this is such an important point. it's a continuous learning process that needs to be practiced. And I appreciate that she also said you can start small and incrementally build it into your practice. it can be overwhelming and impossible to try to get it all right immediately.

oh well this is exactly what I need help with! lovely.

this is something talked about often, but not often enough if scholarly publishing. And scientists who create figures with all different colors even in line graphs make it impossible to read with color blindness, but it's also a bit chaotic even if you can see the full spectrum! However, I just realized that even things like heat maps where different colors make more sense -- this is probably problematic.

this is such an important point and liked the way she framed it.

I hadn't considered this in terms of how a screen reader would do. But for my own eyes, I prefer the readability of using capital letters to indicate a new word. I think this is probably more accessible for everyone?

I've become a pest at work talking about the need to think about alt text. But then it's been something we're stumbling through to decide what makes good alt text. For example, using a figure from a scientific paper as an image in a tweet, but putting the whole caption in there doesn't make sense. It's tricky to figure this out with minimal resources (in staffing/staff time) to do it right. but I will continue to try to do better!

This highlights what I was thinking as I was doing the Language, Please exercise earlier -- just how much language is shaped my culture, but then reinforces that culture -- which historically has been perpetuating negative perceptions. And how easily it becomes to unintentionally be demeaning because it's built in. So again makes me think about how important it is to pay attention to our own language and change the language

When I worked at the museum we were taught to use this type of language if every interacting with the visitors, and then shortly after I then learned my training was incorrect because it is a personal choice. Which made sense to me. Just as the speaker goes on to say that anyone would want to choose how their identity is qualified. which I imagine also changes in any given situation.

I really appreciate this point, as the problem is the creators of the space and putting the onus on them for making it accessible vs those who cannot access it either being left out or the onus being on them figuring out how to access it.

I do wonder if she should have elaborated a little bit by saying that the good guys are specific to the type of bad guy? If I didn't understand this already, I could see the misunderstanding thinking well I got vaccines so I have good guys in me already, why does it matter that I need another one? But the answer is that your body makes specific good guys after every specific bad guy interaction? But also the decision in every communication is where to limit how much info you provide before you overwhelm the listener. so she probably had to choose carefully what info was the most important to convey here, and perhaps led to follow up questions and answers?

Her whole intro was effective in engaging with the audience, but I thought this part was very welcoming. Because she was expressing gratitude in being asked to explain and being trusted. Rather than simply saying: good question and approaching with a professor/expert tone. It's nuanced, but I feels like an important shift in setting the tone to keep the listener open to listening.

I love this! I know a previous commenter thought this might be dumbing down, but I really enjoyed the visuals and if I had to explain vaccines often would want my own plush toy examples. I have taught many intro level biology courses in college, and even having models that aren't toys feels less effective now that I see this. Something about putting a happy face on it makes it more inviting? less fearful.

I understand this already, and I found this delightful and informative for myself.

It's interesting she decided not to really explain what this is. She never gets into what RNA let alone mRNA is. But my guess was that was purposeful. Leading me to believe the audience she is targeting has minimal expertise in science. And then it is understandable why she'd skip over this part, because the point is to help assuage fears about the vaccine and how it was developed. and explain the importance in getting one.