The Plague of the Poor
tabletmag.com
The Plague of the Poor
1–10 of 181 posts
Re: The Plague of the Poor
#2I don't think anti-vaxx content has a place here.
Re: The Plague of the Poor
#3> So whose interests are served by mandating a leaky vaccine that prevents neither infection nor transmission of a disease that is chiefly dangerous to people over 75 or with serious preexisting medical conditions?
Should I keep reading? I think not
Re: The Plague of the Poor
#4> So whose interests are served by mandating a leaky vaccine that prevents neither infection nor transmission of a disease that is chiefly dangerous to people over 75 or with serious preexisting medical conditions? Should I keep reading? I think not
Should I explore perspectives outside of accepted party narratives? I think not
Re: The Plague of the Poor
#5"The emerging bio-authoritarianism that began as “two weeks to flatten the curve” will metastasize into something even more repellent and dangerous unless it is forthrightly opposed now, through boycotts, protests, lawsuits, labor action, and civil disobedience."
What I find truly repellent are highly educated and erudite people who spend huge effort on developing tortured arguments supporting their own agendas - such as to subvert the institutions of the United States in order to usher in an eternal Trumpian dictatorship.
The measles vaccine is not 100% effective.
The smallpox vaccine is not 100% effective.
"By one estimate" and statistics drawn from single rogue studies are not a decent or proper basis for an argument like this, this is not a court of law when precedent and legal text are fundamentals - this is science where the aggregate of evidence and analysis is used to support provisional hypothesis.
This kind of thing is disingenuous and malicious and corrosive to society. The author should be drummed out of wherever but since that's Twitter I'm not sure that that would be good thing or a bad thing.
In other news : just get the vaccine.
Re: The Plague of the Poor
#6This article is all over the place. It brings up true facts then moves on without making a point.
If the article has a message it cerianly isn't found in the writing.
Re: The Plague of the Poor
#7> So whose interests are served by mandating a leaky vaccine that prevents neither infection nor transmission of a disease that is chiefly dangerous to people over 75 or with serious preexisting medical conditions? Should I keep reading? I think not
Should I explore perspectives outside of accepted party narratives? I think not
“Man muss aber nicht an jeder Mülltonne schnuppern, um zu wissen, dass sie stinkt.” (Loosely translated: you don’t need to sniff on every trash can to know that it smells.”
There’s value in reading things that fall outside your preferred narrative. But that’s not an excuse to value everything, no matter how far removed from reality it is.
Re: The Plague of the Poor
#8"The emerging bio-authoritarianism that began as “two weeks to flatten the curve” will metastasize into something even more repellent and dangerous unless it is forthrightly opposed now, through boycotts, protests, lawsuits, labor action, and civil disobedience." What I find truly repellent are highly educated and erudite people who spend huge effort on developing tortured arguments supporting their own agendas - suc…
>> this is science where the aggregate of evidence and analysis is used to support provisional hypothesis.
Except those few occasions where a single experiment/paper/observation can throw out an entire field. It is rare, but science remains open to the possibility that even the most treasured law can be invalidated by a single, repeatable, experiment.
Re: The Plague of the Poor
#9Holy wow this is a shitty anti-vax article.
Re: The Plague of the Poor
#10"The emerging bio-authoritarianism that began as “two weeks to flatten the curve” will metastasize into something even more repellent and dangerous unless it is forthrightly opposed now, through boycotts, protests, lawsuits, labor action, and civil disobedience." What I find truly repellent are highly educated and erudite people who spend huge effort on developing tortured arguments supporting their own agendas - suc…
I mean, I don't know why even continue reading past the first paragraph - the author immediately summons the most overused and ultimately wrong arguments against vaccines - if you start this way then sorry, but I'm just not interested in your point of view after that. Or rather - I am, and I'm happy to have a discussion that started this way, but with an actual person face to face - I'm definitely not reading a blog post where I can't immediately go "no, wait, that's not how this works at all".