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?
When science runs experiments, a
control is used to create a standard, by which to compare the results. If everyone got the vaccine, we would not have any control to compare. This could lead to improper conclusions, such as nobody on earth could naturally withstand the virus without the vaccines. Without controls, politicians and businesses can over estimate the vaccine and appear correct to the layman. If we have control subjects, who do not get the vaccine, we can better quantify the effectiveness of the vaccine. The controls will also tell something about the selective targets of the virus. My position is be a control, for the sake of valid science conclusions.
During the beginning of the pandemic, most jobs and activities stopped or had to change venue; work from home. I worked a job that was considered part of essential services. I was never unemployed, rerouted, or isolated from people, during the entire span of the virus. Everyone who got to stay home and control their environments were like the controls in this experiment. These two extremes for potential daily exposure gave us an opportunity to compare home isolated controls, with the daily socially interactive, in essential services.
The data showed that people who had to interact daily, via being part of essential services, did not drop like flies, even with their higher daily average risks of exposure. The common wisdom and hype did not hold true. The essential services personnel were the Guinea Pigs in this exposure experiment, and the results did not meet the hype. The super markets did not all close down, even with all the stock boys and cashiers being potentially exposed by every customer for over a year straight. This tells me that the virus does not target everyone. It appears that the "title" of essential service caused the virus to avoid you, since the extra exposure did not lead to 2-10 times higher attrition anticipated by the hype.
In the USA, there was another control experiment that happened by chance. The Democrat Party run states had forced lock downs and had forced mask wearing. The Republican run states stayed more open and did not force mask wearing to the same degree. Based on the same common wisdom of hype, the open states should have dropped like flies, but there were very little difference in attrition. Politicians are not scientists but are good at emotional manipulation, with Democrats more willing to be manipulated.
One might conclude from that experiment, that if the common wisdom was true, being a Republican, like being in essential services, gave you an immunity boost, since you got similar results with less precautions. It also showed that masks were not as effective against the virus, as the hype. This was expected, since even N95 and KN95 masks, which were the gold standard, were only 95% effective, while most of the masks available and re-used were 30-60% effective. Virus can get through. As an essential worker I had access to KN95 and N95, masks but I opted for the lighter 50% efficient masks, since it was easier to breath. Fear can create stress and stress can lower your immunity. If you lack fear, your immune system can work better.
Very early, it was discovered the virus had specific targets, connected to the elderly, people with respiratory and circulatory issues, as well as obesity. I do not have any of these issues, other than being late middle aged. I am not too worried about being a control for science integrity. I have already been part of one experiment and those results suggest that I am naturally immune. The data suggests that over 90% of the population is immune, but very few believe it, due to the hype and fear.
The question I have is since people can spread virus through fluid exchange, can immune people spread their immunity, through the same type of fluid exchange? In other words, if I got the virus and my body ground it down, my body fluids will contain specific immune factors and viral fragments, instead of increasing concentrations of active virus. If I sneeze or cough, do I spread a type of natural vaccine?
Masks can slow the entry of the virus into my system in proportional to mask efficiency. However, a mask would also reduce the amount of natural vaccine output from immune people by the same amount. This could explain the similarity in Democrats and Republican states, in spite of different approaches. Democrats absorbed less virus through shutting down and strict mask regulation, but they decreased the spread of natural immunity factors among each other. The opposite happened in Republican states; more natural immunity could be spread but with a higher viral exposure. The result appears to have been a wash with similar final results.
Essential services attrition was similar to the controls at home. This could have been due to the extra precautions, all day long, required for customers and visitors. However, there were also less precautions, among your own team, so natural immunity factors could still be obtained from each other, beyond your immediate families. Controls help science learn about the global affect of the virus and natural immunity.
