Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How the Anti-Vaccine Community Is Responding to Covid-19

undark.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 111 posts

Re: How the Anti-Vaccine Community Is Responding to Covid-19

#41

Post by peter_d_sherman »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #15
peter_d_sherman wrote: post #7

Opinion: Forcing someone else to take a vaccine, if they don't want to, or forcing someone else NOT to take a vaccine, if they do -- is no different than forcing a woman to take an abortion if she doesn't want it, or forcing a woman NOT to take an abortion, if she does want it. It's no different than forcing a man to join the Military if he doesn't want to join, or forcing the man NOT to join the Military, if he does…

Unvaccinated people put the immuno-compromised, newborns and the elderly at risk. The state doesn't have the right to force you to vaccinate, but they do have the right to force you into quarantine if you're not.

I've studied U.S. Law for close to 10 years.

First, please define what you mean by "state".

Are we talking Federal Government, or one or more of the 50 U.S. States?

Next, please explain to me why you think that entity has the power to do that...

Also, please explain to me your understanding of "Consent Of The Governed". What does that term mean, where does that originate from, how does that apply to to the U.S. Federal and State (and also local) governments?

Think of this as a test of your understanding of U.S. Law...

Re: How the Anti-Vaccine Community Is Responding to Covid-19

#42

Post by lpah4all »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #15
peter_d_sherman wrote: post #7

Opinion: Forcing someone else to take a vaccine, if they don't want to, or forcing someone else NOT to take a vaccine, if they do -- is no different than forcing a woman to take an abortion if she doesn't want it, or forcing a woman NOT to take an abortion, if she does want it. It's no different than forcing a man to join the Military if he doesn't want to join, or forcing the man NOT to join the Military, if he does…

Unvaccinated people put the immuno-compromised, newborns and the elderly at risk. The state doesn't have the right to force you to vaccinate, but they do have the right to force you into quarantine if you're not.

No, you can only be forced into quarantine if you have a communicable disease.

And the immuno-compromise put themselves at risk every time they go out without a mask.

Now, are you also going to require older people to top-up their vaccinations? You know they lose efficacy over time, right?

Re: How the Anti-Vaccine Community Is Responding to Covid-19

#43

Post by Tainnor »

henriquez wrote: post #36
bradleyy wrote: post #3

I can't say as conflating antivaxxers with a pediatrician that recommends a delayed/modified vaccine schedule is exactly productive. Delayed/modified schedule isn't to blame for measles. Pretty disingenuous, IMO. For those who don't know, there is a camp of people who believe that we're getting vaccinations at way too fast a schedule. Yes, this includes doctors, like the aforementioned pediatrician.

There is a really strong echo chamber effect among online communities that promotes blind trust in authority when it comes to some things (vaccines, gun control) while decrying authority in other cases (online privacy, facial recognition). I think a cornerstone of curious discussion should actually be understanding, rather than villainizing, viewpoints that lead a person to a cognitively dissonant state, but that is…

every expert I've seen talking about it agrees that we need to first vaccinate at-risk populations because there will be a shortage of vaccines. I'm not sure what kind of viewpoint vaccine skeptics add to this debate.

also, tangentially, I think that blanket distrust of authorities is just as irrational as blanket trust. it should really depend on the situation which is why it's by no means cognitive dissonance to trust authorities in some respects but not in others.

Re: How the Anti-Vaccine Community Is Responding to Covid-19

#44

Post by toss1 »

Often overlooked in commentary on anti-vaxxers, and by the anti-vaxxers themselves, is this:

Freeloading

The anti-vaxxers are freeloading on the herd immunity created and maintained by the smart people.

That herd immunity prevents the regular epidemics & pandemics common before vaccines, when families often had 10 children to see a few survive to adulthood.

There is plenty deliberate ignorance of history, Dunning-Kruger Syndrome, and confirmation bias in their 'arguments', but the root seems to be a (likely) unconscious willingness to freeload on the benefits provided by others.

This is unfortunately coupled with a deliberate ignorance of and/or willingness to deliberately endanger the small subset of people with bona-fide medical conditions that contraindicate vaccination, and so genuinely rely on the herd immunity to survive.

It is far past time to coddle this deliberate ignorance and freeloading. If anti-vaxxers want to stay that way, fine, but they need to choose and not be permitted poison the well - vaccination needs to be required for alk access to public buildings, schools, transport, etc.

Re: How the Anti-Vaccine Community Is Responding to Covid-19

#45

Post by peter_d_sherman »

krapp wrote: post #26
peter_d_sherman wrote: post #7

Opinion: Forcing someone else to take a vaccine, if they don't want to, or forcing someone else NOT to take a vaccine, if they do -- is no different than forcing a woman to take an abortion if she doesn't want it, or forcing a woman NOT to take an abortion, if she does want it. It's no different than forcing a man to join the Military if he doesn't want to join, or forcing the man NOT to join the Military, if he does…

>A future Constitution will explicitly support the right to be medicated/vaccinated if one wishes to be, while conversely supporting the right NOT to be medicated/vaccinated, if one does not. No it won't because the Constitution is not, nor should it ever be, a suicide pact.

No piece of paper is, or ever should be used as a suicide pact, I agree.

