I don't think that's true at all. The data is damn clear you should get vaccinated, PERIOD. Deliberate and directed misinformation is killing good people and is the driving cause of the loss of personal freedoms now that we have effective vaccines. These are not opposite storms. One side (the truth as it has evolved over time) has a mountain of evidence and scientific data that has saved untold human sickness and death. The other side (lies) has, well, nothing but lies and misinformation using fear for control of IMO mainly confused citizens.

There is zero equivalence.


“It pays to keep an open mind, but not so open your brains fall out.”

― Carl Sagan

I respect the person but no, not even close. The stakes are too high for individual choice and personal objection.

Your objection is understandable and I don't take it personally. I don't even disagree with you, at least not up until the point (by my interpretation) you implied consent to forced vaccination. The data that I have manually gathered, suggests that you're correct and the vaccine IS doing its job, saving lives and staving off grave illness, for a number of people. If there exists a table of data that is not intentionally skewed to make people draw a specific conclusion from it, it probably shows this. What it doesn't show, what it can't possibly show, is the number of people suffering complications from it 20 years from now. If you're young, healthy, and extremely unlikely to die from covid, it is absolutely feasible for there to be a course of action for you, other than than blindly following the herd into the vaccination chute, that warrants serious consideration.

I've had this conversation enough times to know what comes next. The accusation of selfishness; "you won't even be moved to do this for the good of society?! How many kids mommies, daddies, and grandparents must die before you'll take this seriously?" I don't accept that argument. I believe it is published that the vaccine is something like 94% effective? People who are concerned, should get vaccinated. And people who are vaccinated, shouldn't be concerned.

(Addressing everyone now, not just @nsaspook )

Please keep in mind that, no matter which side of this you fall on, it's a potentially life & death stance. One does not entertain either ideal half-heartedly. The other side opposes yours for the very same reasons you oppose theirs, with the same amount of conviction. Everyone thinks they're doing the right thing. Please consider that as you go forward; this isn't (or at least, shouldn't be like) politics, where people oppose others because the others oppose them. This is life and death, and people oppose others because they DO value their own lives and the lives of others (yes, on both sides) and they think that their way is the best way to save or improve those lives. Please try to see it that way and this can become a less contentious topic. When seen that way, you are more likely to listen to the other side; after all, there are some pretty smart people across the aisle and they might be onto something. Can't hurt to hear them out.

 

I know for a fact that there are more intelligent people than myself in these Forums,
but it seems that for most people FEAR eradicates rationality.

Hi LowQCAB.

I got my Covid vaccination as early as possible, not out of FEAR, but with the intention weighing the odds in my favour of not becoming seriously ill and being admitted to hospital and endangering the medical workers nursing me.

I did it also to set an example to my family and friends, that if an old guy like me could get vaccinated without having any problems, they would be encouraged to step forward and have their vaccination.

Quaintly in this day and age I also considered it would help my Countrymen and my Country… old fashioned, yes, but it still should be relavent today as it was in the past global conflicts.

The human race is at war with this virus and it will be again in the future against similar global threats.

Note:
When I got my vaccination, I was clearly told it would not prevent me from catching Covid, but it would improve my chances of not being seriously ill and having to hospitalised.

Booster shots are no surprise to most old people, we have the Flu jab annually, Pneumonia jab 5 yearly so on, no big deal.

I mention these, to remind people that many of us are still here because of the vaccinations we had as children, even though they were ‘unproven’ at the time.

E

Perhaps someone could compile list of these previously 'unproven' vaccines, but are now considered acceptable vaccines, that are now in common use globally, today.?

 

Perhaps someone could compile list of these previously 'unproven' vaccines, but are now considered acceptable vaccines, that are now in common use globally, today.?

This would make for an interesting read, although I don't think there would be any surprises in the list, as, like you indicated, everything that did more good than harm, are things we still use today. In the interest of impartiality, I think such a list should be accompanied by another list, of things that were tried and proven to cause more harm than good. Medications or vaccines that were either used briefly, or that used to be commonplace until it was discovered how detrimental they are (cocaine, mercury, et. al.)

My grandfather was a guinea pig for penicillin trials and was given such a heavy dose it caused him to be on his death bed for months. After he recovered he was "awarded" an involuntary medical discharge from the very same military that used him as an experiment.

 

Your objection is understandable and I don't take it personally. I don't even disagree with you, at least not up until the point (by my interpretation) you implied consent to forced vaccination. The data that I have manually gathered, suggests that you're correct and the vaccine IS doing its job, saving lives and staving off grave illness, for a number of people. If there exists a table of data that is not intentionally skewed to make people draw a specific conclusion from it, it probably shows this. What it doesn't show, what it can't possibly show, is the number of people suffering complications from it 20 years from now. If you're young, healthy, and extremely unlikely to die from covid, it is absolutely feasible for there to be a course of action for you, other than than blindly following the herd into the vaccination chute, that warrants serious consideration.

