|
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 August 25 2022 17:00 Mikau313 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2022 06:19 BlackJack wrote:On August 24 2022 21:01 NewSunshine wrote:On August 24 2022 17:27 BlackJack wrote:On August 24 2022 15:26 Mikau313 wrote:On August 24 2022 05:17 BlackJack wrote:On August 23 2022 16:51 Mikau313 wrote:On August 23 2022 06:55 BlackJack wrote:On August 23 2022 06:34 Magic Powers wrote:On August 23 2022 05:09 BlackJack wrote: [quote]
Well then you’re just completely ignoring the rights of the vaccinated to be able to not have to work around the unvaccinated. I think there’s no room in the debate for antivaxxers like you I don't care about covid policy since I have no impact on it, as long as I can live a normal life. Here in this thread I'm trying to mitigate the damage you're doing by spreading misinformation like the one about myocarditis and the one about protection against infection. My goal is to let people know that they benefit from more frequent boosters, and you've been deliberately spreading information that leads them away from that conclusion. You really want to talk about myocarditis again? Are you referencing the time you claimed that "nobody" had been admitted to the hospital for myocarditis after vaccination and I had to correct you by stating that according to the CDC 96% of people diagnosed with vaccine induced myocarditis were admitted to the hospital? On September 19 2021 21:22 Magic Powers wrote:On September 19 2021 20:57 BlackJack wrote: [quote]
Magic Powers: Vaccination (especially Pfizer) contains no risk other than a sore arm for a few days and in few cases maybe a day of (harmless) side effects.
WHO: Clinicians should be aware of the risk of myocarditis and pericarditis with mRNA vaccines
Now I don't know who to believe + Show Spoiler + People are fallible, objective reality is not. You should never trust any source, you should always check multiple independent sources.
From the CDC:
Cases of myocarditis reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)external icon have occurred: After (not because of) mRNA COVID-19 vaccination (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna), especially in male adolescents and young adults, More often after the second dose Usually within several days after vaccination Most patients with myocarditis or pericarditis who received care responded well to medicine and rest and felt better quickly. Patients can usually return to their normal daily activities after their symptoms improve. Those who have been diagnosed with myocarditis should consult with their cardiologist (heart doctor) about return to exercise or sports. More information will be shared as it becomes available.
Furthermore, no hospitalizations or deaths have occured as a result of myocarditis after vaccination. No chronic cases either. + Show Spoiler + Sorry if it's considered misinformation to correct your untruths. If something is common in unvaxxed people when they contract Covid, and getting the vaccine makes that thing go from 'common' to 'almost doesn't happen' the conclusion isn't "vaccines cause myocarditis", it's "vaccines prevent myocarditis". We wouldn’t say either of those things because we have an entire language at our disposal to be precise. We actually don’t have to say things that are factually incorrect. The problem arises when you selectively apply that precise language. When you say: * People have been hospitalised with myocarditis after taking the vaccine But then neglect to say * The amount of people who were hospitalised with myocarditis was almost statistically insignificant; * The vast majority of people who got myocarditis after the vaccine were fine; * Chances of somebody getting myocarditis are astronomically higher from contracting Covid than they are from taking the vaccine even if a causal link between the vaccine and myocarditis were to be established; * Taking the vaccine reduces your chance of contracting myocarditis as a result of Covid to almost 0. * If your goal is to minimize your chance of getting myocarditis taking the vaccine is the objectively correct choice. You are still (intentionally) spreading misinformation, even when you make a precise and true statement initially. Ok so if someone says something that’s untrue I’m not allowed to just say “that’s not true according to this” without saying all that other stuff as well? Well it’s a lot to write but okay. Maybe I can make it my signature so it’s in every post. I mean, you could try just giving people good faith and taking them for what they mean to say, instead of leaping on every factual inaccuracy you find. That would be a start. Folks are human. We slip up, even when we know what we're doing or talking about. Anyone who wants to find something "wrong" will find it. Nobody likes the guy who has to point out every little thing that isn't technically correct. And it's not because of some "inconvenient truth" dynamic. It's because you could just take people for what they obviously mean to say, and just be cool about shit. If these were just "slip ups" it would not be very difficult to just correct the slip ups on the next post and not have to go back and forth over and over by suggesting the slip ups were true because you can get 5 other guys in the thread to go along with it Gets called out for taking things out of context while ignoring the obvious meaning behind the post. -Responds by taking things out of context while ignoring the obvious meaning behind the post
Yeah, you’re the one that doesn’t know the context. MP didn’t make that post about nobody being admitted to the hospital with myocarditis after getting vaccinated because he was making some deeper point about the COVID induced myocarditis that the vaccines also prevent which outnumber the cases of vaccine myocarditis.
Since you weren’t there at the time let me fill you in: he made that post because he had information that vaccine induced is mild and patients typically recover just fine and he just kind of assumed that nobody had been hospitalized or died from it.
After I informed him that there were in fact hospitalizations he said that he wasn’t infallible and said he should have been more rigorous with his research.
The fact that Magic Powers acknowledges he made a mistake there and what he said wasn’t true makes it so much more hilarious that you and several other people came here to post how what he said actually isn’t untrue and had a deeper meaning and I’m taking everything out of context blah blah blah. Apparently you all know more about the meaning of MP’s posts than MP himself
|
On August 25 2022 20:26 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2022 17:00 Mikau313 wrote:On August 25 2022 06:19 BlackJack wrote:On August 24 2022 21:01 NewSunshine wrote:On August 24 2022 17:27 BlackJack wrote:On August 24 2022 15:26 Mikau313 wrote:On August 24 2022 05:17 BlackJack wrote:On August 23 2022 16:51 Mikau313 wrote:On August 23 2022 06:55 BlackJack wrote:On August 23 2022 06:34 Magic Powers wrote: [quote]
I don't care about covid policy since I have no impact on it, as long as I can live a normal life.
Here in this thread I'm trying to mitigate the damage you're doing by spreading misinformation like the one about myocarditis and the one about protection against infection. My goal is to let people know that they benefit from more frequent boosters, and you've been deliberately spreading information that leads them away from that conclusion. You really want to talk about myocarditis again? Are you referencing the time you claimed that "nobody" had been admitted to the hospital for myocarditis after vaccination and I had to correct you by stating that according to the CDC 96% of people diagnosed with vaccine induced myocarditis were admitted to the hospital? On September 19 2021 21:22 Magic Powers wrote:[quote] + Show Spoiler + People are fallible, objective reality is not. You should never trust any source, you should always check multiple independent sources.
From the CDC:
Cases of myocarditis reported to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS)external icon have occurred: After (not because of) mRNA COVID-19 vaccination (Pfizer-BioNTech or Moderna), especially in male adolescents and young adults, More often after the second dose Usually within several days after vaccination Most patients with myocarditis or pericarditis who received care responded well to medicine and rest and felt better quickly. Patients can usually return to their normal daily activities after their symptoms improve. Those who have been diagnosed with myocarditis should consult with their cardiologist (heart doctor) about return to exercise or sports. More information will be shared as it becomes available.
Furthermore, no hospitalizations or deaths have occured as a result of myocarditis after vaccination. No chronic cases either. + Show Spoiler + Sorry if it's considered misinformation to correct your untruths. If something is common in unvaxxed people when they contract Covid, and getting the vaccine makes that thing go from 'common' to 'almost doesn't happen' the conclusion isn't "vaccines cause myocarditis", it's "vaccines prevent myocarditis". We wouldn’t say either of those things because we have an entire language at our disposal to be precise. We actually don’t have to say things that are factually incorrect. The problem arises when you selectively apply that precise language. When you say: * People have been hospitalised with myocarditis after taking the vaccine But then neglect to say * The amount of people who were hospitalised with myocarditis was almost statistically insignificant; * The vast majority of people who got myocarditis after the vaccine were fine; * Chances of somebody getting myocarditis are astronomically higher from contracting Covid than they are from taking the vaccine even if a causal link between the vaccine and myocarditis were to be established; * Taking the vaccine reduces your chance of contracting myocarditis as a result of Covid to almost 0. * If your goal is to minimize your chance of getting myocarditis taking the vaccine is the objectively correct choice. You are still (intentionally) spreading misinformation, even when you make a precise and true statement initially. Ok so if someone says something that’s untrue I’m not allowed to just say “that’s not true according to this” without saying all that other stuff as well? Well it’s a lot to write but okay. Maybe I can make it my signature so it’s in every post. I mean, you could try just giving people good faith and taking them for what they mean to say, instead of leaping on every factual inaccuracy you find. That would be a start. Folks are human. We slip up, even when we know what we're doing or talking about. Anyone who wants to find something "wrong" will find it. Nobody likes the guy who has to point out every little thing that isn't technically correct. And it's not because of some "inconvenient truth" dynamic. It's because you could just take people for what they obviously mean to say, and just be cool about shit. If these were just "slip ups" it would not be very difficult to just correct the slip ups on the next post and not have to go back and forth over and over by suggesting the slip ups were true because you can get 5 other guys in the thread to go along with it Gets called out for taking things out of context while ignoring the obvious meaning behind the post. -Responds by taking things out of context while ignoring the obvious meaning behind the post Yeah, you’re the one that doesn’t know the context. MP didn’t make that post about nobody being admitted to the hospital with myocarditis after getting vaccinated because he was making some deeper point about the COVID induced myocarditis that the vaccines also prevent which outnumber the cases of vaccine myocarditis. Since you weren’t there at the time let me fill you in: he made that post because he had information that vaccine induced is mild and patients typically recover just fine and he just kind of assumed that nobody had been hospitalized or died from it. After I informed him that there were in fact hospitalizations he said that he wasn’t infallible and said he should have been more rigorous with his research. The fact that Magic Powers acknowledges he made a mistake there and what he said wasn’t true makes it so much more hilarious that you and several other people came here to post how what he said actually isn’t untrue and had a deeper meaning and I’m taking everything out of context blah blah blah. Apparently you all know more about the meaning of MP’s posts than MP himself You're still misrepresenting the discussion.
It's not about that single comment by Magic Powers. It's about the overarching discussion, that went far beyond just a single comment by Magic Powers, about myocarditis after taking the vaccine, where you're still misrepresenting the facts just to hold on to an anti-vaccine stance.
You really are doing this on purpose at this point.
|
It is not to hold an antivaxx stance it is to be "right". He had been on the herd immunity had stopped tge pandemic train and was never not "right" then, being correct be damned. The admission will never come, just condecension and sarcasm.
The only way we get out of this loop is just all agree the vaccine is safer than covid for mydo (for everything), and everyone is going to get covid. This is just objective fact.
Then you can get into the more interestimg nuanced discussion on what to do to get more people vaccinated and what cost is worth it given the current situation.
|
Just your thoughts on my personal situation.
