|
Any and all updates regarding the COVID-19 will need a source provided. Please do your part in helping us to keep this thread maintainable and under control.
It is YOUR responsibility to fully read through the sources that you link, and you MUST provide a brief summary explaining what the source is about. Do not expect other people to do the work for you.
Conspiracy theories and fear mongering will absolutely not be tolerated in this thread. Expect harsh mod actions if you try to incite fear needlessly.
This is not a politics thread! You are allowed to post information regarding politics if it's related to the coronavirus, but do NOT discuss politics in here.
Added a disclaimer on page 662. Many need to post better. |
On December 21 2021 02:10 pmh wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2021 01:26 WombaT wrote:On December 20 2021 09:54 pmh wrote:
The best way forward for society as a whole i would not dare to say. Maybe public expectations should be lowerd.The public has never fully realized the scope of this pandemic and messages from authoritys have been to optimistic in general (for which there are definitely some arguments so i can understand that).
We dont have all that many options other then continue with the current strategy and hope that at one point things will get better. If this is actually realistic and how long this would take i would not dare to say either but it could be that we are somewhat close.
The unvaxed are definitely not helping but blaming them is pointless i think. It only increases polarization which isnt particulary helpfull in a situation like this. The problem is also bigger then a certain percentage of the population beeing unvaxed. Many people thought they where good with 2 vaccinations and now everyone does need a booster which cant be done in time because of logistical issues. The unvaxed will still get their protection from infection eventually. I think people forget that we live a rather rarefied existence, especially in the West. We haven’t fully conquered all that nature can throw at us. We aren’t guaranteed a certain standard of living, it’s what we carve out. I don’t blame anti-vaxxers for things dragging on as it seems patently clear that vaccination alone may not cut it. I do think many of their rationales and sometimes underlying motivations are stupid, while vaccination isn’t the golden goose solution, not vaccinating certainly doesn’t bloody help. In addition many, albeit not all don’t exactly adhere to the additional behaviours that help on top of/instead of vaccination. It’s been years since I’ve heard calls to seek to avoid polarisation in all sorts of domains. Sometimes seeking some common ground would absolutely be prudent, sometimes we’re getting into the fallacy of moderation territory. This isn’t to say people aren’t guilty of pious or overly divisive rhetoric that isn’t especially helpful, that frequently also comes from a position of a total lack of understanding or knowledge themselves, or that genuine objections to other things get lumped in as ‘anti-vax’ Without adding a million additional caveats I’m not talking about folks in this thread, but in the environs outside. They’re, absolutely full of shite in myriad mysterious and muddled ways. The only way to have a discussion that doesn’t become poisonous and polarised is not to have it at all. Which isn’t reducing polarisation because ultimately you’re just letting a group of people do what they want, which antagonises the other ‘pole’ anyway. It’s ‘don’t tell me what to do’ taken to such preposterous realms it can only come from a humongous anti-authority streak or plain selfishness, and given some of the crossover into some of their politics, they are only anti-authority when it’s not their bloke. If the government mandated people not to jump in a fire some of these folks would be making giant pyres and triple jumping in holding hands. Yes i do agree. All this is very much true. A prudent strategy to properly adrees this i dont really see unfortunatly. Trying to force the issue has proven to not be very effective. People only dig in more,heels in the sand. The effect of any sort of polarization spreads out like oil,also increasing polarization in other areas. This effect is particulary strong in the USA where every single issue has become polarized mostly along partizan lines. Maybe ignoring and accepting the issue to some extend isnt the worst solution at this point. Simply repeating the message and advices from scientists in a friendly and open manner without directly attacking the unvaxxed on a personal level. As direct pressure only increases resistance. Eventually people will come around if you aproach them this way. At least thats what i hope and also think. This has been the general aproach in most western nations so far so i do think we are doing the right thing when it comes to this. Its mostly the public itself which does become more hostile towards the other side, which i think is not helping. The other option would be to force vaccinations and make them mandatory,this isnt the worst solution for dealing with the pandemic and some countries have resorted to this already. But doing so does go against some of the principles on which our society is build,it does come with collateral damage. For some people this will work.They will take the vaccine and simply stop caring about having been forced to take it. With other people it will backfire and they will be even less willing to comply. In the end it might not be the worst solution as the group which will simply accept it is probably a lot bigger then the group which will resist even more. But it would be much better for the future if this could be avoided all together.
Direct pressure does not increase resistance. Every data point we have has shown vaccine mandates increase vaccination rates. People being mad about it is a great price to pay for having a functional hospital system.
|
On December 21 2021 02:26 Lmui wrote:
I'm going to blame the antivaxxers for the hospital situation we're in.
2 in 3 (67.7%) people in the hospital taking up a bed right now in my province are unvaccinated. This is despite them making up less than 20% of the population. Normalized for age, they are overrepresented in the hospital by a factor of 20-25x.
We could have dropped our hospital utilization by 64% for covid cases if everyone eligible to be vaccinated, was vaccinated (never mind the benefits everywhere else in society). 100% vaccination isn't going to stop Omicron, but it seems to drop it from a bad time to actually flu-like symptoms if you're 2x vax'd and cold like symptoms if you're boosted.
That's a pretty low ratio compared with what I see from American hospitals. Something like 90% on average of hospitalizations are from unvaccinated.
If people got the vaccine it wouldn't be something that would really be an issue anymore for the general public. It would be a tragedy but regular function of hospitals would be possible and the economy would rebound quickly. Instead very selfish and stupid holdouts would rather die and kill others than to do the most minimal of duties to their community.
|
I am seriously loosing faith in restriction-heavy ways of dealing with this pandemic. Restrictions are not and will never be a long term solution, in fact the better they work, the more effectively they push the problem into the future.
I am even thinking that having as many infections as possible right now, while the vaccines still work decently, is by far a superior strategy.
With new variants being even more contagious, there is simply no way we can live normally and having no virus present. Solid, wide spread long term Immunity is the only option, and it should be clear now that vaccines are not enough by themselves.
I remember when a "flat curve" was the goal. In the UK, the number of hospitalizations has been remarkably stable for months, while having a very open society. I find it puzzelig why it isn't talked about more, and there are major both long and short term benefits to that strategy.
|
On December 21 2021 02:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2021 02:10 pmh wrote:On December 21 2021 01:26 WombaT wrote:On December 20 2021 09:54 pmh wrote:
The best way forward for society as a whole i would not dare to say. Maybe public expectations should be lowerd.The public has never fully realized the scope of this pandemic and messages from authoritys have been to optimistic in general (for which there are definitely some arguments so i can understand that).
We dont have all that many options other then continue with the current strategy and hope that at one point things will get better. If this is actually realistic and how long this would take i would not dare to say either but it could be that we are somewhat close.
The unvaxed are definitely not helping but blaming them is pointless i think. It only increases polarization which isnt particulary helpfull in a situation like this. The problem is also bigger then a certain percentage of the population beeing unvaxed. Many people thought they where good with 2 vaccinations and now everyone does need a booster which cant be done in time because of logistical issues. The unvaxed will still get their protection from infection eventually. I think people forget that we live a rather rarefied existence, especially in the West. We haven’t fully conquered all that nature can throw at us. We aren’t guaranteed a certain standard of living, it’s what we carve out. I don’t blame anti-vaxxers for things dragging on as it seems patently clear that vaccination alone may not cut it. I do think many of their rationales and sometimes underlying motivations are stupid, while vaccination isn’t the golden goose solution, not vaccinating certainly doesn’t bloody help. In addition many, albeit not all don’t exactly adhere to the additional behaviours that help on top of/instead of vaccination. It’s been years since I’ve heard calls to seek to avoid polarisation in all sorts of domains. Sometimes seeking some common ground would absolutely be prudent, sometimes we’re getting into the fallacy of moderation territory. This isn’t to say people aren’t guilty of pious or overly divisive rhetoric that isn’t especially helpful, that frequently also comes from a position of a total lack of understanding or knowledge themselves, or that genuine objections to other things get lumped in as ‘anti-vax’ Without adding a million additional caveats I’m not talking about folks in this thread, but in the environs outside. They’re, absolutely full of shite in myriad mysterious and muddled ways. The only way to have a discussion that doesn’t become poisonous and polarised is not to have it at all. Which isn’t reducing polarisation because ultimately you’re just letting a group of people do what they want, which antagonises the other ‘pole’ anyway. It’s ‘don’t tell me what to do’ taken to such preposterous realms it can only come from a humongous anti-authority streak or plain selfishness, and given some of the crossover into some of their politics, they are only anti-authority when it’s not their bloke. If the government mandated people not to jump in a fire some of these folks would be making giant pyres and triple jumping in holding hands. Yes i do agree. All this is very much true. A prudent strategy to properly adrees this i dont really see unfortunatly. Trying to force the issue has proven to not be very effective. People only dig in more,heels in the sand. The effect of any sort of polarization spreads out like oil,also increasing polarization in other areas. This effect is particulary strong in the USA where every single issue has become polarized mostly along partizan lines. Maybe ignoring and accepting the issue to some extend isnt the worst solution at this point. Simply repeating the message and advices from scientists in a friendly and open manner without directly attacking the unvaxxed on a personal level. As direct pressure only increases resistance. Eventually people will come around if you aproach them this way. At least thats what i hope and also think. This has been the general aproach in most western nations so far so i do think we are doing the right thing when it comes to this. Its mostly the public itself which does become more hostile towards the other side, which i think is not helping. The other option would be to force vaccinations and make them mandatory,this isnt the worst solution for dealing with the pandemic and some countries have resorted to this already. But doing so does go against some of the principles on which our society is build,it does come with collateral damage. For some people this will work.They will take the vaccine and simply stop caring about having been forced to take it. With other people it will backfire and they will be even less willing to comply. In the end it might not be the worst solution as the group which will simply accept it is probably a lot bigger then the group which will resist even more. But it would be much better for the future if this could be avoided all together. Verbally, that might be true, but applying direct pressure in other ways has been beneficial to getting more people vaccinated, such as requiring vaccinations to travel or stay employed. They might bitch and moan about it, but at the end of the day, they're vaccinated and finally contributing the tiniest little bit to society (however much they may hate it).
The fuck? Imposing tyranny and then justifying it by showing compliance is one hell of a take.
|
On December 21 2021 02:45 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2021 02:26 Lmui wrote:
I'm going to blame the antivaxxers for the hospital situation we're in.
2 in 3 (67.7%) people in the hospital taking up a bed right now in my province are unvaccinated. This is despite them making up less than 20% of the population. Normalized for age, they are overrepresented in the hospital by a factor of 20-25x.
We could have dropped our hospital utilization by 64% for covid cases if everyone eligible to be vaccinated, was vaccinated (never mind the benefits everywhere else in society). 100% vaccination isn't going to stop Omicron, but it seems to drop it from a bad time to actually flu-like symptoms if you're 2x vax'd and cold like symptoms if you're boosted. Not to mention that Having covid plus vaccination is the best protection. If everyone was vaccinated, those that got the cold like symptoms might never get it again and be way less likely to pass it on. + Show Spoiler +There is zero societal benefit to the unvaccinated and huge drawbacks.
