less bad". But that is not how it was originally presented.
[1]: https://www.whio.com/news/local/exclusive-news-center-7-sits...
[2]: https://thehill.com/homenews/sunday-talk-shows/553773-fauci-...
Izkata|3 years ago
Pfizer's original press release [0] used both "SARS-CoV-2" and "COVID-19", distinguishing between the virus and the disease. The effectiveness they gave was about preventing illness, and they made no claims at all about infection/transmission.
This was fairly well known for a month or two, with many articles bringing up that infection/transmission was an unknown [1][2][3]. It was only a month or two into 2021 that the narrative shifted sharply and this original information was memory-holed remarkably hard. The politicians and media were the ones claiming it would stop infection/transmission, but they started that without any new data.
They could have had ulterior motives, they could have just been parroting others, or it could have just been plain stupidity - with how often the terms "SARS-CoV-2" and "COVID-19" are used interchangeably, it's hard to rule out that they just didn't understand the press release.
[0] https://www.pfizer.com/news/press-release/press-release-deta...
[1] https://www.washington.edu/news/2020/12/02/covid-19-vaccines...
[2] https://www.businessinsider.com/who-says-no-evidence-coronav...
[3] https://www.fredhutch.org/en/news/center-news/2020/12/covid-...