Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Well it's not anti vaccine as much as over the mask mandates for those already vaccinated.
They are pro vax as well , but not privy for forcing people to take it.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
YouTube Blocks All Anti-Vaccine Content
- Thread starter Debater Slayer
- Start date
They are pro vax as well , but not privy for forcing people to take it.
epronovost
Well-Known Member
Any person who consult several doctor who all gave them the same recommendation based on sound science and demonstrable facts and then chooses to not follow them is a fool. It might not be polite or ethical for a doctor to say so, but the reality is that such a person is an idiot. If you ask three mathematicians the 19th digit of pie, yet still don't accept their answer, you are a fool. If you ask three doctors if you should take one of the COVID-19 vaccine and they all answer yes and then not do it, you are equally a fool. This isn't a subjective question; a matter of opinion. It's a matter of fact.
Any person who claims to not have the proper knowledge to assess if they should take one of the COVID-19 vaccine or believe, without expert support, that they don't need to and yet don't consult doctors to have their expert opinion on their specific case; that person is a malicious liar who isn't actually doubtful.
In which case it was pointless and/or misleading for you to bring them up in the first place.
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
But the doctors know the patient. Exerts on tv do not. One gives individual feedback while the other in groups stats that may or may not apply to everyone the way it's portrayed.
If someone didnt listen to "their" doctors, I'd disagree but respect it because each patient deserves that. People respect that right of dying patients.
Anyone who base their decision from doctors that don't know them "and" say their views are 100% correct I'd raise an eye. Even doctors don't claim that much knowledge insofar they don't admit if they made wrong conclusions.
Maybe if experts admit to mistakes more skeptical people would vax.
epronovost
Well-Known Member
That's relevant only in so far a person has a special medical condition. The overwhelming majority of person don't need individual reassurance since there is nothing their doctor would say that would come as a surprise. People are most often aware of their medical condition and pre-existing problems. Hell, the overwhelming majority of the population have taken vaccines on multiple occasions and generally know what to expect as side effects too.
Again, hesitating to take an expert advice given to the general population is comprehensible. Not consulting doctors promptly in that situation and/or not following their advice is stupidity, malice or misinformed dogmatic opinion. If an anti-vax person hasn't consulted their doctor or chose not to follow their advice, that person is a fool or malicious.
Why should anyone respect the decision of a person who is obviously wrong? Why would anyone respect a decision that is not only wrongheaded, but also potentially dangerous for other people than themselves? Nobody respects the decision of a drunk person to drive even if they claim they have yet to kill anybody yet and don't feel like they will. Nobody should respect a foolish decision that might endanger others. That's the case with people refusing to take the vaccine without medical exemption.
Twilight Hue
Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Not really. In light the vaccine itself remains a contention as to why people don't want it in the first place.
If it dosent get rid of the mask requirement, what's the point of taking it if it actually does nothing to remove those requirements?
It's a valid point made by some who are concerned about effectiveness and creates mixed signals.
Especially after announcements like this...
It creates distrust.
Not sure what you're saying here.
Regardless of whether or not any that's true it's still irrelevant to the conversation that you were having with @ratiocinator
You were discussion misinformation related to the vaccine itself.
You.were implying that the doctors that weren't in the pocket of the evil empire had different ideas about the vaccine itself from all of the supposed governmental/corporate medical lackeys, not about any resultant legislation.
So does moving the goal posts.
Alienistic
Anti-conformity
But if you get many vaccines/jabs- you get to virtue signal to the world how intelligent you are (even if you have no immunity), what a selfless and amazingly good human and citizen you are for obeying anyone that has an “expert” label and then gang up on with the herd and bash those who don’t.
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
I did mention the majority don't but the point is be more critical in healthcare recommendations from people you don't know. But it's more of a take at your own risk. The vaccine isn't dangerous "and" it's ideal to question what you're given.
But the difference though is you don't see the propaganda involved. Most people may take their doctors recommendation but consider him a fake if he pushed it. Many medical problems happen as a result.
What is your opinion that people can't bring lawsuits for vaccine related issues rather than just reporting it?
Obviously? I don't see they are obviously wrong.
If they had COVID vac or not and went out not social distancing, yes. I see that wrong. Just not vaccinating. I don't know enough to judge.
Medical exemptions don't matter. They put people endanger too.
If you don't add them it's not health concern but political. You're more concerned about people's choices but not being unvaccinated in and of itself.
There's not enough information to know who has COVID based on solely on their vac status.
What about those vac who may be asymptomatic with delta?
Your suggestion was asking your doctor whether to get the vaccine. You decided NOT to get vaccinated without expert advice. So you don't even take your own advice.
Last edited by a moderator:
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
No. I said whoever gets the vaccine if appropriate ask their doctor not CDC.
I guess you don't want to read what I say.
I'll say it again:
There is no reason for me to ask a doctor about a vaccine I will not take.
It is a waste if his time and mine.
Last edited by a moderator:
epronovost
Well-Known Member
That's simply a common trope in all of medicine. Treatments sometime have side effect. You can sue a pharmaceutical company if there was foul play like hiding side effect or if there was no due diligence to identify these side effects.
That you don't know that at this point in time, over a year and half into the pandemic and over 9 months since the first vaccination took place, makes you either malicious by willingly refusing to inform yourself despite having ample access to good information (including a doctor), an idiot who simply can't understand simple medical advices from your own doctor or so misinformed by all the crap and rumors peddled in social and traditional media about vaccines that you might consider yourself the posterchild of the sort of people who really need the decision presented in the OP to make sensible, enlightened decisions.