And even after all this data and time you still have people who don't understand why in an area with massive spread you would want to prevent people from getting sick by going to online exams. It is like they do not realize that college students interact outside of the college, the danger to them is low but to the community where you still have a ton of unvaccinated is huge.
Also, being sick really sucks. Most of the food recalls happen when none or actually very few die and no one is like government let me eat that contaminated lettuce, its my choice! Because if they are not in fantasy conspiracy world 99.99% of people actively avoid getting sick, even if it is not a risk to kill them.
Hah, anytime Drone or I made the point that COVID to a double vaccinated person was about as bad as the flu you had essay-long criticisms. Now Lmui compares it to not just the flu but even the common cold and you have no objection. I guess what is being said doesn't matter as much as who is saying it. 
|
On December 21 2021 08:55 dudeman001 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2021 02:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 21 2021 02:10 pmh wrote:On December 21 2021 01:26 WombaT wrote:On December 20 2021 09:54 pmh wrote:
The best way forward for society as a whole i would not dare to say. Maybe public expectations should be lowerd.The public has never fully realized the scope of this pandemic and messages from authoritys have been to optimistic in general (for which there are definitely some arguments so i can understand that).
We dont have all that many options other then continue with the current strategy and hope that at one point things will get better. If this is actually realistic and how long this would take i would not dare to say either but it could be that we are somewhat close.
The unvaxed are definitely not helping but blaming them is pointless i think. It only increases polarization which isnt particulary helpfull in a situation like this. The problem is also bigger then a certain percentage of the population beeing unvaxed. Many people thought they where good with 2 vaccinations and now everyone does need a booster which cant be done in time because of logistical issues. The unvaxed will still get their protection from infection eventually. I think people forget that we live a rather rarefied existence, especially in the West. We haven’t fully conquered all that nature can throw at us. We aren’t guaranteed a certain standard of living, it’s what we carve out. I don’t blame anti-vaxxers for things dragging on as it seems patently clear that vaccination alone may not cut it. I do think many of their rationales and sometimes underlying motivations are stupid, while vaccination isn’t the golden goose solution, not vaccinating certainly doesn’t bloody help. In addition many, albeit not all don’t exactly adhere to the additional behaviours that help on top of/instead of vaccination. It’s been years since I’ve heard calls to seek to avoid polarisation in all sorts of domains. Sometimes seeking some common ground would absolutely be prudent, sometimes we’re getting into the fallacy of moderation territory. This isn’t to say people aren’t guilty of pious or overly divisive rhetoric that isn’t especially helpful, that frequently also comes from a position of a total lack of understanding or knowledge themselves, or that genuine objections to other things get lumped in as ‘anti-vax’ Without adding a million additional caveats I’m not talking about folks in this thread, but in the environs outside. They’re, absolutely full of shite in myriad mysterious and muddled ways. The only way to have a discussion that doesn’t become poisonous and polarised is not to have it at all. Which isn’t reducing polarisation because ultimately you’re just letting a group of people do what they want, which antagonises the other ‘pole’ anyway. It’s ‘don’t tell me what to do’ taken to such preposterous realms it can only come from a humongous anti-authority streak or plain selfishness, and given some of the crossover into some of their politics, they are only anti-authority when it’s not their bloke. If the government mandated people not to jump in a fire some of these folks would be making giant pyres and triple jumping in holding hands. Yes i do agree. All this is very much true. A prudent strategy to properly adrees this i dont really see unfortunatly. Trying to force the issue has proven to not be very effective. People only dig in more,heels in the sand. The effect of any sort of polarization spreads out like oil,also increasing polarization in other areas. This effect is particulary strong in the USA where every single issue has become polarized mostly along partizan lines. Maybe ignoring and accepting the issue to some extend isnt the worst solution at this point. Simply repeating the message and advices from scientists in a friendly and open manner without directly attacking the unvaxxed on a personal level. As direct pressure only increases resistance. Eventually people will come around if you aproach them this way. At least thats what i hope and also think. This has been the general aproach in most western nations so far so i do think we are doing the right thing when it comes to this. Its mostly the public itself which does become more hostile towards the other side, which i think is not helping. The other option would be to force vaccinations and make them mandatory,this isnt the worst solution for dealing with the pandemic and some countries have resorted to this already. But doing so does go against some of the principles on which our society is build,it does come with collateral damage. For some people this will work.They will take the vaccine and simply stop caring about having been forced to take it. With other people it will backfire and they will be even less willing to comply. In the end it might not be the worst solution as the group which will simply accept it is probably a lot bigger then the group which will resist even more. But it would be much better for the future if this could be avoided all together. Verbally, that might be true, but applying direct pressure in other ways has been beneficial to getting more people vaccinated, such as requiring vaccinations to travel or stay employed. They might bitch and moan about it, but at the end of the day, they're vaccinated and finally contributing the tiniest little bit to society (however much they may hate it). The fuck? Imposing tyranny and then justifying it by showing compliance is one hell of a take.
The fuck? Calling vaccinations "tyranny" and completely ignoring the absolutely lowest bar for dealing with a global public health crisis is one hell of a take.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On December 21 2021 08:51 Slydie wrote:
I am seriously loosing faith in restriction-heavy ways of dealing with this pandemic. Restrictions are not and will never be a long term solution, in fact the better they work, the more effectively they push the problem into the future.
I am even thinking that having as many infections as possible right now, while the vaccines still work decently, is by far a superior strategy.
With new variants being even more contagious, there is simply no way we can live normally and having no virus present. Solid, wide spread long term Immunity is the only option, and it should be clear now that vaccines are not enough by themselves.
I remember when a "flat curve" was the goal. In the UK, the number of hospitalizations has been remarkably stable for months, while having a very open society. I find it puzzelig why it isn't talked about more, and there are major both long and short term benefits to that strategy.
That is the reality. As viscerally tempting as it is to grandstand about mask mandates or play "vaccine or Mohdoo Island™" until the end of time, you eventually have to find something that gives you a long-term sense of normalcy. The possibility of stopping this disease before it starts or getting herd immunity is long gone; we almost certainly have to accept a higher infection and death rate for the medium term. Dealing with less disruptive logistical concerns like improving hospital capacity, better medications for the very ill, and finding a good long-term vaccine policy are far superior to a permanent cycle of going in and out of not-lockdowns for many years to come.
The UK's shining example of high infection, high vaccination, low death is what we should strive for. It's both acceptable and highly achievable.
|
On December 21 2021 09:03 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2021 08:55 dudeman001 wrote:On December 21 2021 02:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 21 2021 02:10 pmh wrote:On December 21 2021 01:26 WombaT wrote:On December 20 2021 09:54 pmh wrote:
The best way forward for society as a whole i would not dare to say. Maybe public expectations should be lowerd.The public has never fully realized the scope of this pandemic and messages from authoritys have been to optimistic in general (for which there are definitely some arguments so i can understand that).
We dont have all that many options other then continue with the current strategy and hope that at one point things will get better. If this is actually realistic and how long this would take i would not dare to say either but it could be that we are somewhat close.
The unvaxed are definitely not helping but blaming them is pointless i think. It only increases polarization which isnt particulary helpfull in a situation like this. The problem is also bigger then a certain percentage of the population beeing unvaxed. Many people thought they where good with 2 vaccinations and now everyone does need a booster which cant be done in time because of logistical issues. The unvaxed will still get their protection from infection eventually. I think people forget that we live a rather rarefied existence, especially in the West. We haven’t fully conquered all that nature can throw at us. We aren’t guaranteed a certain standard of living, it’s what we carve out. I don’t blame anti-vaxxers for things dragging on as it seems patently clear that vaccination alone may not cut it. I do think many of their rationales and sometimes underlying motivations are stupid, while vaccination isn’t the golden goose solution, not vaccinating certainly doesn’t bloody help. In addition many, albeit not all don’t exactly adhere to the additional behaviours that help on top of/instead of vaccination. It’s been years since I’ve heard calls to seek to avoid polarisation in all sorts of domains. Sometimes seeking some common ground would absolutely be prudent, sometimes we’re getting into the fallacy of moderation territory. This isn’t to say people aren’t guilty of pious or overly divisive rhetoric that isn’t especially helpful, that frequently also comes from a position of a total lack of understanding or knowledge themselves, or that genuine objections to other things get lumped in as ‘anti-vax’ Without adding a million additional caveats I’m not talking about folks in this thread, but in the environs outside. They’re, absolutely full of shite in myriad mysterious and muddled ways. The only way to have a discussion that doesn’t become poisonous and polarised is not to have it at all. Which isn’t reducing polarisation because ultimately you’re just letting a group of people do what they want, which antagonises the other ‘pole’ anyway. It’s ‘don’t tell me what to do’ taken to such preposterous realms it can only come from a humongous anti-authority streak or plain selfishness, and given some of the crossover into some of their politics, they are only anti-authority when it’s not their bloke. If the government mandated people not to jump in a fire some of these folks would be making giant pyres and triple jumping in holding hands. Yes i do agree. All this is very much true. A prudent strategy to properly adrees this i dont really see unfortunatly. Trying to force the issue has proven to not be very effective. People only dig in more,heels in the sand. The effect of any sort of polarization spreads out like oil,also increasing polarization in other areas. This effect is particulary strong in the USA where every single issue has become polarized mostly along partizan lines. Maybe ignoring and accepting the issue to some extend isnt the worst solution at this point. Simply repeating the message and advices from scientists in a friendly and open manner without directly attacking the unvaxxed on a personal level. As direct pressure only increases resistance. Eventually people will come around if you aproach them this way. At least thats what i hope and also think. This has been the general aproach in most western nations so far so i do think we are doing the right thing when it comes to this. Its mostly the public itself which does become more hostile towards the other side, which i think is not helping. The other option would be to force vaccinations and make them mandatory,this isnt the worst solution for dealing with the pandemic and some countries have resorted to this already. But doing so does go against some of the principles on which our society is build,it does come with collateral damage. For some people this will work.They will take the vaccine and simply stop caring about having been forced to take it. With other people it will backfire and they will be even less willing to comply. In the end it might not be the worst solution as the group which will simply accept it is probably a lot bigger then the group which will resist even more. But it would be much better for the future if this could be avoided all together. Verbally, that might be true, but applying direct pressure in other ways has been beneficial to getting more people vaccinated, such as requiring vaccinations to travel or stay employed. They might bitch and moan about it, but at the end of the day, they're vaccinated and finally contributing the tiniest little bit to society (however much they may hate it). The fuck? Imposing tyranny and then justifying it by showing compliance is one hell of a take. The fuck? Calling vaccinations "tyranny" and completely ignoring the absolutely lowest bar for dealing with a global public health crisis is one hell of a take.
