101–110 of 181 posts
This is antivax propaganda.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And sometimes education comes from the rest of society saying “you are welcome to your beliefs, but not welcome to pollute my air at our workplace until you aren’t a danger to me.” We set the precedent for forced vaccination nearly a century ago. There is no slippery slope here, or at least if there is we already slid down the hill and are resting comfortably on flat ground.
I encourage everyone to get vaccinated if they can, but your comment makes no sense and presents a false choice. Vaccinated people can also pollute the air at your workspace and present a danger to you. There is only a limited and temporary reduction in risk of transmission. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02689-y
I like to always highlight not to reduce reality to a single variable, when the correct model contains so many we can't even enumerate them.
I also try very hard not to be told what to think. This requires work. Sadly our society, perhaps fueled by social media, sees individuals who "know" the truth about all kinds of subjects. In quotes because, more often than not, what they believe is in a range between false, a fantasy or, at best, inaccurate or incomplete.
We all know that the concept of vaccines (isolated from any particular event or case, just the idea) is good. From there to always religiously equate "vaccine" to "good" is a mistake. Even worse, label those who do not want to get vaccinated as stupid, well, to be kind, potentially uninformed.
We need more conversation and less hatred.
Issues rarely boil down to a single variable. Through conversation we often learn about the hundred or more we might have missed because we "know" the truth as it was told to us.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They said: "I don't have a large social circle." You need to read context a bit more carefully.
Sure, he said that, but only one of the complications are actually IN his social circle, the rest are two or more steps removed. "My dad's coworker" - 2 steps "my wife's brothers" - 2 steps "My daughter's bf's friends mom" - 4 steps "A friend" - 1 step He might have a small social circle, but even a small circle is going to explode exponentially when you start hoping outwards. By the 4th jump, you're going to start s…
Thanks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Odds of death from AstraZenaca are 1 in 1 million. Let's take odds of the event of having serious complications to be 1/100,000 just to be more skeptical. The odds that 5 people in a row have such serious side effect is 1/10^25. That is equivalent to tossing 83 coins in a row and getting all heads. Which is more likelier. 1/10^25 or that you have false information regarding this. : )
I'm pro vaccine, and am convinced that the benefits of the vaccine absolutely eclipse the risks, but your math is so horrendously wrong here. Delete this. Edit, here's some corrections: This isn't 5 people in a row who had issues, it's 5 people within 4 nodes of distance in their social network. 4 nodes of distance is a lot of people, probably around 200,000 - 2,000,000. The odds of having severe complications from t…
Same guy as before. I know of two people who temporarily lost taste and I heard of one person who died from COVID, a coworker's uncle.
You can rationalize this however you like, but these are the cases I'm aware of.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The politicalization of the vaccine is foolish and unscientific. I think you're confusing cause and effect here. The politicization of the vaccine is the reason the government is now pushing vaccine mandates and such, not a reaction to it. If Fox News had spent the last year telling its viewers that seat belts make you sterile, the government would be raising fines and ramping up enforcement and generally adopting…
Both sides are to blame. I stand by my statement. Any politics directed at vaccines is foolish and unscientific. People should acknowledge that mistakes were made by the government and officials with their foolish statements. CNN and Fox are equal partners in the hysteria. People need to remember the goal is to eliminate the threat, not get everyone vaccinated. These are two different things. Ignoring post-COVID immu…
For you perhaps, but some people have the terminal goal of avoiding vaccination, even if that increases the threat. That is why the government is doing anything and everything, including FUD, to push vaccines down peoples' throats. Their actions will always seem irrational if you ignore that.
I try to summarize leaving out explicit statements about Covid: - a significant portion of the US-Population (my remark: similar to other western countries) is not willing to take the shot - a huge proportion of which are underprivileged, from "working classes" - the pharmaceutical companies have a gigantic financial leverage, in total $1.3 trillion. (My remark: an example from Germany: Biontech Investors: Thomas & A…
This seems very, very concerning and presents a conflict of interest. Can someone help me understand how that is not the case?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Both sides are to blame. I stand by my statement. Any politics directed at vaccines is foolish and unscientific. People should acknowledge that mistakes were made by the government and officials with their foolish statements. CNN and Fox are equal partners in the hysteria. People need to remember the goal is to eliminate the threat, not get everyone vaccinated. These are two different things. Ignoring post-COVID immu…
> People need to remember the goal is to eliminate the threat, not get everyone vaccinated. For you perhaps, but some people have the terminal goal of avoiding vaccination, even if that increases the threat. That is why the government is doing anything and everything, including FUD, to push vaccines down peoples' throats. Their actions will always seem irrational if you ignore that.
The single simplest summation of the concept of evil is "the end justifies the means".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> People need to remember the goal is to eliminate the threat, not get everyone vaccinated. For you perhaps, but some people have the terminal goal of avoiding vaccination, even if that increases the threat. That is why the government is doing anything and everything, including FUD, to push vaccines down peoples' throats. Their actions will always seem irrational if you ignore that.
FUD just pushes people away. If you cannot act in a truthful manner you legitimize their beliefs. When you know better and give up on truth, you lose. The single simplest summation of the concept of evil is "the end justifies the means".
That's a rather strong way to describe someone who refuses to implement a policy you like.
You might be right, a natural immunity exemption might be sound policy. I personally tend to agree. But you can't make the case for it by pretending that opposition to it is based in ignorance or evil, if the opposition is due to the concern that people who would abuse it and the result would be more deaths.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
FUD just pushes people away. If you cannot act in a truthful manner you legitimize their beliefs. When you know better and give up on truth, you lose. The single simplest summation of the concept of evil is "the end justifies the means".
> summation of the concept of evil That's a rather strong way to describe someone who refuses to implement a policy you like. You might be right, a natural immunity exemption might be sound policy. I personally tend to agree. But you can't make the case for it by pretending that opposition to it is based in ignorance or evil, if the opposition is due to the concern that people who would abuse it and the result would…
I’m willing to read these articles, and even sort of willing to consider other viewpoints, but this is mostly garbage. What stands out is the authors’ favor of natural immunity being better than vaccination. It may well be, but it has this small caveat that you need to have had the virus to become naturally immune. E.g. you need to take that 1-2% of not surviving entirely, and if too many people take that chance at t…
A lot of people already have had the virus though. From the article: > During lockdowns, essential and frontline workers bore the brunt of COVID-19 cases while affluent professionals stayed home, teleworked, and ordered delivery. These workers were once called “heroes.” Now the Zoom class labels the same workers “anti-vaxxers” if they prefer to rely on the natural immunity many of them have already acquired from prev…
Also, it is extremely hard to scientifically and politically account for recovery as proof of vaccination. In some European countries, it sort of works, when you have good standards on how exactly to determine and track infection and recovery. Even then there are tradeoffs, because the immunity after vaccination is much better studied and much more predictable.