3 ms·

This post is caused by phone call I had earlier, where family members strongly suggested I shouldn't get vaccinated as the side effects are supposedly more like

This post is caused by phone call I had earlier, where family members strongly suggested I shouldn't get vaccinated as the side effects are supposedly more likely to occur then a critical infection...

DoreenMichele 5y ago
The decision to vaccinate or not vaccinate should not be based on general data. It should be based on personal stuff specific to your life. Some good reasons to vaccinate: 1. You need proof of it so you can travel. 2. You have to have it to do your job. 3. You have reason to believe this will be better for you than not vaccinating. Some good reasons to not vaccinate: 1. You've had a severe reaction to past vaccines. 2. You have an underlying medical condition that makes it contraindicated. If you don't have strong reasons either for or against particular to your specific situation, then it's probably a good idea to err on the side of getting vaccinated to help stop the spread of a global health crisis. Covid and the vaccine for it seem to be mostly problematic due to what they do to your blood rather than actual respiratory problems. If you don't have any blood related disorders, it's probably not particularly dangerous. I am not a doctor. I do have a serious medical condition and read and think a lot about such things. For other kinds of info, it sounds like you need to learn more about what kinds of evidence constitutes strong evidence. One strong piece of evidence can overturn multiple weak pieces of evidence and it's important to know how to judge such things. For some domains of knowledge, there is no substitute for simply getting educated. Being knowledgeable about one thing doesn't necessarily prepare you for judging other things. Sometimes it actually leads you astray if they are different enough.
- 411111111111111 5y ago
  Thank you for responding! > For other kinds of info, it sounds like you need to learn more about what kinds of evidence constitutes strong evidence. One strong piece of evidence can overturn multiple weak pieces of evidence and it's important to know how to judge such things. i am aware of this, but it is hard to actually pay attention to this at all times. my personal rule of thumb has always been that a testable/falsifiable thesis is always more trustworthy then one that is not. But a lot of the highly volatile topics dont have any like that, because actually doing so would be immoral or unrealistic to actually test. They always end up with meta analysis being done on both sides, which can always be portrayed in whatever way you wish. I grew up in a family as the youngest. From my immature point of few as a child back then, everyone looked very knowledgeable and rational. Over the years, everyone in my family increasingly argued with emotions and link videos to people that are - from my point of view - incredibly manipulative. Now I'm in my thirties and everyone in my family seems to see the covid situation as a conspiracy. There is an endless stream of discussions from often quite knowledgeable people doing various meta analysis, showing how there is no/negligible danger, how the tests do not actually work, that the virus is older then 2019 - with the only change being that we now pay attention to it and so much more. As a software/devops engineer, i feel unqualified to have an opinion on the matter. I wouldn't know the first thing about verifying or falsifying any of these theories. nevertheless, I am told that I should research and decide for myself, and that just trusting the official channels is negligent or even dangerous. And the thing is that I agree on the last point. I know my government (germany) to be corrupt beyond any doubt. All of them have been proven to have stolen public money, participated in nepotism and supported policies which made our society objectively worse off while profiting various parties - with no consequences to the politicians. I just hope we will have less controversy on this topic in the future, though it doesn't really look like there is any chance of this happening.
  - DoreenMichele 5y ago
    You need to find ways to disentangle yourself from the family drama. Disengage as much as possible. Arguing with it tends to make things worse. But a lot of the highly volatile topics dont have any like that, because actually doing so would be immoral or unrealistic to actually test. Things that can't be tested can still be checked against known good mental models and historical incidents. There is an endless stream of discussions from often quite knowledgeable people doing various meta analysis, showing how there is no/negligible danger, how the tests do not actually work, that the virus is older then 2019 - with the only change being that we now pay attention to it and so much more. As a software/devops engineer, i feel unqualified to have an opinion on the matter. What you are describing is really an issue of unhealthy social dynamics. It has nothing to do with the question you asked and everything to do with knowing how to handle people. It's perfectly fine to not have an opinion on every topic under the sun. People who have and share strong opinions on things they are ignorant about are called blowhards. Just don't discuss things you don't know enough about to have an informed opinion about. Don't let people drag you into discussions of such things. At most, listen politely. If that's making you uncomfortable or they are insisting you agree with them or insisting you act on their opinion, don't engage. Shut it down. I know my government (germany) to be corrupt beyond any doubt. "The News" tends to be bad news and focuses on everything that goes wrong. No one is perfect and people make mistakes and that's reality, but listening too much to the news will convince you things are worse than they really are. There is a global health crisis ongoing, so people are stressed out. You see more social weirdness during this kind of crisis. Politely let people know "I know you are stressed out about all of this. So am I. And for my own mental health, I just can't discuss this with you. Thank you for understanding." As for actual actionable decisions related to the pandemic, it doesn't matter where the virus came from. It matters that you protect your health and make choices rooted in what kind of future you want. If travel is an important part of your life, you likely need to vaccinate to keep doing that. So look to your future and questions like that, not to the past and drama surrounding questions of how we got here. Understanding how we got here can be valuable sometimes for resolving a problem. But that's not what your family is doing. Ignore all that. Think about what you need to do to not get sick, not get fired from your job, not end up barred from things that matter to you, etc.

