You must log in or register to comment.

[deleted] t1_j89ohk7 wrote



brianthalion t1_j8c0u5f wrote

Yeah we're learning about the real misinformation now. I'm personally appalled at all the people on here who were lied to just like the rest of us, yet still rally behind those who lied to and endangered us by the millions for profit.


moyismoy t1_j8989fo wrote

this is just what happens when you dont have good educational systems. I think one of the best skills you can learn is how to sort out good information from bad.


fatuous_sobriquet t1_j89itpe wrote

It’s true. American education is abysmal.


moyismoy t1_j89lxvl wrote

no, but its also not that good. We tend to rank between 10-30 out of ~200 nations for education. as such we are doing better then sub-Saharan Africa for total pop vaccinated. Though i guess thats not impressive.


stusthrowaway t1_j89v7pt wrote

Better than the other third world nations.


NeedlessPedantics t1_j8a15ep wrote

I think you’re trying to use “third world” in a colloquial sense to mean something similar to impoverished.

But the US is certainly part of the first world, but not because of reasons you may think. Rather, it’s in part because the US was an allied democratic nation following the Second World War.

People misuse these terms frequently though, so I get it.


moyismoy t1_j8a1xuv wrote

the funny thing is Austria, Switzerland, and other nations doing far betting then the USA on everything we can test for are still 3rd world.


NeedlessPedantics t1_j8a2gpo wrote

That’s right.

Which is why I tried giving the guy some additional information so he doesn’t make himself look foolish to anyone that knows what those terms actually mean in the future.

So of course he downvotes, says something shitty, then deletes his comment.

Because providing a better understanding of something with additional information is just a dick move on my part. /s


HeIIjumper t1_j8aj2tt wrote

Maybe intelligence metrics are off?

Or maybe intelligence isn't the most important metric?


moyismoy t1_j8aqyz9 wrote

lol, the metric is if you were allied to the USA(1st world) or the USSR(2nd world) or other(3rd world) back in the 60s.


HeIIjumper t1_j8b635z wrote

Why do you use it, then?


moyismoy t1_j8be8w2 wrote

I dont use it. I use gapminder.


HeIIjumper t1_j8bed4e wrote

Do you not understand what I'm saying?

If you're so intelligent, why are you "third world"?


Billbat1 t1_j8b6s7f wrote

is it ok to consider usa as a developing country considering its shocking healthcare system?


Penis_Envy_Peter t1_j8d4cmo wrote

To have the capacity to do right and opting to not from greed is worse than failing to do so as a result of inability. The US is hyper developed and morally bankrupt.


Billbat1 t1_j8d4x2k wrote

theres plenty of corruption in uk and canada. i wouldnt say americans are more susceptible to corruption. when america was forming there was a strong sense of the american dream. of working hard to make sure you had a good life. its a useful idea to motivate people back then. but that idea has stuck around and now theres still a lot of people who think its up to the individual to work hard to buy healthcare.


acdha t1_j8a2sob wrote

It’s not. American education quite closely tracks the parents’ socioeconomic status, and we have a disproportionate level of poverty for a rich nation, however. Once you compare children of similar status things tend to be a lot more similar than you’d expect based on our political discourse.

One similar confound for comparison is that we use one general system for everyone and don’t track kids into separate non-college vocational programs. That’s not saying that those are bad decisions but if you’re comparing student performance or cost you need to make sure that you’re not inadvertently comparing a system where, say, kids with learning disabilities are separated to one where they aren’t without trying to correct for that.


Petaurus_australis t1_j8c4rr5 wrote

>It’s not. American education quite closely tracks the parents’ socioeconomic status, and we have a disproportionate level of poverty for a rich nation, however. Once you compare children of similar status things tend to be a lot more similar than you’d expect based on our political discourse.

But comparing children of similar status is not indicative of the overall state of education. If there's a lot of poor people, and poor people have worse education accessibility, then the country isn't likely going to be very well educated. If money is intrinsically tied to education in your country... that's still a factor in how educated the country is overall, and the quality of the education people receive.

We don't consider Ethiopia a very well educated country, and most of that is because of the abysmal socioeconomics, I mean what is the other explanation for the difference? That they are an innately stupid race of human? I think that kind of thinking is about three centuries past it's expiry date. If the top 5% in Ethiopia have similar education to the top 5% in New Zealand, that's all and good for the top 5%, but high quality for one small percentile bracket, does not translate to the quality of education for the overall population.

