How to be critical of the information: video analysis

We live in a world where information is very accessible; we are literally at one click away from a vast array of information. This particular pandemic era saw an explosion of SARS-Cov-2 virus illness and vaccine related information, myth busters, fact checkers. The information presented is for most part of excellent visual or writing quality which confers a sense of validity. But in reality, is the information actually valid? How can we make the difference between the truthful, the half truth and the downright false? This is no small task, because we do want to believe, but more than ever we have to be cautious. Now is time to learn to be analytical with the information. The more you will analyze the better you will become at it. You will start here, step by step, with these two exercises;

Exercise 1: Video analysis, mRNA vaccine technology

Watch this video from the Guardian (13 nov. 2020)

This video from the guardian was an accurate portrayal of the Pfizer-BioNtech candidate vaccine back in November 2020. The commentator managed to present both the great promises and hope carried by the Pfizer announcement as well as the many hurdles that will need to be overcome.

Regardless of haw accurate things may seems one still need to be analytical.

Take notes of words that show promises, hope, potential; 

  1. Should, 
  2. Maybe, 
  3. Preliminary results, 
  4. Great hope, we believe, we think etc.

Beware of relative ” shady” statements such as

  1. Great
  2. Rare
  3. A few or many

Look for words and transparent expressions highlighting  certainty; 

  1. Affirmative sentences 
  2. “it will”, “it does”, 
  3. Explanations, 
  4. Concrete examples of success.
  5. Number, percentage, comparison.

These words or expressions  are indicators that help differentiate between hypothesis and scientific facts.

Watch the video, once again.

Watch with an analytical mind and be aware of the subtilty of language:

  • 90% effective in the early results;
  • Omission of the part where the body itself creates the spike protein.
  • According to scientists and government the first phase of the roll out ( care home resident and workers, NHS workers, 80, 70, 60, and 50 years-old’s ) should cover 99% of those people at risk of dying from the disease.
  • Take note of all the things we don’t know.
  • Take note of empty affirmation: ”There is a lot of concerns about these vaccines, simply because of the speed at which they were developed, but the regulators have said that they will not cut corners and that for them safety is paramount.

After that second take on the video, what is your perception of the Pfizer immunization product? Promising vaccine candidate or certainly a great vaccine? Less than two month after this announcement, this product received emergency use authorization. Did the regulators manage to answer all the ” we don’t knows” in that short period of time? How did they not cut corners? What will trigger the second phase of the roll out if 90% of those at risk of dying will be covered by the first phase of the roll out? Shouldn’t this be based on stronger positive results from clinical trials?

Video 2 analysis: How to be critical

  • Geared with the knowledge about the cell and the immune response of your body, write every question that comes to your mind while watching this video.
  • Take note of the use of overly qualitative adjectives, of  enthusiastic voice tone. Who is making these statements (ex. superb, wonderful, extraordinary!)? Aren’t they supposed to be more objective and show a little reserve?
  • What do you feel when listening to those statements? Did this create a willingness, a positive influence towards the new vaccine technology as the good news?
  • How close to the truth is this statement ‘’ vaccines shows your immune system how to respond to a threat ‘’ ? The previous lesson about the immune system explained that it already knows how to respond to a threat; a safe vaccine will only help the immune system to respond towards a specific infectious agent.
  • What about when the spike protein was mentioned ‘’When injected into your body on its own, it is harmless’’ This is an assumption. This was not studied at the time and new research may show otherwise.
  • Overlapping the clinical trials, means that it was not required to finish one phase before going to the next. Allowing this breach of good clinical practices from the manufacturers will certainly save a lot of time. How did the government and regulatory agencies ensure that no corners were cut in the process? Did they rely only on preliminary results to move forward?
  • What are your thoughts on this overly simplified version of the mRNA technology? What do you think could actually happen when taking into account the complexity of the cell, the immune system and the human body?
  • Close your eyes and picture this mRNA injection, but using the cell imagery from the first lesson. What do you see?
  • After seeing the video, how did you feel about the new technology?
  • Now, take a moment to verify the credentials of the producers; do any of them have a scientific background?
  • Take a moment to verify the collaborators. Think of potential biases or conflict of interest; any association with vaccine makers? What is the source or purpose of this video? Is it purely informative? Is it a marketing tool? Is it totally impartial?

Now, draw your own conclusion….

Promises may look like diamonds, but with a closer look they may just be cubic zirconia. Mistaking cubic zirconia for diamond is a quite costly mistake.