You're talking about stripping people's right to - as you said it - travel or stay employed, unless they take a corporation's pharmaceutical product. THAT is a tyrannical approach to the problem.
|
On December 21 2021 09:08 dudeman001 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2021 09:03 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 21 2021 08:55 dudeman001 wrote:On December 21 2021 02:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 21 2021 02:10 pmh wrote:On December 21 2021 01:26 WombaT wrote:On December 20 2021 09:54 pmh wrote:
The best way forward for society as a whole i would not dare to say. Maybe public expectations should be lowerd.The public has never fully realized the scope of this pandemic and messages from authoritys have been to optimistic in general (for which there are definitely some arguments so i can understand that).
We dont have all that many options other then continue with the current strategy and hope that at one point things will get better. If this is actually realistic and how long this would take i would not dare to say either but it could be that we are somewhat close.
The unvaxed are definitely not helping but blaming them is pointless i think. It only increases polarization which isnt particulary helpfull in a situation like this. The problem is also bigger then a certain percentage of the population beeing unvaxed. Many people thought they where good with 2 vaccinations and now everyone does need a booster which cant be done in time because of logistical issues. The unvaxed will still get their protection from infection eventually. I think people forget that we live a rather rarefied existence, especially in the West. We haven’t fully conquered all that nature can throw at us. We aren’t guaranteed a certain standard of living, it’s what we carve out. I don’t blame anti-vaxxers for things dragging on as it seems patently clear that vaccination alone may not cut it. I do think many of their rationales and sometimes underlying motivations are stupid, while vaccination isn’t the golden goose solution, not vaccinating certainly doesn’t bloody help. In addition many, albeit not all don’t exactly adhere to the additional behaviours that help on top of/instead of vaccination. It’s been years since I’ve heard calls to seek to avoid polarisation in all sorts of domains. Sometimes seeking some common ground would absolutely be prudent, sometimes we’re getting into the fallacy of moderation territory. This isn’t to say people aren’t guilty of pious or overly divisive rhetoric that isn’t especially helpful, that frequently also comes from a position of a total lack of understanding or knowledge themselves, or that genuine objections to other things get lumped in as ‘anti-vax’ Without adding a million additional caveats I’m not talking about folks in this thread, but in the environs outside. They’re, absolutely full of shite in myriad mysterious and muddled ways. The only way to have a discussion that doesn’t become poisonous and polarised is not to have it at all. Which isn’t reducing polarisation because ultimately you’re just letting a group of people do what they want, which antagonises the other ‘pole’ anyway. It’s ‘don’t tell me what to do’ taken to such preposterous realms it can only come from a humongous anti-authority streak or plain selfishness, and given some of the crossover into some of their politics, they are only anti-authority when it’s not their bloke. If the government mandated people not to jump in a fire some of these folks would be making giant pyres and triple jumping in holding hands. Yes i do agree. All this is very much true. A prudent strategy to properly adrees this i dont really see unfortunatly. Trying to force the issue has proven to not be very effective. People only dig in more,heels in the sand. The effect of any sort of polarization spreads out like oil,also increasing polarization in other areas. This effect is particulary strong in the USA where every single issue has become polarized mostly along partizan lines. Maybe ignoring and accepting the issue to some extend isnt the worst solution at this point. Simply repeating the message and advices from scientists in a friendly and open manner without directly attacking the unvaxxed on a personal level. As direct pressure only increases resistance. Eventually people will come around if you aproach them this way. At least thats what i hope and also think. This has been the general aproach in most western nations so far so i do think we are doing the right thing when it comes to this. Its mostly the public itself which does become more hostile towards the other side, which i think is not helping. The other option would be to force vaccinations and make them mandatory,this isnt the worst solution for dealing with the pandemic and some countries have resorted to this already. But doing so does go against some of the principles on which our society is build,it does come with collateral damage. For some people this will work.They will take the vaccine and simply stop caring about having been forced to take it. With other people it will backfire and they will be even less willing to comply. In the end it might not be the worst solution as the group which will simply accept it is probably a lot bigger then the group which will resist even more. But it would be much better for the future if this could be avoided all together. Verbally, that might be true, but applying direct pressure in other ways has been beneficial to getting more people vaccinated, such as requiring vaccinations to travel or stay employed. They might bitch and moan about it, but at the end of the day, they're vaccinated and finally contributing the tiniest little bit to society (however much they may hate it). The fuck? Imposing tyranny and then justifying it by showing compliance is one hell of a take. The fuck? Calling vaccinations "tyranny" and completely ignoring the absolutely lowest bar for dealing with a global public health crisis is one hell of a take. You're talking about stripping people's right to - as you said it - travel or stay employed, unless they take a corporation's pharmaceutical product. THAT is a tyrannical approach to the problem.
Under normal circumstances, that would be tyrannical. However, a global pandemic that has already killed millions of people can hardly be described as "normal". Extreme circumstances call for extreme actions, including requiring that people take a corporation's pharmaceutical product or lose the right to travel or be employed.
This is a public health issue. I'm tired of being unable to live life normally because 10-20% of the population refuses to get vaccinated for "philosophical reasons". Their refusal to get vaccinated has detrimental effects on the quality of my life. This year, my university just recently started having in-person classes again, and they'll have to stop if the situation declines.
When there is a public health crisis, the public needs to work together to solve it, and that means sacrificing some of your personal freedom.
|
On December 21 2021 09:08 dudeman001 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2021 09:03 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 21 2021 08:55 dudeman001 wrote:On December 21 2021 02:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 21 2021 02:10 pmh wrote:On December 21 2021 01:26 WombaT wrote:On December 20 2021 09:54 pmh wrote:
The best way forward for society as a whole i would not dare to say. Maybe public expectations should be lowerd.The public has never fully realized the scope of this pandemic and messages from authoritys have been to optimistic in general (for which there are definitely some arguments so i can understand that).
We dont have all that many options other then continue with the current strategy and hope that at one point things will get better. If this is actually realistic and how long this would take i would not dare to say either but it could be that we are somewhat close.
The unvaxed are definitely not helping but blaming them is pointless i think. It only increases polarization which isnt particulary helpfull in a situation like this. The problem is also bigger then a certain percentage of the population beeing unvaxed. Many people thought they where good with 2 vaccinations and now everyone does need a booster which cant be done in time because of logistical issues. The unvaxed will still get their protection from infection eventually. I think people forget that we live a rather rarefied existence, especially in the West. We haven’t fully conquered all that nature can throw at us. We aren’t guaranteed a certain standard of living, it’s what we carve out. I don’t blame anti-vaxxers for things dragging on as it seems patently clear that vaccination alone may not cut it. I do think many of their rationales and sometimes underlying motivations are stupid, while vaccination isn’t the golden goose solution, not vaccinating certainly doesn’t bloody help. In addition many, albeit not all don’t exactly adhere to the additional behaviours that help on top of/instead of vaccination. It’s been years since I’ve heard calls to seek to avoid polarisation in all sorts of domains. Sometimes seeking some common ground would absolutely be prudent, sometimes we’re getting into the fallacy of moderation territory. This isn’t to say people aren’t guilty of pious or overly divisive rhetoric that isn’t especially helpful, that frequently also comes from a position of a total lack of understanding or knowledge themselves, or that genuine objections to other things get lumped in as ‘anti-vax’ Without adding a million additional caveats I’m not talking about folks in this thread, but in the environs outside. They’re, absolutely full of shite in myriad mysterious and muddled ways. The only way to have a discussion that doesn’t become poisonous and polarised is not to have it at all. Which isn’t reducing polarisation because ultimately you’re just letting a group of people do what they want, which antagonises the other ‘pole’ anyway. It’s ‘don’t tell me what to do’ taken to such preposterous realms it can only come from a humongous anti-authority streak or plain selfishness, and given some of the crossover into some of their politics, they are only anti-authority when it’s not their bloke. If the government mandated people not to jump in a fire some of these folks would be making giant pyres and triple jumping in holding hands. Yes i do agree. All this is very much true. A prudent strategy to properly adrees this i dont really see unfortunatly. Trying to force the issue has proven to not be very effective. People only dig in more,heels in the sand. The effect of any sort of polarization spreads out like oil,also increasing polarization in other areas. This effect is particulary strong in the USA where every single issue has become polarized mostly along partizan lines. Maybe ignoring and accepting the issue to some extend isnt the worst solution at this point. Simply repeating the message and advices from scientists in a friendly and open manner without directly attacking the unvaxxed on a personal level. As direct pressure only increases resistance. Eventually people will come around if you aproach them this way. At least thats what i hope and also think. This has been the general aproach in most western nations so far so i do think we are doing the right thing when it comes to this. Its mostly the public itself which does become more hostile towards the other side, which i think is not helping. The other option would be to force vaccinations and make them mandatory,this isnt the worst solution for dealing with the pandemic and some countries have resorted to this already. But doing so does go against some of the principles on which our society is build,it does come with collateral damage. For some people this will work.They will take the vaccine and simply stop caring about having been forced to take it. With other people it will backfire and they will be even less willing to comply. In the end it might not be the worst solution as the group which will simply accept it is probably a lot bigger then the group which will resist even more. But it would be much better for the future if this could be avoided all together. Verbally, that might be true, but applying direct pressure in other ways has been beneficial to getting more people vaccinated, such as requiring vaccinations to travel or stay employed. They might bitch and moan about it, but at the end of the day, they're vaccinated and finally contributing the tiniest little bit to society (however much they may hate it). The fuck? Imposing tyranny and then justifying it by showing compliance is one hell of a take. The fuck? Calling vaccinations "tyranny" and completely ignoring the absolutely lowest bar for dealing with a global public health crisis is one hell of a take. You're talking about stripping people's right to - as you said it - travel or stay employed, unless they take a corporation's pharmaceutical product. THAT is a tyrannical approach to the problem.
No, you're stripping people's rights by condemning vaccines. People do not have the right to jeopardize the health of those around them. You don't get to do whatever the hell you want, regardless of how it may endanger others. Focusing on the idea that it's because of "corporate pharmaceuticals" is completely glossing over the very real death toll and severe injury toll of the insanely infectious pandemic we've been fighting. And this is true in non-covid contexts as well, such as mandatory vaccines for public school children.
|
On December 21 2021 09:03 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2021 08:55 dudeman001 wrote:On December 21 2021 02:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 21 2021 02:10 pmh wrote:On December 21 2021 01:26 WombaT wrote:On December 20 2021 09:54 pmh wrote:
The best way forward for society as a whole i would not dare to say. Maybe public expectations should be lowerd.The public has never fully realized the scope of this pandemic and messages from authoritys have been to optimistic in general (for which there are definitely some arguments so i can understand that).
We dont have all that many options other then continue with the current strategy and hope that at one point things will get better. If this is actually realistic and how long this would take i would not dare to say either but it could be that we are somewhat close.