The even worse quality of that system is that it essentially maintains a dynamic where the poor remain uneducated, and therefore remain poor because education is tied to income, the poor go on to have more kids than other demographics (because that's what the demographic transition model shows) and the kids grow up poor, and soon you find the system becomes dominated by that demographic and the educated portion grows into a ever more concentrated elite. Exactly what you see in the USA, and exactly why countries where the highest quality education system is accessible to pretty much the entirety of the population tend to score higher overall nationally, than the USA, IE, Sweden.


acdha t1_j8d2815 wrote

First, I was specifically responding to the “abysmal” characterization — I think there's plenty of room for improvement. The main point was that when making comparisons across countries we have to perform some corrections if we're looking for ideas about where we could improve. Since wealth isn't evenly distributed across countries or within them it's easy to find a smaller country which looks like an outlier, run some editorials about how they've discovered the secret to education, and not really have learned anything other than that life easier if you're not poor.

What we'd want to look for in setting goals are the countries with high social mobility because, as you mentioned, it's better when students can do markedly better than their parents. The results of that comparison likely also ideas outside of the educational system itself: for example, if the child of poor immigrants in Scandinavia does better it might be that their teachers and curriculum are about the same but the better social support system means their parents aren't working 3 jobs to make rent or asking their oldest child to stay home to watch their siblings while they work.

Part of why I mentioned immigrants in that previous example is that this is also a complicating factor for the U.S. because we have a relatively large number of immigrants compared to many of our peers and a large fraction don't arrive speaking English. Many older children score poorly that way due to language proficiency, so using those figures to attack the educational system is a disservice to both sides.


rodgerdodger19 t1_j8bg3gh wrote

It show with you(looked at your history) sorry the education failed you. Hopefully it gets better as the younger generations come of age and force change.


[deleted] t1_j89d32w wrote



catscanmeow t1_j89ps5c wrote

Also in a way, and i know this will be controversial... It shows what happens when you let your internet be accessible to everyone in the world, its too easy for foreign powers to manipulate your political discourse, especially considering how easy it is to do that with essentially infinite automated bots.


Srynaive t1_j8a4ghx wrote

I wonder how this has inpacted excess deaths in Africa.


InsouciantSoul t1_j8bblnd wrote

Covid has not been an issue in Africa...


Not-the-best-name t1_j8cduxg wrote

COVID has definitely been an issue in Africa. Although, the life expectancy in even South Africa for males is 62, so it affected us a bit differently.


Meriwether1 t1_j8bah1t wrote

I mean it mainly killed fat and old people so…


Sminada t1_j8clorn wrote

While this is true, there was still a considerable number of other people who were affected. Most countries in Africa have lower obesity rates and life expectancy than, for example, the US. But the access to good medical care is lower. You can't just take the official numbers at face value. Take Tanzania: President Magufuli has done everything in his power to cover up outbreaks or even the mere existence of the virus. There was no vaccination program, no testing, no safety regulation, and the hospitals were not prepared. This led to a lot of people just dying on the streets. Cases that could easily have been prevented.

"Fun" fact: President Magufuli himself died of a mysterious lung disease. The government denied it was covid...


SnooPuppers1978 t1_j8cztkx wrote

What were excess deaths in Tanzania and other African countries compared to US/Europe and others?

You can hide causes of deaths, but hiding excess deaths if you keep track of them would be extremely difficult.


Sminada t1_j8dm659 wrote

Had to look it up myself.

132K excess deaths. That's 127 excess deaths per 100K.

I'm not sure how reliable the data is. While coming from a reliable source,, they themselves will have received it from the government of each country. I'm no expert, but I have been told that such data - like GDP - can't really be considered reliable.


Srynaive t1_j8bs1or wrote

So because they were old and fat, their deaths are okay? That's pretty fucked up.


Meriwether1 t1_j8btshq wrote

Who said it was ok? Their blood is on the hands of the corporations that run this country.


