Mandatory Vaccinations?

[Martin]

For future pandemics they will put the Vaccines in the public water supply. And in bottled water. That should keep the conspiracy theorists happy.

 

[SomeRandom]

For future pandemics they will put the Vaccines in the public water supply. And in bottled water. That should keep the conspiracy theorists happy.

Oh two birds with one stone. I like it

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Do we have evidence that they are silencing things that are both true and not misrepresented? If so thats def a problem

Yes. It's coercion. It's trying to get people to take the vaccine by eliminating and downplaying the shot and any opinion that speaks against it "and" those facts that are cons.

The video is just one example.

My question is why would provaxxers try to discredit this. It's not encouraging vaxxers not to take the vaccine. Why try to talk against it unless they are more focused on the person giving the info or just assume any person unvaccinated will always say false things. It's a fallacy and it doesn't work unless one has confirmation bias and only see what they want.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

For future pandemics they will put the Vaccines in the public water supply. And in bottled water. That should keep the conspiracy theorists happy.

That's a weird one? Why would people out any vaccine in water?

 

[Martin]

That's a weird one? Why would people out any vaccine in water?

To make sure everyone gets it. That's the best way to develop herd immunity with minimum casualties, and recover from the pandemic.
And to give the conspiracy theorists something to talk about.

 

[Martin]

That's a weird one? Why would people out any vaccine in water?

To make sure everyone gets it. That's the best way to develop herd immunity with minimum casualties, and recover from the pandemic.
And to give the conspiracy theorists something to talk about.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

To make sure everyone gets it. That's the best way to develop herd immunity with minimum casualties, and recover from the pandemic.
And to give the conspiracy theorists something to talk about.

Believe me provaxxers will talk about it too.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

To make sure everyone gets it. That's the best way to develop herd immunity with minimum casualties, and recover from the pandemic.
And to give the conspiracy theorists something to talk about.

Oops. Was that me that repeated the comment?

 

[SomeRandom]

Yes. It's coercion. It's trying to get people to take the vaccine by eliminating and downplaying the shot and any opinion that speaks against it "and" those facts that are cons.

The video is just one example.

My question is why would provaxxers try to discredit this. It's not encouraging vaxxers not to take the vaccine. Why try to talk against it unless they are more focused on the person giving the info or just assume any person unvaccinated will always say false things. It's a fallacy and it doesn't work unless one has confirmation bias and only see what they want.

I’m curious of your opinion on this measure.
In my state right now, due to lockdown measures, all businesses require a person to wear a mask (excluding a medical reason not to) and to “sign in” on an app that lets the government track your movements, which is to allow for contact tracing if a venture becomes a hotspot. If you do not meet those requirements then the business by law has to refuse you service, even if it’s essential items like groceries.
Do you think those measures are coercive?
Mere curiosity on my part, I assure you. I dunno, I think I just want an outsider’s perspective. It’s been nagging me today. Sorry. It just seems like this is the precursor to mandatory vaccines for certain workplaces. Or even the other way around. So you guys seem already there, that’s all

 

[Unveiled Artist]

If I remember, I don't think you're in the states? Australia?

In the US is highly coercive. On a positive (there's always two sides) it does work. Near 90% of people have gotten their first and second short of the vaccine. Promoting/coersion/convincing et cetera in and of itself is highly affective. Just some people see the other side and others do not. Inherently I don't see that as a problem since antivaxxers and the unvaccinated so far I know aren't trying to tell provaxxers and the vaccinated to not get the vaccine. Since there is no push not to get it, I don't know what the problem is saying so.

I’m curious of your opinion on this measure.

In my state right now, due to lockdown measures, all businesses require a person to wear a mask (excluding a medical reason not to) and to “sign in” on an app that lets the government track your movements, which is to allow for contact tracing if a venture becomes a hotspot. If you do not meet those requirements then the business by law has to refuse you service, even if it’s essential items like groceries.

