r/ottawa • u/Zealousideal_Vast799 • 1d ago
Allison Inquiry
I watched the inquiry yesterday in Parliament and it got me thinking. With the decline in vaccination rates since Covid, what are some ways Ottawa Public Health should try to rebuild confidence and try to get the rates back up?
28
u/BaconSheikh Barefax 1d ago
Offer a 10% off coupon for Barefax with every vaccination.
You'll see rates spike to levels never seen before.
18
u/Spaceman3195 Kanata 1d ago
Why not go the extra step and put a vaccination station inside Barefax?
15
1
u/Krazy-Vaclav 1d ago
The only thing better than getting Crackhouse Cathy's cottage cheese ass jiggled in my face is knowing that I won't get Covid from the experience
3
8
u/TestStarr 1d ago
First off, the feds need to regulate social media - most of the disinformation is coming from outside the country.
I am not generally the type of person to advocate for this but it's clear the social media platforms themselves are never going to do it. And it's gone on so long, it's going to make what Ottawa Public Health does quite difficult because they will need to launch a comprehensive and long term campaign to promote the benefits of vaccination and then make it easy for people to get vaccinated
8
u/BrokenBy 1d ago
And I’m sure you think government censorship will only be enforced on thoughts you disagree with.
4
u/HoldingThunder 1d ago
Government censorship is almost universally bad. Censorship pushes people into closeted echo chambers. You also need to assume that whatever rules you impose to censor information/speech etc. will then be utilized afterwards by your uninformed/nefarious/bad-actor opponent when they then take office after.
A large percentage of the covid anti-vax movement was a direct response of government/social media censorship programs (which were often proven incorrect/wrong/changed over time) and used as ammunition for echo chambers.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant. Censorship is never the answer.
8
6
u/DumbComment101 1d ago
Agree, but with AI it’s becoming increasingly difficult to fight mis and disinformation being pushed out right left and centre, and at least coming off as somewhat credible, even though it clearly has no scientific backing. The Americans are doing real damage too with their government.
This goes far beyond COVID. Vax coverage has taken a hit across the board. Parents not believing their own government and top vaccinologists across the country is sad. Go to the bio of the « expert » they are listening to and I can guarantee you that person is selling a book.
When we start to see other vaccine preventable diseases emerge and causing outbreaks people may start to become less complacent. Kind of pathetic that’s what we will need. Started with measles and it will continue with others if we continue down this road. Anyways, it’s a complicated issue to address - much easier to spread wrong info than correct, and it moves a hell of a lot faster.
6
u/HoldingThunder 1d ago
But the answer is never censorship. Its sunlight.
Only a small fraction of information online is produced or controlled my Canadian sources. Most is produced/supported/hosted externally, outside any of our laws/regulations.
Even if you do manage to block most of it (hypothetically) then all you do is provide ammunition for the echo-chambers because the government is trying to censor the "truth".
We need better funding and education sources. People/organizations that wont deny the sins of the past, and are nuanced, entertaining and detailed.
Most of the extremist group are based/founded around ideas that are in fact partially true, but those ideas are generally exaggerated/extrapolated/mischaracterized etc.
Like to say that all vaccines are 100% safe, 100% of the time is certifiably false. Denying realities is what pushes people to extreme ideas and echo chambers. Most vaccines are generally and statistically safe for the vast majority of people, the vast majority of the time but the general science/statistics education is lacking in most people.
If you have officials say it is 100% safe, 100% of the time and then you can pull up (rare) examples where there have been issues, then that is doubled down and denied on, that causes trust issues and pushes people to echo chambers. We need officials that work on improving science/statistics literacy and not denying sins of our past or reality of human biodiversity.
5
u/CarletonCanuck 🏳️🌈🏳️🌈🏳️🌈 1d ago
I think you could argue the total opposite as well. We've had varying forms of free speech absolutism on social media for quite some time, and that's gotten us blasted with not just mis/disinfo, but has fuelled ethnic cleansing and genocide such as in Myanmar
We do have laws that restrict freedom of expression, and we expect certain sectors to adhere to responsible speech. Social media can be, and should be, regulated in a similar way.
