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

Routine vaccinations drop among U.S. kindergartners for the third year in a row

statnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 234 posts

Re: Routine vaccinations drop among U.S. kindergartners for the third year in a row

#91

Post by mrphoebs »

ben_w wrote: post #68
realjhol wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually yes, sometimes an outsider opinion can be the correct one... that is the very essence of scientific enquiry - to ask questions. Who am I? Some rando on the Internet, but I correctly assessed that the vaccines wouldn't prevent transmission, carried a non-zero risk of side effects - sometimes extremely serious, that natural immunity would provide far greater protection, that vaccination was unnecessary for chi…

> We have been proven correct about every single one of these things No, you haven't. > natural immunity would provide far greater protection false > vaccines wouldn't prevent transmission, carried a non-zero risk of side effects "Prevent" and "non-zero" are weasel words, that sentence as written is true of literally every treatment and prophylactic in existence forever . But it does reduce the risk of transmission e…

While I agree with the points you are making and think they are important, they could have been made just as effectively without resorting to an Ad hominem format. Though the quality of civil discourse on HN has degraded over the years, HN is still the one of the places I expect to live upto a higher standard.

(I'm sorry to any readers that this comment is not adding anything materially useful to the wider discussion)

Re: Routine vaccinations drop among U.S. kindergartners for the third year in a row

#92

Post by knaik94 »

blumomo wrote: post #86
realjhol wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Why in 2023 people still believe that C19 mRNA prevents infecting others? This myth has long been classified as wrong (unlike advertised in the beginning of its rollout)

If you don't become infected, you can't infect others. The vaccine reduces the chances of you become sick with covid.

Re: Routine vaccinations drop among U.S. kindergartners for the third year in a row

#93

Post by blibble »

pclmulqdq wrote: post #80
blibble wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it is not possible for your DNA to be modified by the mRNA vaccines, so it is not gene therapy and the virus will turn your body into a spike protein factory regardless

This is actually not true - reverse transcriptase is present in your cells, and has been known to add code from viral RNA to your DNA, sometimes permanently.

you are thinking of integrase, which is not present

and there is no primer site on the mRNA for RT to operate

if it was that easy for random bits of floating mRNA to integrate itself into your DNA then we'd never make it to the point of being born

Re: Routine vaccinations drop among U.S. kindergartners for the third year in a row

#94

Post by Avamander »

blumomo wrote: post #86
realjhol wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Why in 2023 people still believe that C19 mRNA prevents infecting others? This myth has long been classified as wrong (unlike advertised in the beginning of its rollout)

It's just that the nuance is often ignored in the initial saying. Why do people try to debunk something out of a game of telephone instead on restoring the original information.

Point has always been that people who are less ill, less severely ill, for a shorter duration, with fewer or no symptoms, have lower chances of infecting others.

The urge to simplify is great but it causes these weird discussions like "does the vaccine prevent (all) infection" or like what we have here.

Re: Routine vaccinations drop among U.S. kindergartners for the third year in a row

#95

Post by ben_w »

fidgewidge wrote: post #63
ben_w wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is very true. I don't know if you're saying that about vaccination providers or anti-vax campaigners (Deliberate ambiguity? I ask because I do that sometime). While there is a massive difference in evidence supporting these two sides, as I have a mere GCSE grade C in biology, I necessarily have to just have faith in the research methods and licensing regimes that made my 4 Covid jabs and humpteen others. Not una…

Why? There's no requirement that you get a credential from a particular group in society before being allowed to distrust them. If such a rule really existed it'd be a field day for scammers. For example nobody would be allowed to doubt any claim related to Web3 if they hadn't already spent years writing smart contracts. Or they wouldn't be allowed to decide Tesla FSD isn't safe enough, because they aren't themselves…

Why do I trust the vaccines?

Because medicine is generally useful and functional.

Because doctors studied at the same university that taught me much of my profession.

Because nations in economic dispute with each other, nations with territorial disputes, even nations at war with each other, still all agree that the vaccines are a good idea.

Re: Routine vaccinations drop among U.S. kindergartners for the third year in a row

#96

Post by nabla9 »

NhanH wrote: post #88
nabla9 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thank you for sharing your personal experience. Unfortunately sharing personal stories like this in the internet is the source of much grief for three reasons: 1) There is no way to quantify how likely this is from personal stories. If your experience is 1 in 100 event, you are doing more harm sharing it than not sharing it if 1 in 10 becomes too suspicious to follow diagnosis. 2) We really don't know. Either things…

So “lived experience” matters until it is against the dogma. Sharing personal story likes this is the reason the internet being a wonderful place. It should always be recommended as long as it is truthful, and doesn’t involve explicit agenda of spamming out other experience or information.