Virginia has it "vaccinated-don't wear masks unvaccinated-required to wear masks "

It's presented to where a person unvaccinated people are at a disadvantage. Businesses can't say it out right (least not that I know of). I think it would be better to say this without the faces and things like that.

New York has a sign in app. I don't know how it works. Our VA governor seems to be tight-lipped about vaccine passports and similar check in methods-thank goodness.

That sounds creepy.

Do you think those measures are coercive?

Mere curiosity on my part, I assure you. I dunno, I think I just want an outsider’s perspective. It’s been nagging me today. Sorry. It just seems like this is the precursor to mandatory vaccines for certain workplaces. Or even the other way around. So you guys seem already there, that’s all

I had to look that up, precursor? What do you mean in this context?

For me it's like walking in a bubble outside and seeing how they present their signs, how people talk, their side of the story, from television censoring anything not promoting the vaccines, and a general sense of push. I know I'm not the only one who feels this way but off RF people just mentioned it once in a blue moon and go their way. I don't speak with many people and those that I do at work aren't quite my age bracket to really discuss things with (and not appropriate to mention it though not illegal).

Even with the anthrax scare and people running to get toilet paper then was creepy. I was about 12 years old and remember being pushed back over that... then 1999 came and people were getting can goods.

Funny, when the pandemic hit people started getting toilet paper. I was oblivious to it when I saw just one package just sitting there.

Something about majority rules gets at me. I never took vaccines and never will so that's not a big problem for me in that respect if I think of it at all. Just everything surrounding it. Then I get on RF and think "wait... people 'actually' think these things." Interesting observation when it doesn't turn into a man-slaughter.

 

[SalixIncendium]

Near 90% of people have gotten their first and second short of the vaccine.

Where are you getting this information? Looking at various sources, the US is nowhere near 90%.

Here's one source:

U.S. COVID-19 vaccine tracker: See your state's progress

And before you question this source, they are getting their information directly from the CDC.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Where are you getting this information? Looking at various sources, the US is nowhere near 90%.

Here's one source:

U.S. COVID-19 vaccine tracker: See your state's progress

And before you question this source, they are getting their information directly from the CDC.

It's a quasi-idiom meaning more than a half.

For example, if someone talked about the number of people in a classroom but wasn't focused on statistics just the fact there is a lesser/somewhat greater/greater number, they may use percentages to say that without it being related to a statistics... where in a conversation about numbers, that statistic would be literal and therefore sourced as well as relevant to the topic.

 

[SalixIncendium]

It's a quasi-idiom meaning more than a half.

I like to call it misinformation, but to-may-to...to-mah-to.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I like to call it misinformation, but to-may-to...to-mah-to.

It's english language slang/idiom. Has Nothing to do with the COVID and vaccines.

Please don't judge the information/language choice based on my argument and being unvaccinated.

Edit. Refresh the comment page. I gave an example.

 

[Martin]

Oops. Was that me that repeated the comment?

No, that was me. Smart-phone on a train situation.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I like to call it misinformation, but to-may-to...to-mah-to.

My opinions would be the same whether or not I was vaccinated since it has nothing to do with discrediting the vaccine, encouraging people not to take it, its efficiency, and people's morality in taking it. It's specific to the push the government, media, and people have around it and my opinion about the side affects that is one factor of not being vaccinated.

Please don't make this any more than what it is.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

No, that was me. Smart-phone on a train situation.

Memories. Tunnels are horrible.

 

[SomeRandom]

If I remember, I don't think you're in the states? Australia?

Yes, sorry. I’m in Australia. I just find it interesting the way my culture regards “government inference” (for lack of a better phrase) and the way the US does in general. Like what I would consider just normal procedures, my American family seems to regard as too much overreach and an encroachment of human rights and liberties. Just curious is all.