I've had this conversation enough times to know what comes next. The accusation of selfishness; "you won't even be moved to do this for the good of society?! How many kids mommies, daddies, and grandparents must die before you'll take this seriously?" I don't accept that argument. I believe it is published that the vaccine is something like 94% effective? People who are concerned, should get vaccinated. And people who are vaccinated, shouldn't be concerned.

(Addressing everyone now, not just @nsaspook )

Please keep in mind that, no matter which side of this you fall on, it's a potentially life & death stance. One does not entertain either ideal half-heartedly. The other side opposes yours for the very same reasons you oppose theirs, with the same amount of conviction. Everyone thinks they're doing the right thing. Please consider that as you go forward; this isn't (or at least, shouldn't be like) politics, where people oppose others because the others oppose them. This is life and death, and people oppose others because they DO value their own lives and the lives of others (yes, on both sides) and they think that their way is the best way to save or improve those lives. Please try to see it that way and this can become a less contentious topic. When seen that way, you are more likely to listen to the other side; after all, there are some pretty smart people across the aisle and they might be onto something. Can't hurt to hear them out.

I plan to live forever or die trying. People are suffering complications and dying from covid today, the parents of young children are dying from covid today. I can't count the number of unknown and slightly tested shots I had 40 years ago but I'm still kicking. If you're unvaccinated, young, healthy and infected you are likely to spread the virus to a person who is not young and healthy with a much higher chance of sickness and death. That not selfish, it's just not very nice.

There is nothing to listen to on the anti-vaxx side. Yes, it does hurt to hear them out unless a logical, factual counterargument is made not to them but to the people they influence.

 

I plan to live forever or die trying. People are suffering complications and dying from covid today, the parents of young children are dying from covid today.

I hear you. The argument is I think by definition short sighted, but that doesn't make it wrong. I agree with you that getting vaccinated is the right call for almost everyone (probably).

I can't count the number of unknown and slightly tested shots I had 40 years ago but I'm still kicking.

Were any of them mRNA?

If you're unvaccinated, young, healthy and infected you are likely to spread the virus to a person who is not young and healthy with a much higher chance of sickness and death. That not selfish, it's just not very nice.

Agreed, but please allow me to make a slight change: if you're unvaccinated, young, healthy and infected you are likely to spread the virus to a person who is not young and healthy, not vaccinated, and with a much higher chance of sickness and death.

Do you agree with the change I made? If so, I would expect, by my own estimation of what your opinions probably are (correct me if I'm wrong) this is amounts to young "idiots" killing off older "idiots." Which equals less idiots. So, win? Or if my change negates your point then I'm at a loss; someone who is vaccinated should be well protected.

There is nothing to listen to on the anti-vaxx side. Yes, it does hurt to hear them out unless a logical, factual counterargument is made not to them but to the people they influence.

I agree, point taken. If the point is to undo damage that is created by willful misrepresentation or outright lies for the benefit of an impressionable audience then the cause is just. The counterpoints should be always directed to the audience in a way that they will be palatable to the audience. Engaging an "opponent" probably benefits only those who already agree with you (and of course, the opponent). Perhaps your posts here have been already presented to the audience, but I failed to recognize it.

Please consider that not everyone with reluctance over this specific vaccine is "anti-vax," and characterizing them as such (or even seeming to) is definitely undermining everything you're trying to accomplish, so be careful with that.

 

"" There is nothing to listen to on the anti-vaxx side. ""
This statement "should" speak for its self.

Any comment that I might make might be
misinterpreted as "name-calling", or some other un-useful, negative label.

So I merely ask that everyone question
themselves as to the wisdom of such a belief.

YOU know quite well that EVERYONE makes mistakes, including YOU.
( You means every person on this planet )

It is totally impossible to help someone who believes that they "know" what truth is.
Well, that is their God given Right,
until You start pointing-fingers at people who may have a differing viewpoint.

This is precisely how all Wars are started.

Who will help to end this insane cycle ?

Will You ?

It starts by realizing that something can be learned from ANY person,
even from a person that You think is totally crazy or insane, or
that You consider to be your enemy,
and that,
You could not possibly have "all the answers",
and that,
at least some of what You know is incorrect or incomplete, or both.
.
.
.

 

After all of this resistance to the vaccine talk and the reasons they give for resisting, the only thing I can come up with is they have been vaccinated. But not against covid, but against intelligence.