My girlfriend felt a little sick a few months ago, tested positive x3 on rapid tests. Got a PCR test, also tested positive. She had mild symptoms for a few days, the worst of it it was an earache for her but she was back to 100% in 3-4 days. I didn’t feel sick right away but a few days later I did. I had mild symptoms the worst of it was mild sinus pressure and I developed a mild cough on day 3 and by day 4 it cleared up and on day 5 I was 100%. Neither of us are vaccinated, I’ve had much worst colds and flus then what I experienced with Covid.
|
On August 25 2022 16:16 evilfatsh1t wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2022 14:41 Sermokala wrote:On August 25 2022 06:34 BlackJack wrote:On August 25 2022 04:13 Sermokala wrote:On August 24 2022 13:42 BlackJack wrote:On August 24 2022 10:53 Sermokala wrote:On August 24 2022 10:10 evilfatsh1t wrote:On August 24 2022 10:03 Sermokala wrote:On August 24 2022 05:28 BlackJack wrote:On August 24 2022 03:03 Sermokala wrote: [quote] The truth is that its a result of covid. The truth is that there are many less cases of it with the vaccine than without it. The truth is that its already known and isn't an issue for rational free thinking individuals.
But the real truth that you refuse to answer is why you think its the answer to why people shouldn't get vaccinated. Why should I keep talking to you? You’re still asking me why I think people shouldn’t get vaccinated? Liquid’Drone: bj’s position is this BJ: yeah that’s my position DPB: bjs position is this Bj: yeah that’s my position Sermokala: no that’s not his position. He thinks people shouldn’t get vaccinated Do you have any idea how obnoxious that is? To tell someone that is saying “this is what I believe” “no, that’s not what you believe. You actually believe this.” Which is whatever. I’ve been dealing with that for a long time in this thread so I’m used to ignoring it by now. I’m just telling you this in case this is something you do in real life because you will lose a lot of relationships if you can’t accept what someone is telling you at face value. Because you repeatedly refuse to answer the basic question I keep asking you. You keep refusing to address the most simple points about your position in a constant state of trying to achieve gotchas that get dismissed by everyone. You constantly lie and bring up things you show you know is a lie. You keep spreading anti vax misinformation and except people to never question or respond to you. When confronted you ignore what people are saying and insist that you're somehow being attacked because you're somehow the only one that knows the truth. You keep refusing to answer even the most basic questions that people ask you with the blind resistance of someone who is afraid to question anything that they're saying. So I will constantly ask you the same basic question you keep refusing to answer. Why do you think people shouldn't be mandated to get the vaccine, when we have a list of other mandates about basic operations in the country that are no different from it. hes already answered that question. other posters have even pointed out what his position is in relation to your question. you can disagree with him but to suggest that he hasnt responded at all to your points just shows youre not reading. He hasn't though people keep trying to posit what he's trying to say and he simply agrees without elaborating on any points of confusion people have. He states that he's against vaccine mandates on seemingly two major vectors. That it has cons to it and that it doesn't stop transmission. His only offered explanation on the first is about how you get a heart condition sometimes if you get it. However he is then shown studies that say that it is at such a low rate that even compared to getting covid normally that it isn't a real con. He doesn't respond to this information and insists that people are attacking him for contradicting this information. The second has some truth to it that the protection against infection fades after some time without boosters. However when he is confronted with the fact that it was never the point to stop transmission completely and that it still shows clear improvements on not going to the hospital with it or dying. He doesn't respond to this information and then says that him getting the vaccine should tell us that he understands what the vaccine is doing. After ignoring his basic points being refuted he turns into the common anti-vaxer argument of "if its so good then why should people have to get it to work with people who don't get it." this of course ignoring the swaths of other safety mandates in jobs that are for peoples protections that he is informed of and never responds about. then he repeats yet another antivax argument about it actually being about bodily autonomy, just like abortion, before being informed that it is a decision that effects other people but hey again he doesn't respond to this point. But its the fact that he can't answer a basic question that keeps getting to why I think he's an anti vaxer. He understands that if he answers that basic question about why he doesn't think people should get the vaccine then it would be impossible to deny that he's an antivaxer despite his claim about being vaccinated himself. He said he would request a ban if I showed him information of him being anti vax and when I did he welched on this he went on like nothing happened and never responded to the quotes of him. If we can't have a simple discussion of asking people questions and answering them then we're not having a discussion. And its an extremely simple question that I keep asking in so many different ways that he just somehow can't answer. Don't you find it odd that people have to say that he answered the question without being able to say even vaugly what that answer is? I’ve answered that question many times. Vaccine mandates should be judged on a case by case basis. That’s not my opinion that’s just how it works. Why do you suppose schools mandate MMR vaccines and not flu vaccines? Do you just think that the people making these decisions are just flu anti-vaxxers? Since you think the only thing that matters is if vaccines do more good than harm and otherwise there is no moral argument against vaccine mandates does that mean you also support vaccine mandates for flu as well? Or do you just not give a shit about the people that die of the flu? Or maybe your answer is something like “personally I draw the line just before thinking we need to mandate the flu vaccine for everyone” and if that’s your answer you should read it over and over and over until you realize that that’s an acceptable answer Edit: also in before the people that are incapable of understanding nuanced perspectives come in to post “OMG BJ is comparing COVID to the flu! What a typical anti-vaxxer!!” Yes I am for a flu vaccine in workplaces and where it is judged to provide a cost-effective solution to flu outbreaks. There are flu vaccine mandates in such workplaces already where it is not already strongly recommended by experts. But again you dodge the question by trying to posit a different question without giving any sort of argument or point about what you think about the vaccine mandates. You don't even say if you are against flu vaccine mandates but somehow think that fighting on the front of it being the flu is an argument that you would win. You feel the need to pre emt this criticism because you know how much anti-vax propaganda is saying that covid is just the flu. So again why do you think people shouldn't be mandated to get the vaccine that makes the covid vaccine different than other vacines? You couldn't infer from my post that I would also be against flu vaccine mandates? I'm not sure how else I can explain my position if you're not satisfied with my answer that vaccine mandates should be judged on a case by case basis. Are you trying to argue that if I'm in favor of some vaccine mandates then I have to be in favor of all vaccine mandates? I repeat a simple question. A simple question you refuse to answer in anything but misdirecting questions in response. I am hopeful now that we are reaching near where you will answer such a simple question. Simply stating that you look at things on a case-by-case basis isn't an answer to any question about the vaccine or anything that people were asking you. Now that we've gotten to the point where you agree that it is a case-by-case basis about vaccines. My question remains about why you have a problem with the covid vaccine to where you don't think it shouldn't be mandated like any number of the other mandates that we have and accept. People in elementary and middle schools should be getting a flu vaccine every year. They work in an environment that contains a massive amount of vectors for outbreaks in the kids that go to these schools. I don't really understand why people won't listen to the science on that front but society has at least come to accept the level of death that comes with flu season every year. Covid however is not the flu, covid is much worse by any metric measurable. It is the modern plague with the capability of breaking down society if it wasn't handled with the levels of modern care that our hospitals employ. Even with the lockdowns that forced so much suffering it still caused the system to almost buckle while cranking up the deaths from a thousand other things that normally go on at hospitals. If you want the question framed yet another way now what about the case of the covid vaccine that you believe that it shouldn't be mandated? that is literally his answer. for him covid is at a level now where the risk is acceptable for society without having to take away the freedom of choice for individuals. your idea that all decisions are black and white and the freedom to make choices, even bad choices, does not stack up in value compared to the objective benefit claimed by science is your own opinion. i most certainly do not think flu vaccines should be mandatory, even in schools. you both are going around in circles basically because you refuse to read between the lines and keep assuming hes dodging your questions. hes already answered it and most people have recognised it. his answer has been smacking your face for a while so much that you even wrote it down for him. drones summary below is good and accurate about what ive interpreted to be bj's stance Show nested quote +On August 25 2022 04:49 Liquid`Drone wrote: .... the value of what I like to describe as perceived autonomy. Myself, I think this, that people should be allowed to themselves steer the direction of their life even if it entails them making stupid decisions, is a significant independent value. Even acknowledging that experts or whatnot can make better decisions for people than what they can themselves make, the consequences of people making bad choices must be very dire before I want to strip people of the power to make bad choices. He doesn't need other people to help him dodge the simple question I keep asking. I don't keep asking him a black and white question I keep asking a question that asks a very simple very foundational question about what his opinion is regarding the vaccine.
If his shitck this whole time was "Gee I think that a mandate now that the vaccine isn't at a plague level it isn't needed to be mandated" He could have said that pages and pages ago. I have never made it a black and white issue to make decisions I have quite insistently asked what his thinking about the covid vaccine now is different than the other vaccines that are mandated. Do you want to say what your issue is with flu vaccines that you don't think people in schools should be mandated to get it, with the science that we know it would save lives?
If I've had to write it down for him then I would then be able to do this cool thing where I respond to the thing he says. Some call that discussion, I know its a wild concept for BJ but you know you learn new things every day.
If he wants the question framed yet another way I will do so again.
What about the covid vaccine makes it so that it doesn't cross the line of "people's ability to make bad decisions" compared to other mandates that we have in society?
|
On August 26 2022 01:11 castleeMg wrote: Just your thoughts on my personal situation.
My girlfriend felt a little sick a few months ago, tested positive x3 on rapid tests. Got a PCR test, also tested positive. She had mild symptoms for a few days, the worst of it it was an earache for her but she was back to 100% in 3-4 days. I didn’t feel sick right away but a few days later I did. I had mild symptoms the worst of it was mild sinus pressure and I developed a mild cough on day 3 and by day 4 it cleared up and on day 5 I was 100%. Neither of us are vaccinated, I’ve had much worst colds and flus then what I experienced with Covid. Did you and your girlfriend stay home and/or wear a mask while you were sick with what you could assume was covid?
Do you think it would have been better to have gotten vaccinated and suffered less when you got covid?
I mean I'm happy for your situation, I've had a pair of cousins in their 20's that were in the hospital for months from it this year alone. I've had 4 aunts and 2 uncles die from it because they were old. I don't know what you're looking for but no ones going to be anything but very happy you were lucky enough to be resistant to it more than others.
|
On August 26 2022 01:11 castleeMg wrote: Just your thoughts on my personal situation.
My girlfriend felt a little sick a few months ago, tested positive x3 on rapid tests. Got a PCR test, also tested positive. She had mild symptoms for a few days, the worst of it it was an earache for her but she was back to 100% in 3-4 days. I didn’t feel sick right away but a few days later I did. I had mild symptoms the worst of it was mild sinus pressure and I developed a mild cough on day 3 and by day 4 it cleared up and on day 5 I was 100%. Neither of us are vaccinated, I’ve had much worst colds and flus then what I experienced with Covid. My thoughts as an MD: your experience is very typical. I encourage you to get the flu and covid vaccine this fall/winter. If you are sick with cold like symptoms, remember to wear a mask when outside near others!
|
Northern Ireland20729 Posts
On August 25 2022 04:49 Liquid`Drone wrote: I get a flu (or covid) vaccine mandate if you're working in a nursing home or similar. Otherwise it seems like crazy overkill for flu/omicron. (More understandable for earlier strains that were more dangerous and where vaccines were more efficient in hindering spread.)
