So here's the thing

I block people who have obviously bad intentions

This person came to my post with conspiracies and made the contradictory claim that the vaccines in question were both more reactogenic in black people and also not tested in them (go figure that one out)

after politely linking to a guidance from NASEM on the equitable distribution of a COVID-19 vaccine I was given a conspiracy theory about the CIA's involvement in this and the usual line of us not being able to trust pharmaceutical companies
Conspiracy theories aside, I would agree: pharmaceutical companies have violated our trust in the past and it's a problem. The most obvious example is the opioid crisis.

Here's why that comparison does not apply here:
The motive of profit is fundamentally different. People who have chronic pain can be reliant or addicted to opioids and will do anything to get them. Even if regular boosters are needed, the dosing for a vaccine is just not the same.
Vaccines in general are not the big money makers for pharmaceutical companies. They are public health interventions. This one will also likely be subsidized by the government (at least if expert recommendations are adhered to) which further weakens the argument
The other thing is: from the perspective of the pharmaceutical company, do you want to be responsible for putting out one of the most high profile and closely scrutinized products probably in the history of the industry only to have it fail or harm people...
Irreparably tarnishing your reputation?

No. Of course not.

The results being reported by the pharmaceutical companies are preliminary, and we don't have full access to them. But the data itself has been reviewed by a DSMB. This is an Independent group of experts.
They do not have a financial incentive to lie about the results, make them appear better than they are, or anything of the sort. That is literally one of the requirements for being in a DSMB. Their decisions, together with regulatory bodies' govern transition through...
the clinical trial process.

We should keep being skeptical, we should demand transparency, and we should wait for the full data.

But we shouldn't resort to conspiracy thinking. It's lazy and it's uninteresting and it's not worth the time taken to come up with it.
I'd also add that given the syndemic vulnerabilities experienced by black people (and other people of diverse backgrounds), there are few things I could think of that would be worse than withholding a COVID-19 vaccine that we already know works out of poorly founded
quasi-theoretical concerns about biological differences, as this would only serve to widen those inequities.
Also if you bother to read the post you will see multiple peer-reviewed studies supporting the claims made, as well as industry guidances from the FDA.

More from Life

“We don’t negotiate salaries” is a negotiation tactic.

Always. No, your company is not an exception.

A tactic I don’t appreciate at all because of how unfairly it penalizes low-leverage, junior employees, and those loyal enough not to question it, but that’s negotiation for you after all. Weaponized information asymmetry.

Listen to Aditya


And by the way, you should never be worried that an offer would be withdrawn if you politely negotiate.

I have seen this happen *extremely* rarely, mostly to women, and anyway is a giant red flag. It suggests you probably didn’t want to work there.

You wish there was no negotiating so it would all be more fair? I feel you, but it’s not happening.

Instead, negotiate hard, use your privilege, and then go and share numbers with your underrepresented and underpaid colleagues. […]

You May Also Like

क्या आप जानते हैं कि क्या है, पितृ पक्ष में कौवे को खाना देने के पीछे का वैज्ञानिक कारण!

श्राद्ध पक्ष में कौओं का बड़ा ही महत्व है। कहते है कौआ यम का प्रतीक है, यदि आपके हाथों दिया गया भोजन ग्रहण कर ले, तो ऐसा माना जाता है कि पितरों की कृपा आपके ऊपर है और वे आपसे ख़ुश है।


कुछ लोग कहते हैं की व्यक्ति मरकर सबसे पहले कौवे के रूप में जन्म लेता है और उसे खाना खिलाने से वह भोजन पितरों को मिलता है

शायद हम सबने अपने घर के किसी बड़े बुज़ुर्ग, किसी पंडित या ज्योतिषाचार्य से ये सुना होगा। वे अनगिनत किस्से सुनाएंगे, कहेंगे बड़े बुज़ुर्ग कह गए इसीलिए ऐसा करना

शायद ही हमें कोई इसके पीछे का वैज्ञानिक कारण बता सके।

हमारे ऋषि मुनि और पौराणिक काल में रहने वाले लोग मुर्ख नहीं थे! कभी सोचियेगा कौवों को पितृ पक्ष में खिलाई खीर हमारे पूर्वजों तक कैसे पहुंचेगी?

हमारे ऋषि मुनि विद्वान थे, वे जो बात करते या कहते थे उसके पीछे कोई न कोई वैज्ञानिक कारण छुपा होता था।

एक बहुत रोचक तथ्य है पितृ पक्ष, भादो( भाद्रपद) प्रकृति और काक के बीच।

एक बात जो कह सकते कि हम सब ने स्वतः उग आये पीपल या बरगद का पेड़/ पौधा किसी न किसी दीवार, पुरानी

इमारत, पर्वत या अट्टालिकाओं पर ज़रूर देखा होगा। देखा है न?

ज़रा सोचिये पीपल या बरगद की बीज कैसे पहुंचे होंगे वहाँ तक? इनके बीज इतने हल्के भी नहीं होते के हवा उन्हें उड़ाके ले जा सके।
1/“What would need to be true for you to….X”

Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?

A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:


2/ First, “X” could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to

- “Feel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- “Feel that we’re in a good place as a company”
- “Feel that we’re on the same page”
- “Feel that we both got what we wanted from this deal

3/ Normally, we aren’t that direct. Example from startup/VC land:

Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.

Worse over, the founders don’t know what they need to do in order to be fundable.

4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?

To get clarity.

You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.

It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.

5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is “what would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?”

Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.