The unvaxed are definitely not helping but blaming them is pointless i think. It only increases polarization which isnt particulary helpfull in a situation like this. The problem is also bigger then a certain percentage of the population beeing unvaxed. Many people thought they where good with 2 vaccinations and now everyone does need a booster which cant be done in time because of logistical issues. The unvaxed will still get their protection from infection eventually. I think people forget that we live a rather rarefied existence, especially in the West. We haven’t fully conquered all that nature can throw at us. We aren’t guaranteed a certain standard of living, it’s what we carve out. I don’t blame anti-vaxxers for things dragging on as it seems patently clear that vaccination alone may not cut it. I do think many of their rationales and sometimes underlying motivations are stupid, while vaccination isn’t the golden goose solution, not vaccinating certainly doesn’t bloody help. In addition many, albeit not all don’t exactly adhere to the additional behaviours that help on top of/instead of vaccination. It’s been years since I’ve heard calls to seek to avoid polarisation in all sorts of domains. Sometimes seeking some common ground would absolutely be prudent, sometimes we’re getting into the fallacy of moderation territory. This isn’t to say people aren’t guilty of pious or overly divisive rhetoric that isn’t especially helpful, that frequently also comes from a position of a total lack of understanding or knowledge themselves, or that genuine objections to other things get lumped in as ‘anti-vax’ Without adding a million additional caveats I’m not talking about folks in this thread, but in the environs outside. They’re, absolutely full of shite in myriad mysterious and muddled ways. The only way to have a discussion that doesn’t become poisonous and polarised is not to have it at all. Which isn’t reducing polarisation because ultimately you’re just letting a group of people do what they want, which antagonises the other ‘pole’ anyway. It’s ‘don’t tell me what to do’ taken to such preposterous realms it can only come from a humongous anti-authority streak or plain selfishness, and given some of the crossover into some of their politics, they are only anti-authority when it’s not their bloke. If the government mandated people not to jump in a fire some of these folks would be making giant pyres and triple jumping in holding hands. Yes i do agree. All this is very much true. A prudent strategy to properly adrees this i dont really see unfortunatly. Trying to force the issue has proven to not be very effective. People only dig in more,heels in the sand. The effect of any sort of polarization spreads out like oil,also increasing polarization in other areas. This effect is particulary strong in the USA where every single issue has become polarized mostly along partizan lines. Maybe ignoring and accepting the issue to some extend isnt the worst solution at this point. Simply repeating the message and advices from scientists in a friendly and open manner without directly attacking the unvaxxed on a personal level. As direct pressure only increases resistance. Eventually people will come around if you aproach them this way. At least thats what i hope and also think. This has been the general aproach in most western nations so far so i do think we are doing the right thing when it comes to this. Its mostly the public itself which does become more hostile towards the other side, which i think is not helping. The other option would be to force vaccinations and make them mandatory,this isnt the worst solution for dealing with the pandemic and some countries have resorted to this already. But doing so does go against some of the principles on which our society is build,it does come with collateral damage. For some people this will work.They will take the vaccine and simply stop caring about having been forced to take it. With other people it will backfire and they will be even less willing to comply. In the end it might not be the worst solution as the group which will simply accept it is probably a lot bigger then the group which will resist even more. But it would be much better for the future if this could be avoided all together. Verbally, that might be true, but applying direct pressure in other ways has been beneficial to getting more people vaccinated, such as requiring vaccinations to travel or stay employed. They might bitch and moan about it, but at the end of the day, they're vaccinated and finally contributing the tiniest little bit to society (however much they may hate it). The fuck? Imposing tyranny and then justifying it by showing compliance is one hell of a take. The fuck? Calling vaccinations "tyranny" and completely ignoring the absolutely lowest bar for dealing with a global public health crisis is one hell of a take.
I might be an idealist, but from a principal point of view, I do not support vaccine mandates. All medication should be taken by choice, not force. I also find it very hard to defend that you can be demanded to give medical information to anyone working for example in a restaurant, who has no HC-related function nor education. Other implications of letting go of this area of privacy
give me chills.
I absolutely support vaccines and put my whole summer holiday on hold to get my shots ASAP, but mandates are a very tough question of benefits and values. We have given up a lot of personal freedom to fight this pandemic, and there is no telling when, if ever, we will get them back.
|
On December 21 2021 08:51 Slydie wrote:
I am seriously loosing faith in restriction-heavy ways of dealing with this pandemic. Restrictions are not and will never be a long term solution, in fact the better they work, the more effectively they push the problem into the future.
I am even thinking that having as many infections as possible right now, while the vaccines still work decently, is by far a superior strategy.
With new variants being even more contagious, there is simply no way we can live normally and having no virus present. Solid, wide spread long term Immunity is the only option, and it should be clear now that vaccines are not enough by themselves.
I remember when a "flat curve" was the goal. In the UK, the number of hospitalizations has been remarkably stable for months, while having a very open society. I find it puzzelig why it isn't talked about more, and there are major both long and short term benefits to that strategy.
From what I am seeing for most restrictions is tied to hospital pressure. That is why "X level of restrictions works in Y country so just do that" is generally not very helpful.
Dutch society was mostly open, cases surged, hospitals filled and we had to close back down to manage it. You can't then point at the UK and say "just open up, it will be fine". We were open, it wasn't fine.
That is also what flattening the curve was always about, more cases = more people in hospital. If cases keep going up forever then eventually healthcare will collapse. At some point you need to stop the growth, aka flatten the curve.
Nor are most countries using restriction heavy ways as a long term solution. Again, it all ties back to healthcare pressure. You open up when you can, you close back up when you have to. If the pressure on healthcare never rises to high you can stay open. If it does get to high you need to close back down or you run out of hospital space and people start dying in the corridors, and no one wants to let it get that far.
Why one country is doing better then another despite having the same/similar measures is likely tied to 1001 factors. I wish there was a 1 size fits all 'just do this' solution, but there doesn't seem to be one.
|
On December 21 2021 09:13 codonbyte wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2021 09:08 dudeman001 wrote:On December 21 2021 09:03 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 21 2021 08:55 dudeman001 wrote:On December 21 2021 02:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 21 2021 02:10 pmh wrote:On December 21 2021 01:26 WombaT wrote:On December 20 2021 09:54 pmh wrote:
The best way forward for society as a whole i would not dare to say. Maybe public expectations should be lowerd.The public has never fully realized the scope of this pandemic and messages from authoritys have been to optimistic in general (for which there are definitely some arguments so i can understand that).
We dont have all that many options other then continue with the current strategy and hope that at one point things will get better. If this is actually realistic and how long this would take i would not dare to say either but it could be that we are somewhat close.
The unvaxed are definitely not helping but blaming them is pointless i think. It only increases polarization which isnt particulary helpfull in a situation like this. The problem is also bigger then a certain percentage of the population beeing unvaxed. Many people thought they where good with 2 vaccinations and now everyone does need a booster which cant be done in time because of logistical issues. The unvaxed will still get their protection from infection eventually. I think people forget that we live a rather rarefied existence, especially in the West. We haven’t fully conquered all that nature can throw at us. We aren’t guaranteed a certain standard of living, it’s what we carve out. I don’t blame anti-vaxxers for things dragging on as it seems patently clear that vaccination alone may not cut it. I do think many of their rationales and sometimes underlying motivations are stupid, while vaccination isn’t the golden goose solution, not vaccinating certainly doesn’t bloody help. In addition many, albeit not all don’t exactly adhere to the additional behaviours that help on top of/instead of vaccination. It’s been years since I’ve heard calls to seek to avoid polarisation in all sorts of domains. Sometimes seeking some common ground would absolutely be prudent, sometimes we’re getting into the fallacy of moderation territory. This isn’t to say people aren’t guilty of pious or overly divisive rhetoric that isn’t especially helpful, that frequently also comes from a position of a total lack of understanding or knowledge themselves, or that genuine objections to other things get lumped in as ‘anti-vax’ Without adding a million additional caveats I’m not talking about folks in this thread, but in the environs outside. They’re, absolutely full of shite in myriad mysterious and muddled ways. The only way to have a discussion that doesn’t become poisonous and polarised is not to have it at all. Which isn’t reducing polarisation because ultimately you’re just letting a group of people do what they want, which antagonises the other ‘pole’ anyway. It’s ‘don’t tell me what to do’ taken to such preposterous realms it can only come from a humongous anti-authority streak or plain selfishness, and given some of the crossover into some of their politics, they are only anti-authority when it’s not their bloke. If the government mandated people not to jump in a fire some of these folks would be making giant pyres and triple jumping in holding hands. Yes i do agree. All this is very much true. A prudent strategy to properly adrees this i dont really see unfortunatly. Trying to force the issue has proven to not be very effective. People only dig in more,heels in the sand. The effect of any sort of polarization spreads out like oil,also increasing polarization in other areas. This effect is particulary strong in the USA where every single issue has become polarized mostly along partizan lines. Maybe ignoring and accepting the issue to some extend isnt the worst solution at this point. Simply repeating the message and advices from scientists in a friendly and open manner without directly attacking the unvaxxed on a personal level. As direct pressure only increases resistance. Eventually people will come around if you aproach them this way. At least thats what i hope and also think. This has been the general aproach in most western nations so far so i do think we are doing the right thing when it comes to this. Its mostly the public itself which does become more hostile towards the other side, which i think is not helping. The other option would be to force vaccinations and make them mandatory,this isnt the worst solution for dealing with the pandemic and some countries have resorted to this already. But doing so does go against some of the principles on which our society is build,it does come with collateral damage. For some people this will work.They will take the vaccine and simply stop caring about having been forced to take it. With other people it will backfire and they will be even less willing to comply. In the end it might not be the worst solution as the group which will simply accept it is probably a lot bigger then the group which will resist even more. But it would be much better for the future if this could be avoided all together. Verbally, that might be true, but applying direct pressure in other ways has been beneficial to getting more people vaccinated, such as requiring vaccinations to travel or stay employed. They might bitch and moan about it, but at the end of the day, they're vaccinated and finally contributing the tiniest little bit to society (however much they may hate it). The fuck? Imposing tyranny and then justifying it by showing compliance is one hell of a take. The fuck? Calling vaccinations "tyranny" and completely ignoring the absolutely lowest bar for dealing with a global public health crisis is one hell of a take. You're talking about stripping people's right to - as you said it - travel or stay employed, unless they take a corporation's pharmaceutical product. THAT is a tyrannical approach to the problem. Under normal circumstances, that would be tyrannical. However, a global pandemic that has already killed millions of people can hardly be described as "normal". Extreme circumstances call for extreme actions, including requiring that people take a corporation's pharmaceutical product or lose the right to travel or be employed. This is a public health issue. I'm tired of being unable to live life normally because 10-20% of the population refuses to get vaccinated for "philosophical reasons". Their refusal to get vaccinated has detrimental effects on the quality of my life. This year, my university just recently started having in-person classes again, and they'll have to stop if the situation declines. When there is a public health crisis, the public needs to work together to solve it, and that means sacrificing some of your personal freedom.
If we were dealing with a pandemic that had a 98% death rate I would be completely onboard with taking extreme action to overcome the disease. But instead we have a virus with a 98% survival rate AND is highly treatable even without the use of vaccines. I don't believe you've met the burden of justification to remove people's rights in this regard.