But please clearly explain to me why you think the Constitution is in your words, a "suicide pact".

Re: How the Anti-Vaccine Community Is Responding to Covid-19

#46

Post by henriquez »

Tainnor wrote: post #43
henriquez wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a really strong echo chamber effect among online communities that promotes blind trust in authority when it comes to some things (vaccines, gun control) while decrying authority in other cases (online privacy, facial recognition). I think a cornerstone of curious discussion should actually be understanding, rather than villainizing, viewpoints that lead a person to a cognitively dissonant state, but that is…

every expert I've seen talking about it agrees that we need to first vaccinate at-risk populations because there will be a shortage of vaccines. I'm not sure what kind of viewpoint vaccine skeptics add to this debate. also, tangentially, I think that blanket distrust of authorities is just as irrational as blanket trust. it should really depend on the situation which is why it's by no means cognitive dissonance to tr…

Trusting authority in some cases and not others is not cognitive dissonance.

Cognitive dissonance comes from encountering something that goes against your confirmation bias, and runs the risk of knee jerk reactions.

Example of knee jerk reaction: the GP's example of the article (and possibly you) conflating a doctor who says "maybe we should slow down" with anti-vaxxers.

Re: How the Anti-Vaccine Community Is Responding to Covid-19

#47

Post by Zenst »

One fair point "Floyd said, “are talking about washing your hands, but why aren’t they talking about things you can do to boost your immune system like vitamin D?"

Given that in some countries in the northern hemisphere we are seeing a disproportionate number of ethnic minorities deaths from this, the aspect that vitamin D or lack of, does seem to be a factor and certainly one in which such advice would do more good than any harm I can think of beyond stock pilers effect. Though lack of vitamin D is not something that is the prevail of any pigment, just more likely and given the data, I'm supprised that such advice is not more vocalised. Though for many it will be basic health knowledge akin to basic first aid, that many is not all.

For reference https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1211435 https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-review-to-be-launched...

Re: How the Anti-Vaccine Community Is Responding to Covid-19

#48

Post by toss1 »

duckMuppet wrote: post #39
maxdo wrote: post #2

This planet will always have people who are always not happy with something. And don't get me wrong it positive. Even stupid alarming vaccine campaigns caused better results evaluation. And since this is a liberal society where you can't force people to stay at home even if it will cause death, oh well... this is the only way, someone should die without vaccine first.

It's not about the vaccines. It's about control. If the ppl are vaccinated, those ppl should be safe, and in theory those unvaccinated masses dying off from X illness increases the overall fitness of the population. However, it's not at all about that. This is about forcing those who may not think or believe the same to not only acquiesce, but to actively proclaim they are science deniers and that another group is in…

It is not control, it is the anti-vaxxers freeloading on the herd immunity maintained by the smart people and deliberately endangering the people with genuine medical conditions that prevent vaccination & so literally depend on the herd immunity to live

We are not on the Lewis & Clark expedition, we live in a highly complex society, which requires serious maintenance.

Re: How the Anti-Vaccine Community Is Responding to Covid-19

#49

Post by lpah4all »

AshamedCaptain wrote: post #28
lpah4all wrote: post #13

Vaccines are an absolutely revolutionary technology. That said, mixing profit with essential medical technology is a recipe for failure. The first way to make something more profitable is to cut costs. What corners do these corps cut to up their margins? And how does that decrease health outcomes for some percent of the population? The bottom-line is that no for-profit corp can be trusted with your health. Vaccines m…

There's something very wrong in your message, practically the same bias as the vaccine "denialists". First you establish your order of trust as: 1. Government 2. For-profit-corporations Then you acknowledge that your actual practisting order of trust is: 1. Your gut (why is "the entire schedule frankly insane"?) 2. European Governments 3. Your American Government The later ranking is not justified at all by your earl…

Your biases are so ingrained you don't even realize them.

Yes, I am biased against for-profit corps. Which one, especially among the pharmas, do you trust?

No, this is not my gut, this is my experience with for-profit corps and my knowing their past and recent history.

And you say there is something wrong with my message, but you did not state one single fact to argue. You are the one arguing from your gut and your belief that our govt and for-profit corps give a shit about anything other than your money. They only care that you can't prove the tort.

And who said I trust governments? You did. I didn't say that shit. I said our government should run these programs, but what I didn't say was that we need governments made up of actual "public servants", not the corrupt, self-dealing lying pieces of shit that take a boatload of money from corps of all kinds, the bigger the cozier.

Your thinking you are so smart is getting in the way of your education.

Re: How the Anti-Vaccine Community Is Responding to Covid-19

#50

Post by defertoreptar »

beefield wrote: post #19

There are a couple of other groups I would like to be interviewed as well. - Economists who have bought into the crowding out theory. Are they consistent and still oppose government spending? [1] - People/corporations who have lobbied for and taken advantage of all kinds of loopholes in taxation as to avoid paying taxes and who think taxation is theft, and are now expecting government to pay them out from this mess.…

Your three examples run in a similar vein: individual rights vs the role of government. I think many of those you would see as holding contradictory views would say that government intervention in these areas actually fall under the domain of something they believe is one of the few justifiable functions of government: defense. Only, it's not a war this time.
Post reply on HN