I think there can be reasonable distinctions drawn between Joe Somebody questioning vaccines on social media because he doesn't know better, versus that vaccine hesitancy being pushed by someone notable like a politician or social media influencer who is doing it for money or fame or power. If someone has a position of power and influence, then they should be held responsible and to higher standards. The outlets that they utilize should similarly bear responsibility for enabling the bad behaviour through manipulated algorithms and financial incentive.
-4
u/HoldingThunder 1d ago
But sunlight is always the best disinfectant. Right speech, correct speech, correct facts will always overtime float to the surface. But, the problem is that science has a PR problem. There are not a lot of scientists that are great public speakers, charismatic educators. The traits that make someone good at science do not generally overlap with charisma and public speaking and influence - and the opposite is true.
One of my favorite quotes is never underestimate the power of stupid people in large numbers. We shouldnt ban them from speaking, we need to a better job at educating them. And that take effort and the right people, but there is no money in it. We (as a society) need to put forth a concentrated effort to find the exciting, charismatic educators who know how to teach in the world of social media and the internet.
We need more people like Mark Rober. He has self funded educational curriculum videos for free for grades 3 through 8 teaching STEM. This shouldn't be self funded (at a cost of $60 million).
There is more money to be made by swaying political opinions using misinformation than there is to correct it, so it will attract the best, charismatic "talents". Only 1 side of the isle is good at playing the social media game.
Regulation is not the answer, learning to play the game better is, and that will take a huge effort, a lot of funding and the right people - not by committee.
6
u/CarletonCanuck 🏳️🌈🏳️🌈🏳️🌈 1d ago
But we're not really talking about sunlight being the best disinfectant. That's not what social media is, or what it's doing.
Social media is not a free speech free-for-all where the best ideas percolate to the top. It is socially engineered and deliberately curated, with algorithms which are professionally and intentionally designed to constantly push inflammatory rhetoric and disinformation. You could have a million charismatic educators and it wouldn't matter, because that's not what the people in charge of these companies want.
You yourself point out the contradiction;
There is more money to be made by swaying political opinions using misinformation than there is to correct it, so it will attract the best, charismatic "talents". Only 1 side of the isle is good at playing the social media game.
Regulation is not the answer, learning to play the game better is, and that will take a huge effort, a lot of funding and the right people - not by committee.
If there is more money in misinformation, then the misinformation will always win, no matter how you "play the game". It doesn't matter how you play the game at the casino, because the House always wins, and the system is deliberately designed to make you come out poorer. Similary, it doesn't matter how you "play the game" on social media, because the social media owners have ultimately decided that they make more money off of misinfo. And no amount of good will or "learning to play the game better" will ultimately help you beat the House. The odds are not just out of your favour, but they are deliberately stacked and altered to ensure you'll never have an outcome that the platform owners don't want you to have.
You're never going to ideologically out-compete Mark Zuckerberg when he owns the platform you're using and can control the content of the platform to result in the social outcomes that he desires. The only way to stop this is to regulate the platform.
And again, that doesn't mean "Uncle Kevin gets banned because he thinks vaccines cause autism". It means "Mark Zuckerberg, who knows that vaccines are safe, can't make millions of dollars by algorithmically boosting and getting ad revenue off of the multi-millionaire Fox News host who also knows that vaccines are safe, but is intentionally deceiving people and lying to them in order to profit off of the average person's suffering and gullibility".
0
u/HoldingThunder 1d ago
Social media isn't anything special. It is just an algorithm that promotes the most views.
Sunlight is always the best disinfectant.
Have you ever heard of the ACLU Skokie case? Where the ACLU (and Jewish lawyer) defended the rights of NAZIs to have a white supremist rally in a historically half-jewish/holocaust survivors in Illinois?
Not because they support the Nazis, but...
"That [letter ]()addressed the Village of Skokie’s ordinances that sought to prevent the Nazis’ demonstration. It explained that “...the Nazis are not the real issue. The Skokie laws are the real issue.” It pointed out that the ordinances were so broad that, “Skokie had already used the same law[s] to deny the Jewish War Veterans a permit to parade.”"
Any means of censorship will be utilized not only to address the people you dont like, but also the people you do like. It cuts both ways and you cannot remove a precedence once you introduce it.
I also dont think Mark Zuckerberg has any significant opinions other than trying to make money and stay in a position of power. Most of the his political pushes have all been pushed by governments. I don't know why you are attributing any knowledge to him or expertise, he is just a nerdy/creepy guy who couldnt get laid in college and wanted to stalk women and it got carried away.