I actually think this whole discussion, even though some posters are trying to make it be about vaccine efficiency or whatnot (in reality, I think there disagreement on this particular topic is pretty small - everybody here agrees that the vaccines are very good at hindering serious illness and death), is actually more about the value of what I like to describe as perceived autonomy. Myself, I think this, that people should be allowed to themselves steer the direction of their life even if it entails them making stupid decisions, is a significant independent value. Even acknowledging that experts or whatnot can make better decisions for people than what they can themselves make, the consequences of people making bad choices must be very dire before I want to strip people of the power to make bad choices. Again - if talking about some health care workers, I can see the criteria be there, but for most, I think it wasn't. During the early stages of covid I also thought harsh measures were warranted - but mostly for the pre-vaccine rollout stage.
What more is, strongarming people isn't without cost. Public trust in experts and institutions is an invaluable currency for a functional society. This trust is, the way I perceive it, eroded every time people are forced to act against their wishes. I also acknowledge that it sucks when there are big influential political and media players who actively try to erode said trust, and I understand why Americans felt more 'forced to force' people than what the case is for me as a Norwegian, but I still wish people could understand that opposition to vaccine mandates isn't necessarily a calculation of whether vaccines are good or not - there are other factors people might attribute different degrees of worth to which can make people reach different conclusions. I largely agree, I’m not sure about this part.
We’ve seen is the increasingly large cohort of people who distrust almost any even vague central pillars of media, extend that to scientific bodies.
With the transferral to a new domain that was (largely) ignored previously, it took time to build up a real ingrained skepticism there. But that is now in place, and pretty strongly embedded. I imagine it will be that much harder if there’s a big new COVID surge or new variant, or some new pandemic down the line to get that cohort to even vaguely play ball off the bat.
I feel you put your teacher’s hat on when considering this rather intractable issue. If we consider good pedagogical practice, open transparent dialogue, building mutual respect and trust, treating students as individuals with differing ideas and tailoring approaches, I’ve agreed with all this whenever I’ve heard you allude to it, either directly in educational contexts or indirectly.
The problem is, and I have no better ideas, is that I think you extrapolate this out as an approach to convince and win over the aforementioned cohort. We’re dealing with both less and much more malleable people, they’ve matured into a rigid mindset, and it manifests very flexibility in ‘I don’t trust x if I don’t like y’. There is no trust there to erode in the first place.
There is no institutional voice they trust when it conflicts with something they want, or don’t want to do. While not perfect, and without missteps institutions the world over have been broadly transparent and showed their working throughout.
If the horse isn’t taking the carrot, well your two options are the stick, or just leaving it be for a while. There are clear downsides to both. One being that those who reluctantly but for the ‘greater good’ adhere to various impositions saying ‘fuck that, look at how many people aren’t bothering what’s the point?’
There’s a certain threshold, whatever the numbers are, when a pandemic mitigation strategy is doomed to failure. If the non-compliant cohort is sufficiently large, and they face no consequence then you will start seeing portions of the previously compliant stop bothering.
I don’t think we saw those thresholds tipped in my internal calculus, so a broader mandate was something I wasn’t generally advocating, although Mohdoo IslandTM did have its charms.
Next wave, or next pandemic (hopefully that doesn’t happen!), I’m less sure those thresholds aren’t pushed past.
I have said for a long, long time now that the waning of influence of central institutions and pillars is a bigger problem than the symptoms of that decline. The pandemic is that in microcosm. People, including myself may come to erroneous or misguided positions, but there is no way to correct them of misconceptions.
|
I was curious to see how the Russian and Chinese Vaccines were preforming because I have not heard much of them at all in the past year.
The Russian Vaccine, Sputnik, was hard to track down any real results and the articles I read basically said the same thing. Much of the data the Russians put out is apparently very unlikely and they have had their share of events making it unreliable including shipping out different versions than were tested. It appears it might be as effective as JJ was but it is a long winding road to come to any sort of answer, I've sourced the most informative article I could find on the matter.
Meanwhile, the Sputnik propaganda rolls on. In the English language media that I see, they are still bashing Pfizer and mRNA vaccines, while cherry-picking data on Sputnik V and Sputnik Light, and their claims are often passed on uncritically. They’re claiming to be the first nasal vaccine in the world since Sputnik was registered in Russia for nasal use. It wasn’t first, though. That already happened with an intranasal protein subunit vaccine in Iran last October. (More on the dozens of intranasal vaccines in the pipeline in my recent post.) RDIF was sanctioned, they claimed, because the US was “lobbied by a number of large Western pharmaceutical companies”. That doesn’t seem likely. A vaccine that possibly peaked at around 2% and wasn’t authorized in EuroAmerica was never much of a market threat.
All this isn’t just background noise. Propaganda can have real consequences. In the end, its effects, combined with the problematic drug development program, manufacturing quality problems, and the harm caused by not delivering second doses on a major scale in places like Argentina, will make it hard to assess the full impact of this vaccine.
But back to Sputnik V. Can we put its effectiveness into perspective at all? That’s hard, because there are comparatively few studies of Sputnik V, and fewer still with study designs that can provide reliable results. I’ve detailed the handful of ones I’ve found that include results from multiple vaccines and effectiveness on symptomatic Covid or all infections below this post, which is the closest outcome to the central efficacy rate in Covid vaccine trials. In those, vaccine effectiveness for Sputnik V ranges from 58% to 95% – with the 58% from a more reliable study type and the 95% not. In the 2 more reliable studies that include non-Russian vaccines, Sputnik’s effectiveness against infection is similar to AstraZeneca’s (Bello-Chavolla 2022, Macchia 2021).
https://absolutelymaybe.plos.org/2022/04/20/did-we-ever-find-out-how-effective-sputnik-v-vaccine-actually-is/
To find out about the Chinese developed vaccine was much easier as a big study was posted on Aug 20th. Sinopharm appears to have been a safe and effective vaccine. They do not compare it to others. China is apparently close to having and mRna vaccine for Omni so that their first one preformed well is a good sign.
Effectiveness of Sinopharm’s BBIBP-CorV was consistent with phase III clinical trial results. Two doses of BBIBP-CorV was highly protective against COVID-19-associated serious or critical hospitalization in working-age adults under real-world conditions and moderately effective in older adults. Booster dose vaccination was associated with complete protection, regardless of age, although only a small proportion of subjects received booster doses.
https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12889-022-14016-9
|
On August 26 2022 01:18 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2022 16:16 evilfatsh1t wrote:On August 25 2022 14:41 Sermokala wrote:On August 25 2022 06:34 BlackJack wrote:On August 25 2022 04:13 Sermokala wrote:On August 24 2022 13:42 BlackJack wrote:On August 24 2022 10:53 Sermokala wrote:On August 24 2022 10:10 evilfatsh1t wrote:On August 24 2022 10:03 Sermokala wrote:On August 24 2022 05:28 BlackJack wrote: [quote]
Why should I keep talking to you? You’re still asking me why I think people shouldn’t get vaccinated?
Liquid’Drone: bj’s position is this
BJ: yeah that’s my position
DPB: bjs position is this
Bj: yeah that’s my position
Sermokala: no that’s not his position. He thinks people shouldn’t get vaccinated
Do you have any idea how obnoxious that is? To tell someone that is saying “this is what I believe” “no, that’s not what you believe. You actually believe this.”
Which is whatever. I’ve been dealing with that for a long time in this thread so I’m used to ignoring it by now. I’m just telling you this in case this is something you do in real life because you will lose a lot of relationships if you can’t accept what someone is telling you at face value. Because you repeatedly refuse to answer the basic question I keep asking you. You keep refusing to address the most simple points about your position in a constant state of trying to achieve gotchas that get dismissed by everyone. You constantly lie and bring up things you show you know is a lie. You keep spreading anti vax misinformation and except people to never question or respond to you. When confronted you ignore what people are saying and insist that you're somehow being attacked because you're somehow the only one that knows the truth. You keep refusing to answer even the most basic questions that people ask you with the blind resistance of someone who is afraid to question anything that they're saying. So I will constantly ask you the same basic question you keep refusing to answer. Why do you think people shouldn't be mandated to get the vaccine, when we have a list of other mandates about basic operations in the country that are no different from it. hes already answered that question. other posters have even pointed out what his position is in relation to your question. you can disagree with him but to suggest that he hasnt responded at all to your points just shows youre not reading. He hasn't though people keep trying to posit what he's trying to say and he simply agrees without elaborating on any points of confusion people have. He states that he's against vaccine mandates on seemingly two major vectors. That it has cons to it and that it doesn't stop transmission. His only offered explanation on the first is about how you get a heart condition sometimes if you get it. However he is then shown studies that say that it is at such a low rate that even compared to getting covid normally that it isn't a real con. He doesn't respond to this information and insists that people are attacking him for contradicting this information. The second has some truth to it that the protection against infection fades after some time without boosters. However when he is confronted with the fact that it was never the point to stop transmission completely and that it still shows clear improvements on not going to the hospital with it or dying. He doesn't respond to this information and then says that him getting the vaccine should tell us that he understands what the vaccine is doing. After ignoring his basic points being refuted he turns into the common anti-vaxer argument of "if its so good then why should people have to get it to work with people who don't get it." this of course ignoring the swaths of other safety mandates in jobs that are for peoples protections that he is informed of and never responds about. then he repeats yet another antivax argument about it actually being about bodily autonomy, just like abortion, before being informed that it is a decision that effects other people but hey again he doesn't respond to this point. But its the fact that he can't answer a basic question that keeps getting to why I think he's an anti vaxer. He understands that if he answers that basic question about why he doesn't think people should get the vaccine then it would be impossible to deny that he's an antivaxer despite his claim about being vaccinated himself. He said he would request a ban if I showed him information of him being anti vax and when I did he welched on this he went on like nothing happened and never responded to the quotes of him. If we can't have a simple discussion of asking people questions and answering them then we're not having a discussion. And its an extremely simple question that I keep asking in so many different ways that he just somehow can't answer. Don't you find it odd that people have to say that he answered the question without being able to say even vaugly what that answer is? I’ve answered that question many times. Vaccine mandates should be judged on a case by case basis. That’s not my opinion that’s just how it works. Why do you suppose schools mandate MMR vaccines and not flu vaccines? Do you just think that the people making these decisions are just flu anti-vaxxers? Since you think the only thing that matters is if vaccines do more good than harm and otherwise there is no moral argument against vaccine mandates does that mean you also support vaccine mandates for flu as well? Or do you just not give a shit about the people that die of the flu? Or maybe your answer is something like “personally I draw the line just before thinking we need to mandate the flu vaccine for everyone” and if that’s your answer you should read it over and over and over until you realize that that’s an acceptable answer Edit: also in before the people that are incapable of understanding nuanced perspectives come in to post “OMG BJ is comparing COVID to the flu! What a typical anti-vaxxer!!” Yes I am for a flu vaccine in workplaces and where it is judged to provide a cost-effective solution to flu outbreaks. There are flu vaccine mandates in such workplaces already where it is not already strongly recommended by experts. But again you dodge the question by trying to posit a different question without giving any sort of argument or point about what you think about the vaccine mandates. You don't even say if you are against flu vaccine mandates but somehow think that fighting on the front of it being the flu is an argument that you would win. You feel the need to pre emt this criticism because you know how much anti-vax propaganda is saying that covid is just the flu. So again why do you think people shouldn't be mandated to get the vaccine that makes the covid vaccine different than other vacines? You couldn't infer from my post that I would also be against flu vaccine mandates? I'm not sure how else I can explain my position if you're not satisfied with my answer that vaccine mandates should be judged on a case by case basis. Are you trying to argue that if I'm in favor of some vaccine mandates then I have to be in favor of all vaccine mandates? I repeat a simple question. A simple question you refuse to answer in anything but misdirecting questions in response. I am hopeful now that we are reaching near where you will answer such a simple question. Simply stating that you look at things on a case-by-case basis isn't an answer to any question about the vaccine or anything that people were asking you. Now that we've gotten to the point where you agree that it is a case-by-case basis about vaccines. My question remains about why you have a problem with the covid vaccine to where you don't think it shouldn't be mandated like any number of the other mandates that we have and accept. People in elementary and middle schools should be getting a flu vaccine every year. They work in an environment that contains a massive amount of vectors for outbreaks in the kids that go to these schools. I don't really understand why people won't listen to the science on that front but society has at least come to accept the level of death that comes with flu season every year. Covid however is not the flu, covid is much worse by any metric measurable. It is the modern plague with the capability of breaking down society if it wasn't handled with the levels of modern care that our hospitals employ. Even with the lockdowns that forced so much suffering it still caused the system