Read on Twitter
Weird how everyone with expertise in epidemiology, the CDC or the "damning" slide presentation in question doesn't agree with this account of events. https://twitter.com/Yascha_Mounk/status/1341866668528717824
This is the slide presentation Yascha cites as the *only* evidence for narrative that the CDC almost caved to SJWs. It's clearly a supplement to a more detailed verbal presentation and it's absurd to cite it out of context without real reporting.
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/slides-2020-12/slides-12-20/02-COVID-Dooling.pdf
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/slides-2020-12/slides-12-20/02-COVID-Dooling.pdf
Keep in mind, the meeting was a month ago. At the time it wasn't clear if the vaccine made people less infectious. Under those conditions it actually makes sense to discuss other considerations that reducing immediate mortality risk.
Yascha says it's bananas to immunize an Uber driver before an 80-year-old, but that Uber driver comes into contact with far more people every day. If the vaccine makes him less infectious, it could prevent more deaths in the long run. It's at least worth discussing!
I'm already way out of my depth here scientifically. But so is Yascha! It's deranged to write a column about this without investigating what was actually going on in these deliberations.
Good thread on the vaccine, infectiousness and how scientific debates don't always aid public understanding. Journalists need to be really careful wading into this stuff and Yascha is just busting into it like the Kool-Aid Man. https://twitter.com/hankgreen/status/1341165998674567169