I can remember in my very early years standing in a long line of people at the city health department to get the first polio shot. To me the blame for this resistance started with the one who must not be mentioned. He knew and admitted it to Bob Woodward, but not to the public at large how bad it is. Then some of the "news" talking heads got involved say to resist the jab. Even though the companies they work for have a mandate to be vaccinated.

So then the "vocal minority starts in and many here go along with them, because it's easier to believe when you only hear one side of an argument, and it's proven by psychologists that a conspiracy theory is more believed when it is reinforced by those you hang out with. So that is why I believe some that resist getting the jab have been vaccinated against intelligence, and that vaccine seems to be working very well.

 

If You don't see it on the TV, then it didn't happen.
I call that looking at only one side of the story.
It's living in a "Bubble".

What about the 50% who look at ALL sides, and then say no ?
.
.
.

 

I hear you. The argument is I think by definition short sighted, but that doesn't make it wrong. I agree with you that getting vaccinated is the right call for almost everyone (probably).


Were any of them mRNA?


Agreed, but please allow me to make a slight change: if you're unvaccinated, young, healthy and infected you are likely to spread the virus to a person who is not young and healthy, not vaccinated, and with a much higher chance of sickness and death.

Do you agree with the change I made? If so, I would expect, by my own estimation of what your opinions probably are (correct me if I'm wrong) this is amounts to young "idiots" killing off older "idiots." Which equals less idiots. So, win? Or if my change negates your point then I'm at a loss; someone who is vaccinated should be well protected.


I agree, point taken. If the point is to undo damage that is created by willful misrepresentation or outright lies for the benefit of an impressionable audience then the cause is just. The counterpoints should be always directed to the audience in a way that they will be palatable to the audience. Engaging an "opponent" probably benefits only those who already agree with you (and of course, the opponent). Perhaps your posts here have been already presented to the audience, but I failed to recognize it.

Please consider that not everyone with reluctance over this specific vaccine is "anti-vax," and characterizing them as such (or even seeming to) is definitely undermining everything you're trying to accomplish, so be careful with that.

mRNA? It's a lot safer that most of the inactive virus vaccines we were given.
https://www.hhs.gov/immunization/basics/types/index.html

Older vaccinated people like me are the majority of people dying from breakthrough infections so it's not a matter of young "idiots" killing off older idiots" and young "idiots" is the source of virus variants that are slowly making vaccines less effective.

I've been careful to note the differences in the unvaccinated viewpoints but at this point the side of vaccine truth has decided to force the shot on the reluctant whether you want it or not.

The "opponent" here is not some raving anti-vaxx that will never change their mind because it's unusually just one of many unscientific ideas they hold, the true "opponent" here is sickness and death.

 

mRNA? It's a lot safer that most of the inactive virus vaccines we were given.
https://www.hhs.gov/immunization/basics/types/index.html

Older vaccinated people like me are the majority of people dying from breakthrough infections so it's not a matter of young "idiots" killing off older idiots" and young "idiots" is the source of virus variants that are slowly making vaccines less effective.

Thanks for the info, I respect your position, and I'm glad to be no longer part of the group drawing your ire.

I've been careful to note the differences in the unvaccinated viewpoints but at this point the side of vaccine truth has decided to force the shot on the reluctant whether you want it or not.

Good luck with that. I've got $5 that says all you'll manage to do with that tactic is drive away fence-sitters and further polarize the people who already don't agree with you. But we will see. I trust that when I return in a few months I'll find this thread exactly as I left it, despite my best efforts. Or closed.

 

Thanks for the info, I respect your position, and I'm glad to be no longer part of the group drawing your ire.


Good luck with that. I've got $5 that says all you'll manage to do with that tactic is drive away fence-sitters and further polarize the people who already don't agree with you. But we will see. I trust that when I return in a few months I'll find this thread exactly as I left it, despite my best efforts. Or closed.

You easily win the $5. I agree it will have a negative effect on the still reluctant but IMO the result will be getting the hell out of this endless cycle of restrictions because of the unvaccinated hordes.
At the point it's just countering obvious anti-vaxx falsehoods, not changing minds. The changing minds era has ended and the greater good era has started using the long established principle of mandated health emergency powers.


Quackery


Vaccination
https://collections.nlm.nih.gov/catalog/nlm:nlmuid-101392773-img

 

You easily win the $5. I agree it will have a negative effect on the still reluctant but IMO the result will be getting the hell out of this endless cycle of restrictions because of the unvaccinated hordes.
At the point it's just countering obvious anti-vaxx falsehoods, not changing minds. The changing minds era has ended and the greater good era has started using the long established principle of mandated health emergency powers.

View attachment 247707
Quackery

View attachment 247706
Vaccination
https://collections.nlm.nih.gov/catalog/nlm:nlmuid-101392773-img

Wait, you're seriously suggesting that people should (will?) be forcefully vaccinated against their will? Please clarify... should? Or will? Is there something I don't know about because I choose to live under a rock, about to happen? Or is it just your wishful thinking?