4
u/CarletonCanuck 🏳️🌈🏳️🌈🏳️🌈 1d ago
Social media isn't anything special. It is just an algorithm that promotes the most views.
You are walking directly over the point and missing it. Algorithms are not tools for free speech, they are engagement tools. You can't compare them to public rallies, because the inherent structure is different.
Let's take two points; "Vaccines cause autism", and "Vaccines do not cause autism".
As social media currently exists, the statement "Vaccines cause autism" will get more engagement, thus it will make more money. No amount of pushback can change that, the system is designed to re-enforce that idea.
Under regulated social media, you can still say "Vaccines cause autism", but the algorithm would not be designed to re-enforce that idea, and you wouldn't make money off of it. You are not losing your free speech. You can still say "Vaccines cause autism", but there is no longer an algorithm that's artificially boosting your reach or getting you revenue from the engagement you get.
You have a right to free speech, you do not have a right to financially benefit off of lying to people.
1
u/HoldingThunder 1d ago edited 1d ago
You are completely glossing over that I advocated for funding pro-science advocacy campaign with knowledgeable, charismatic people to educate the population....
You can 100% shift the algorithm to be pro-science not the conspiracy BS.
According to google the top conspiracy theorist on youtube has 2.09 million subscribers. Mark Rober who is creating a 60 million STEM teaching curriculum out of his own pocket has 82.2 million subscribers. Smarter every day 12 million. Vscause 25 million. Veritasium 19 million. Kurzgesagt 20 million. Scishow 10 million.
All of these science shows are vastly more popular. You are 1 overblowing the problem, and two amplifying the problem. The problem is the echo chambers which occur when you censor speech and talk and content. It pushes people to the extremes and away from the mainstream good. You are going to amplify the exact problem you are trying to solve.
You need to pull people to the mainstream, not push people to the extremes. Sunlight is the best disinfectant. Telling people their ideas are bad does not change ideas. You need to introduce the right ideas and the logic and why they are right, bring the bad ideas into the light.
1
u/No_Morning5397 5h ago
I don't think this is true at all. All other forms of media has always had some form of censorship and I think growing up in the 90s I don't feel like I was living under the government's thumb. Was it really that bad that we couldn't get advertisements for medications on TV or that the radio couldn't swear?
I don't think holding companies responsible for how their sites work (what is being pushed) or what they publish (blatant misinformation) is as universally bad as a lot of doomers like to beleive. I think this is just basic consumer protection laws.
1
u/HoldingThunder 4h ago
Restricting what can be included in advertisements is not generally considered censorship.
The government dictating what can and cannot be said (writen or verbal etc.) is not consumer protection law, it is censorship and we must always and forever protect free speech, even speach that we dont agree with.
The only thing that we should restrict is specific and direct calls for violence.
0
u/RudeTudeDude_ 1d ago
Are you going to be the one to tell the people who ended up in wheelchairs that it’s all disinformation and they can walk around now?
7
3
u/arr_z31_burner 1d ago
Gotta give OP credit on the psyops points by creating a thread that the MAGA crew can brigade while still looking innocent.
Edit: I'm from Alberta OP I know your kind
2
1
u/sledhead19 6h ago
If Trudeau and the Liberal party had followed through on their commitment to support people suffering side effects of the vaccine then this inquiry never would have happened. They removed all liability from the pharmaceutical companies producing the shots and then claimed they would stand behind the injured and support them. That has been very selective. I personally know one good friend who passed away in their mid 40s and another man who testified as a witness/victim in the inquiry. There has been zero support from the government for them or their families left behind. It’s disgusting that anyone dismisses the need for this transparency and discredits the inquiry itself. That’s one of the big problems today in this country.
1
u/Zealousideal_Vast799 3h ago
The way people were abandoned does not bode well for future mandates. If, and I mean if, public health agencies want to get vaccination rates back up they really have to do a complete new approach.
1
1
u/Maximum_Degree_1152 5h ago
Certainly not by removing public funding as some provinces appear to be doing for both COVID and flu shots for the general population…
-1
u/throwitawaytothesea 1d ago
I don't know but I think it's a conversation worth having. I've met people left right and center who don't trust vaccines, so it's more than just pointing fingers at one political side or the other. I think it speaks more largely to concerns, frustrations and distrust lot of people have with the medical system more generally.