On December 21 2021 09:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2021 09:08 dudeman001 wrote:On December 21 2021 09:03 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 21 2021 08:55 dudeman001 wrote:On December 21 2021 02:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 21 2021 02:10 pmh wrote:On December 21 2021 01:26 WombaT wrote:On December 20 2021 09:54 pmh wrote:
The best way forward for society as a whole i would not dare to say. Maybe public expectations should be lowerd.The public has never fully realized the scope of this pandemic and messages from authoritys have been to optimistic in general (for which there are definitely some arguments so i can understand that).
We dont have all that many options other then continue with the current strategy and hope that at one point things will get better. If this is actually realistic and how long this would take i would not dare to say either but it could be that we are somewhat close.
The unvaxed are definitely not helping but blaming them is pointless i think. It only increases polarization which isnt particulary helpfull in a situation like this. The problem is also bigger then a certain percentage of the population beeing unvaxed. Many people thought they where good with 2 vaccinations and now everyone does need a booster which cant be done in time because of logistical issues. The unvaxed will still get their protection from infection eventually. I think people forget that we live a rather rarefied existence, especially in the West. We haven’t fully conquered all that nature can throw at us. We aren’t guaranteed a certain standard of living, it’s what we carve out. I don’t blame anti-vaxxers for things dragging on as it seems patently clear that vaccination alone may not cut it. I do think many of their rationales and sometimes underlying motivations are stupid, while vaccination isn’t the golden goose solution, not vaccinating certainly doesn’t bloody help. In addition many, albeit not all don’t exactly adhere to the additional behaviours that help on top of/instead of vaccination. It’s been years since I’ve heard calls to seek to avoid polarisation in all sorts of domains. Sometimes seeking some common ground would absolutely be prudent, sometimes we’re getting into the fallacy of moderation territory. This isn’t to say people aren’t guilty of pious or overly divisive rhetoric that isn’t especially helpful, that frequently also comes from a position of a total lack of understanding or knowledge themselves, or that genuine objections to other things get lumped in as ‘anti-vax’ Without adding a million additional caveats I’m not talking about folks in this thread, but in the environs outside. They’re, absolutely full of shite in myriad mysterious and muddled ways. The only way to have a discussion that doesn’t become poisonous and polarised is not to have it at all. Which isn’t reducing polarisation because ultimately you’re just letting a group of people do what they want, which antagonises the other ‘pole’ anyway. It’s ‘don’t tell me what to do’ taken to such preposterous realms it can only come from a humongous anti-authority streak or plain selfishness, and given some of the crossover into some of their politics, they are only anti-authority when it’s not their bloke. If the government mandated people not to jump in a fire some of these folks would be making giant pyres and triple jumping in holding hands. Yes i do agree. All this is very much true. A prudent strategy to properly adrees this i dont really see unfortunatly. Trying to force the issue has proven to not be very effective. People only dig in more,heels in the sand. The effect of any sort of polarization spreads out like oil,also increasing polarization in other areas. This effect is particulary strong in the USA where every single issue has become polarized mostly along partizan lines. Maybe ignoring and accepting the issue to some extend isnt the worst solution at this point. Simply repeating the message and advices from scientists in a friendly and open manner without directly attacking the unvaxxed on a personal level. As direct pressure only increases resistance. Eventually people will come around if you aproach them this way. At least thats what i hope and also think. This has been the general aproach in most western nations so far so i do think we are doing the right thing when it comes to this. Its mostly the public itself which does become more hostile towards the other side, which i think is not helping. The other option would be to force vaccinations and make them mandatory,this isnt the worst solution for dealing with the pandemic and some countries have resorted to this already. But doing so does go against some of the principles on which our society is build,it does come with collateral damage. For some people this will work.They will take the vaccine and simply stop caring about having been forced to take it. With other people it will backfire and they will be even less willing to comply. In the end it might not be the worst solution as the group which will simply accept it is probably a lot bigger then the group which will resist even more. But it would be much better for the future if this could be avoided all together. Verbally, that might be true, but applying direct pressure in other ways has been beneficial to getting more people vaccinated, such as requiring vaccinations to travel or stay employed. They might bitch and moan about it, but at the end of the day, they're vaccinated and finally contributing the tiniest little bit to society (however much they may hate it). The fuck? Imposing tyranny and then justifying it by showing compliance is one hell of a take. The fuck? Calling vaccinations "tyranny" and completely ignoring the absolutely lowest bar for dealing with a global public health crisis is one hell of a take. You're talking about stripping people's right to - as you said it - travel or stay employed, unless they take a corporation's pharmaceutical product. THAT is a tyrannical approach to the problem. No, you're stripping people's rights by condemning vaccines. People do not have the right to jeopardize the health of those around them. You don't get to do whatever the hell you want, regardless of how it may endanger others. Focusing on the idea that it's because of "corporate pharmaceuticals" is completely glossing over the very real death toll and severe injury toll of the insanely infectious pandemic we've been fighting. And this is true in non-covid contexts as well, such as mandatory vaccines for public school children.
You're arguing for removing people's rights under the imposition of force unless they act how you want them to. But you know what, fine. I said above that if we were dealing with a deadlier virus I would agree to a mandate because there is a threshold at which imposed behavior becomes justified. Here are my terms:
Prove to me that unless every individual takes this vaccine - and only this vaccine - society itself can no longer function. If you show me evidence that meets this burden I'll submit that your argument is better than anything I can come up with. Until then I will keep my rights, thank you.
|
On December 21 2021 09:21 Slydie wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2021 09:03 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 21 2021 08:55 dudeman001 wrote:On December 21 2021 02:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 21 2021 02:10 pmh wrote:On December 21 2021 01:26 WombaT wrote:On December 20 2021 09:54 pmh wrote:
The best way forward for society as a whole i would not dare to say. Maybe public expectations should be lowerd.The public has never fully realized the scope of this pandemic and messages from authoritys have been to optimistic in general (for which there are definitely some arguments so i can understand that).
We dont have all that many options other then continue with the current strategy and hope that at one point things will get better. If this is actually realistic and how long this would take i would not dare to say either but it could be that we are somewhat close.
The unvaxed are definitely not helping but blaming them is pointless i think. It only increases polarization which isnt particulary helpfull in a situation like this. The problem is also bigger then a certain percentage of the population beeing unvaxed. Many people thought they where good with 2 vaccinations and now everyone does need a booster which cant be done in time because of logistical issues. The unvaxed will still get their protection from infection eventually. I think people forget that we live a rather rarefied existence, especially in the West. We haven’t fully conquered all that nature can throw at us. We aren’t guaranteed a certain standard of living, it’s what we carve out. I don’t blame anti-vaxxers for things dragging on as it seems patently clear that vaccination alone may not cut it. I do think many of their rationales and sometimes underlying motivations are stupid, while vaccination isn’t the golden goose solution, not vaccinating certainly doesn’t bloody help. In addition many, albeit not all don’t exactly adhere to the additional behaviours that help on top of/instead of vaccination. It’s been years since I’ve heard calls to seek to avoid polarisation in all sorts of domains. Sometimes seeking some common ground would absolutely be prudent, sometimes we’re getting into the fallacy of moderation territory. This isn’t to say people aren’t guilty of pious or overly divisive rhetoric that isn’t especially helpful, that frequently also comes from a position of a total lack of understanding or knowledge themselves, or that genuine objections to other things get lumped in as ‘anti-vax’ Without adding a million additional caveats I’m not talking about folks in this thread, but in the environs outside. They’re, absolutely full of shite in myriad mysterious and muddled ways. The only way to have a discussion that doesn’t become poisonous and polarised is not to have it at all. Which isn’t reducing polarisation because ultimately you’re just letting a group of people do what they want, which antagonises the other ‘pole’ anyway. It’s ‘don’t tell me what to do’ taken to such preposterous realms it can only come from a humongous anti-authority streak or plain selfishness, and given some of the crossover into some of their politics, they are only anti-authority when it’s not their bloke. If the government mandated people not to jump in a fire some of these folks would be making giant pyres and triple jumping in holding hands. Yes i do agree. All this is very much true. A prudent strategy to properly adrees this i dont really see unfortunatly. Trying to force the issue has proven to not be very effective. People only dig in more,heels in the sand. The effect of any sort of polarization spreads out like oil,also increasing polarization in other areas. This effect is particulary strong in the USA where every single issue has become polarized mostly along partizan lines. Maybe ignoring and accepting the issue to some extend isnt the worst solution at this point. Simply repeating the message and advices from scientists in a friendly and open manner without directly attacking the unvaxxed on a personal level. As direct pressure only increases resistance. Eventually people will come around if you aproach them this way. At least thats what i hope and also think. This has been the general aproach in most western nations so far so i do think we are doing the right thing when it comes to this. Its mostly the public itself which does become more hostile towards the other side, which i think is not helping. The other option would be to force vaccinations and make them mandatory,this isnt the worst solution for dealing with the pandemic and some countries have resorted to this already. But doing so does go against some of the principles on which our society is build,it does come with collateral damage. For some people this will work.They will take the vaccine and simply stop caring about having been forced to take it. With other people it will backfire and they will be even less willing to comply. In the end it might not be the worst solution as the group which will simply accept it is probably a lot bigger then the group which will resist even more. But it would be much better for the future if this could be avoided all together. Verbally, that might be true, but applying direct pressure in other ways has been beneficial to getting more people vaccinated, such as requiring vaccinations to travel or stay employed. They might bitch and moan about it, but at the end of the day, they're vaccinated and finally contributing the tiniest little bit to society (however much they may hate it). The fuck? Imposing tyranny and then justifying it by showing compliance is one hell of a take. The fuck? Calling vaccinations "tyranny" and completely ignoring the absolutely lowest bar for dealing with a global public health crisis is one hell of a take. I might be an idealist, but from a principal point of view, I do not support vaccine mandates. All medication should be taken by choice, not force. I also find it very hard to defend that you can be demanded to give medical information to anyone working for example in a restaurant, who has no HC-related function nor education. Other implications of letting go of this area of privacy give me chills. I absolutely support vaccines and put my whole summer holiday on hold to get my shots ASAP, but mandates are a very tough question of benefits and values. We have given up a lot of personal freedom to fight this pandemic, and there is no telling when, if ever, we will get them back.
I'm fine with people voluntarily electing to take their own personal medication that isn't relevant to an infectious disease that could harm others. I'm also fine with people not getting vaccinated, if they're not going to be around other people. (I mean, I wish they wouldn't, but if they're not going to be around anyone, then their decision to stay unvaccinated won't jeopardize other people, so I don't really care about that.) But you - general "you", not "you" personally - can't have it both ways, because the unvaccinated person's freedom is not the only freedom that matters. Other people matter too, and their freedoms matter just as much as yours. If you don't want to contribute to society, then don't, but then you don't get to be part of society. And that's totally your call to make, but we've had enforceable laws and public health regulations and travel restrictions and employment requirements forever, including vaccination prerequisites in many cases.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
As should be no surprise, the second South Africa strain is now the most common variant in the US. There's a common pattern with all these variants that by the time they make the news, they're already everywhere. UK and India strains had the same behavior.
|
On December 21 2021 09:21 Slydie wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2021 09:03 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 21 2021 08:55 dudeman001 wrote:On December 21 2021 02:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 21 2021 02:10 pmh wrote:On December 21 2021 01:26 WombaT wrote:On December 20 2021 09:54 pmh wrote:
The best way forward for society as a whole i would not dare to say. Maybe public expectations should be lowerd.The public has never fully realized the scope of this pandemic and messages from authoritys have been to optimistic in general (for which there are definitely some arguments so i can understand that).
