Who has a neutral stance in this vaccine

[Wildswanderer]

Yes -- and I hope that we are also aware that our free choices will have consequences, and take that basic fact into consideration.

But if it is your contention that the only thing that matters, when you make your "free choices," is you, you, only you, nothing but you and forget everybody else --- well then, I guess you know who you are and what you care about.

Gult shaming people for their decision is exactly the kind of attitude that turns people into anti vaxxers.

 

[We Never Know]

Truly unwarranted. The world total of shots given so far is 2,665,000,000. That's nearly THREE BILLION.

Meanwhile, as of today, there have been 182,278,025 cases of COVID-19 reported to the WHO, along with 3,947,657 deaths.

And again meanwhile -- of those nearly 3 billion shots, there have been a total of 119 deaths.

If you do the math, that means that COVID-19 is 49,227 times more likely to kill you than the vaccine.

Why can't children under 12 get the vaccine? I haven't found anything that answers that yet.

 

[ChristineM]

One difference from you and an unvaccinated person is the severity of the virus if you both were to get it. Yours won't be as severe.
However you both can still get it, still carry it, still infect others.

Just like the flu and pneumonia shots cut down the severity of the person vaccinated, neither shot will stop you from getting them or spreading them

Which is why i am vaccinated, social distancing and wearing a mask when out of the house. Wherever possible isolate too. Just because i i ha had the vaccine us no excuse for complacency.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

What about it, give 10,000 monkeys a gun each and some will die. Any level of risk of human life is too high

Doctors go off level of risk to know who is more acceptable to certain illnesses and viruses over others. They don't give medical advice over a blanketed statement.

Level of risk us a Must in all medical decisions.

It's not specific to covid but basic common sense. You not only judge if you're at risk but the level of risk and factors determines what's best for you And others.

Experts say this but people are just jumping to get this vaccine. In the states it's highly marketized. In some countries (I think one member said new Zealand) there are barely cases compared to the states. In the states some states have more population than others among other things so governors in some states aren't as pushed as say new York where population is so high people are living under the streets.

If risk factors mean nothing, I'm not sure how your medical decisions and others are wisely chosen--going off what you've been saying.

 

[ChristineM]

Doctors go off level of risk to know who is more acceptable to certain illnesses and viruses over others. They don't give medical advice over a blanketed statement.

Level of risk us a Must in all medical decisions.

It's not specific to covid but basic common sense. You not only judge if you're at risk but the level of risk snf factors determines what's best for you And others.

Experts say this but people are just jumping to get this vaccine. In the states it's highly marketized. In some countries (I think one member said new Zealand) there are barely cases compared to the states. In the states some states have more population than others among other things so governorsin some states aren't as pushed as say new York where population is so high people are living under the streets.

If risk factors mean nothing, I'm not sure how your medical decisions and others are widely chosen--going off what you've been saying.

Feel free to take the risk.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Why can't children under 12 get the vaccine? I haven't found anything that answers that yet.

Because there has been insufficient testing in that age demographic. That work has begun.

 

[Revoltingest]

Who has a neutral stance in this vaccine argument?

Meaning you're not for or against it, but just choose what's best for you and others with no overarching opinion either way?

I don't feel anti/pro are needed. Maybe just those who take it and those who don't.

Does one need a side to make a decision and how is that justification true?

How to pick a side....
- Seek the best info available. Epidemiologists are the
most expert in things pandemic. Look for evidence
based claims & arguments. Don't rely upon internet
gadflies like me. Investigate cromulent sources.
- Consider risks quantitatively. Covid has risks.
Vaccination has risks. One set of risks (Covid) is far
worse & more prevalent than the other (vaccination).
- Consider personal circumstances, eg, risk group
(age, health, weight), immune status, social situation.
- Consider one's choice having effects upon others.
We want to minimize the danger of infecting them.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

She has a right to fear based on the coersion, censoring, people's attitudes, etc.

What "censoring"?

She may have fallen to conspiracy

"may have"? I think it's quite certain.

Can you imagine people telling her her fears are irrational and she should read the "real" facts and all would be fine....than shoot her down if she's still scared?

No ethical doctor, therapist, and hotline for that matter would do that.

I don't even know how to respond to that.
Her problem is likely that she gets her "news" and "information" from facebook channels and other "social" media, from baffoons who claim expertise and pretend to be skilled and qualified reporters.

I see this everywhere. Whenever people come up with the most crazy nonsense, they tend to repeat that. And when you try to find out what their sources are, it's always something like that: facebook, instagram, twittern, 4chan, reddit, telegram,........

"social" media is breeding a generation of morons who are incapable of vetting their sources.

So the first step, imo, is to teach such people that getting intel from proper sources is step one.

And if they are hellbend on believing in "massive conspiracies" accross the entire scientific community or that the WHO is "working with bill gates to chip everybody", then yea.... not much you can do about it I'm afraid.