In the US is highly coercive. On a positive (there's always two sides) it does work. Near 90% of people have gotten their first and second short of the vaccine. Promoting/coersion/convincing et cetera in and of itself is highly affective. Just some people see the other side and others do not. Inherently I don't see that as a problem since antivaxxers and the unvaccinated so far I know aren't trying to tell provaxxers and the vaccinated to not get the vaccine. Since there is no push not to get it, I don't know what the problem is saying so.

Interesting. Our government is currently being balled out for failing to vaccinate our population effectively.
By that I mean failing to secure the right amount of vaccines to actually have such a number of vaccinated in the first place. I know we have some backup Moderna stock for “booster” purposes in case more potent strains arise in the future. But the fact that they haven’t secured enough Pfizer and AstraZeneca vaccines to actually get the population vaccinated in the first place is a pretty big PR nightmare for the government right now. Which I find interesting.

Virginia has it "vaccinated-don't wear masks unvaccinated-required to wear masks "

Oh really? Weird. Here only kids under 12 and those with medical issues are allowed to be without masks. Not sure why being vaccinated excuses you from a mask during lockdown procedures. Since I’m pretty sure people who are vaccinated can still get the disease, just at a lower rate (presumably.) I wonder if this is a cultural thing?? Or perhaps I’m missing something. I’m no doctor after all.

It's presented to where a person unvaccinated people are at a disadvantage. Businesses can't say it out right (least not that I know of). I think it would be better to say this without the faces and things like that.

That is a bit odd, ngl.
To be fair, we’re still at a stage where only the most at risk citizens are even allowed to be vaccinated. Still I can’t imagine such advice would be issued here. Maybe this is another instance of cultural barriers maybe???

New York has a sign in app. I don't know how it works. Our VA governor seems to be tight-lipped about vaccine passports and similar check in methods-thank goodness.

Interesting.
Are you still allowed to travel? We’re not, more or less. They keep changing the rules, honestly.
Sometimes we have a “travel bubble” with New Zealand (our neighbours) then that gets revoked. Then it’s safe again and rinse and repeat. Bloody government, I tell ya

That sounds creepy.

It is a bit “double unplus good.” I mean I understand the reasoning behind such methods so I will comply. But still. The government knowing my movements is scary all the same. Ewww

I had to look that up, precursor? What do you mean in this context?

I guess I mean we are kind of looking to countries that have implemented the vaccines more efficiently than us and just how they’re handling the pandemic right now. For our own potential strategies moving forward. You guys already have mandatory vaccines it seems like. So I thought maybe that is a direction my country might be heading towards. I dunno. Maybe I’m just stir crazy with the lockdown right now.

For me it's like walking in a bubble outside and seeing how they present their signs, how people talk, their side of the story, from television censoring anything not promoting the vaccines, and a general sense of push. I know I'm not the only one who feels this way but off RF people just mentioned it once in a blue moon and go their way. I don't speak with many people and those that I do at work aren't quite my age bracket to really discuss things with (and not appropriate to mention it though not illegal).

Interesting. I can sympathise with your frustrations. It’s all a little…..odd really.

Even with the anthrax scare and people running to get toilet paper then was creepy. I was about 12 years old and remember being pushed back over that... then 1999 came and people were getting can goods.

I’m afraid I’m only really familiar with that through (US based) TV shows. That was like a highly infectious disease spread through particles, right?It was similar to the plague? I can only imagine the fear of such a reality. I’m sorry.

Funny, when the pandemic hit people started getting toilet paper. I was oblivious to it when I saw just one package just sitting there.

Omg right??? During our first lockdown we actually legit ran out of toilet paper and the judgmental stares I got just for buying a pack. Wow. What is with that?
I can understand stocking up on supplies like food and water. But the toilet paper craze still baffles me. Lol

Something about majority rules gets at me. I never took vaccines and never will so that's not a big problem for me in that respect if I think of it at all. Just everything surrounding it. Then I get on RF and think "wait... people 'actually' think these things." Interesting observation when it doesn't turn into a man-slaughter.