We dont have all that many options other then continue with the current strategy and hope that at one point things will get better. If this is actually realistic and how long this would take i would not dare to say either but it could be that we are somewhat close.
The unvaxed are definitely not helping but blaming them is pointless i think. It only increases polarization which isnt particulary helpfull in a situation like this. The problem is also bigger then a certain percentage of the population beeing unvaxed. Many people thought they where good with 2 vaccinations and now everyone does need a booster which cant be done in time because of logistical issues. The unvaxed will still get their protection from infection eventually. I think people forget that we live a rather rarefied existence, especially in the West. We haven’t fully conquered all that nature can throw at us. We aren’t guaranteed a certain standard of living, it’s what we carve out. I don’t blame anti-vaxxers for things dragging on as it seems patently clear that vaccination alone may not cut it. I do think many of their rationales and sometimes underlying motivations are stupid, while vaccination isn’t the golden goose solution, not vaccinating certainly doesn’t bloody help. In addition many, albeit not all don’t exactly adhere to the additional behaviours that help on top of/instead of vaccination. It’s been years since I’ve heard calls to seek to avoid polarisation in all sorts of domains. Sometimes seeking some common ground would absolutely be prudent, sometimes we’re getting into the fallacy of moderation territory. This isn’t to say people aren’t guilty of pious or overly divisive rhetoric that isn’t especially helpful, that frequently also comes from a position of a total lack of understanding or knowledge themselves, or that genuine objections to other things get lumped in as ‘anti-vax’ Without adding a million additional caveats I’m not talking about folks in this thread, but in the environs outside. They’re, absolutely full of shite in myriad mysterious and muddled ways. The only way to have a discussion that doesn’t become poisonous and polarised is not to have it at all. Which isn’t reducing polarisation because ultimately you’re just letting a group of people do what they want, which antagonises the other ‘pole’ anyway. It’s ‘don’t tell me what to do’ taken to such preposterous realms it can only come from a humongous anti-authority streak or plain selfishness, and given some of the crossover into some of their politics, they are only anti-authority when it’s not their bloke. If the government mandated people not to jump in a fire some of these folks would be making giant pyres and triple jumping in holding hands. Yes i do agree. All this is very much true. A prudent strategy to properly adrees this i dont really see unfortunatly. Trying to force the issue has proven to not be very effective. People only dig in more,heels in the sand. The effect of any sort of polarization spreads out like oil,also increasing polarization in other areas. This effect is particulary strong in the USA where every single issue has become polarized mostly along partizan lines. Maybe ignoring and accepting the issue to some extend isnt the worst solution at this point. Simply repeating the message and advices from scientists in a friendly and open manner without directly attacking the unvaxxed on a personal level. As direct pressure only increases resistance. Eventually people will come around if you aproach them this way. At least thats what i hope and also think. This has been the general aproach in most western nations so far so i do think we are doing the right thing when it comes to this. Its mostly the public itself which does become more hostile towards the other side, which i think is not helping. The other option would be to force vaccinations and make them mandatory,this isnt the worst solution for dealing with the pandemic and some countries have resorted to this already. But doing so does go against some of the principles on which our society is build,it does come with collateral damage. For some people this will work.They will take the vaccine and simply stop caring about having been forced to take it. With other people it will backfire and they will be even less willing to comply. In the end it might not be the worst solution as the group which will simply accept it is probably a lot bigger then the group which will resist even more. But it would be much better for the future if this could be avoided all together. Verbally, that might be true, but applying direct pressure in other ways has been beneficial to getting more people vaccinated, such as requiring vaccinations to travel or stay employed. They might bitch and moan about it, but at the end of the day, they're vaccinated and finally contributing the tiniest little bit to society (however much they may hate it). The fuck? Imposing tyranny and then justifying it by showing compliance is one hell of a take. The fuck? Calling vaccinations "tyranny" and completely ignoring the absolutely lowest bar for dealing with a global public health crisis is one hell of a take. I might be an idealist, but from a principal point of view, I do not support vaccine mandates. All medication should be taken by choice, not force. I also find it very hard to defend that you can be demanded to give medical information to anyone working for example in a restaurant, who has no HC-related function nor education. Other implications of letting go of this area of privacy give me chills. I absolutely support vaccines and put my whole summer holiday on hold to get my shots ASAP, but mandates are a very tough question of benefits and values. We have given up a lot of personal freedom to fight this pandemic, and there is no telling when, if ever, we will get them back.
You know what gives me chills? The thought of losing the freedom to attend in-person classes at university. Or actually go out to dinner at restaurants and bars. Or the freedom to get on a plane and travel where I please. That's what really gives me chills. Yet all those freedoms are at stake if we don't get this pandemic under control. If one person's freedom to refuse reasonable medical treatment is infringing on society's freedom to pursue life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, then the solution is clear.
You want the right to refuse to get vaccinated, okay, fine. You can have that right. However, you do not have the right to put other people's lives in danger, which means that employers can ban you from working if you aren't vaccinated. In fact, I'd go further and say that it is unreasonable for an employer to require someone to endanger their own safety by working in the presence of unvaccinated people, who are more likely to be infected with covid.
And of course subjecting other airline passengers to your presence is out of the question in the confined space of an aircraft. And universities that want to be able to continue in-person lessons would be wise to ban you from their campuses, since it would unfairly jeopardize the safety of other students.
So yes, it's understandable to want your own freedom and liberty, but it can't come at the expense of other people's freedom and liberty.
|
On December 21 2021 09:39 codonbyte wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2021 09:21 Slydie wrote:On December 21 2021 09:03 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 21 2021 08:55 dudeman001 wrote:On December 21 2021 02:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 21 2021 02:10 pmh wrote:On December 21 2021 01:26 WombaT wrote:On December 20 2021 09:54 pmh wrote:
The best way forward for society as a whole i would not dare to say. Maybe public expectations should be lowerd.The public has never fully realized the scope of this pandemic and messages from authoritys have been to optimistic in general (for which there are definitely some arguments so i can understand that).
We dont have all that many options other then continue with the current strategy and hope that at one point things will get better. If this is actually realistic and how long this would take i would not dare to say either but it could be that we are somewhat close.
The unvaxed are definitely not helping but blaming them is pointless i think. It only increases polarization which isnt particulary helpfull in a situation like this. The problem is also bigger then a certain percentage of the population beeing unvaxed. Many people thought they where good with 2 vaccinations and now everyone does need a booster which cant be done in time because of logistical issues. The unvaxed will still get their protection from infection eventually. I think people forget that we live a rather rarefied existence, especially in the West. We haven’t fully conquered all that nature can throw at us. We aren’t guaranteed a certain standard of living, it’s what we carve out. I don’t blame anti-vaxxers for things dragging on as it seems patently clear that vaccination alone may not cut it. I do think many of their rationales and sometimes underlying motivations are stupid, while vaccination isn’t the golden goose solution, not vaccinating certainly doesn’t bloody help. In addition many, albeit not all don’t exactly adhere to the additional behaviours that help on top of/instead of vaccination. It’s been years since I’ve heard calls to seek to avoid polarisation in all sorts of domains. Sometimes seeking some common ground would absolutely be prudent, sometimes we’re getting into the fallacy of moderation territory. This isn’t to say people aren’t guilty of pious or overly divisive rhetoric that isn’t especially helpful, that frequently also comes from a position of a total lack of understanding or knowledge themselves, or that genuine objections to other things get lumped in as ‘anti-vax’ Without adding a million additional caveats I’m not talking about folks in this thread, but in the environs outside. They’re, absolutely full of shite in myriad mysterious and muddled ways. The only way to have a discussion that doesn’t become poisonous and polarised is not to have it at all. Which isn’t reducing polarisation because ultimately you’re just letting a group of people do what they want, which antagonises the other ‘pole’ anyway. It’s ‘don’t tell me what to do’ taken to such preposterous realms it can only come from a humongous anti-authority streak or plain selfishness, and given some of the crossover into some of their politics, they are only anti-authority when it’s not their bloke. If the government mandated people not to jump in a fire some of these folks would be making giant pyres and triple jumping in holding hands. Yes i do agree. All this is very much true. A prudent strategy to properly adrees this i dont really see unfortunatly. Trying to force the issue has proven to not be very effective. People only dig in more,heels in the sand. The effect of any sort of polarization spreads out like oil,also increasing polarization in other areas. This effect is particulary strong in the USA where every single issue has become polarized mostly along partizan lines. Maybe ignoring and accepting the issue to some extend isnt the worst solution at this point. Simply repeating the message and advices from scientists in a friendly and open manner without directly attacking the unvaxxed on a personal level. As direct pressure only increases resistance. Eventually people will come around if you aproach them this way. At least thats what i hope and also think. This has been the general aproach in most western nations so far so i do think we are doing the right thing when it comes to this. Its mostly the public itself which does become more hostile towards the other side, which i think is not helping. The other option would be to force vaccinations and make them mandatory,this isnt the worst solution for dealing with the pandemic and some countries have resorted to this already. But doing so does go against some of the principles on which our society is build,it does come with collateral damage. For some people this will work.They will take the vaccine and simply stop caring about having been forced to take it. With other people it will backfire and they will be even less willing to comply. In the end it might not be the worst solution as the group which will simply accept it is probably a lot bigger then the group which will resist even more. But it would be much better for the future if this could be avoided all together. Verbally, that might be true, but applying direct pressure in other ways has been beneficial to getting more people vaccinated, such as requiring vaccinations to travel or stay employed. They might bitch and moan about it, but at the end of the day, they're vaccinated and finally contributing the tiniest little bit to society (however much they may hate it). The fuck? Imposing tyranny and then justifying it by showing compliance is one hell of a take. The fuck? Calling vaccinations "tyranny" and completely ignoring the absolutely lowest bar for dealing with a global public health crisis is one hell of a take. I might be an idealist, but from a principal point of view, I do not support vaccine mandates. All medication should be taken by choice, not force. I also find it very hard to defend that you can be demanded to give medical information to anyone working for example in a restaurant, who has no HC-related function nor education. Other implications of letting go of this area of privacy give me chills. I absolutely support vaccines and put my whole summer holiday on hold to get my shots ASAP, but mandates are a very tough question of benefits and values. We have given up a lot of personal freedom to fight this pandemic, and there is no telling when, if ever, we will get them back. You know what gives me chills? The thought of losing the freedom to attend in-person classes at university. Or actually go out to dinner at restaurants and bars. Or the freedom to get on a plane and travel where I please. That's what really gives me chills. Yet all those freedoms are at stake if we don't get this pandemic under control. If one person's freedom to refuse reasonable medical treatment is infringing on society's freedom to pursue life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, then the solution is clear. You want the right to refuse to get vaccinated, okay, fine. You can have that right. However, you do not have the right to put other people's lives in danger, which means that employers can ban you from working if you aren't vaccinated. In fact, I'd go further and say that it is unreasonable for an employer to require someone to endanger their own safety by working in the presence of unvaccinated people, who are more likely to be infected with covid. And of course subjecting other airline passengers to your presence is out of the question in the confined space of an aircraft. And universities that want to be able to continue in-person lessons would be wise to ban you from their campuses, since it would unfairly jeopardize the safety of other students. So yes, it's understandable to want your own freedom and liberty, but it can't come at the expense of other people's freedom and liberty.