to almost buckle while cranking up the deaths from a thousand other things that normally go on at hospitals. If you want the question framed yet another way now what about the case of the covid vaccine that you believe that it shouldn't be mandated? that is literally his answer. for him covid is at a level now where the risk is acceptable for society without having to take away the freedom of choice for individuals. your idea that all decisions are black and white and the freedom to make choices, even bad choices, does not stack up in value compared to the objective benefit claimed by science is your own opinion. i most certainly do not think flu vaccines should be mandatory, even in schools. you both are going around in circles basically because you refuse to read between the lines and keep assuming hes dodging your questions. hes already answered it and most people have recognised it. his answer has been smacking your face for a while so much that you even wrote it down for him. drones summary below is good and accurate about what ive interpreted to be bj's stance On August 25 2022 04:49 Liquid`Drone wrote: .... the value of what I like to describe as perceived autonomy. Myself, I think this, that people should be allowed to themselves steer the direction of their life even if it entails them making stupid decisions, is a significant independent value. Even acknowledging that experts or whatnot can make better decisions for people than what they can themselves make, the consequences of people making bad choices must be very dire before I want to strip people of the power to make bad choices. He doesn't need other people to help him dodge the simple question I keep asking. I don't keep asking him a black and white question I keep asking a question that asks a very simple very foundational question about what his opinion is regarding the vaccine. If his shitck this whole time was "Gee I think that a mandate now that the vaccine isn't at a plague level it isn't needed to be mandated" He could have said that pages and pages ago. I have never made it a black and white issue to make decisions I have quite insistently asked what his thinking about the covid vaccine now is different than the other vaccines that are mandated. Do you want to say what your issue is with flu vaccines that you don't think people in schools should be mandated to get it, with the science that we know it would save lives? If I've had to write it down for him then I would then be able to do this cool thing where I respond to the thing he says. Some call that discussion, I know its a wild concept for BJ but you know you learn new things every day. If he wants the question framed yet another way I will do so again. What about the covid vaccine makes it so that it doesn't cross the line of "people's ability to make bad decisions" compared to other mandates that we have in society?
Typically the things we vaccinate children for in schools are very dangerous to them and offer them immunity for years. Another study came out that showed vaccine efficacy in adolescents in Brazil was 5.9% after 98 days. So if you require all the kids to get a booster at the start of the school year they'll have almost no protection against infection by winter break which is not even halfway through the school year. At that point I don't think DPB or Liquid`Drone will be so safe knowing that only 19 of their students will get COVID instead of 20.
Will mandating flu vaccines save lives? Yeah. Will mandating COVID boosters every school year save lives? Yeah. Will mandating COVID boosters every 3 months save lives? Yeah.
Do you think we should mandate boosters every 3 months or do you just want people to be killed by others? Everyone is entitled to view the competing interests of bodily autonomy/personal choice vs public health and determine where they think the lines should be drawn. You just happen to think that you personally get to decide where the lines are drawn and everyone who disagrees is just less moral or less rational.
"But BJ why are you talking about transmission again, why don't you mention how COVID vaccines prevent severe illness and death"
Well I am glad you asked. COVID vaccines have shown to offer lasting protection against severe illness and death. Talk to your doctor today about receiving the COVID vaccine!
|
On August 26 2022 06:46 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2022 01:18 Sermokala wrote:On August 25 2022 16:16 evilfatsh1t wrote:On August 25 2022 14:41 Sermokala wrote:On August 25 2022 06:34 BlackJack wrote:On August 25 2022 04:13 Sermokala wrote:On August 24 2022 13:42 BlackJack wrote:On August 24 2022 10:53 Sermokala wrote:On August 24 2022 10:10 evilfatsh1t wrote:On August 24 2022 10:03 Sermokala wrote: [quote] Because you repeatedly refuse to answer the basic question I keep asking you.
You keep refusing to address the most simple points about your position in a constant state of trying to achieve gotchas that get dismissed by everyone. You constantly lie and bring up things you show you know is a lie.
You keep spreading anti vax misinformation and except people to never question or respond to you. When confronted you ignore what people are saying and insist that you're somehow being attacked because you're somehow the only one that knows the truth.
You keep refusing to answer even the most basic questions that people ask you with the blind resistance of someone who is afraid to question anything that they're saying.
So I will constantly ask you the same basic question you keep refusing to answer. Why do you think people shouldn't be mandated to get the vaccine, when we have a list of other mandates about basic operations in the country that are no different from it. hes already answered that question. other posters have even pointed out what his position is in relation to your question. you can disagree with him but to suggest that he hasnt responded at all to your points just shows youre not reading. He hasn't though people keep trying to posit what he's trying to say and he simply agrees without elaborating on any points of confusion people have. He states that he's against vaccine mandates on seemingly two major vectors. That it has cons to it and that it doesn't stop transmission. His only offered explanation on the first is about how you get a heart condition sometimes if you get it. However he is then shown studies that say that it is at such a low rate that even compared to getting covid normally that it isn't a real con. He doesn't respond to this information and insists that people are attacking him for contradicting this information. The second has some truth to it that the protection against infection fades after some time without boosters. However when he is confronted with the fact that it was never the point to stop transmission completely and that it still shows clear improvements on not going to the hospital with it or dying. He doesn't respond to this information and then says that him getting the vaccine should tell us that he understands what the vaccine is doing. After ignoring his basic points being refuted he turns into the common anti-vaxer argument of "if its so good then why should people have to get it to work with people who don't get it." this of course ignoring the swaths of other safety mandates in jobs that are for peoples protections that he is informed of and never responds about. then he repeats yet another antivax argument about it actually being about bodily autonomy, just like abortion, before being informed that it is a decision that effects other people but hey again he doesn't respond to this point. But its the fact that he can't answer a basic question that keeps getting to why I think he's an anti vaxer. He understands that if he answers that basic question about why he doesn't think people should get the vaccine then it would be impossible to deny that he's an antivaxer despite his claim about being vaccinated himself. He said he would request a ban if I showed him information of him being anti vax and when I did he welched on this he went on like nothing happened and never responded to the quotes of him. If we can't have a simple discussion of asking people questions and answering them then we're not having a discussion. And its an extremely simple question that I keep asking in so many different ways that he just somehow can't answer. Don't you find it odd that people have to say that he answered the question without being able to say even vaugly what that answer is? I’ve answered that question many times. Vaccine mandates should be judged on a case by case basis. That’s not my opinion that’s just how it works. Why do you suppose schools mandate MMR vaccines and not flu vaccines? Do you just think that the people making these decisions are just flu anti-vaxxers? Since you think the only thing that matters is if vaccines do more good than harm and otherwise there is no moral argument against vaccine mandates does that mean you also support vaccine mandates for flu as well? Or do you just not give a shit about the people that die of the flu? Or maybe your answer is something like “personally I draw the line just before thinking we need to mandate the flu vaccine for everyone” and if that’s your answer you should read it over and over and over until you realize that that’s an acceptable answer Edit: also in before the people that are incapable of understanding nuanced perspectives come in to post “OMG BJ is comparing COVID to the flu! What a typical anti-vaxxer!!” Yes I am for a flu vaccine in workplaces and where it is judged to provide a cost-effective solution to flu outbreaks. There are flu vaccine mandates in such workplaces already where it is not already strongly recommended by experts. But again you dodge the question by trying to posit a different question without giving any sort of argument or point about what you think about the vaccine mandates. You don't even say if you are against flu vaccine mandates but somehow think that fighting on the front of it being the flu is an argument that you would win. You feel the need to pre emt this criticism because you know how much anti-vax propaganda is saying that covid is just the flu. So again why do you think people shouldn't be mandated to get the vaccine that makes the covid vaccine different than other vacines? You couldn't infer from my post that I would also be against flu vaccine mandates? I'm not sure how else I can explain my position if you're not satisfied with my answer that vaccine mandates should be judged on a case by case basis. Are you trying to argue that if I'm in favor of some vaccine mandates then I have to be in favor of all vaccine mandates? I repeat a simple question. A simple question you refuse to answer in anything but misdirecting questions in response. I am hopeful now that we are reaching near where you will answer such a simple question. Simply stating that you look at things on a case-by-case basis isn't an answer to any question about the vaccine or anything that people were asking you. Now that we've gotten to the point where you agree that it is a case-by-case basis about vaccines. My question remains about why you have a problem with the covid vaccine to where you don't think it shouldn't be mandated like any number of the other mandates that we have and accept. People in elementary and middle schools should be getting a flu vaccine every year. They work in an environment that contains a massive amount of vectors for outbreaks in the kids that go to these schools. I don't really understand why people won't listen to the science on that front but society has at least come to accept the level of death that comes with flu season every year. Covid however is not the flu, covid is much worse by any metric measurable. It is the modern plague with the capability of breaking down society if it wasn't handled with the levels of modern care that our hospitals employ. Even with the lockdowns that forced so much suffering it still caused the system to almost buckle while cranking up the deaths from a thousand other things that normally go on at hospitals. If you want the question framed yet another way now what about the case of the covid vaccine that you believe that it shouldn't be mandated? that is literally his answer. for him covid is at a level now where the risk is acceptable for society without having to take away the freedom of choice for individuals. your idea that all decisions are black and white and the freedom to make choices, even bad choices, does not stack up in value compared to the objective benefit claimed by science is your own opinion. i most certainly do not think flu vaccines should be mandatory, even in schools. you both are going around in circles basically because you refuse to read between the lines and keep assuming hes dodging your questions. hes already answered it and most people have recognised it. his answer has been smacking your face for a while so much that you even wrote it down for him. drones summary below is good and accurate about what ive interpreted to be bj's stance On August 25 2022 04:49 Liquid`Drone wrote: .... the value of what I like to describe as perceived autonomy. Myself, I think this, that people should be allowed to themselves steer the direction of their life even if it entails them making stupid decisions, is a significant independent value. Even acknowledging that experts or whatnot can make better decisions for people than what they can themselves make, the consequences of people making bad choices must be very dire before I want to strip people of the power to make bad choices. He doesn't need other people to help him dodge the simple question I keep asking. I don't keep asking him a black and white question I keep asking a question that asks a very simple very foundational question about what his opinion is regarding the vaccine. If his shitck this whole time was "Gee I think that a mandate now that the vaccine isn't at a plague level it isn't needed to be mandated" He could have said that pages and pages ago. I have never made it a black and white issue to make decisions I have quite insistently asked what his thinking about the covid vaccine now is different than the other vaccines that are mandated. Do you want to say what your issue is with flu vaccines that you don't think people in schools should be mandated to get it, with the science that we know it would save lives? If I've had to write it down for him then I would then be able to do this cool thing where I respond to the thing he says. Some call that discussion, I know its a wild concept for BJ but you know you learn new things every day. If he wants the question framed yet another way I will do so again. What about the covid vaccine makes it so that it doesn't cross the line of "people's ability to make bad decisions" compared to other mandates that we have in society? Typically the things we vaccinate children for in schools are very dangerous to them and offer them immunity for years. Another study came out that showed vaccine efficacy in adolescents in Brazil was 5.9% after 98 days. So if you require all the kids to get a booster at the start of the school year they'll have almost no protection against infection by winter break which is not even halfway through the school year. At that point I don't think DPB or Liquid`Drone will be so safe knowing that only 19 of their students will get COVID instead of 20. Will mandating flu vaccines save lives? Yeah. Will mandating COVID boosters every school year save lives? Yeah. Will mandating COVID boosters every 3 months save lives? Yeah. Do you think we should mandate boosters every 3 months or do you just want people to be killed by others? Everyone is entitled to view the competing interests of bodily autonomy/personal choice vs public health and determine where they think the lines should be drawn. You just happen to think that you personally get to decide where the lines are drawn and everyone who disagrees is just less moral or less rational. "But BJ why are you talking about transmission again, why don't you mention how COVID vaccines prevent severe illness and death" Well I am glad you asked. COVID vaccines have shown to offer lasting protection against severe illness and death. Talk to your doctor today about receiving the COVID vaccine! Why quote a study and not link it? 5.9% in Brazil at 28 days and 50.6% in Scotland after 98 days. Why leave out half the information? Pretty dramatic differences.
