4 ms·

Why are people so STUPID? Why would you A) not protect your child from harmful disease by vaccination. B) Put other people at risk by reducing herd immunity. Wh

by jjuhl 7y ago

Why are people so STUPID? Why would you A) not protect your child from harmful disease by vaccination. B) Put other people at risk by reducing herd immunity. Why? Fuck, I hate humanity.

cameronbrown 7y ago
This is the simply the result of the US education system. You reap what you sow as a country, but it's a tragedy that defenseless children will be the ones who bare the brunt of it.
- gigatexal 7y ago
  I agree! It's the gradual dumbing down of the populace that is one of the primary causes. Someone asserted a link to autism from vaccines and then the whole thing took like gasoline on a fire.
- StreamBright 7y ago
  Not necessarily, this is the result of many things combined. Social media made it super easy to spread lies and misinformation. You could have a broken education before, but without the means to distribute your lies, your impact on society was small. Also Hollywood celebrities are the biggest contributors to anti-vaccination sentiment. https://jezebel.com/heres-a-fairly-comprehensive-list-of-anti-vaccination-c-1714760128 https://jezebel.com/heres-a-fairly-comprehensive-list-of-ant...
  - cameronbrown 7y ago
    No. Social media is an extension of ourselves. Better education stops lies, not censorship - which is the only viable alternative to fake news and come with all the obvious pitfalls.
- _red 7y ago
  Should "undocumented immigrants" be vaccinated? How could that be achieved?
  - cameronbrown 7y ago
    They need to be documented obviously. Valid medical records are an absolute must, or more people will end up dead. Refugees are a different matter but should still be taken care of.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
klntsky 7y ago
No, avoiding vaccination is clever for two reasons: 1. There is a risk of harm from the vaccine itself. 2. When everyone else is vaccinated, it does not statistically matter whether you are vaccinated or not. So the best strategy to reduce your own risks is to try to impose vaccination on everyone nearby except yourself.
- danharaj 7y ago
  Executing that strategy has a cost much higher than the risk of vaccine complications. So it's not the best strategy by any means.
  - klntsky 7y ago
    It depends on the variables. Besides, we can't even measure the risks.
- jjuhl 7y ago
  "There is a risk of harm from the vaccine itself" - A very low risk. And the risk from the disease itself is much higher.
  - logicchains 7y ago
    The OP's point was that the risk of _catching_ the disease might be even lower, _if_ everybody else is vaccinated.
- logicchains 7y ago
  Surprised this was downvoted. From a purely self-interested perspective it makes sense. For anyone who's not aware of the (very low) risk of harm from various vaccines, see https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/side-effects.htm https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/side-effects.htm. "Life-threatening severe illness with organ failure (about 1 person in 250,000). More than half the people who suffer this side effect die.", for instance, is a side effect of the yellow fever vaccination, which might still be a higher chance than the chance of catching yellow fever, especially if everybody else has been vaccinated against it. Of course it doesn't hold so well when not everybody else has been vaccinated, as then the chance of catching the disease is higher. That's presumably why OP added the qualifier "everybody else is vaccinated".
newcrobuzon 7y ago
In some cases (certainly not all) the answer to your question is: Because you actually study the clinical trials. Because you read all the epidemiological studies. Because you try to understand the pharmacokinetics of the vaccines. And after then you make a (very hard) decision weighing all the risks and unknowns on both ends.

by jjuhl 7y ago

Why are people so STUPID? Why would you A) not protect your child from harmful disease by vaccination. B) Put other people at risk by reducing herd immunity. Why? Fuck, I hate humanity.

cameronbrown 7y ago

This is the simply the result of the US education system. You reap what you sow as a country, but it's a tragedy that defenseless children will be the ones who bare the brunt of it.

gigatexal 7y ago
I agree! It's the gradual dumbing down of the populace that is one of the primary causes. Someone asserted a link to autism from vaccines and then the whole thing took like gasoline on a fire.
StreamBright 7y ago
Not necessarily, this is the result of many things combined. Social media made it super easy to spread lies and misinformation. You could have a broken education before, but without the means to distribute your lies, your impact on society was small. Also Hollywood celebrities are the biggest contributors to anti-vaccination sentiment. https://jezebel.com/heres-a-fairly-comprehensive-list-of-anti-vaccination-c-1714760128 https://jezebel.com/heres-a-fairly-comprehensive-list-of-ant...
- cameronbrown 7y ago
  No. Social media is an extension of ourselves. Better education stops lies, not censorship - which is the only viable alternative to fake news and come with all the obvious pitfalls.
_red 7y ago
Should "undocumented immigrants" be vaccinated? How could that be achieved?
- cameronbrown 7y ago
  They need to be documented obviously. Valid medical records are an absolute must, or more people will end up dead. Refugees are a different matter but should still be taken care of.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

klntsky 7y ago

No, avoiding vaccination is clever for two reasons: 1. There is a risk of harm from the vaccine itself. 2. When everyone else is vaccinated, it does not statistically matter whether you are vaccinated or not. So the best strategy to reduce your own risks is to try to impose vaccination on everyone nearby except yourself.

danharaj 7y ago
Executing that strategy has a cost much higher than the risk of vaccine complications. So it's not the best strategy by any means.
- klntsky 7y ago
  It depends on the variables. Besides, we can't even measure the risks.
jjuhl 7y ago
"There is a risk of harm from the vaccine itself" - A very low risk. And the risk from the disease itself is much higher.
- logicchains 7y ago
  The OP's point was that the risk of _catching_ the disease might be even lower, _if_ everybody else is vaccinated.
logicchains 7y ago
Surprised this was downvoted. From a purely self-interested perspective it makes sense. For anyone who's not aware of the (very low) risk of harm from various vaccines, see https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/side-effects.htm https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/side-effects.htm. "Life-threatening severe illness with organ failure (about 1 person in 250,000). More than half the people who suffer this side effect die.", for instance, is a side effect of the yellow fever vaccination, which might still be a higher chance than the chance of catching yellow fever, especially if everybody else has been vaccinated against it. Of course it doesn't hold so well when not everybody else has been vaccinated, as then the chance of catching the disease is higher. That's presumably why OP added the qualifier "everybody else is vaccinated".

newcrobuzon 7y ago

In some cases (certainly not all) the answer to your question is: Because you actually study the clinical trials. Because you read all the epidemiological studies. Because you try to understand the pharmacokinetics of the vaccines. And after then you make a (very hard) decision weighing all the risks and unknowns on both ends.