6 ms·

> As a healthy 30 year old I would prefer to take my risk with covid than take these vaccines. Unfortunate that you're also unilaterally forcing everyone you c

> As a healthy 30 year old I would prefer to take my risk with covid than take these vaccines. Unfortunate that you're also unilaterally forcing everyone you come into contact with to take that same risk if you are infected without realizing it.

trhway 5y ago
> everyone you come into contact with to take that same risk how come so if those "everyone" got vaccinated? I mean all the risk groups who has clearly higher risk from covid than vaccine should definitely go for vaccine. The rest - personal choice of risk. And as a healthy 49 years old, i'm taking my chance with covid and have no plans for vaccination (i was always laughing at anti-vaxxers, yet seeing all misinformation and propaganda (the stench of USSR strength propaganda is just overwhelming) around covid i think i'll pass this one)
- PostThisTooFast 5y ago
  Then you're an asshole, because you make yourself a petri dish for virus mutation that could produce a much deadlier variant and cost us all dearly... again.
- nrb 5y ago
  "everyone" currently excludes a large number of people who would otherwise like to be immunized for a variety of reasons (age, medical risks), and vaccines are not 100% effective
- eganist 5y ago
  > (i was always laughing at anti-vaxxers, yet seeing all misinformation and propaganda (the smell of USSR strength propaganda is just overwhelming) around covid i think i'll pass this one) No, you weren't. A common false-flag (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag) attack involves presenting oneself as a member of an opposing viewpoint in order to find adherents for the desired viewpoint. The tell is your use of the words "misinformation" and "propaganda." People who tend to levy such claims also tend to share more of it: https://www.colorado.edu/today/2020/06/17/who-shares-most-fake-news-new-study-sheds-light https://www.colorado.edu/today/2020/06/17/who-shares-most-fa... - "The paper, in the journal Human Communication Research, also found that people who lack trust in conventional media, and in one another, post misinformation more often." I was always pro-vax, and that hasn't changed with this vaccine.
  - trhway 5y ago
    >The tell is your use of the words "misinformation" and "propaganda." People who tend to levy such claims also tend to share more of it you said it yourself. It is kind of ironically not surprising that you levied the above mentioned claim and actually posted the misinformation and propaganda yourself - see below. >No, you weren't. you really don't know, yet you're making with complete confidence such a completely false blatantly contradicting facts[0] statement just because it suits your narrative >A common false-flag ... and helps you to advance your agenda. Thus your post is a clear example of misinformation and propaganda. Not sure that you're doing it intentionally, probably you're just caught up in that mob hysteria. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8860543 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8860543
    - mike_hearn 5y ago
      It's very amusing you were actually able to show yourself laughing at anti-vaxers right here on HN, thus winning the argument against eganist completely. You should probably have called that out more clearly. I guessed what might be in the link but it would have been good to quote it.
      - eganist 5y ago
        > It's very amusing you were actually able to show yourself laughing at anti-vaxers right here on HN, thus winning the argument against eganist completely. You should probably have called that out more clearly. I guessed what might be in the link but it would have been good to quote it. My guess is that what drew so much ire was the tone and presentation. Similar to "thus winning the argument against eganist completely" when it was less of an argument and more of an immune response to common patterns that proved in this case to be a false positive. But yes, simply going with quoting the past post, drawing attention to it very clearly in text ("Please see linked one example of a past post where I've declared my own pro-vaccine views"), and then using that past position to contextualize their current aversion would've been great for constructive engagement. Water under the bridge. Either way, sorry trhway; glad you're not anti-vax, but hoping to win you over to the mRNA side (though feel free to laugh at me on my way to the grave if I die of vaccine induced long term effects. I guess I'll have earned it at that point).
- munificent 5y ago
  > how come so if those "everyone" got vaccinated? Well, for starters, the vaccine isn't available for anyone under the age of 12.
- weaksauce 5y ago
  > And as a healthy 49 years old, i'm taking my chance with covid and have no plans for vaccination so you would rather be at between a 1 in 500 and a 1 in 250 risk of dying in your age group + a much higher risk than that of some long covid symptoms that are debilitating/unknown if they will ever get better vs. a 1 in a 1,000,000 chance you get something that might be bad but is likely survivable... I don't understand the anti-vaxxer "logic"
  - adamiscool8 5y ago
    Not OP but the chance of hospitalization in that age bracket is about 0.2% [0] There appears to be at least a 20% chance that post-vaccine someone of that age will feel rough enough to take medication [1]. People who are currently healthy choosing to avoid the risk of immediate short-term pain when presented with a small, remote gain seems like classic prospect theory! [0] https://www.statista.com/statistics/1122354/covid-19-us-hospital-rate-by-age/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1122354/covid-19-us-hosp... [1] https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/info-by-product/pfizer/reactogenicity.html#18-systemic-reactions https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/info-by-product/pfizer...
    - AshamedCaptain 5y ago
      20% chance of feeling rough enough to take medication does not seem much higher than the human average. Without comparing to placebo it is meaningless.
      - adamiscool8 5y ago
        They did compare it to placebo, plus, humans don’t compare to placebo they compare to their status quo condition.
    - weaksauce 5y ago
      you are conflating "rough enough to take a medication" with being "so sick you are in the hospital with covid." crazy comparison. I got my vaccine and the second shot hit me hard enough that I had to take some ibuprofen. Not a single regret and it wasn't that bad. you are comparing apples to oranges.

