Without any disrespect, I feel that these "learnings" betray a void of empathy from the author.

How are any of his points news to anyone, two years on? And there's some very dangerous stuff in there.

1. This was obvious very quickly. The idea that we would vaccinate the virus out of existence with leaky vaccines was always absurd.

And yes, sickness is inevitable. Did SA really think he could avoid an airborne global pandemic, rife across the planet for years, without living in hiding? No? Then how is this a learning?

2. This isn't a very helpful thing to "learn". Before a test result or major symptoms, there's no real way to tell foreboding from paranoia.

A feeling of foreboding is often described by patients before major events, for good reasons, and they are often pooh-poohed by doctors, especially if the patients are female, old, young, or poor.

3. Hold on. We need less oversight and care of novel vaccines? Rather than more open, more distributed, more scientific and consistent analysis?

Large pharma companies refused to share their safety data. Accurate statistics on Corona, mortality, and vaccine side effects are still impossible to find, partly because our institutions failed us, partly because we don't expect companies to share their data and work together in the common good.

For all the praise they've gotten for "speedy" development of vaccines, the fact remains that in the non wealthy parts of the world, most vulnerable people don't have even one shot. In wealthy countries, the shots are being pushed at children, supposedly to protect their grandparents who are on their fourth shot. This is demented - and the solution sure af isn't fewer delays and less regulation.

If the sprays are very effective, and shown safe (I'm not saying they are or aren't - I haven't looked into it as they're not even available to me), then how do we know there isn't a clause in Pfizer et al's contracts forbidding their use? We don't know the text of Pfizer's contracts in most cases; the excerpts we've seen are ridiculously draconian and onerous. [0], [1]

> Pfizer has formalized 73 deals for its coronavirus vaccine. According to Transparency International, a London-based advocacy group, only five contracts have been formally published by governments, and these with “significant redactions.”

And Scott thinks we need more action, less regulation, even than providing full legal indemnity while declaring the vaccine safe on the other side of our mouth? Booo.

4. I don't know much about Paxlovid. A ten second google reveals that it's not recommended for people with serious illness, liver or kidney issues, or people on medication. Telling people to pop it like candy seems fucking irresponsible.

As far as the point is that our response and guidelines were insufficient, yes, point very much taken - but this isn't news.

5, 6, 7. Brooo.... People have been saying all of this since the "bad cold" of Winter 2019. You say it like it's news because it just happened to you. Did you not have friends who told you this? Did you not read a single account? ... Didn't your son get this 6 months ago??!! I'm sorry you fell sick guy, but it's a bit fucking tone deaf to complain about your "milder than a cold" symptoms 2 years and millions of deaths into a global pandemic.

Not impressed by these "learnings" at all. Anyone who learns anything from this hasn't been paying any attention; and if people walk away with the impression that we need less regulation and faster blind action then that's bad, and Scott should feel bad.

I'm left with a very strong impression that SA lacks empathy in a major way. I can't diagnose narcissism but I'd go so far as to suggest that he looks into it.

[0] https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/dec/05/wall-of-secr...

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/10/19/secret-vacci...