> To wit: he says that the mRNA cancer vaccines are a scientific dead end, that the existing mRNA vaccines' research can be funded by industry, there are good alternatives, and that the technology has been tainted in the public mind. Therefore he supports de-prioritizing the research.

> None of these arguments can be characterized as "wants to defund mRNA research".

If I said "paying our mortgage is a dead-end, someone else can fund it, there are good alternatives to paying it, and therefore I'm de-prioritizing paying it"…

Would "I'm defunding our mortgage" be a substantially accurate summary of my position? (Yes.)

▲

timr 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Defunding == "taking all the money away".

Deprioritizing == "giving priority to something else".

It isn't hard to be nuanced. Particularly in this case, when you realize that the manufacturers of the mRNA Covid vaccines have made literally billions of dollars with which to do research.

▲

ceejayoz 2 days ago | parent [-]

> It isn't hard to be nuanced.

It takes a lot of effort to find that much nuance.

The nuanced description for your position is "a pretty huge stretch".

▲

timr 2 days ago | parent [-]

It's literally the definitions of the words.

▲

ceejayoz 2 days ago | parent [-]

Look who's suddenly struggling with nuance now.

Deprioritizing something enough becomes defunding pretty fast.

Like that five year old JIRA ticket that no one bothers with.

▲

timr 2 days ago | parent [-]

> Deprioritizing something enough becomes defunding pretty fast.

And right there, you acknowledge the difference. Have a nice day.

▲

ceejayoz 2 days ago | parent [-]

> And right there, you acknowledge the difference.

"I'm not murdering you, I'm just doing a very, very large blood draw!"

Do you find people fall for this often?

	▲	2 days ago \| parent [-]
		[deleted]

▲

notahacker 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Also, regardless of whether his other arguments are neutral and technical in between swipes at Biden policy, I don't think a "Bay Area liberal" opens his argument with the suggestion that NIH funding policies should be heavily influenced by the possibility certain classes of treatment might be refused by conservatives sufficiently susceptible to conspiratorial arguments against them...