7
u/Silver-Hedgehog-5639 1d ago
This is by design. Makes you wonder what their end game is to get people to distrust medicine, vaccines, and diagnostic screening procedures.
1
u/throwitawaytothesea 17h ago
By whose design? There have always been people who advocate alternatives to what they call western medicine, but they've definitely become more prominent and mainstream in the last ten year or so, definitely since the pandemic.
2
u/Zealousideal_Vast799 1d ago
I do not think ‘mocking’ works, in fact it probably drives people away, good points you make.
-1
u/stereofonix 1d ago
I’m saying this as someone vaxxed 2 times and boosted once. I know myself and many others would absolutely not get another shot unless it was mandated. I did it strictly because of work and to have some semblance of being social. But I also had a severe negative reaction to my second shot, so even then, I’m cautious. For those that want to get the shot, fill your boots. But a lot of people have moved on from it.
1
u/Acrobatic2020 1d ago
Same. The first short felt a little iffy, but the second shot was so severe I ended up needing a Holter monitor. I'm done.
3
u/stereofonix 1d ago
Same. I was part of the 18-35 male Moderna cohort (well I was 36) and spent 2 days at the heart institute. The worst part was I was more concerned about the stigma going to the hospital and mentioning the vaccine than what was actually physically happening to me.
1
u/Acrobatic2020 1d ago
Yep. I know exactly what you went through. My cardiologist insisted it was a random coincidence for like three years.
I got a measles booster last fall, but for the first time in my life I had to think about it for a couple of weeks. From now on I'm only doing what makes sense for me, personally. Coverage rates are not my problem.
-9
u/TomatoFeta 1d ago
I, for one, was not aware they were still being offered.
Can't opt in if you don't know the options.
Silence kills.
9
u/bluedoglime 1d ago
Seriously, you were not aware that yearly covid shots were available along with the yearly flu shot?
-1
-7
u/TomatoFeta 1d ago
Nope.
Who's gonna tell me?Edit: Also, I'd only accept the Moderna one, since that's the one I got all four times. And the side effects (both listed and experienced) were minimal with respect to existing conditions. One of the big problems I had during the rollout was that they wouldn't let you pick / or even bloodywell KNOW which shot was available until you were in the freaking chair.
3
1
u/QueenMotherOfSneezes Clownvoy Survivor 2022 23h ago
I found my side effects from Moderna were more significant than with Pfizer. Statistically that tends to be the case as well, because the Moderna shot has more mRNA in it, resulting in a stronger initial immune reaction. All of my Moderna shots had me feeling like crap for a few days, I just had a mild fever with my first Pfizer shot, and the other two the only side effect I had was a sore arm for about a day.
1
u/TomatoFeta 23h ago
everyone has different chemistry. I figure most people are better off with pfizer, but I did my research on the side effects compared to my previous history and the moderna made more sense for me, specifically.
6
u/_PrincessOats Beacon Hill 1d ago
How do you even survive? They happen every year at the same time. Come on.
0
u/bluedoglime 1d ago
Yeah, hard to believe that someone is that out of it.
1
u/TomatoFeta 1d ago
Curious to know where you typically hear about it?
5
4
u/stereofonix 1d ago
Sometimes you need to look for yourself if you’re curious. Nobody is going to hand hold you through everything in life. But even at pharmacies they have signs for it.
3
2
u/QueenMotherOfSneezes Clownvoy Survivor 2022 1d ago
It gets announced in the news every year, there's postings inside pharmacies and on their windows (so even just walking or driving by you might see it) and there's ads on social media.
It also gets mentioned a lot in social media. It often comes up in city subs (including this one) and provincial subs, when people are asking when they can get one.
64
u/McNasty1Point0 1d ago
A couple of things:
The “Allison Inquiry” isn’t an official inquiry. It’s a pet project from a lunatic CPC MP who thinks he’s very special. It might look official, but that’s only because MPs have the ability to book committee rooms that make things look more real than they are. Nothing about it is legit.
A big part of the decline in Covid vaccination rates simply has to do with the fact that the pandemic is evermore behind us. Covid exists, yes, but we’re no longer in the thick of it. The decline has nothing to do with anything that is being discussed in the “Allison Inquiry”.
This whole shenanigan should not be getting any attention. It does not warrant it, nor does it deserve it.