Srynaive t1_j8bx8ox wrote

My apologies. When I read something like "I mean it mainly killed fat and old people so..." it seemingly implies you are okay with those deaths, or that they are of no consequence. I don't know how else I was supposed to understand that, but I am willing to accept that you did not mean what I thought you were heavily implying.


SunixKO t1_j8c0kws wrote

There are less fat and old people in Africa, that is how I read it. Don't understand how you read it otherwise


CROM________ t1_j8dssew wrote

What corporations run the country? They have a radical left government. Borderline communist in terms of ideology. Do you imply that the lefties there are corporate puppets? Pepper in your mouth.


Kumimono t1_j8cprzv wrote

Hmm, what's the difference between misinformation and disinformation? First is wrong, second is wrong on purpose?


Coenclucy t1_j8bi01e wrote

This is like the butchers financial sponsor judging his meat.


Baud_Olofsson t1_j8ckomg wrote

What? I can't even tell what you are trying to say, other than that it's conspiratorial in nature.


1122334411 t1_j8cqpuy wrote

It’s not conspiratorial that Covid vaccines were not popular because of low infection rate in sub Saharan Africa. You also have an entire continent that has been the plaything of the WHO for decades. Circumcising millions of men for no reason based on junk science…


MonitorPowerful5461 t1_j8d5snm wrote

COVID infections rates in SSA are low, but far higher than the numbers, for a few reasons

  1. Good hygiene - diseases kill, without good hygiene you die
  2. Terrible data collection - governments do not have the capability to accurately assess how many citizens have COVID (nor do they want to)
  3. Being sick is considered shameful - if you’re sick with COVID, it’s perceived that that means you are “dirty”, and so people pretend they are not sick
  4. COVID is often mistaken for other diseases

This is true for a lot of diseases, not necessarily just in SSA. Malaria is one of the only “socially acceptable” diseases - it has a tendency to overshadow everything else since it is so common and devastating.

The thing with malaria is, even if it doesn’t kill you, it can make you incredibly tired for months on end. So you can’t work. And that in itself can kill you


Coenclucy t1_j8lkp1v wrote

They get a lot of sun and vitamin D plays a big role according to science


Coenclucy t1_j8lllp1 wrote

You never heard the expression a butcher that judges his own meat? Its a colloquial in dutch.


Rincon_yal t1_j8c5wdi wrote

Misinformation was all from our governments and pharmaceutical companies. Systemic failure at every level.


Meriwether1 t1_j8b9cwc wrote

Overall Africa faired pretty well because they aren’t pumped full of processed foods.


biggiejon t1_j8bym1r wrote

Because they weren't pumped full of something


real__pale t1_j8ca9jt wrote

Yes , yes , because they weren't pumped full of processed............... Mandatory. "foods"


Spirited-Reputation6 t1_j8cxq8c wrote

It is my understanding that the latest vaccines have zero efficacy against the current variants, FYI


JarJarBit t1_j8dqcbw wrote

Africa has one of the lowest vax rate in the world and one in the same time one of the lowest excess deaths. Conclusions:

  1. No vax, no problem?
  2. African nations are in better overall health?
  3. No Vitamin D deficiency? Opinions?

QuailMundane5103 t1_j8cqvpk wrote

This is an extraordinary time to be living through, one has to hope the collective insanity eventually dissipates.

Whatever metric you use, these mRNA injections have been an abject failure. Countries that had high uptake have suffered wave after wave of Covid, cratered birth rates, extraordinary excess mortality in all age bands.

Those that didn't have high uptake aren't suffering so much and in Europe chronically unhealthy populations like Bulgaria are actually seeing the 'pull-forward' effect, with post-pandemic mortality falling below normal levels.

Yet against this backdrop of the most disasterous public health intervention in history, we have papers and articles bemoaning Africa's refusal to be as blind and credulous as Western populations.

Truly extraordinary.


deletedtothevoid t1_j8cu98d wrote

>Researchers also noted that while the findings need further investigation, growing evidence suggests people who have had COVID-19 infection may be at an increased risk for new or worsening cardiovascular disease, which may have been a factor in the rising rates from 2019 to 2020.

Note: vaccines are safe ( so long you don't have a pre-existing condition). I am not saying vaccines are bad by any means.

My only question is what part of the infection would cause this to occur?


goodgodling t1_j8dgowq wrote

Covid-19 causes inflamation, and can cause inflamation that damages blood vessels and the heart.