trhway 5y ago

> everyone you come into contact with to take that same risk how come so if those "everyone" got vaccinated? I mean all the risk groups who has clearly higher risk from covid than vaccine should definitely go for vaccine. The rest - personal choice of risk. And as a healthy 49 years old, i'm taking my chance with covid and have no plans for vaccination (i was always laughing at anti-vaxxers, yet seeing all misinformation and propaganda (the stench of USSR strength propaganda is just overwhelming) around covid i think i'll pass this one)

PostThisTooFast 5y ago
Then you're an asshole, because you make yourself a petri dish for virus mutation that could produce a much deadlier variant and cost us all dearly... again.
nrb 5y ago
"everyone" currently excludes a large number of people who would otherwise like to be immunized for a variety of reasons (age, medical risks), and vaccines are not 100% effective
eganist 5y ago
> (i was always laughing at anti-vaxxers, yet seeing all misinformation and propaganda (the smell of USSR strength propaganda is just overwhelming) around covid i think i'll pass this one) No, you weren't. A common false-flag (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag) attack involves presenting oneself as a member of an opposing viewpoint in order to find adherents for the desired viewpoint. The tell is your use of the words "misinformation" and "propaganda." People who tend to levy such claims also tend to share more of it: https://www.colorado.edu/today/2020/06/17/who-shares-most-fake-news-new-study-sheds-light https://www.colorado.edu/today/2020/06/17/who-shares-most-fa... - "The paper, in the journal Human Communication Research, also found that people who lack trust in conventional media, and in one another, post misinformation more often." I was always pro-vax, and that hasn't changed with this vaccine.
- trhway 5y ago
  >The tell is your use of the words "misinformation" and "propaganda." People who tend to levy such claims also tend to share more of it you said it yourself. It is kind of ironically not surprising that you levied the above mentioned claim and actually posted the misinformation and propaganda yourself - see below. >No, you weren't. you really don't know, yet you're making with complete confidence such a completely false blatantly contradicting facts[0] statement just because it suits your narrative >A common false-flag ... and helps you to advance your agenda. Thus your post is a clear example of misinformation and propaganda. Not sure that you're doing it intentionally, probably you're just caught up in that mob hysteria. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8860543 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8860543
  - mike_hearn 5y ago
    It's very amusing you were actually able to show yourself laughing at anti-vaxers right here on HN, thus winning the argument against eganist completely. You should probably have called that out more clearly. I guessed what might be in the link but it would have been good to quote it.
    - eganist 5y ago
      > It's very amusing you were actually able to show yourself laughing at anti-vaxers right here on HN, thus winning the argument against eganist completely. You should probably have called that out more clearly. I guessed what might be in the link but it would have been good to quote it. My guess is that what drew so much ire was the tone and presentation. Similar to "thus winning the argument against eganist completely" when it was less of an argument and more of an immune response to common patterns that proved in this case to be a false positive. But yes, simply going with quoting the past post, drawing attention to it very clearly in text ("Please see linked one example of a past post where I've declared my own pro-vaccine views"), and then using that past position to contextualize their current aversion would've been great for constructive engagement. Water under the bridge. Either way, sorry trhway; glad you're not anti-vax, but hoping to win you over to the mRNA side (though feel free to laugh at me on my way to the grave if I die of vaccine induced long term effects. I guess I'll have earned it at that point).
munificent 5y ago
> how come so if those "everyone" got vaccinated? Well, for starters, the vaccine isn't available for anyone under the age of 12.
weaksauce 5y ago
> And as a healthy 49 years old, i'm taking my chance with covid and have no plans for vaccination so you would rather be at between a 1 in 500 and a 1 in 250 risk of dying in your age group + a much higher risk than that of some long covid symptoms that are debilitating/unknown if they will ever get better vs. a 1 in a 1,000,000 chance you get something that might be bad but is likely survivable... I don't understand the anti-vaxxer "logic"
- adamiscool8 5y ago
  Not OP but the chance of hospitalization in that age bracket is about 0.2% [0] There appears to be at least a 20% chance that post-vaccine someone of that age will feel rough enough to take medication [1]. People who are currently healthy choosing to avoid the risk of immediate short-term pain when presented with a small, remote gain seems like classic prospect theory! [0] https://www.statista.com/statistics/1122354/covid-19-us-hospital-rate-by-age/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1122354/covid-19-us-hosp... [1] https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/info-by-product/pfizer/reactogenicity.html#18-systemic-reactions https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/info-by-product/pfizer...
  - AshamedCaptain 5y ago
    20% chance of feeling rough enough to take medication does not seem much higher than the human average. Without comparing to placebo it is meaningless.
    - adamiscool8 5y ago
      They did compare it to placebo, plus, humans don’t compare to placebo they compare to their status quo condition.
  - weaksauce 5y ago
    you are conflating "rough enough to take a medication" with being "so sick you are in the hospital with covid." crazy comparison. I got my vaccine and the second shot hit me hard enough that I had to take some ibuprofen. Not a single regret and it wasn't that bad. you are comparing apples to oranges.