To this day I still don't understand this argument so please enlighten me. How is an unvaccinated person any more dangerous to other individuals than a vaccinated person? They are more dangerous to themselves, yes, the vaccine provides strong protection from symptom severity. But repeated scientific study shows no difference in viral load & transmissibility between the two groups.
|
Northern Ireland25436 Posts
On December 21 2021 08:51 Slydie wrote:
I am seriously loosing faith in restriction-heavy ways of dealing with this pandemic. Restrictions are not and will never be a long term solution, in fact the better they work, the more effectively they push the problem into the future.
I am even thinking that having as many infections as possible right now, while the vaccines still work decently, is by far a superior strategy.
With new variants being even more contagious, there is simply no way we can live normally and having no virus present. Solid, wide spread long term Immunity is the only option, and it should be clear now that vaccines are not enough by themselves.
I remember when a "flat curve" was the goal. In the UK, the number of hospitalizations has been remarkably stable for months, while having a very open society. I find it puzzelig why it isn't talked about more, and there are major both long and short term benefits to that strategy.
How do you flatten the curve without some degree of restriction? It was a pre-vaccine strategy to buy time and prevent the health system in particular for being overwhelmed, and considerably more stringent restrictions were in place to accomplish this.
You’ve been critical of Spain’s overzealousness particularly in terms of masking for quite some period now, as one poster mentioned (and I haven’t checked) Spain are doing relatively fine currently, they may be on to something with elements of their approach. Maybe it’s got nothing to do with it, there are a million factors at play.
Flattening the curve isn’t some neutral spot that can be accomplished by inaction and just letting people pick up immunity, the entire idea was to control rates to a manageable level.
Flattening the curve is not a strategy, it is not a policy, it is an end goal to whit you need strategy and policies in place to accomplish. I will assume in your statement ‘I am even thinking that having as many infections as possible right now, while the vaccines still work decently, is by far a superior strategy.’ that you are advocating this from a position of ‘before the vaccine(s) is superseded by new variants and can’t prevent mass hospitalisation from infection.
But even then, ‘let everyone get infected’ is essentially the diametric opposite of flattening the curve. Flattening the curve exists as a phrase in common parlance to keep new infections and subsequent likely hospitalisation below a manageable threshold, by various means.
What do you want people to ‘talk about’ more? That the U.K. had a successful vaccine uptake and thus avoided mass hospitalisation while staying relatively open?
We did talk about that, people were quite enjoying this state of affairs where it seemed vaccines alone could deliver a return to basically normality. People were quite happy with this.
I think you provide a lot of valuable commentary but I have zero idea what you’re actually arguing here, or why
|
On December 21 2021 09:33 dudeman001 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2021 09:13 codonbyte wrote:On December 21 2021 09:08 dudeman001 wrote:On December 21 2021 09:03 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 21 2021 08:55 dudeman001 wrote:On December 21 2021 02:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 21 2021 02:10 pmh wrote:On December 21 2021 01:26 WombaT wrote:On December 20 2021 09:54 pmh wrote:
The best way forward for society as a whole i would not dare to say. Maybe public expectations should be lowerd.The public has never fully realized the scope of this pandemic and messages from authoritys have been to optimistic in general (for which there are definitely some arguments so i can understand that).
We dont have all that many options other then continue with the current strategy and hope that at one point things will get better. If this is actually realistic and how long this would take i would not dare to say either but it could be that we are somewhat close.
The unvaxed are definitely not helping but blaming them is pointless i think. It only increases polarization which isnt particulary helpfull in a situation like this. The problem is also bigger then a certain percentage of the population beeing unvaxed. Many people thought they where good with 2 vaccinations and now everyone does need a booster which cant be done in time because of logistical issues. The unvaxed will still get their protection from infection eventually. I think people forget that we live a rather rarefied existence, especially in the West. We haven’t fully conquered all that nature can throw at us. We aren’t guaranteed a certain standard of living, it’s what we carve out. I don’t blame anti-vaxxers for things dragging on as it seems patently clear that vaccination alone may not cut it. I do think many of their rationales and sometimes underlying motivations are stupid, while vaccination isn’t the golden goose solution, not vaccinating certainly doesn’t bloody help. In addition many, albeit not all don’t exactly adhere to the additional behaviours that help on top of/instead of vaccination. It’s been years since I’ve heard calls to seek to avoid polarisation in all sorts of domains. Sometimes seeking some common ground would absolutely be prudent, sometimes we’re getting into the fallacy of moderation territory. This isn’t to say people aren’t guilty of pious or overly divisive rhetoric that isn’t especially helpful, that frequently also comes from a position of a total lack of understanding or knowledge themselves, or that genuine objections to other things get lumped in as ‘anti-vax’ Without adding a million additional caveats I’m not talking about folks in this thread, but in the environs outside. They’re, absolutely full of shite in myriad mysterious and muddled ways. The only way to have a discussion that doesn’t become poisonous and polarised is not to have it at all. Which isn’t reducing polarisation because ultimately you’re just letting a group of people do what they want, which antagonises the other ‘pole’ anyway. It’s ‘don’t tell me what to do’ taken to such preposterous realms it can only come from a humongous anti-authority streak or plain selfishness, and given some of the crossover into some of their politics, they are only anti-authority when it’s not their bloke. If the government mandated people not to jump in a fire some of these folks would be making giant pyres and triple jumping in holding hands. Yes i do agree. All this is very much true. A prudent strategy to properly adrees this i dont really see unfortunatly. Trying to force the issue has proven to not be very effective. People only dig in more,heels in the sand. The effect of any sort of polarization spreads out like oil,also increasing polarization in other areas. This effect is particulary strong in the USA where every single issue has become polarized mostly along partizan lines. Maybe ignoring and accepting the issue to some extend isnt the worst solution at this point. Simply repeating the message and advices from scientists in a friendly and open manner without directly attacking the unvaxxed on a personal level. As direct pressure only increases resistance. Eventually people will come around if you aproach them this way. At least thats what i hope and also think. This has been the general aproach in most western nations so far so i do think we are doing the right thing when it comes to this. Its mostly the public itself which does become more hostile towards the other side, which i think is not helping. The other option would be to force vaccinations and make them mandatory,this isnt the worst solution for dealing with the pandemic and some countries have resorted to this already. But doing so does go against some of the principles on which our society is build,it does come with collateral damage. For some people this will work.They will take the vaccine and simply stop caring about having been forced to take it. With other people it will backfire and they will be even less willing to comply. In the end it might not be the worst solution as the group which will simply accept it is probably a lot bigger then the group which will resist even more. But it would be much better for the future if this could be avoided all together. Verbally, that might be true, but applying direct pressure in other ways has been beneficial to getting more people vaccinated, such as requiring vaccinations to travel or stay employed. They might bitch and moan about it, but at the end of the day, they're vaccinated and finally contributing the tiniest little bit to society (however much they may hate it). The fuck? Imposing tyranny and then justifying it by showing compliance is one hell of a take. The fuck? Calling vaccinations "tyranny" and completely ignoring the absolutely lowest bar for dealing with a global public health crisis is one hell of a take. You're talking about stripping people's right to - as you said it - travel or stay employed, unless they take a corporation's pharmaceutical product. THAT is a tyrannical approach to the problem. Under normal circumstances, that would be tyrannical. However, a global pandemic that has already killed millions of people can hardly be described as "normal". Extreme circumstances call for extreme actions, including requiring that people take a corporation's pharmaceutical product or lose the right to travel or be employed. This is a public health issue. I'm tired of being unable to live life normally because 10-20% of the population refuses to get vaccinated for "philosophical reasons". Their refusal to get vaccinated has detrimental effects on the quality of my life. This year, my university just recently started having in-person classes again, and they'll have to stop if the situation declines. When there is a public health crisis, the public needs to work together to solve it, and that means sacrificing some of your personal freedom. If we were dealing with a pandemic that had a 98% death rate I would be completely onboard with taking extreme action to overcome the disease. But instead we have a virus with a 98% survival rate AND is highly treatable even without the use of vaccines. I don't believe you've met the burden of justification to remove people's rights in this regard. Show nested quote +On December 21 2021 09:14 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 21 2021 09:08 dudeman001 wrote:On December 21 2021 09:03 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 21 2021 08:55 dudeman001 wrote:On December 21 2021 02:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 21 2021 02:10 pmh wrote:On December 21 2021 01:26 WombaT wrote:On December 20 2021 09:54 pmh wrote:
The best way forward for society as a whole i would not dare to say. Maybe public expectations should be lowerd.The public has never fully realized the scope of this pandemic and messages from authoritys have been to optimistic in general (for which there are definitely some arguments so i can understand that).
We dont have all that many options other then continue with the current strategy and hope that at one point things will get better. If this is actually realistic and how long this would take i would not dare to say either but it could be that we are somewhat close.