That's not what I said.

> It should always be recommended as long as it is truthful,

That's the point. You never know.

Re: Routine vaccinations drop among U.S. kindergartners for the third year in a row

#97

Post by hutzlibu »

knaik94 wrote: post #92
blumomo wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why in 2023 people still believe that C19 mRNA prevents infecting others? This myth has long been classified as wrong (unlike advertised in the beginning of its rollout)

If you don't become infected, you can't infect others. The vaccine reduces the chances of you become sick with covid.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2116597

"Although vaccination still lowers the risk of infection, similar viral loads in vaccinated and unvaccinated persons who are infected with the delta variant call into question the degree to which vaccination prevents transmission."

Not to dispute your claim, but to put it into context. But apart from that, I am out of this debate.

Re: Routine vaccinations drop among U.S. kindergartners for the third year in a row

#98

Post by colinb »

Xylakant wrote: post #51
lolinder wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is a parent with a very specific kind of mindset about who should be the ultimate authority on their child. I think this may be your problem: you don't perceive the parent as the ultimate authority on the child. As a tutor, you fill a strictly advisory role, not a position of authority, and even your advisory role is limited in scope. If you try to exert authority or influence outside of that scope then yes, y…

But the question is whether parents should be the ultimate authority on the child, and the law in many countries does not support that. The lines get drawn at different points in different countries, but many have laws against child endangerment etc. For example, in Europe it’s mandatory to send your child to school - whether the parents want it or not. Some parts of the curriculum are mandatory, whether the parents…

> For example, in Europe it’s mandatory to send your child to school

No. No it isn’t. I don’t know where you’re writing from but I can tell you that home schooling is a thing in some European countries. Maybe all of them? I can say for sure and I’m unwilling to subscribe to a sweeping statement about a mass of 44 countries. It amazes me that anyone would.

Re: Routine vaccinations drop among U.S. kindergartners for the third year in a row

#99

Post by fidgewidge »

knaik94 wrote: post #81
fidgewidge wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you think that the problem may be the other way around? Their perception of the reliability of "the science" is accurate and yours is warped. The last years have split the population into those who blindly believe in academic and government scientific claims, regardless of how incredible those claims are or how frequently they turn out to have been wrong. And the rest, who don't treat science religiously, and who…

That is some very charged language. Showing empathy and helping a child become better at critical thinking isn't anything close to brainwashing. Maybe you're trying to use language that you imagine the parents might think in, but that's not charitable to them either. By asking this question, I felt like I was making it clear that I am trying to understand the parents and reach some middle ground.

You aren't showing empathy, you claimed the parents were "brick walls" with "warped perceptions" who were harming their own children, and that you specifically told them that! No wonder they got defensive. That's the opposite of trying to understand them and it's certainly not charitable to them, is it?

To engage in empathy you must be able to fairly articulate their views and the reasoning they use to arrive at them, in the same way they would or even better. In both posts you haven't done that. That's why they aren't listening to you. Your response to their views is laughable, it's to say "trust me" and then try to manipulate ("guide") their child when they aren't around, which is the opposite of being trustworthy. They trusted you to tutor their child in specific subjects and instead you betrayed that trust, then act surprised when they are "brick walls"?

To convince the parents, you first need to convince them to talk to you and take you seriously. That in turn requires that you, firstly, stop bringing their child into it. Just ignore the child. The child is not being harmed, you aren't a hero who's saving them. The child's views are not your business, they are the parent's business. And secondly, that you do the legwork to fairly investigate their beliefs and the evidence they found convincing, so you can debate with them directly instead of telling them about "a place of trustworthiness" that they clearly don't believe in.

Re: Routine vaccinations drop among U.S. kindergartners for the third year in a row

#100

Post by ben_w »

mrphoebs wrote: post #91
ben_w wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We have been proven correct about every single one of these things No, you haven't. > natural immunity would provide far greater protection false > vaccines wouldn't prevent transmission, carried a non-zero risk of side effects "Prevent" and "non-zero" are weasel words, that sentence as written is true of literally every treatment and prophylactic in existence forever . But it does reduce the risk of transmission e…

While I agree with the points you are making and think they are important, they could have been made just as effectively without resorting to an Ad hominem format. Though the quality of civil discourse on HN has degraded over the years, HN is still the one of the places I expect to live upto a higher standard. (I'm sorry to any readers that this comment is not adding anything materially useful to the wider discussion…

Noted. I'm not sure how to make the same points without saying that some of the statements were weasel words, but if you could suggest a different way to make the same points, I'd appreciate it.

(Apart from anything else, I know that raising the other party's heart rate is a terrible way to change their minds).

Post reply on HN