DoreenMichele 5y ago

The decision to vaccinate or not vaccinate should not be based on general data. It should be based on personal stuff specific to your life. Some good reasons to vaccinate: 1. You need proof of it so you can travel. 2. You have to have it to do your job. 3. You have reason to believe this will be better for you than not vaccinating. Some good reasons to not vaccinate: 1. You've had a severe reaction to past vaccines. 2. You have an underlying medical condition that makes it contraindicated. If you don't have strong reasons either for or against particular to your specific situation, then it's probably a good idea to err on the side of getting vaccinated to help stop the spread of a global health crisis. Covid and the vaccine for it seem to be mostly problematic due to what they do to your blood rather than actual respiratory problems. If you don't have any blood related disorders, it's probably not particularly dangerous. I am not a doctor. I do have a serious medical condition and read and think a lot about such things. For other kinds of info, it sounds like you need to learn more about what kinds of evidence constitutes strong evidence. One strong piece of evidence can overturn multiple weak pieces of evidence and it's important to know how to judge such things. For some domains of knowledge, there is no substitute for simply getting educated. Being knowledgeable about one thing doesn't necessarily prepare you for judging other things. Sometimes it actually leads you astray if they are different enough.

411111111111111 5y ago
Thank you for responding! > For other kinds of info, it sounds like you need to learn more about what kinds of evidence constitutes strong evidence. One strong piece of evidence can overturn multiple weak pieces of evidence and it's important to know how to judge such things. i am aware of this, but it is hard to actually pay attention to this at all times. my personal rule of thumb has always been that a testable/falsifiable thesis is always more trustworthy then one that is not. But a lot of the highly volatile topics dont have any like that, because actually doing so would be immoral or unrealistic to actually test. They always end up with meta analysis being done on both sides, which can always be portrayed in whatever way you wish. I grew up in a family as the youngest. From my immature point of few as a child back then, everyone looked very knowledgeable and rational. Over the years, everyone in my family increasingly argued with emotions and link videos to people that are - from my point of view - incredibly manipulative. Now I'm in my thirties and everyone in my family seems to see the covid situation as a conspiracy. There is an endless stream of discussions from often quite knowledgeable people doing various meta analysis, showing how there is no/negligible danger, how the tests do not actually work, that the virus is older then 2019 - with the only change being that we now pay attention to it and so much more. As a software/devops engineer, i feel unqualified to have an opinion on the matter. I wouldn't know the first thing about verifying or falsifying any of these theories. nevertheless, I am told that I should research and decide for myself, and that just trusting the official channels is negligent or even dangerous. And the thing is that I agree on the last point. I know my government (germany) to be corrupt beyond any doubt. All of them have been proven to have stolen public money, participated in nepotism and supported policies which made our society objectively worse off while profiting various parties - with no consequences to the politicians. I just hope we will have less controversy on this topic in the future, though it doesn't really look like there is any chance of this happening.
- DoreenMichele 5y ago
  You need to find ways to disentangle yourself from the family drama. Disengage as much as possible. Arguing with it tends to make things worse. But a lot of the highly volatile topics dont have any like that, because actually doing so would be immoral or unrealistic to actually test. Things that can't be tested can still be checked against known good mental models and historical incidents. There is an endless stream of discussions from often quite knowledgeable people doing various meta analysis, showing how there is no/negligible danger, how the tests do not actually work, that the virus is older then 2019 - with the only change being that we now pay attention to it and so much more. As a software/devops engineer, i feel unqualified to have an opinion on the matter. What you are describing is really an issue of unhealthy social dynamics. It has nothing to do with the question you asked and everything to do with knowing how to handle people. It's perfectly fine to not have an opinion on every topic under the sun. People who have and share strong opinions on things they are ignorant about are called blowhards. Just don't discuss things you don't know enough about to have an informed opinion about. Don't let people drag you into discussions of such things. At most, listen politely. If that's making you uncomfortable or they are insisting you agree with them or insisting you act on their opinion, don't engage. Shut it down. I know my government (germany) to be corrupt beyond any doubt. "The News" tends to be bad news and focuses on everything that goes wrong. No one is perfect and people make mistakes and that's reality, but listening too much to the news will convince you things are worse than they really are. There is a global health crisis ongoing, so people are stressed out. You see more social weirdness during this kind of crisis. Politely let people know "I know you are stressed out about all of this. So am I. And for my own mental health, I just can't discuss this with you. Thank you for understanding." As for actual actionable decisions related to the pandemic, it doesn't matter where the virus came from. It matters that you protect your health and make choices rooted in what kind of future you want. If travel is an important part of your life, you likely need to vaccinate to keep doing that. So look to your future and questions like that, not to the past and drama surrounding questions of how we got here. Understanding how we got here can be valuable sometimes for resolving a problem. But that's not what your family is doing. Ignore all that. Think about what you need to do to not get sick, not get fired from your job, not end up barred from things that matter to you, etc.