 

Wait, you're seriously suggesting that people should (will?) be forcefully vaccinated against their will? Please clarify... should? Or will? Is there something I don't know about because I choose to live under a rock, about to happen? Or is it just your wishful thinking?

I don't want goon squads breaking down doors like in China but rights work both ways. The right to be left alone unvaccinate IMO is clear but the second you are in the public arena in a world health emergency you need be within the norms of public rights.

1: People Are Dying
2: The Economy Is Still Struggling
3: We’ve Given People Enough Damn Time
4: 75 percent of Americans have already had at least one dose.
5: You can opt for a free vaccine or pay each week for a test in order to opt out.
6: ETC...

It's a bad choice of really cranking down the screws on the unvaccinated in a sea of worse choices like letting the status quo continue with 650,000 casualties and currently 1,500 Americans daily dying from CV. If you value American freedom please get vaccinated ASAP. IMO that's small-c conservative.

 

I don't want goon squads breaking down doors like in China but rights work both ways. The right to be left alone unvaccinate IMO is clear but the second you are in the public arena in a world health emergency you need be within the norms of public rights.

1: People Are Dying
2: The Economy Is Still Struggling
3: We’ve Given People Enough Damn Time
4: 75 percent of Americans have already had at least one dose.
5: ETC...

It's a bad choice of really cranking down the screws on the unvaccinated in a sea of worse choices like letting the status quo continue with 650,000 casualties and currently 1,500 Americans daily dying from CV. If you value American freedom please get vaccinated ASAP. IMO that's small-c conservative.

You didn't answer the question.

 

You didn't answer the question.

If you mean held down and stuck with a needle, NO. Even the military gives you the option to quit. If you mean rules that make non-compliance costly and a pain in the ass, YES.

 

If you mean held down and stuck with a needle, NO. Even the military gives you the option to quit. If you mean rules that make non-compliance costly and a pain in the ass, YES.

So you are talking about what I thought you were talking about. Never know what it is a "NSA spook" knows, that you don't. Love how, just like everything else, it's a disciplinary measure, and it's aimed at people who work for a living. Don't hear anything about the people living off my tax dollars getting their checks garnished for not getting vaccinated. How about instead of penalties, offer incentives? Want to get 5% off your owed income tax this year? Include your shot record showing a completed covid vaccination within the next 60 days with your tax filing. That would get a LOT of people off the fence. Just call it an incentive-based stimulus package and then it won't matter that we can't afford it.

 

One thing IMO we should do is to allow medical proof of natural infection to be the equivalent of vaccination. There is pretty good science to say they are at least equivalent for immunity for the short term.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1

Conclusions This study demonstrated that natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity. Individuals who were both previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 and given a single dose of the vaccine gained additional protection against the Delta variant.

 

So you are talking about what I thought you were talking about. Never know what it is a "NSA spook" knows, that you don't. Love how, just like everything else, it's a disciplinary measure, and it's aimed at people who work for a living. Don't hear anything about the people living off my tax dollars getting their checks garnished for not getting vaccinated. How about instead of penalties, offer incentives? Want to get 5% off your owed income tax this year? Include your shot record showing a completed covid vaccination within the next 60 days with your tax filing. That would get a LOT of people off the fence. Just call it an incentive-based stimulus package and then it won't matter that we can't afford it.

Here the homeless are exempt from mask rules because it's impossible to enforce on a person you can't punish. Most of the older people living off our tax dollars have been vaccinated because they are following my live forever plan.
The incentive is easy. Really don’t want to get vaccinated, but don’t want to lose their job. That's the fate of a human wallet.

 

If you mean held down and stuck with a needle, NO. Even the military gives you the option to quit. If you mean rules that make non-compliance costly and a pain in the ass, YES.

That's about the same strategy used to discourage smokers from violating other people's right to clean air ... and it worked ... and I agree with it.

 

Here the homeless are exempt from mask rules because it's impossible to enforce on a person you can't punish.

Right, so incentivize. Everything doesn't have to be a dick-waving, in-your-face reminder that your freedom is a paper-thin augmentation of reality.

The incentive is easy. Really don’t want to get vaccinated, but don’t want to lose their job. That's the fate of a human wallet.

Right, lose their job. Not their income, their job. Have to get drug tested if you want to work for your keep. Why do these authoritarian shows of power always disproportionately effect the working person? Can't there be a way to put in place a measure that applies to everyone equally? Or if not, at least one that doesn't go straight for the nuts of the people fueling the whole economy? Maybe an incetiv.... never mind, no, that's obviously stupid. The carrot never works. Only the stick. Always the stick. All hail the stick!