The unvaxed are definitely not helping but blaming them is pointless i think. It only increases polarization which isnt particulary helpfull in a situation like this. The problem is also bigger then a certain percentage of the population beeing unvaxed. Many people thought they where good with 2 vaccinations and now everyone does need a booster which cant be done in time because of logistical issues. The unvaxed will still get their protection from infection eventually. I think people forget that we live a rather rarefied existence, especially in the West. We haven’t fully conquered all that nature can throw at us. We aren’t guaranteed a certain standard of living, it’s what we carve out. I don’t blame anti-vaxxers for things dragging on as it seems patently clear that vaccination alone may not cut it. I do think many of their rationales and sometimes underlying motivations are stupid, while vaccination isn’t the golden goose solution, not vaccinating certainly doesn’t bloody help. In addition many, albeit not all don’t exactly adhere to the additional behaviours that help on top of/instead of vaccination. It’s been years since I’ve heard calls to seek to avoid polarisation in all sorts of domains. Sometimes seeking some common ground would absolutely be prudent, sometimes we’re getting into the fallacy of moderation territory. This isn’t to say people aren’t guilty of pious or overly divisive rhetoric that isn’t especially helpful, that frequently also comes from a position of a total lack of understanding or knowledge themselves, or that genuine objections to other things get lumped in as ‘anti-vax’ Without adding a million additional caveats I’m not talking about folks in this thread, but in the environs outside. They’re, absolutely full of shite in myriad mysterious and muddled ways. The only way to have a discussion that doesn’t become poisonous and polarised is not to have it at all. Which isn’t reducing polarisation because ultimately you’re just letting a group of people do what they want, which antagonises the other ‘pole’ anyway. It’s ‘don’t tell me what to do’ taken to such preposterous realms it can only come from a humongous anti-authority streak or plain selfishness, and given some of the crossover into some of their politics, they are only anti-authority when it’s not their bloke. If the government mandated people not to jump in a fire some of these folks would be making giant pyres and triple jumping in holding hands. Yes i do agree. All this is very much true. A prudent strategy to properly adrees this i dont really see unfortunatly. Trying to force the issue has proven to not be very effective. People only dig in more,heels in the sand. The effect of any sort of polarization spreads out like oil,also increasing polarization in other areas. This effect is particulary strong in the USA where every single issue has become polarized mostly along partizan lines. Maybe ignoring and accepting the issue to some extend isnt the worst solution at this point. Simply repeating the message and advices from scientists in a friendly and open manner without directly attacking the unvaxxed on a personal level. As direct pressure only increases resistance. Eventually people will come around if you aproach them this way. At least thats what i hope and also think. This has been the general aproach in most western nations so far so i do think we are doing the right thing when it comes to this. Its mostly the public itself which does become more hostile towards the other side, which i think is not helping. The other option would be to force vaccinations and make them mandatory,this isnt the worst solution for dealing with the pandemic and some countries have resorted to this already. But doing so does go against some of the principles on which our society is build,it does come with collateral damage. For some people this will work.They will take the vaccine and simply stop caring about having been forced to take it. With other people it will backfire and they will be even less willing to comply. In the end it might not be the worst solution as the group which will simply accept it is probably a lot bigger then the group which will resist even more. But it would be much better for the future if this could be avoided all together. Verbally, that might be true, but applying direct pressure in other ways has been beneficial to getting more people vaccinated, such as requiring vaccinations to travel or stay employed. They might bitch and moan about it, but at the end of the day, they're vaccinated and finally contributing the tiniest little bit to society (however much they may hate it). The fuck? Imposing tyranny and then justifying it by showing compliance is one hell of a take. The fuck? Calling vaccinations "tyranny" and completely ignoring the absolutely lowest bar for dealing with a global public health crisis is one hell of a take. You're talking about stripping people's right to - as you said it - travel or stay employed, unless they take a corporation's pharmaceutical product. THAT is a tyrannical approach to the problem. No, you're stripping people's rights by condemning vaccines. People do not have the right to jeopardize the health of those around them. You don't get to do whatever the hell you want, regardless of how it may endanger others. Focusing on the idea that it's because of "corporate pharmaceuticals" is completely glossing over the very real death toll and severe injury toll of the insanely infectious pandemic we've been fighting. And this is true in non-covid contexts as well, such as mandatory vaccines for public school children. You're arguing for removing people's rights under the imposition of force unless they act how you want them to. But you know what, fine. I said above that if we were dealing with a deadlier virus I would agree to a mandate because there is a threshold at which imposed behavior becomes justified. Here are my terms: Prove to me that unless every individual takes this vaccine - and only this vaccine - society itself can no longer function. If you show me evidence that meets this burden I'll submit that your argument is better than anything I can come up with. Until then I will keep my rights, thank you.
I don't know why this is brought up every week or so, but "survival rate" is simply not the bar we should be electing to have, when countless others have already experienced devastating effects of covid besides literal death. Just for further reference, people who quote the 98% or 99% survival rate are immediately taken less seriously in discussions about covid, because they imply the false dichotomy of "unless a covid-infected person dies, they end up being fine and not worthy of consideration". Not only is this fallacious, but it also doesn't account for the massive overburdening of our hospitals that are completely preventable by more people being vaccinated - which jeopardizes other patients who aren't infected by covid but still need those emergency resources - and those who are hospitalized from covid (regardless of whether they ultimately live or die) are significantly disproportionately unvaccinated. And if the long-term effects of covid and the hospital saturation weren't enough, there's also the lack of contribution towards herd immunity, to help protect those who are either genetically immunocompromised or are taking medicine that makes them more susceptible to infection, which could be the stranger you pass in the supermarket or the coworker who works alongside you.
And I don't care about your "terms", which only reveal that you don't understand how vaccines work. To copy a line I wrote a few minutes ago: we've had enforceable laws and public health regulations and travel restrictions and employment requirements forever, including vaccination prerequisites in many cases. You have the right to not abide by them as long as you're okay with the consequences, which means you'll be missing out on parts of society, and literally no one cares that you want to throw a temper tantrum over why you can't be unsafe around others. Grow up or get lost.
|
On December 21 2021 09:47 dudeman001 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 21 2021 09:39 codonbyte wrote:On December 21 2021 09:21 Slydie wrote:On December 21 2021 09:03 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 21 2021 08:55 dudeman001 wrote:On December 21 2021 02:25 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On December 21 2021 02:10 pmh wrote:On December 21 2021 01:26 WombaT wrote:On December 20 2021 09:54 pmh wrote:
The best way forward for society as a whole i would not dare to say. Maybe public expectations should be lowerd.The public has never fully realized the scope of this pandemic and messages from authoritys have been to optimistic in general (for which there are definitely some arguments so i can understand that).
We dont have all that many options other then continue with the current strategy and hope that at one point things will get better. If this is actually realistic and how long this would take i would not dare to say either but it could be that we are somewhat close.
The unvaxed are definitely not helping but blaming them is pointless i think. It only increases polarization which isnt particulary helpfull in a situation like this. The problem is also bigger then a certain percentage of the population beeing unvaxed. Many people thought they where good with 2 vaccinations and now everyone does need a booster which cant be done in time because of logistical issues. The unvaxed will still get their protection from infection eventually. I think people forget that we live a rather rarefied existence, especially in the West. We haven’t fully conquered all that nature can throw at us. We aren’t guaranteed a certain standard of living, it’s what we carve out. I don’t blame anti-vaxxers for things dragging on as it seems patently clear that vaccination alone may not cut it. I do think many of their rationales and sometimes underlying motivations are stupid, while vaccination isn’t the golden goose solution, not vaccinating certainly doesn’t bloody help. In addition many, albeit not all don’t exactly adhere to the additional behaviours that help on top of/instead of vaccination. It’s been years since I’ve heard calls to seek to avoid polarisation in all sorts of domains. Sometimes seeking some common ground would absolutely be prudent, sometimes we’re getting into the fallacy of moderation territory. This isn’t to say people aren’t guilty of pious or overly divisive rhetoric that isn’t especially helpful, that frequently also comes from a position of a total lack of understanding or knowledge themselves, or that genuine objections to other things get lumped in as ‘anti-vax’ Without adding a million additional caveats I’m not talking about folks in this thread, but in the environs outside. They’re, absolutely full of shite in myriad mysterious and muddled ways. The only way to have a discussion that doesn’t become poisonous and polarised is not to have it at all. Which isn’t reducing polarisation because ultimately you’re just letting a group of people do what they want, which antagonises the other ‘pole’ anyway. It’s ‘don’t tell me what to do’ taken to such preposterous realms it can only come from a humongous anti-authority streak or plain selfishness, and given some of the crossover into some of their politics, they are only anti-authority when it’s not their bloke. If the government mandated people not to jump in a fire some of these folks would be making giant pyres and triple jumping in holding hands. Yes i do agree. All this is very much true. A prudent strategy to properly adrees this i dont really see unfortunatly. Trying to force the issue has proven to not be very effective. People only dig in more,heels in the sand. The effect of any sort of polarization spreads out like oil,also increasing polarization in other areas. This effect is particulary strong in the USA where every single issue has become polarized mostly along partizan lines. Maybe ignoring and accepting the issue to some extend isnt the worst solution at this point. Simply repeating the message and advices from scientists in a friendly and open manner without directly attacking the unvaxxed on a personal level. As direct pressure only increases resistance. Eventually people will come around if you aproach them this way. At least thats what i hope and also think. This has been the general aproach in most western nations so far so i do think we are doing the right thing when it comes to this. Its mostly the public itself which does become more hostile towards the other side, which i think is not helping. The other option would be to force vaccinations and make them mandatory,this isnt the worst solution for dealing with the pandemic and some countries have resorted to this already. But doing so does go against some of the principles on which our society is build,it does come with collateral damage. For some people this will work.They will take the vaccine and simply stop caring about having been forced to take it. With other people it will backfire and they will be even less willing to comply. In the end it might not be the worst solution as the group which will simply accept it is probably a lot bigger then the group which will resist even more. But it would be much better for the future if this could be avoided all together. Verbally, that might be true, but applying direct pressure in other ways has been beneficial to getting more people vaccinated, such as requiring vaccinations to travel or stay employed. They might bitch and moan about it, but at the end of the day, they're vaccinated and finally contributing the tiniest little bit to society (however much they may hate it). The fuck? Imposing tyranny and then justifying it by showing compliance is one hell of a take. The fuck? Calling vaccinations "tyranny" and completely ignoring the absolutely lowest bar for dealing with a global public health crisis is one hell of a take. I might be an idealist, but from a principal point of view, I do not support vaccine mandates. All medication should be taken by choice, not force. I also find it very hard to defend that you can be demanded to give medical information to anyone working for example in a restaurant, who has no HC-related function nor education. Other implications of letting go of this area of privacy give me chills. I absolutely support vaccines and put my whole summer holiday on hold to get my shots ASAP, but mandates are a very tough question of benefits and values. We have given up a lot of personal freedom to fight this pandemic, and there is no telling when, if ever, we will get them back. You know what gives me chills? The thought of losing the freedom to attend in-person classes at university. Or actually go out to dinner at restaurants and bars. Or the freedom to get on a plane and travel where I please. That's what really gives me chills. Yet all those freedoms are at stake if we don't get this pandemic under control. If one person's freedom to refuse reasonable medical treatment is infringing on society's freedom to pursue life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness, then the solution is clear. You want the right to refuse to get vaccinated, okay, fine. You can have that right. However, you do not have the right to put other people's lives in danger, which means that employers can ban you from working if you aren't vaccinated. In fact, I'd go further and say that it is unreasonable for an employer to require someone to endanger their own safety by working in the presence of unvaccinated people, who are more likely to be infected with covid. And of course subjecting other airline passengers to your presence is out of the question in the confined space of an aircraft. And universities that want to be able to continue in-person lessons would be wise to ban you from their campuses, since it would unfairly jeopardize the safety of other students. So yes, it's understandable to want your own freedom and liberty, but it can't come at the expense of other people's freedom and liberty. To this day I still don't understand this argument so please enlighten me. How is an unvaccinated person any more dangerous to other individuals than a vaccinated person? They are more dangerous to themselves, yes, the vaccine provides strong protection from symptom severity. But repeated scientific study shows no difference in viral load & transmissibility between the two groups.
![[image loading]](https://images.foxtv.com/static.fox13news.com/www.fox13news.com/content/uploads/2021/08/1280/720/ffbfc3b6-snapshot-copy.jpg?ve=1&tl=1)
Cumulative number of COVID-19 vaccination Number % in Populaton
People Vaccinated with at least One Dose 342,748 83.16%
People Fully Vaccinated 290,645 70.52%
Now do the math between how much hospital resources an unvacinated person uses vs a vaccinated person uses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