Aštra’el
Aštara, Blade of Aštoreth
No, they are not. You may feel passionately about your opinions as many people do, but that does not make the opinions of those you disagree with “objectively wrong”.
epronovost
Well-Known Member
In that specific case yes. Taking the COVID-19 vaccine if you can take it safely (and almost everybody can) is better for your health and that of the society in which you live than not taking it. That's an objective, measurable and even quantifiable fact. I know this isn't always true, but medical risk assessment isn't a subjective question, it's an objective one with a quantifiable answer.
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
I don't see how repeating myself of being informed will change your opinions otherwise, but I still maintain you're generalizing a whole population of unvaccinated people. You don't know why they are unvaccinated, their health, the reasons for their choices, and just any other factor. Opinions aren't facts, though.
Vaccinated people can be asymptomatic with the Delta. They can put others in danger and kill them just like unvaccinated people.
The rarity of this doesn't invalidate the probability of it happening (if you don't take that probability for granted). No one is scot free. Everyone could be asymptomatic.
So in that respect we can kill one another by being asymptomatic vaccinated or not.
I can only see your point if someone Did have COVID and went around infecting people. However, because we all could be asymptomatic, we either can all be endangering others or we can accept we don't know and take precautions whether we choose to vaccinate or not.
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
@epronovost There is a loophole in provaxxer logic and its at the tip of my tongue.
You're saying that facts about the vaccine should "make" people choose to vaccinate.
It being common sense, immoral, or stupid are all opinions.
However, how can you prove that "common sense" enough to discern the intelligence and morality of unvaccinated people's decisions?
Common sense is subjective. Unless you can prove that unvaccinated people have COVID, it's all opinion. I mean, I use science to know which meds to take and which treatments to get. If science told me other people are dangerous because they May infect and kill me, I'd be highly suspicious. This can lead to borderline paranoia with government, media, and science making it worse. Let scientist advice per their expertise. Can you imagine if an expert talked about his opposition on some facts of the vaccine how much they would censor his views as misinformation?
Science doesn't do this. Politics does.
You're saying that facts about the vaccine should "make" people choose to vaccinate.
It being common sense, immoral, or stupid are all opinions.
However, how can you prove that "common sense" enough to discern the intelligence and morality of unvaccinated people's decisions?
Common sense is subjective. Unless you can prove that unvaccinated people have COVID, it's all opinion. I mean, I use science to know which meds to take and which treatments to get. If science told me other people are dangerous because they May infect and kill me, I'd be highly suspicious. This can lead to borderline paranoia with government, media, and science making it worse. Let scientist advice per their expertise. Can you imagine if an expert talked about his opposition on some facts of the vaccine how much they would censor his views as misinformation?
Science doesn't do this. Politics does.
epronovost
Well-Known Member
If its their health, their decision was the correct one. If it was by personal choice, no matter the reason, that reason is simply bull****.
That's precisely why you should get vaccinated. It's just like driving. Anybody who drives a motor vehicle could kill someone; those who are drunk while driving increase dramatically their chance of killing someone and/or themselves. Those who are vaccinated could get the disease and die from it or pass it on to someone else who could die from it, but the chances of this happening is vastly inferior to those who aren't vaccinated. The exact number is 98% less chance of dying and around 70% less chances to transmit the disease. That's simply a fact. That's why driving drunk isn't respected; that's why not being vaccinated when you can isn't respectable either. It's both stupid and dangerous. 98% less chance of dying or being seriously ill and 70% less chance of transmitting the disease is a massive improvement over nothing and the risk of falling seriously ill from the vaccine is about 1 in 200 000 (or 0.000005%).
Last edited:
Why would anyone not trust the CDC (after trump)? Or for that matter, why would anyone not trust expert public health officials? I got vaccinated because I trust experts and it was my duty to society. I've had no ill effects.
You're a non-expert deciding to not get the vaccination for reasons that are not rational. We know. We have gone over this. You don't want expert advice because you don't seem to trust experts. Or you have some irrational fear. Who knows.
As long as you stay at home and don't go into society for any reason you won't pose a threat.
Last edited by a moderator:
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
Correct is subjective as with common sense.
This has nothing to do with me.
It is up to the individual person whether he or she wants to take the vaccine and I hope people take or don't take the vaccine based on sound assessment.
Since you can only infect people if you have COVID and any person vaccinated and not can infect others, that excuse is moot. Facts aren't biased, people are. Anyone who reads the facts derive different conclusions but the facts themselves aren't "common sense." They evolve. Scientist learn new things. Nothing is fixed.
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
People shouldn't depend only on the CDC for healthcare advice. In the US there are disclaimers on health sites that say information on said site are for informational purposes only. Here's an example https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/hearingloss/freematerials/just-in-time-for-pcp.pdf
DISCLAIMER: Information about organizations,
books, videos, and any other material outside the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is
included for information purposes only. CDC has no
control over the information at these sites. Views and
opinions of these organizations are not necessarily
those of CDC, the U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS), or the U.S. Public Health
Service (PHS)
The vaccine isn't inherently dangerous,
so people take it at their own risk.
It does help to know CDC, WHO, and other sites are authoritative for information purposes (research for example). I find it very discerning that CDC and government doesn't mention this to people. If it's from the experts I'm sure mentioning this they would listen.
I said I don't get the vaccine because I don't warrant the risk, never got one, and side affects do concern me as well as the way its pushed.
My life was saved by experts in their field.
The context is not to take every information as if it were from god.
I'd only pose a threat if I had COVID. Since I don't, the threat is perceived and many provaxxers tend to be the ones who harbor it insofar to make it a big deal our economy is faltering because of it.
Anything else you add is your opinion. Beliefs aren't facts.