As the saying goes, you can lead a horse to water....

 

[We Never Know]

Because there has been insufficient testing in that age demographic. That work has begun.

Pretty much like it was for everyone. However if its safe, its safe?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

How to pick a side....
- Seek the best info available. Epidemiologists are the
most expert in things pandemic. Look for evidence
based claims & arguments. Don't rely upon internet
gadflies like me. Investigate cromulent sources.
- Consider risks quantitatively. Covid has risks.
Vaccination has risks. One set of risks (Covid) is far
worse & more prevalent than the other (vaccination).
- Consider personal circumstances, eg, risk group
(age, health, weight), immune status, social situation.

Both sides have done this. I bet even those neutral to the argument have done so as well.

Facts aren't magical. People derive different valid decisions based on the same facts.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

What "censoring"?

I'll get back to the rest...where do you live?

US media has censored the "other side" for awhile now. Social media just as much. If you can find anything online and any expert-video for that matter that says something that's not beneficial about getting the vaccine, it's probably rare. It's kind of like they are scared to give the other side for fear that people a. may panic and b. may not take the vaccine and not establish herd immunity. They've been doing this for years.

"See What CDC Recommends | Pros and Cons of the Vaccines" Take this for example in google search... then look at the real site Benefits of Getting a COVID-19 Vaccine

They forgot to change the headline.... if this was both sided, there would be cons as well as pros.

My whole point was I was wondering if there are people who don't have a side on this and are pretty neutral with all the politics. I should have done a poll but figured it would turn into a debate anyhow.

 

[Revoltingest]

Both sides have done this.

This is not so (from what I've seen).

Facts aren't magical. People derive different valid decisions based on the same facts.

This does not mean that all conflicting opinions are valid.
The steps I laid out are very different what's employed
by the anti-vaxers I know, who dismiss epidemiologists'
opinions entirely.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Truly unwarranted. The world total of shots given so far is 2,665,000,000. That's nearly THREE BILLION.

Meanwhile, as of today, there have been 182,278,025 cases of COVID-19 reported to the WHO, along with 3,947,657 deaths.

And again meanwhile -- of those nearly 3 billion shots, there have been a total of 119 deaths.

If you do the math, that means that COVID-19 is 49,227 times more likely to kill you than the vaccine.

Uhu.

There's also all this buzz about the Astrazeneca vaccine.
A few cases of thrombosis occurred after the shot. Suddenly everyone is up in arms about how this vaccine is "dangerous" and how it shouldn't be given to such and such people. It went so far as politicians suspending the vaccination with that vaccine.

Then a rational scientist ran the actual numbers. His conclusion: if you are worried about thrombosis, you should actually get this vaccine.

Why?

He ran the numbers and compared the rate of occurrence of thrombosis in general, with the rate of occurrence after getting that vaccine. As it turns out, it was FAR MORE occurring in the populace that did NOT get that vaccine then it did in those that DID get that vaccine.



Today with all the "social media", everything gets blown up out of proportion immediately.
There's one case of death resulting from a vaccine and suddenly that supposedly says something about that vaccine.

In reality, no matter how well tested a vaccine is, if you give that to 3 billion people, OFF COURSE there are going to be occurrences of unexpected responses, death, severe illness, allergic reaction, etc.

This is the case with ANY vaccine. Or ANYTHING that you can eat or drink.

 

[We Never Know]

Which is why i am vaccinated, social distancing and wearing a mask when out of the house. Wherever possible isolate too. Just because i i ha had the vaccine us no excuse for complacency.

And that's good that yiu choose that.
However some people think a mask is their suit of armor.
I see people driving around alone wearing a mask.
Setting at home on their porch alone wearing a mask.
Out feeding their livestock alone wearing a mask.

Mask are becoming a huge part of the litter being thrown out everywhere. I see them laying in most parking lots, streets, along roadways, etc. If people are going to be responsible and wear a mask, I wish they would be more responsible and throw them in the trashcan when they are done with them.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Mask are becoming a huge part of the litter being thrown out everywhere. I see them laying in most parking lots, streets, along roadways, etc. If people are going to be responsible and wear a mask, I wish they would be more responsible and throw them in the trashcan when they are done with them.

Uhu. Next to the pollution, it's also simply disgusting.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Uhu.

There's also all this buzz about the Astrazeneca vaccine.
A few cases of thrombosis occurred after the shot. Suddenly everyone is up in arms about how this vaccine is "dangerous" and how it shouldn't be given to such and such people. It went so far as politicians suspending the vaccination with that vaccine.

Then a rational scientist ran the actual numbers. His conclusion: if you are worried about thrombosis, you should actually get this vaccine.

Why?