I can understand.
Wow. You were allowed to do ignore your vaccines like that?
Where I live if you don’t have your shots (without a legitimate medical reason) then you don’t get to go to school, daycare or anything of the sort. My dad had cancer so it was especially important that I was fully vaccinated so I didn’t accidentally kill him. We were quite aware of the consequences of not vaccinating. Far more than many anti vaxxers seem to be. (Not a judgement, just an observation.) Those people could have killed my father, my Aunty in hospice, my baby nephew with Leukaemia and a number of my at risk relatives at a drop of a hat.
I’m sorry, I have a hard time sympathising with such a movement, I’m afraid. Selfish and ignorant. And dangerous to my loved ones to boot. Sorry. I really don’t mean to pass any judgement, but I just can’t abide such recklessness in this day and age. This is the age of information and to disregard public health like that. If one is allergic to an ingredient or worried about it in any given vaccine, then fair enough. But such decisions often kill those far more vulnerable than the decision makers. And I’ve seen it first hand. Can’t abide it, emotionally. speaking. Sorry again. I’m speaking more generally about that issue. Not about anything you said specifically. It just grinds my gears that the anti vaxxer movement is allowed to kill loved ones of bystanders and cry victim all the time. Yeah screw them. I know that’s somewhat irrational, but please remember that I grew up in the oncology ward. Where those guys could have killed everyone in there. Men, women and kids.
With families no less. Rant over I guess lol

 

[SkepticThinker]

Your opinion about me shouldnt discredit some of the facts I'm saying. They're not meant to defend against the vaccine.

I don't exactly have an opinion about you as a person, because I don't know you.
My opinions have only to do with the content of your posts and your arguments.

Let's use heart problems. That side effect is just as serious as COVID. The severity depends on the person.

I don't know why we have to keep diverting to some other ailment. Can't we just stick with blood clots?

Blood clots is a killer but hopefully not if one makes it to the hospital on time. Even people on RF had COVID. So, I personally wouldn't downplay other illness....but this has nothing to do with vaccines.

My point was this ...
People seem to put a lot of emphasis on the apparent fact that the COVID vaccine has appeared to cause blood clots to some degree in a small percentage of people who have received the vaccine. People such as yourself appear to be quite concerned about this. Some people are even up in arms about it, trying to spread the word that the vaccines are dangerous and perhaps even more dangerous than getting COVID and people shouldn't get it and on and on with that stuff, as though it would be safer just to get COVID instead (I have several friends on Facebook who are doing this as we speak). But then when we actually look at the data, we see that instances of blood clots from people who have contracted COVID are far, far higher (and deadlier) than they are in the population of people who have received the vaccine. In other words, you're much more likely to get blood clots from COVID than you are from the vaccine. In a discussion of the pros and cons or advantages versus disadvantages of getting vaccinated, you never seem to see this glaring fact come into consideration on the side of the people who are against the vaccine. And I'd say it's a pretty important fact to consider in a discussion about the pros and cons about the safety of vaccines. In a discussion including "both sides" of the arguments, I'd say that's a pretty important fact to include, don't you?

You get my point? discrediting one illness over another

I really don't. And I don't think you're getting my point because you're trying to make some other point instead.

Because it seems you're more focused on my being unvaccinated and talking about side effects than just reading the info without bias to intentions.

I don't think I've said a word about you personally being vaccinated.
All I've done is respond to the words you've typed.

The whole point was in the first comment of mine you commented on.

Disagreeing doesnt mean I'm wrong or ignorant.
It was in reference to discrediting not what anyone said

Disagreeing with me doesn't necessarily mean you're wrong or ignorant. But you could, in fact, be wrong and ignorant on the subject. Especially if you're ignoring pertinent facts.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I don't exactly have an opinion about you as a person, because I don't know you.
My opinions have only to do with the content of your posts and your arguments.

Thanks. I know some others feel otherwise...quite literally.