Misclassification of testing results and variant sequencing might also have occurred, which could explain the accentuated protection declining during the delta-dominant period in Brazil. Vaccine effectiveness estimated in Brazil was lower than the corresponding vaccine effectiveness in Scotland, which is probably explained by the increased background risk of COVID-19 transmission in Brazil, which is the result of many factors such as public health interventions.
Two doses of vaccination with BNT162b2 among adolescents are insufficient to sustain protection against symptomatic disease; however, they do offer substantial protection against serious COVID-19 outcomes for at least 3 months. Our findings support the importance of maximising vaccination coverage and the consideration of booster doses for adolescents, though further research is needed.
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(22)00451-0/fulltext?rss=yes
|
On August 26 2022 06:46 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2022 01:18 Sermokala wrote:On August 25 2022 16:16 evilfatsh1t wrote:On August 25 2022 14:41 Sermokala wrote:On August 25 2022 06:34 BlackJack wrote:On August 25 2022 04:13 Sermokala wrote:On August 24 2022 13:42 BlackJack wrote:On August 24 2022 10:53 Sermokala wrote:On August 24 2022 10:10 evilfatsh1t wrote:On August 24 2022 10:03 Sermokala wrote: [quote] Because you repeatedly refuse to answer the basic question I keep asking you.
You keep refusing to address the most simple points about your position in a constant state of trying to achieve gotchas that get dismissed by everyone. You constantly lie and bring up things you show you know is a lie.
You keep spreading anti vax misinformation and except people to never question or respond to you. When confronted you ignore what people are saying and insist that you're somehow being attacked because you're somehow the only one that knows the truth.
You keep refusing to answer even the most basic questions that people ask you with the blind resistance of someone who is afraid to question anything that they're saying.
So I will constantly ask you the same basic question you keep refusing to answer. Why do you think people shouldn't be mandated to get the vaccine, when we have a list of other mandates about basic operations in the country that are no different from it. hes already answered that question. other posters have even pointed out what his position is in relation to your question. you can disagree with him but to suggest that he hasnt responded at all to your points just shows youre not reading. He hasn't though people keep trying to posit what he's trying to say and he simply agrees without elaborating on any points of confusion people have. He states that he's against vaccine mandates on seemingly two major vectors. That it has cons to it and that it doesn't stop transmission. His only offered explanation on the first is about how you get a heart condition sometimes if you get it. However he is then shown studies that say that it is at such a low rate that even compared to getting covid normally that it isn't a real con. He doesn't respond to this information and insists that people are attacking him for contradicting this information. The second has some truth to it that the protection against infection fades after some time without boosters. However when he is confronted with the fact that it was never the point to stop transmission completely and that it still shows clear improvements on not going to the hospital with it or dying. He doesn't respond to this information and then says that him getting the vaccine should tell us that he understands what the vaccine is doing. After ignoring his basic points being refuted he turns into the common anti-vaxer argument of "if its so good then why should people have to get it to work with people who don't get it." this of course ignoring the swaths of other safety mandates in jobs that are for peoples protections that he is informed of and never responds about. then he repeats yet another antivax argument about it actually being about bodily autonomy, just like abortion, before being informed that it is a decision that effects other people but hey again he doesn't respond to this point. But its the fact that he can't answer a basic question that keeps getting to why I think he's an anti vaxer. He understands that if he answers that basic question about why he doesn't think people should get the vaccine then it would be impossible to deny that he's an antivaxer despite his claim about being vaccinated himself. He said he would request a ban if I showed him information of him being anti vax and when I did he welched on this he went on like nothing happened and never responded to the quotes of him. If we can't have a simple discussion of asking people questions and answering them then we're not having a discussion. And its an extremely simple question that I keep asking in so many different ways that he just somehow can't answer. Don't you find it odd that people have to say that he answered the question without being able to say even vaugly what that answer is? I’ve answered that question many times. Vaccine mandates should be judged on a case by case basis. That’s not my opinion that’s just how it works. Why do you suppose schools mandate MMR vaccines and not flu vaccines? Do you just think that the people making these decisions are just flu anti-vaxxers? Since you think the only thing that matters is if vaccines do more good than harm and otherwise there is no moral argument against vaccine mandates does that mean you also support vaccine mandates for flu as well? Or do you just not give a shit about the people that die of the flu? Or maybe your answer is something like “personally I draw the line just before thinking we need to mandate the flu vaccine for everyone” and if that’s your answer you should read it over and over and over until you realize that that’s an acceptable answer Edit: also in before the people that are incapable of understanding nuanced perspectives come in to post “OMG BJ is comparing COVID to the flu! What a typical anti-vaxxer!!” Yes I am for a flu vaccine in workplaces and where it is judged to provide a cost-effective solution to flu outbreaks. There are flu vaccine mandates in such workplaces already where it is not already strongly recommended by experts. But again you dodge the question by trying to posit a different question without giving any sort of argument or point about what you think about the vaccine mandates. You don't even say if you are against flu vaccine mandates but somehow think that fighting on the front of it being the flu is an argument that you would win. You feel the need to pre emt this criticism because you know how much anti-vax propaganda is saying that covid is just the flu. So again why do you think people shouldn't be mandated to get the vaccine that makes the covid vaccine different than other vacines? You couldn't infer from my post that I would also be against flu vaccine mandates? I'm not sure how else I can explain my position if you're not satisfied with my answer that vaccine mandates should be judged on a case by case basis. Are you trying to argue that if I'm in favor of some vaccine mandates then I have to be in favor of all vaccine mandates? I repeat a simple question. A simple question you refuse to answer in anything but misdirecting questions in response. I am hopeful now that we are reaching near where you will answer such a simple question. Simply stating that you look at things on a case-by-case basis isn't an answer to any question about the vaccine or anything that people were asking you. Now that we've gotten to the point where you agree that it is a case-by-case basis about vaccines. My question remains about why you have a problem with the covid vaccine to where you don't think it shouldn't be mandated like any number of the other mandates that we have and accept. People in elementary and middle schools should be getting a flu vaccine every year. They work in an environment that contains a massive amount of vectors for outbreaks in the kids that go to these schools. I don't really understand why people won't listen to the science on that front but society has at least come to accept the level of death that comes with flu season every year. Covid however is not the flu, covid is much worse by any metric measurable. It is the modern plague with the capability of breaking down society if it wasn't handled with the levels of modern care that our hospitals employ. Even with the lockdowns that forced so much suffering it still caused the system to almost buckle while cranking up the deaths from a thousand other things that normally go on at hospitals. If you want the question framed yet another way now what about the case of the covid vaccine that you believe that it shouldn't be mandated? that is literally his answer. for him covid is at a level now where the risk is acceptable for society without having to take away the freedom of choice for individuals. your idea that all decisions are black and white and the freedom to make choices, even bad choices, does not stack up in value compared to the objective benefit claimed by science is your own opinion. i most certainly do not think flu vaccines should be mandatory, even in schools. you both are going around in circles basically because you refuse to read between the lines and keep assuming hes dodging your questions. hes already answered it and most people have recognised it. his answer has been smacking your face for a while so much that you even wrote it down for him. drones summary below is good and accurate about what ive interpreted to be bj's stance On August 25 2022 04:49 Liquid`Drone wrote: .... the value of what I like to describe as perceived autonomy. Myself, I think this, that people should be allowed to themselves steer the direction of their life even if it entails them making stupid decisions, is a significant independent value. Even acknowledging that experts or whatnot can make better decisions for people than what they can themselves make, the consequences of people making bad choices must be very dire before I want to strip people of the power to make bad choices. He doesn't need other people to help him dodge the simple question I keep asking. I don't keep asking him a black and white question I keep asking a question that asks a very simple very foundational question about what his opinion is regarding the vaccine. If his shitck this whole time was "Gee I think that a mandate now that the vaccine isn't at a plague level it isn't needed to be mandated" He could have said that pages and pages ago. I have never made it a black and white issue to make decisions I have quite insistently asked what his thinking about the covid vaccine now is different than the other vaccines that are mandated. Do you want to say what your issue is with flu vaccines that you don't think people in schools should be mandated to get it, with the science that we know it would save lives? If I've had to write it down for him then I would then be able to do this cool thing where I respond to the thing he says. Some call that discussion, I know its a wild concept for BJ but you know you learn new things every day. If he wants the question framed yet another way I will do so again. What about the covid vaccine makes it so that it doesn't cross the line of "people's ability to make bad decisions" compared to other mandates that we have in society? Typically the things we vaccinate children for in schools are very dangerous to them and offer them immunity for years. Another study came out that showed vaccine efficacy in adolescents in Brazil was 5.9% after 98 days. So if you require all the kids to get a booster at the start of the school year they'll have almost no protection against infection by winter break which is not even halfway through the school year. At that point I don't think DPB or Liquid`Drone will be so safe knowing that only 19 of their students will get COVID instead of 20. Will mandating flu vaccines save lives? Yeah. Will mandating COVID boosters every school year save lives? Yeah. Will mandating COVID boosters every 3 months save lives? Yeah. Do you think we should mandate boosters every 3 months or do you just want people to be killed by others? Everyone is entitled to view the competing interests of bodily autonomy/personal choice vs public health and determine where they think the lines should be drawn. You just happen to think that you personally get to decide where the lines are drawn and everyone who disagrees is just less moral or less rational. "But BJ why are you talking about transmission again, why don't you mention how COVID vaccines prevent severe illness and death" Well I am glad you asked. COVID vaccines have shown to offer lasting protection against severe illness and death. Talk to your doctor today about receiving the COVID vaccine! You keep trying to come up with gotchas like they mean anything to the conversation. For someone that complains about a black and white argument against you you are really really eager to find one that works for you.
