651–660 of 722 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So you are the type of person who will always do anything the authorities tell you to do. I suppose we are not likely to see eye to eye.
No the implication is a vaccine mandate in itself implies a calculated risk assessment that is sufficiently obvious it doesn’t make sense to use it as a basis for discussion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> since vaccinated people can still get sick. Then may be you should complain to people who gave you the vaccine, instead of pushing others to take this thing that apparently does not work as advertised.
> Then may be you should complain to people who gave you the vaccine, instead of pushing others to take this thing that apparently does not work as advertised. You clearly don't understand how vaccines work. No vaccine in history has ever kept all vaccinated people from getting sick.
An 80% efficacy may be good enough for you to take the vaccine. But for someone they might be looking for 95% efficacy to make it worthwhile for them.
But in no circumstance, I should be able to dictate that my threshold of efficacy should be good enough for you, and thus you should take it as well, so that my riskier choice will provide better ROI for me...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Then may be you should complain to people who gave you the vaccine, instead of pushing others to take this thing that apparently does not work as advertised. You clearly don't understand how vaccines work. No vaccine in history has ever kept all vaccinated people from getting sick.
Sure, so apparently efficacy matters. An 80% efficacy may be good enough for you to take the vaccine. But for someone they might be looking for 95% efficacy to make it worthwhile for them. But in no circumstance, I should be able to dictate that my threshold of efficacy should be good enough for you, and thus you should take it as well, so that my riskier choice will provide better ROI for me...
> They are putting themselves at risk surely, but the risk doesn't really spread to people who have been vaccinated.
This is false because no vaccine provides 100% protection. You even here have agreed we me. Your point that people should complain to vaccine manufacturers about efficacy is both irrelevant and misguided.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I never said that vaccine material was singular; my intent was for "material" to represent the totality of all material content in the vaccine dose, save perhaps for the water molecules it is suspended in. If you want to go down that rabbit hole of "long lasting impacts" then you must equally accept that everything you eat is a risk. Everything you wear against your skin is a risk. Every breath you take. Every move y…
>then you must equally accept that everything you eat is a risk. I do. That is why I am not going to dictate what you should eat, and why I think that will be very wrong.
But given how extremely well tested it is, given its utterly astonishing and indisputable efficacy, given that the upsides greatly outweigh the risks[0], I have no problem with society applying a bit of societal pressure on people to get vaccinated voluntarily.
[0] Obviously this is the case when talking about known risks, likely but unproven risks, or even unlikely but plausible risks. But it's still true EVEN IF you accepted all of the wacky paranoid nonsense about vaccine safety and their beliefs about "long term risks". I haven't heard any anti-vax argument that makes the vaccine out to be even one tenth as bad as the disease it protects you from.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People should absolutely get vaccinated. After Eric Topol's appearance on Sam Harris' Making Sense podcast, the argument has been made and it's airtight... for you , yourself going and getting vaccinated of your own volition. What should not happen - what cannot happen - is the government or private entities forcing you to be vaccinated, or you lose your means of supporting yourself. It's as un-American as it gets. P…
Nobody lives in a "truly free society". This is one of these stupid American inventions that I wish would die because it's so obviously wrong—and so obviously incomplete as an intellectual concept. Everyone's fate is ultimately and inextricably intertwined with the actions of their neighbours. You can either be "truly free," or you can be a member of society. You can't be both. Here in my home country of Australia, a…
If it is beyond me to evaluate the product, I would look at people who are capable that I trust, to evaluate it for me.
So this is the basic principle in this context. I should be free to choose who I trust. Just because I trust someone, shouldn't mean you must trust them as well.
But with these mandates, the implication is that every one should trust a certain bunch of people. And that is the freedom of choice that is really being taken away from the people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> You can either be "truly free," or you can be a member of society. You can't be both. Says who? I am one of the, according to you, stupid Americans who loves and demands freedom. I am forced to live in society and I am forced to participate by paying taxes. I don’t want your shot or your schools or your healthcare. I want to be left alone. You may think I am stupid but I think you are too.
> one of the, according to you, stupid Americans I never said "stupid Americans." You have the freedom to misrepresent my words, but you don't have the freedom to actually change what I wrote, which remains published above. > I am forced to live in society No, you want to live in society. Society is where the hamburgers are; it's where the Internet is; it's where the houses with pipes delivering an endless bounty of…
Ok, so it is not ideal right now, but we should try to move towards the ideal, instead of away from it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>then you must equally accept that everything you eat is a risk. I do. That is why I am not going to dictate what you should eat, and why I think that will be very wrong.
I don't know of anyone who's "dictating" that you get the vaccine and I would oppose anyone who wants to make vaccinations literally compulsory. But given how extremely well tested it is, given its utterly astonishing and indisputable efficacy, given that the upsides greatly outweigh the risks[0], I have no problem with society applying a bit of societal pressure on people to get vaccinated voluntarily. [0] Obviously…
The problem is that you are essentially imposing your trust in the institutions, onto others.
Trust in "science" is fundamentally different from trust in "scientists". Even though it might make sense to apply societal pressure to mandate trust in "science", it makes no sort of sense to mandate trust in "scientists".
I think it is hard for a lot of people to see or acknowledge the distinction between "Science" and "Scientists" which is causing these debates..
I work at google and am vaxxed but this pisses me off. I decided that the vaccine was worth the risk and for the best overall but if someone makes a different calculus I can understand and respect that. IMHO they gone way outside the reasonable scope of an employer - this is a cultural decision at the society level - why the fuck does my employer give a shit about this. Unless the employees are only commuting back an…
There is a counter point to yours, just as valid, where folks don’t want to be around unvaccinated folks. Maybe they have an immunocompromised relative or child at home. Maybe they don’t feel safe with unvaccinated folks around. This is a game of odds. People keep acting like this is binary. You’re statistically more likely to have and spread covid without the vaccine. I would be delighted if my employer enforced thi…
What's next in this scope creep? Your local grocery forces you to vaccinate if you want any food?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The hell are you talking about, we have data from the clinical trials that ran last year. Those phases have completed.
At this point we don't even need clinical trial data because their safety and efficacy have also been proven in the real world.
Also https://roundingtheearth.substack.com/p/defining-away-vaccin...
Not addressing concerns of people who have suffered adverse effects, does not inspire confidence either..
https://www.c19vaxreactions.com/uploads/1/3/7/7/137732232/le...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is NO SAFETY data because no COVID vaccines have finished clinical trails yet. That's what "Emergency Authorization" means - we give it to people even though it hasn't gone through the human clinical trials that every other drug normally does! Everyone vaccinated is legally and procedurally part of those clinical trials - it says so on the FDA web site. And those trials are not scheduled to be completed until 2…
The hell are you talking about, we have data from the clinical trials that ran last year. Those phases have completed.
"There is no FDA approved vaccine to prevent COVID-19"
and
"This is an unapproved vaccine"
This was written by Pfizer, May 10, 2021