I don't know why we have to keep diverting to some other ailment. Can't we just stick with blood clots?

Okay. Though my point still stands, though. Blood clots in itself isn't a problem (like having signs of COVID isn't a problem) up until they get worse... COVID sounds deadly depend on multiple factors... people get better and others die. Blood clots, from what I gather, doesn't have that flexibility, for lack of better words. So, they're both severe. My original point was why discredit blood clots compared to COVID in severity?

I mean, saying blood clots are rare, for example, doesn't mean they are less serious unless one is taking for granted one can't be affected by side affects.

My point was this ...
People seem to put a lot of emphasis on the apparent fact that the COVID vaccine has appeared to cause blood clots to some degree in a small percentage of people who have received the vaccine.

People such as yourself appear to be quite concerned about this. Some people are even up in arms about it, trying to spread the word that the vaccines are dangerous and perhaps even more dangerous than getting COVID and people shouldn't get it and on and on with that stuff, as though it would be safer just to get COVID instead (I have several friends on Facebook who are doing this as we speak).

But then when we actually look at the data, we see that instances of blood clots from people who have contracted COVID are far, far higher (and deadlier) than they are in the population of people who have received the vaccine.

In other words, you're much more likely to get blood clots from COVID than you are from the vaccine. In a discussion of the pros and cons or advantages versus disadvantages of getting vaccinated, you never seem to see this glaring fact come into consideration on the side of the people who are against the vaccine.

And I'd say it's a pretty important fact to consider in a discussion about the pros and cons about the safety of vaccines. In a discussion including "both sides" of the arguments, I'd say that's a pretty important fact to include, don't you?

I wouldn't be political about it, but yes. I am quite concern mostly because it's experimental. If it wasn't, I think some people would probably take the vaccine or have more motivation to do so. Then you have different cultures and personalities as well as people who make decisions based on their individual circumstance (say where they live) than the people dying on the other side of the world. It really does depend.

No. I just said I don't take the vaccine because it's experimental and the side affects are extreme. I'd survive from COVID than I would the result of a blood clot but I'm not too concerned with either-though I did have a blood clot scare couple months ago and thankfully the tests said negative.

Can you rephrase?

In a discussion of the pros and cons or advantages versus disadvantages of getting vaccinated, you never seem to see this glaring fact come into consideration on the side of the people who are against the vaccine.

The facts of people who are against the vaccine? I don't agree with a lot of them, at least the political stance from antivaxxers. The CDC sites and similar I look at but I don't dismiss them because I am unvaccinated, more so that I'm not able to read statistics well and medical terms are foreign. For example with herd immunity I had to look that up in layman's terms "and" without the bias from the presenter involved. Difficult, but I found it.

Pros/cons of not getting vaccinated? I have but I don't get myself worked up over how many people died and why vaccines work and things like that. Negative motivations is counterproductive for me.

I really don't. And I don't think you're getting my point because you're trying to make some other point instead.

The original comment was why do vaccinated people downplay COVID vaccine side affects.

I don't think I've said a word about you personally being vaccinated. All I've done is respond to the words you've typed.

Ok.

Disagreeing with me doesn't necessarily mean you're wrong or ignorant. But you could, in fact, be wrong and ignorant on the subject. Especially if you're ignoring pertinent facts.

I agree and disagree. I'm ignorant with medical jargon but ignoring? No.

How can you tell I'm ignoring the facts, though? As a fact?

Edit.
Can I ask... if I were vaccinated and put down antivaxxers and said the same thing about the severity of the vaccine side affects as well as why they are downplayed, how would that look different than as an unvaccinated person I said the same thing?

I can't inherently tell, until someone says a blatant accusation statement(s), whether they genuinely don't take into consideration blood clots and side affects (or did but took the risk) or they do not because they believe it's an antivaxxer argument and dismiss it because of it. I can see the confirmation bias involved but I don't find that bad "if" it doesn't cause harm to other people.