> Would you listen to anything they had to say, or just want to punch them in the face?

They're not listening now. We've passed the point where persuadable people in good faith are holding out (for what? The full FDA approval was two weeks ago.) It's time to go the other way and mandate the vaccine -or- frequent testing (I think 1/week is too infrequent) -or- they can preemptively isolate themselves from society.

So you are making a common mistake, you are considering a huge swath of people from a wide range of demographics and political persuasions as a single cognitive entity. They are not. Let's say you don't shame, you get an additional 15% uptake. Let's say you do shame, you only get 5%. Shaming is part of the problem for reasons I stated above. It certainly makes the people shaming feel better about themselves, but it's a net negative to the outcome of which those people are purporting solve.

Bottom line, shitting on people is never effective.

No, my question was actually about whether persuadable people still exist. People for whom politeness and reason will work. Because I think those people have gotten the vaccine. Do you think that subpopulation exists, what motivates them and what will make them change their mind?

Because you seem to think shaming is about me feeling better at a huge cost: "you get an additional 15% uptake. Let's say you do shame, you only get 5%." I just don't think those numbers are at all accurate. I don't even think that the causation "shaming -> less vaccination" is true.

>I don't even think that the causation "shaming -> less vaccination" is true.

You don't understand human nature or yourself. Shame on you. Did that make you change your mind? Didn't think so.

I'm sure persuadable people exist, just what percent, I don't know. There are millions unvaccinated in the US and it will change over time. Many people are taking the "wait and see approach." If you don't understand why, see the Tuskegee Experiment. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_Syphilis_Study) All I know is shaming will have the opposite effect, assuming the intention is to get people to vaccinate. Shaming people is a very selfish and self centered action. The news does it all the time so you get that little hit of dopamine to watch more. Fat shaming is counter productive, lazy shaming counter productive, poor shaming counter productive, homeless shaming counter productive. Drug shaming is counter productive. Why on earth do you think it would it work now?

Do you have any data to show that laughing at anti-vaxxers dying of COVID decreases the amount of people willing to get vaccinated? Common sense suggests to me that it's the other way around.

If you’re going to force the vaccine if persuasion fails then why bother with persuasion?

I'd rather persuade - it's better long term if people get the shot voluntarily. We've just hit a point where it seems more more persuasion is possible.

Or am I wrong? What could possibly persuade the current holdouts?

The news needs to show more videos of sick people and bodies stacking in freezers. That will do it for most. They're incentivized to draw it out though. They would love 3 years of COVID, at least profit wise.

Why have we consistently seen thousands and thousands of new vaccinations daily if no one ever changes their minds?

Given the vaccines don't prevent transmission, why is it so important to you that the unvaccinated acquiesce or isolate?

Nobody authoritative ever said they prevented transmission. Ever. They reduce transmission.

Even if you choose to ignore that, consider: Vaccinated people have shorter recovery times and are less likely to require hospitalization.

That results in a shorter time window for spreading the virus. Furthermore, if you can recover at home you are less likely to spread it to health care workers or other patients.

Vaccines help prevent transmission. They are not 100% effective - the effectiveness depends on the vaccine and variant and study but quite high. That's a long way of saying that they "don't prevent transmission"

In the UK's vaccine surveillance report released today it showed the rate of infection in vaccinated individuals ages 40-79 was significantly higher than unvaccinated.

Edit: Link to report (pdf warning) https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...

The same report says that early results indicate that a single dose of the mRNA vaccines provides a 35-50% reduction in transmissions. Given that the second shot dramatically improves the results, we can assume that number will improve. Those are fuzzy numbers whoever, as it is difficult to measure. The prevention of infections is 55-70%