The problem is that you keep wanting to switch up transmission and protection. If boosters every 3 months was what was needed to keep hospitals from collapsing then yes I would be for it. The schedule of shots for kids is based on what will kill them if they don't get the shot or the booster from it. The problem is that you jump instantly from this to the idea that them still getting the disease matters when its already a success that they will have a resistance enough to not die from it.
If you accept that people get to determine where they think the lines should be drawn then they bear responsibility for placing where those lines are drawn. Thats how making decisions work. I can disagree with people and say that they are less moral or less rational because they were free to make that decision the same as I am able to make that decision. This is how free choice works we've been working with it for a few thousand years or more depending on what you believe about the creation of the universe. This is another gotcha that isn't a real point. Making statements about how people have free choice and how you have a decision structure are not answers to a question. They're just general statements about existence.
I'm glad you decide to admit that vaccines are good and would save lives if they were mandated though at the end. Its been a long journey but I'm glad to have reached the point with you where you agree with covid vaccine mandates now.
|
On August 26 2022 08:58 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2022 06:46 BlackJack wrote:On August 26 2022 01:18 Sermokala wrote:On August 25 2022 16:16 evilfatsh1t wrote:On August 25 2022 14:41 Sermokala wrote:On August 25 2022 06:34 BlackJack wrote:On August 25 2022 04:13 Sermokala wrote:On August 24 2022 13:42 BlackJack wrote:On August 24 2022 10:53 Sermokala wrote:On August 24 2022 10:10 evilfatsh1t wrote: [quote] hes already answered that question. other posters have even pointed out what his position is in relation to your question. you can disagree with him but to suggest that he hasnt responded at all to your points just shows youre not reading. He hasn't though people keep trying to posit what he's trying to say and he simply agrees without elaborating on any points of confusion people have. He states that he's against vaccine mandates on seemingly two major vectors. That it has cons to it and that it doesn't stop transmission. His only offered explanation on the first is about how you get a heart condition sometimes if you get it. However he is then shown studies that say that it is at such a low rate that even compared to getting covid normally that it isn't a real con. He doesn't respond to this information and insists that people are attacking him for contradicting this information. The second has some truth to it that the protection against infection fades after some time without boosters. However when he is confronted with the fact that it was never the point to stop transmission completely and that it still shows clear improvements on not going to the hospital with it or dying. He doesn't respond to this information and then says that him getting the vaccine should tell us that he understands what the vaccine is doing. After ignoring his basic points being refuted he turns into the common anti-vaxer argument of "if its so good then why should people have to get it to work with people who don't get it." this of course ignoring the swaths of other safety mandates in jobs that are for peoples protections that he is informed of and never responds about. then he repeats yet another antivax argument about it actually being about bodily autonomy, just like abortion, before being informed that it is a decision that effects other people but hey again he doesn't respond to this point. But its the fact that he can't answer a basic question that keeps getting to why I think he's an anti vaxer. He understands that if he answers that basic question about why he doesn't think people should get the vaccine then it would be impossible to deny that he's an antivaxer despite his claim about being vaccinated himself. He said he would request a ban if I showed him information of him being anti vax and when I did he welched on this he went on like nothing happened and never responded to the quotes of him. If we can't have a simple discussion of asking people questions and answering them then we're not having a discussion. And its an extremely simple question that I keep asking in so many different ways that he just somehow can't answer. Don't you find it odd that people have to say that he answered the question without being able to say even vaugly what that answer is? I’ve answered that question many times. Vaccine mandates should be judged on a case by case basis. That’s not my opinion that’s just how it works. Why do you suppose schools mandate MMR vaccines and not flu vaccines? Do you just think that the people making these decisions are just flu anti-vaxxers? Since you think the only thing that matters is if vaccines do more good than harm and otherwise there is no moral argument against vaccine mandates does that mean you also support vaccine mandates for flu as well? Or do you just not give a shit about the people that die of the flu? Or maybe your answer is something like “personally I draw the line just before thinking we need to mandate the flu vaccine for everyone” and if that’s your answer you should read it over and over and over until you realize that that’s an acceptable answer Edit: also in before the people that are incapable of understanding nuanced perspectives come in to post “OMG BJ is comparing COVID to the flu! What a typical anti-vaxxer!!” Yes I am for a flu vaccine in workplaces and where it is judged to provide a cost-effective solution to flu outbreaks. There are flu vaccine mandates in such workplaces already where it is not already strongly recommended by experts. But again you dodge the question by trying to posit a different question without giving any sort of argument or point about what you think about the vaccine mandates. You don't even say if you are against flu vaccine mandates but somehow think that fighting on the front of it being the flu is an argument that you would win. You feel the need to pre emt this criticism because you know how much anti-vax propaganda is saying that covid is just the flu. So again why do you think people shouldn't be mandated to get the vaccine that makes the covid vaccine different than other vacines? You couldn't infer from my post that I would also be against flu vaccine mandates? I'm not sure how else I can explain my position if you're not satisfied with my answer that vaccine mandates should be judged on a case by case basis. Are you trying to argue that if I'm in favor of some vaccine mandates then I have to be in favor of all vaccine mandates? I repeat a simple question. A simple question you refuse to answer in anything but misdirecting questions in response. I am hopeful now that we are reaching near where you will answer such a simple question. Simply stating that you look at things on a case-by-case basis isn't an answer to any question about the vaccine or anything that people were asking you. Now that we've gotten to the point where you agree that it is a case-by-case basis about vaccines. My question remains about why you have a problem with the covid vaccine to where you don't think it shouldn't be mandated like any number of the other mandates that we have and accept. People in elementary and middle schools should be getting a flu vaccine every year. They work in an environment that contains a massive amount of vectors for outbreaks in the kids that go to these schools. I don't really understand why people won't listen to the science on that front but society has at least come to accept the level of death that comes with flu season every year. Covid however is not the flu, covid is much worse by any metric measurable. It is the modern plague with the capability of breaking down society if it wasn't handled with the levels of modern care that our hospitals employ. Even with the lockdowns that forced so much suffering it still caused the system to almost buckle while cranking up the deaths from a thousand other things that normally go on at hospitals. If you want the question framed yet another way now what about the case of the covid vaccine that you believe that it shouldn't be mandated? that is literally his answer. for him covid is at a level now where the risk is acceptable for society without having to take away the freedom of choice for individuals. your idea that all decisions are black and white and the freedom to make choices, even bad choices, does not stack up in value compared to the objective benefit claimed by science is your own opinion. i most certainly do not think flu vaccines should be mandatory, even in schools. you both are going around in circles basically because you refuse to read between the lines and keep assuming hes dodging your questions. hes already answered it and most people have recognised it. his answer has been smacking your face for a while so much that you even wrote it down for him. drones summary below is good and accurate about what ive interpreted to be bj's stance On August 25 2022 04:49 Liquid`Drone wrote: .... the value of what I like to describe as perceived autonomy. Myself, I think this, that people should be allowed to themselves steer the direction of their life even if it entails them making stupid decisions, is a significant independent value. Even acknowledging that experts or whatnot can make better decisions for people than what they can themselves make, the consequences of people making bad choices must be very dire before I want to strip people of the power to make bad choices. He doesn't need other people to help him dodge the simple question I keep asking. I don't keep asking him a black and white question I keep asking a question that asks a very simple very foundational question about what his opinion is regarding the vaccine. If his shitck this whole time was "Gee I think that a mandate now that the vaccine isn't at a plague level it isn't needed to be mandated" He could have said that pages and pages ago. I have never made it a black and white issue to make decisions I have quite insistently asked what his thinking about the covid vaccine now is different than the other vaccines that are mandated. Do you want to say what your issue is with flu vaccines that you don't think people in schools should be mandated to get it, with the science that we know it would save lives? If I've had to write it down for him then I would then be able to do this cool thing where I respond to the thing he says. Some call that discussion, I know its a wild concept for BJ but you know you learn new things every day. If he wants the question framed yet another way I will do so again. What about the covid vaccine makes it so that it doesn't cross the line of "people's ability to make bad decisions" compared to other mandates that we have in society? Typically the things we vaccinate children for in schools are very dangerous to them and offer them immunity for years. Another study came out that showed vaccine efficacy in adolescents in Brazil was 5.9% after 98 days. So if you require all the kids to get a booster at the start of the school year they'll have almost no protection against infection by winter break which is not even halfway through the school year. At that point I don't think DPB or Liquid`Drone will be so safe knowing that only 19 of their students will get COVID instead of 20. Will mandating flu vaccines save lives? Yeah. Will mandating COVID boosters every school year save lives? Yeah. Will mandating COVID boosters every 3 months save lives? Yeah. Do you think we should mandate boosters every 3 months or do you just want people to be killed by others? Everyone is entitled to view the competing interests of bodily autonomy/personal choice vs public health and determine where they think the lines should be drawn. You just happen to think that you personally get to decide where the lines are drawn and everyone who disagrees is just less moral or less rational. "But BJ why are you talking about transmission again, why don't you mention how COVID vaccines prevent severe illness and death" Well I am glad you asked. COVID vaccines have shown to offer lasting protection against severe illness and death. Talk to your doctor today about receiving the COVID vaccine! You keep trying to come up with gotchas like they mean anything to the conversation. For someone that complains about a black and white argument against you you are really really eager to find one that works for you. The problem is that you keep wanting to switch up transmission and protection. If boosters every 3 months was what was needed to keep hospitals from collapsing then yes I would be for it. The schedule of shots for kids is based on what will kill them if they don't get the shot or the booster from it. The problem is that you jump instantly from this to the idea that them still getting the disease matters when its already a success that they will have a resistance enough to not die from it. If you accept that people get to determine where they think the lines should be drawn then they bear responsibility for placing where those lines are drawn. Thats how making decisions work. I can disagree with people and say that they are less moral or less rational because they were free to make that decision the same as I am able to make that decision. This is how free choice works we've been working with it for a few thousand years or more depending on what you believe about the creation of the universe. This is another gotcha that isn't a real point. Making statements about how people have free choice and how you have a decision structure are not answers to a question. They're just general statements about existence. I'm glad you decide to admit that vaccines are good and would save lives if they were mandated though at the end. Its been a long journey but I'm glad to have reached the point with you where you agree with covid vaccine mandates now. except the problem with mandates is that the individual isnt drawing the line. the goverment is. thats the point of this discussion. how can any individual bear the responsibility for drawing the line where they think it should be, when they arent drawing the line at all?