He ran the numbers and compared the rate of occurrence of thrombosis in general, with the rate of occurrence after getting that vaccine. As it turns out, it was FAR MORE occurring in the populace that did NOT get that vaccine then it did in those that DID get that vaccine.



Today with all the "social media", everything gets blown up out of proportion immediately.
There's one case of death resulting from a vaccine and suddenly that supposedly says something about that vaccine.

In reality, no matter how well tested a vaccine is, if you give that to 3 billion people, OFF COURSE there are going to be occurrences of unexpected responses, death, severe illness, allergic reaction, etc.

This is the case with ANY vaccine. Or ANYTHING that you can eat or drink.

Excellent post. I myself had a look at the numbers of thrombosis (not as thoroughly, but enough), and having done so, I have now had 2 doses of the Astrazeneca vaccine.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

How to pick a side....
- Seek the best info available. Epidemiologists are the
most expert in things pandemic. Look for evidence
based claims & arguments. Don't rely upon internet
gadflies like me. Investigate cromulent sources.
- Consider risks quantitatively. Covid has risks.
Vaccination has risks. One set of risks (Covid) is far
worse & more prevalent than the other (vaccination).
- Consider personal circumstances, eg, risk group
(age, health, weight), immune status, social situation.
- Consider one's choice having effects upon others.
We want to minimize the danger of infecting them.

I'm only going to get it if there's another large US surge, as the discussion is a bit late I find, for the risks of covid to be worse currently than the risk of vaccine side effects, for me. However I wear a mask and carry antibacterial wipes with me, I'm careful about things when I can be. Not sure whether the antibacterial wipes destroy covid germs (on hands and surfaces), but now that I brought it up, I do need to look it up.

 

[We Never Know]

Uhu.

There's also all this buzz about the Astrazeneca vaccine.
A few cases of thrombosis occurred after the shot. Suddenly everyone is up in arms about how this vaccine is "dangerous" and how it shouldn't be given to such and such people. It went so far as politicians suspending the vaccination with that vaccine.

Then a rational scientist ran the actual numbers. His conclusion: if you are worried about thrombosis, you should actually get this vaccine.

Why?

He ran the numbers and compared the rate of occurrence of thrombosis in general, with the rate of occurrence after getting that vaccine. As it turns out, it was FAR MORE occurring in the populace that did NOT get that vaccine then it did in those that DID get that vaccine.



Today with all the "social media", everything gets blown up out of proportion immediately.
There's one case of death resulting from a vaccine and suddenly that supposedly says something about that vaccine.

In reality, no matter how well tested a vaccine is, if you give that to 3 billion people, OFF COURSE there are going to be occurrences of unexpected responses, death, severe illness, allergic reaction, etc.

This is the case with ANY vaccine. Or ANYTHING that you can eat or drink.

All medicine's have side effects. That's cut and dry.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I'll get back to the rest...where do you live?

Belgium.

US media has censored the "other side" for awhile now. Social media just as much.

The "other side", being unscientific conspiratory nutjobs who do nothing but spread misinformation, which in the present day in the middle of a global pandemic would actually be (and IS) incredibly harmful and downright dangerous?

If you can find anything online and any expert-video for that matter that says something that's not beneficial about getting the vaccine, it's probably rare.

It's probably also false.

It's kind of like they are scared to give the other side for fear that people a. may panic and b. may not take the vaccine and not establish herd immunity. They've been doing this for years.

Or, they understand how mega damaging it is to society and how it works against solving the pandemic?
We are talking about a country where a ridiculous amount of people believe the anonymous poster named "Q" when he says that "the deep state" consists of "evil pedophile democrats" who engage in sex slavery of minors and who kill babies during satanic rituals and what-not.

Sure, censorship will not solve the much deeper issues that makes these people so mega gullible.
Indeed, in Belgium, we don't have a need to "censor" such crazy talk because overall people are better educated and not that gullible - apparently.

"See What CDC Recommends | Pros and Cons of the Vaccines" Take this for example in google search... then look at the real site Benefits of Getting a COVID-19 Vaccine

They forgot to change the headline.... if this was both sided, there would be cons as well as pros.

My whole point was I was wondering if there are people who don't have a side on this and are pretty neutral with all the politics. I should have done a poll but figured it would turn into a debate anyhow.

I don't get the US. Why is it that they jump on every little thing and are so easily tricked into believing the craziest conspiracy nonsense?

It's been baffling me for years.

 

[ChristineM]

And that's good that yiu choose that.
However some people think a mask is their suit of armor.
I see people driving around alone wearing a mask.
Setting at home on their porch alone wearing a mask.
Out feeding their livestock alone wearing a mask.

Mask are becoming a huge part of the litter being thrown out everywhere. I see them laying in most parking lots, streets, along roadways, etc. If people are going to be responsible and wear a mask, I wish they would be more responsible and throw them in the trashcan when they are done with them.

Id prefer to clean up a discarded mask or two than die of Covid