 I mostly don't post this kind of thing anymore, but this feels extra egregious. This whole thing is written as though in opposition to urgent pressure from the CDC to give kids covid boosters. But in reality, a CDC "recommendation" just means that children are *allowed* to receive the vaccines AT ALL. So this whole elaborate argument is in favor of *zero* parental choice. 7 comments
And also, in reality, getting pediatric boosters is increasingly difficult! Zero health providers in our region were doing them this fall. None at the hospital, none in primary care, no drugstores. Even WITH a CDC recommendation, we had to check all the drugstores in adjacent metro areas every morning at 6 and then pull our kid out of school and drive four hours round-trip to get her a shot. So: David Leonhardt specifically has disproportionate influence over policymakers who think of themselves as super-rational, and has spun this exact kind of false narrative for years—and is now gunning for the last opportunity for parents in the US to vaccinate their kids against a still-disabling virus. The fall 2024 round of FDA and CDC debate over pediatric boosters is probably going to be extremely gnarly. This is a great year to get involved in public comment, if you haven't before.  @kissane It's David Leonhardt. He's staked pretty much his entire brand on anti-vaxxx. He'll never be happy until everyone who worked on them is in prison; & if that happened he'd post every day to gin up outrage advocating for their sentences to be continously extended. |
Gregory's Server
@kissane damn, wow