and your last 2 sentences just seems to me like youre reading bj's posts only to look for what you want, instead of reading what he actually says. your takeaway from the entire discussion now cannot end with that. the discussion was never about whether mandates would save more lives statistically, its about whether mandates should be in place despite of. you will probably respond with "if mandates save more lives, the decision is a no brainer" and the discussion will do another lap again. you both should just agree to disagree and stop responding to each other on this.
|
There's always a balance to be had right. It is clearly healthier to not eat fast food, so we should institute a ban on it, then less people will die of obesity related diseases. Somehow there is no credible push for banning fast food. All we do is try to educate people to eat healthier and force fast food stores to display information about the calories.
|
I'm with evilfatsh1t on this one. I have no idea what your (Serm) endgame is or your ultimate goal in the discussion is. BlackJack seems like he's been pretty open about vaccines being good, people should get vaccines to protect themselves, and vaccine mandates as a general thing being something worth considering in cases where they make sense. BlackJack doesn't seem to believe they make sense given the current COVID vaccine effectiveness. You seem to disagree. Agree to disagree, and move on.
It still feels like you decided they're antivaxx and filter everything through that lens.
|
On August 26 2022 12:38 gobbledydook wrote: There's always a balance to be had right. It is clearly healthier to not eat fast food, so we should institute a ban on it, then less people will die of obesity related diseases. Somehow there is no credible push for banning fast food. All we do is try to educate people to eat healthier and force fast food stores to display information about the calories.
Someone getting heart disease from McDonald's doesn't also transmit said heart disease to their neighbor. That's one of the big reasons vaccines are mandated. When it comes to vaccines, your choice does effect others. Also, eating fast food isn't putting the healthcare system on the brink of collapse like COVID was. Just two really big differences that should be obvious to people still using this talking point 2 years later.
|
On August 26 2022 07:00 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2022 06:46 BlackJack wrote:On August 26 2022 01:18 Sermokala wrote:On August 25 2022 16:16 evilfatsh1t wrote:On August 25 2022 14:41 Sermokala wrote:On August 25 2022 06:34 BlackJack wrote:On August 25 2022 04:13 Sermokala wrote:On August 24 2022 13:42 BlackJack wrote:On August 24 2022 10:53 Sermokala wrote:On August 24 2022 10:10 evilfatsh1t wrote: [quote] hes already answered that question. other posters have even pointed out what his position is in relation to your question. you can disagree with him but to suggest that he hasnt responded at all to your points just shows youre not reading. He hasn't though people keep trying to posit what he's trying to say and he simply agrees without elaborating on any points of confusion people have. He states that he's against vaccine mandates on seemingly two major vectors. That it has cons to it and that it doesn't stop transmission. His only offered explanation on the first is about how you get a heart condition sometimes if you get it. However he is then shown studies that say that it is at such a low rate that even compared to getting covid normally that it isn't a real con. He doesn't respond to this information and insists that people are attacking him for contradicting this information. The second has some truth to it that the protection against infection fades after some time without boosters. However when he is confronted with the fact that it was never the point to stop transmission completely and that it still shows clear improvements on not going to the hospital with it or dying. He doesn't respond to this information and then says that him getting the vaccine should tell us that he understands what the vaccine is doing. After ignoring his basic points being refuted he turns into the common anti-vaxer argument of "if its so good then why should people have to get it to work with people who don't get it." this of course ignoring the swaths of other safety mandates in jobs that are for peoples protections that he is informed of and never responds about. then he repeats yet another antivax argument about it actually being about bodily autonomy, just like abortion, before being informed that it is a decision that effects other people but hey again he doesn't respond to this point. But its the fact that he can't answer a basic question that keeps getting to why I think he's an anti vaxer. He understands that if he answers that basic question about why he doesn't think people should get the vaccine then it would be impossible to deny that he's an antivaxer despite his claim about being vaccinated himself. He said he would request a ban if I showed him information of him being anti vax and when I did he welched on this he went on like nothing happened and never responded to the quotes of him. If we can't have a simple discussion of asking people questions and answering them then we're not having a discussion. And its an extremely simple question that I keep asking in so many different ways that he just somehow can't answer. Don't you find it odd that people have to say that he answered the question without being able to say even vaugly what that answer is? I’ve answered that question many times. Vaccine mandates should be judged on a case by case basis. That’s not my opinion that’s just how it works. Why do you suppose schools mandate MMR vaccines and not flu vaccines? Do you just think that the people making these decisions are just flu anti-vaxxers? Since you think the only thing that matters is if vaccines do more good than harm and otherwise there is no moral argument against vaccine mandates does that mean you also support vaccine mandates for flu as well? Or do you just not give a shit about the people that die of the flu? Or maybe your answer is something like “personally I draw the line just before thinking we need to mandate the flu vaccine for everyone” and if that’s your answer you should read it over and over and over until you realize that that’s an acceptable answer Edit: also in before the people that are incapable of understanding nuanced perspectives come in to post “OMG BJ is comparing COVID to the flu! What a typical anti-vaxxer!!” Yes I am for a flu vaccine in workplaces and where it is judged to provide a cost-effective solution to flu outbreaks. There are flu vaccine mandates in such workplaces already where it is not already strongly recommended by experts. But again you dodge the question by trying to posit a different question without giving any sort of argument or point about what you think about the vaccine mandates. You don't even say if you are against flu vaccine mandates but somehow think that fighting on the front of it being the flu is an argument that you would win. You feel the need to pre emt this criticism because you know how much anti-vax propaganda is saying that covid is just the flu. So again why do you think people shouldn't be mandated to get the vaccine that makes the covid vaccine different than other vacines? You couldn't infer from my post that I would also be against flu vaccine mandates? I'm not sure how else I can explain my position if you're not satisfied with my answer that vaccine mandates should be judged on a case by case basis. Are you trying to argue that if I'm in favor of some vaccine mandates then I have to be in favor of all vaccine mandates? I repeat a simple question. A simple question you refuse to answer in anything but misdirecting questions in response. I am hopeful now that we are reaching near where you will answer such a simple question. Simply stating that you look at things on a case-by-case basis isn't an answer to any question about the vaccine or anything that people were asking you. Now that we've gotten to the point where you agree that it is a case-by-case basis about vaccines. My question remains about why you have a problem with the covid vaccine to where you don't think it shouldn't be mandated like any number of the other mandates that we have and accept. People in elementary and middle schools should be getting a flu vaccine every year. They work in an environment that contains a massive amount of vectors for outbreaks in the kids that go to these schools. I don't really understand why people won't listen to the science on that front but society has at least come to accept the level of death that comes with flu season every year. Covid however is not the flu, covid is much worse by any metric measurable. It is the modern plague with the capability of breaking down society if it wasn't handled with the levels of modern care that our hospitals employ. Even with the lockdowns that forced so much suffering it still caused the system to almost buckle while cranking up the deaths from a thousand other things that normally go on at hospitals. If you want the question framed yet another way now what about the case of the covid vaccine that you believe that it shouldn't be mandated? that is literally his answer. for him covid is at a level now where the risk is acceptable for society without having to take away the freedom of choice for individuals. your idea that all decisions are black and white and the freedom to make choices, even bad choices, does not stack up in value compared to the objective benefit claimed by science is your own opinion. i most certainly do not think flu vaccines should be mandatory, even in schools. you both are going around in circles basically because you refuse to read between the lines and keep assuming hes dodging your questions. hes already answered it and most people have recognised it. his answer has been smacking your face for a while so much that you even wrote it down for him. drones summary below is good and accurate about what ive interpreted to be bj's stance On August 25 2022 04:49 Liquid`Drone wrote: .... the value of what I like to describe as perceived autonomy. Myself, I think this, that people should be allowed to themselves steer the direction of their life even if it entails them making stupid decisions, is a significant independent value. Even acknowledging that experts or whatnot can make better decisions for people than what they can themselves make, the consequences of people making bad choices must be very dire before I want to strip people of the power to make bad choices. He doesn't need other people to help him dodge the simple question I keep asking. I don't keep asking him a black and white question I keep asking a question that asks a very simple very foundational question about what his opinion is regarding the vaccine. If his shitck this whole time was "Gee I think that a mandate now that the vaccine isn't at a plague level it isn't needed to be mandated" He could have said that pages and pages ago. I have never made it a black and white issue to make decisions I have quite insistently asked what his thinking about the covid vaccine now is different than the other vaccines that are mandated. Do you want to say what your issue is with flu vaccines that you don't think people in schools should be mandated to get it, with the science that we know it would save lives? If I've had to write it down for him then I would then be able to do this cool thing where I respond to the thing he says. Some call that discussion, I know its a wild concept for BJ but you know you learn new things every day. If he wants the question framed yet another way I will do so again. What about the covid vaccine makes it so that it doesn't cross the line of "people's ability to make bad decisions" compared to other mandates that we have in society? Typically the things we vaccinate children for in schools are very dangerous to them and offer them immunity for years. Another study came out that showed vaccine efficacy in adolescents in Brazil was 5.9% after 98 days. So if you require all the kids to get a booster at the start of the school year they'll have almost no protection against infection by winter break which is not even halfway through the school year. At that point I don't think DPB or Liquid`Drone will be so safe knowing that only 19 of their students will get COVID instead of 20. Will mandating flu vaccines save lives? Yeah. Will mandating COVID boosters every school year save lives? Yeah. Will mandating COVID boosters every 3 months save lives? Yeah. Do you think we should mandate boosters every 3 months or do you just want people to be killed by others? Everyone is entitled to view the competing interests of bodily autonomy/personal choice vs public health and determine where they think the lines should be drawn. You just happen to think that you personally get to decide where the lines are drawn and everyone who disagrees is just less moral or less rational. "But BJ why are you talking about transmission again, why don't you mention how COVID vaccines prevent severe illness and death" Well I am glad you asked. COVID vaccines have shown to offer lasting protection against severe illness and death. Talk to your doctor today about receiving the COVID vaccine! Why quote a study and not link it? 5.9% in Brazil at 28 days and 50.6% in Scotland after 98 days. Why leave out half the information? Pretty dramatic differences.Show nested quote +Misclassification of testing results and variant sequencing might also have occurred, which could explain the accentuated protection declining during the delta-dominant period in Brazil. Vaccine effectiveness estimated in Brazil was lower than the corresponding vaccine effectiveness in Scotland, which is probably explained by the increased background risk of COVID-19 transmission in Brazil, which is the result of many factors such as public health interventions. Show nested quote +Two doses of vaccination with BNT162b2 among adolescents are insufficient to sustain protection against symptomatic disease; however, they do offer substantial protection against serious COVID-19 outcomes for at least 3 months. Our findings support the importance of maximising vaccination coverage and the consideration of booster doses for adolescents, though further research is needed. https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(22)00451-0/fulltext?rss=yes Because being factual and precise only matters when pointing out the part of the truth that reinforces his world view. The parts that don't he just ignores.