RGregoryClark t1_j8ftlvn wrote

The published paper here:

It is notable the greatest increase happened after the introduction of the vaccine. Also the greatest increase was in the younger age groups, also known to be the case with the vaccine. (Yes, it is admitted by the CDC the vaxx causes heart issues. The only dispute is if the vaxx or COVID causes more.)

To confirm the link to the vaccine further the researchers should look at even younger age groups, such as under 25. If this also shows the worse heart effects, that strongly implies the vaccine is the cause.

Also, note the researchers did not record vaccine status. So they can not determine whether there is a vaccine link. Clearly, they should review the health records to include this data to make that determination.


AutoModerator t1_j897wnq wrote

Welcome to r/science! This is a heavily moderated subreddit in order to keep the discussion on science. However, we recognize that many people want to discuss how they feel the research relates to their own personal lives, so to give people a space to do that, personal anecdotes are allowed as responses to this comment. Any anecdotal comments elsewhere in the discussion will be removed and our normal comment rules apply to all other comments.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.


Wagamaga OP t1_j8981zb wrote

A recent study that examined the impact of information sources on Covid-19 vaccine hesitancy in sub-Saharan Africa discovered a strong link between people’s use of various media sources and vaccination resistance.

In 2020, when the pandemic’s impact in Africa was still underestimated, the World Health Organization (WHO) reported that nearly 6000 people were hospitalized worldwide as a result of misinformation about coronavirus.

By then, the organization was working to combat false coronavirus information on social media platforms through the Africa Infodemic Response Alliance.,

According to the study, the prevalence of Covid-19 vaccine hesitancy in the region was 73 percent among social media users, 72 percent among TV viewers, and 42 percent among newspaper readers.

The study was conducted by African researchers from Western Sydney University in Australia; Cape Town and Kwazulu-Natal universities in South Africa and Jos, Benin, and Calabar universities in Nigeria.

It was the first of its kind to demonstrate the impact of information sources on vaccine uptake in sub-Saharan Africa.

It involved 2572 respondents and found that resistance to the Covid-19 vaccines was most common (87 percent) among social media and least common (37 percent) among newspaper readers.

Potential negative effects

Vaccination resistance was also documented in individuals, especially females, who got information about the vaccine from friends and relatives.

In many ways, the spread of the Covid-19 pandemic in sub-Saharan Africa was accompanied by unprecedented and recurring waves of misinformation and disinformation.

This raised serious concerns about safety and potential negative effects, as well as what scientists called an Infodemic, or too much information, including false or misleading information in physical and digital environments.


Xilmi t1_j8d2ym3 wrote

My hypothesis as to what is the most reliable predictor about someone's willingness to take a vaccine is how much they trust those who are promoting it.

So in this regard the question we should ask ourselves is:

What could be the reason that "media platforms that spread misinformation" were considered to be more trustworthy than those who promoted the vaccine?

I think censorship played a big role in reducing trustworthiness as it's still historically tainted with a negative image of being used mostly by totalitarian regimes. To people for whom freedom of speech is an important value, the attempt of silencing dissent might have been considered as so appalling, that they lost their trust.


Gurdus4 t1_j8df8nj wrote

I agree, that's why even if the truth about COVID is on the side of the mainstream sources, and the establishment and the majority of authority (although we don't know how many people are afraid to say they disagree with establishment for fears of repercussions), the fact is at the end of the day, censorship was wrong and useless.


Stoneluthiery t1_j8dffel wrote

And who is the schmuck that decides what qualifies as misinformation or disinformation?


[deleted] t1_j89f1ar wrote



[deleted] t1_j89rjnm wrote



[deleted] t1_j898d1l wrote



[deleted] t1_j89a0cz wrote



[deleted] t1_j89b7nc wrote



[deleted] t1_j89by6o wrote



Don_Ford t1_j8bxw78 wrote

Or maybe they know that they aren't protecting people from COVID?

If we had Novavax access they would be lining up.


Gurdus4 t1_j8dffmh wrote

Vaccine hesitancy is linked to a wave of truth spreading around the world waking people up to what a corrupt and broken establishment we have and public health system.

It's all tainted by political and financial and fear based motivations rather than science.