And then he either ignores it when you point that out to him, or continues with more half-truths and misinformation while feigning righteous indignance.
|
|
On August 26 2022 13:51 StasisField wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2022 12:38 gobbledydook wrote: There's always a balance to be had right. It is clearly healthier to not eat fast food, so we should institute a ban on it, then less people will die of obesity related diseases. Somehow there is no credible push for banning fast food. All we do is try to educate people to eat healthier and force fast food stores to display information about the calories.
Someone getting heart disease from McDonald's doesn't also transmit said heart disease to their neighbor. That's one of the big reasons vaccines are mandated. When it comes to vaccines, your choice does effect others. Also, eating fast food isn't putting the healthcare system on the brink of collapse like COVID was. Just two really big differences that should be obvious to people still using this talking point 2 years later. tobacco isnt a banned substance. alcohol isnt a banned substance. 2 examples of things that are proven to be harmful to its consumers but also have an effect on people around the consumer. if decision making was as simple and black and white as sermokala suggests they should be, then there would be a massive list of things that should be prohibited in todays society. the reality is these decisions are far more nuanced due to the considerations that have to be given to intangible and unquantifiable values. approaching huge decisions from a solely statistical standpoint is demonstrating a complete lack of understanding of why and how society functions the way it does and why governments/politicians fail so much to actually get shit done.
|
On August 26 2022 08:58 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On August 26 2022 06:46 BlackJack wrote:On August 26 2022 01:18 Sermokala wrote:On August 25 2022 16:16 evilfatsh1t wrote:On August 25 2022 14:41 Sermokala wrote:On August 25 2022 06:34 BlackJack wrote:On August 25 2022 04:13 Sermokala wrote:On August 24 2022 13:42 BlackJack wrote:On August 24 2022 10:53 Sermokala wrote:On August 24 2022 10:10 evilfatsh1t wrote: [quote] hes already answered that question. other posters have even pointed out what his position is in relation to your question. you can disagree with him but to suggest that he hasnt responded at all to your points just shows youre not reading. He hasn't though people keep trying to posit what he's trying to say and he simply agrees without elaborating on any points of confusion people have. He states that he's against vaccine mandates on seemingly two major vectors. That it has cons to it and that it doesn't stop transmission. His only offered explanation on the first is about how you get a heart condition sometimes if you get it. However he is then shown studies that say that it is at such a low rate that even compared to getting covid normally that it isn't a real con. He doesn't respond to this information and insists that people are attacking him for contradicting this information. The second has some truth to it that the protection against infection fades after some time without boosters. However when he is confronted with the fact that it was never the point to stop transmission completely and that it still shows clear improvements on not going to the hospital with it or dying. He doesn't respond to this information and then says that him getting the vaccine should tell us that he understands what the vaccine is doing. After ignoring his basic points being refuted he turns into the common anti-vaxer argument of "if its so good then why should people have to get it to work with people who don't get it." this of course ignoring the swaths of other safety mandates in jobs that are for peoples protections that he is informed of and never responds about. then he repeats yet another antivax argument about it actually being about bodily autonomy, just like abortion, before being informed that it is a decision that effects other people but hey again he doesn't respond to this point. But its the fact that he can't answer a basic question that keeps getting to why I think he's an anti vaxer. He understands that if he answers that basic question about why he doesn't think people should get the vaccine then it would be impossible to deny that he's an antivaxer despite his claim about being vaccinated himself. He said he would request a ban if I showed him information of him being anti vax and when I did he welched on this he went on like nothing happened and never responded to the quotes of him. If we can't have a simple discussion of asking people questions and answering them then we're not having a discussion. And its an extremely simple question that I keep asking in so many different ways that he just somehow can't answer. Don't you find it odd that people have to say that he answered the question without being able to say even vaugly what that answer is? I’ve answered that question many times. Vaccine mandates should be judged on a case by case basis. That’s not my opinion that’s just how it works. Why do you suppose schools mandate MMR vaccines and not flu vaccines? Do you just think that the people making these decisions are just flu anti-vaxxers? Since you think the only thing that matters is if vaccines do more good than harm and otherwise there is no moral argument against vaccine mandates does that mean you also support vaccine mandates for flu as well? Or do you just not give a shit about the people that die of the flu? Or maybe your answer is something like “personally I draw the line just before thinking we need to mandate the flu vaccine for everyone” and if that’s your answer you should read it over and over and over until you realize that that’s an acceptable answer Edit: also in before the people that are incapable of understanding nuanced perspectives come in to post “OMG BJ is comparing COVID to the flu! What a typical anti-vaxxer!!” Yes I am for a flu vaccine in workplaces and where it is judged to provide a cost-effective solution to flu outbreaks. There are flu vaccine mandates in such workplaces already where it is not already strongly recommended by experts. But again you dodge the question by trying to posit a different question without giving any sort of argument or point about what you think about the vaccine mandates. You don't even say if you are against flu vaccine mandates but somehow think that fighting on the front of it being the flu is an argument that you would win. You feel the need to pre emt this criticism because you know how much anti-vax propaganda is saying that covid is just the flu. So again why do you think people shouldn't be mandated to get the vaccine that makes the covid vaccine different than other vacines? You couldn't infer from my post that I would also be against flu vaccine mandates? I'm not sure how else I can explain my position if you're not satisfied with my answer that vaccine mandates should be judged on a case by case basis. Are you trying to argue that if I'm in favor of some vaccine mandates then I have to be in favor of all vaccine mandates? I repeat a simple question. A simple question you refuse to answer in anything but misdirecting questions in response. I am hopeful now that we are reaching near where you will answer such a simple question. Simply stating that you look at things on a case-by-case basis isn't an answer to any question about the vaccine or anything that people were asking you. Now that we've gotten to the point where you agree that it is a case-by-case basis about vaccines. My question remains about why you have a problem with the covid vaccine to where you don't think it shouldn't be mandated like any number of the other mandates that we have and accept. People in elementary and middle schools should be getting a flu vaccine every year. They work in an environment that contains a massive amount of vectors for outbreaks in the kids that go to these schools. I don't really understand why people won't listen to the science on that front but society has at least come to accept the level of death that comes with flu season every year. Covid however is not the flu, covid is much worse by any metric measurable. It is the modern plague with the capability of breaking down society if it wasn't handled with the levels of modern care that our hospitals employ. Even with the lockdowns that forced so much suffering it still caused the system to almost buckle while cranking up the deaths from a thousand other things that normally go on at hospitals. If you want the question framed yet another way now what about the case of the covid vaccine that you believe that it shouldn't be mandated? that is literally his answer. for him covid is at a level now where the risk is acceptable for society without having to take away the freedom of choice for individuals. your idea that all decisions are black and white and the freedom to make choices, even bad choices, does not stack up in value compared to the objective benefit claimed by science is your own opinion. i most certainly do not think flu vaccines should be mandatory, even in schools. you both are going around in circles basically because you refuse to read between the lines and keep assuming hes dodging your questions. hes already answered it and most people have recognised it. his answer has been smacking your face for a while so much that you even wrote it down for him. drones summary below is good and accurate about what ive interpreted to be bj's stance On August 25 2022 04:49 Liquid`Drone wrote: .... the value of what I like to describe as perceived autonomy. Myself, I think this, that people should be allowed to themselves steer the direction of their life even if it entails them making stupid decisions, is a significant independent value. Even acknowledging that experts or whatnot can make better decisions for people than what they can themselves make, the consequences of people making bad choices must be very dire before I want to strip people of the power to make bad choices. He doesn't need other people to help him dodge the simple question I keep asking. I don't keep asking him a black and white question I keep asking a question that asks a very simple very foundational question about what his opinion is regarding the vaccine. If his shitck this whole time was "Gee I think that a mandate now that the vaccine isn't at a plague level it isn't needed to be mandated" He could have said that pages and pages ago. I have never made it a black and white issue to make decisions I have quite insistently asked what his thinking about the covid vaccine now is different than the other vaccines that are mandated. Do you want to say what your issue is with flu vaccines that you don't think people in schools should be mandated to get it, with the science that we know it would save lives? If I've had to write it down for him then I would then be able to do this cool thing where I respond to the thing he says. Some call that discussion, I know its a wild concept for BJ but you know you learn new things every day. If he wants the question framed yet another way I will do so again. What about the covid vaccine makes it so that it doesn't cross the line of "people's ability to make bad decisions" compared to other mandates that we have in society? Typically the things we vaccinate children for in schools are very dangerous to them and offer them immunity for years. Another study came out that showed vaccine efficacy in adolescents in Brazil was 5.9% after 98 days. So if you require all the kids to get a booster at the start of the school year they'll have almost no protection against infection by winter break which is not even halfway through the school year. At that point I don't think DPB or Liquid`Drone will be so safe knowing that only 19 of their students will get COVID instead of 20. Will mandating flu vaccines save lives? Yeah. Will mandating COVID boosters every school year save lives? Yeah. Will mandating COVID boosters every 3 months save lives? Yeah. Do you think we should mandate boosters every 3 months or do you just want people to be killed by others? Everyone is entitled to view the competing interests of bodily autonomy/personal choice vs public health and determine where they think the lines should be drawn. You just happen to think that you personally get to decide where the lines are drawn and everyone who disagrees is just less moral or less rational. "But BJ why are you talking about transmission again, why don't you mention how COVID vaccines prevent severe illness and death" Well I am glad you asked. COVID vaccines have shown to offer lasting protection against severe illness and death. Talk to your doctor today about receiving the COVID vaccine! You keep trying to come up with gotchas like they mean anything to the conversation. For someone that complains about a black and white argument against you you are really really eager to find one that works for you. The problem is that you keep wanting to switch up transmission and protection. If boosters every 3 months was what was needed to keep hospitals from collapsing then yes I would be for it. The schedule of shots for kids is based on what will kill them if they don't get the shot or the booster from it. The problem is that you jump instantly from this to the idea that them still getting the disease matters when its already a success that they will have a resistance enough to not die from it. If you accept that people get to determine where they think the lines should be drawn then they bear responsibility for placing where those lines are drawn. Thats how making decisions work. I can disagree with people and say that they are less moral or less rational because they were free to make that decision the same as I am able to make that decision. This is how free choice works we've been working with it for a few thousand years or more depending on what you believe about the creation of the universe. This is another gotcha that isn't a real point. Making statements about how people have free choice and how you have a decision structure are not answers to a question. They're just general statements about existence. I'm glad you decide to admit that vaccines are good and would save lives if they were mandated though at the end. Its been a long journey but I'm glad to have reached the point with you where you agree with covid vaccine mandates now.
yep, you got me. well played
|
|
|
|