8 ms·

There are a LOT of anti-vaxxers who disingenuously couch their advocacy as "I'm only asking questions". It's no surprise when you've seen a 10:1 ratio of bad a

There are a LOT of anti-vaxxers who disingenuously couch their advocacy as "I'm only asking questions". It's no surprise when you've seen a 10:1 ratio of bad actors to good (or worse), one might get a little exasperated. In any case, I've recently been reading Lauren Sompayrac's "How the Immune System Works", and it's a technical overview of the immune system. It's not going to make you into a full blown immunologist, but it will give you the answers to most the questions you ask above, and a framework and vocabulary to begin to understand deeper academic immunology works. P.S. The immune system is FUCKING AWESOME. There's rarely a page where my mind is not blown. Edit: I misspelled "Sompayrac"; it is now correct.

chris_wot 5y ago
Is that a book?
- IvyMike 5y ago
  Yes: https://www.wiley.com/en-us/How+the+Immune+System+Works%2C+6th+Edition-p-9781119542124 https://www.wiley.com/en-us/How+the+Immune+System+Works%2C+6...
- cwt137 5y ago
  Yes. https://www.amazon.com/How-Immune-System-Works-dp-111954212X/dp/111954212X/ https://www.amazon.com/How-Immune-System-Works-dp-111954212X...
newsbinator 5y ago
That's fine- whether or not their question is disingenuous, it's almost always a reasonable question that has been asked and answered by researchers, or that has been asked and not been able to be answered (e.g. what are the long term effects of mRNA vaccines?). It's perfectly fine to say, "we don't know what are the long term effects of mRNA vaccines but we can guess they're unlikely to be worse than the long term effects of the thing they're vaccinating against, which you're almost certain to catch sooner or later".
walrus01 5y ago
> There are a LOT of anti-vaxxers who disingenuously couch their advocacy as "I'm only asking questions" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning
- canadianfella 5y ago
  I’ve been accused of this before and it’s fucking bullshit.
  - hashkb 5y ago
    Were you saying something racist? I'm just asking.
    - krastanov 5y ago
      Come on, really!? In a discussion about how trolls use "I am just asking", you decided that doing the same is a good idea. I am not op, but I have been accused of sealioning in the exact opposite direction: I was defending some curriculum based on ideas from critical race theory. Edit: Well, as the comment below alluded to, I probably missed a pretty obvious piece of sarcasm... This is certainly funny in hindsight.
      - walrus01 5y ago
        One of the difficult parts of text based debate and discussion is that it's impossible to determine from vocal inflection, tone of voice and method of delivery whether someone is genuinely a fool, simply cosplaying as one, being sarcastic or facetious, etc.
        hashkb 5y ago
        Oh, I'm definitely, genuinely a fool. For ever trying to get a point across on the internet.
      - hashkb 5y ago
jmspring 5y ago
Most of the Q-idiots are of the same mindset. "Go do the research" is a common phrase.
sjansen 5y ago
> There are a LOT of anti-vaxxers who disingenuously couch their advocacy as "I'm only asking questions". And they quickly reveal their bad faith, at which point they can safely be ignored. Or, if you don't feel like discussing it, it's easy enough to say "I don't know about that, but the anti-vaccine stuff sounds like lies to scare people so I decided to trust my doctor." If honest questions are met with hostility, while the anti-vaxxers are friendly and "helpful", guess who's going to be more influential?
- IvyMike 5y ago
  I agree, and that's why I try to answer questions with friendly answers. It wasn't so much that I was advocating for dismissing the question, I was just trying to explain why experts have gotten really, really tired, and might do so. (Also: My local county facebook group has no shortage of very vindictive, angry, and seeming inexhaustible anti-vaxxers.)
GPerson 5y ago
I’m having a hard time believing you’ve met worse than a 10:1 ratio, with respect to interest in vaccines, of “bad actors” to “good actors”. Here are some links to polls about American views on vaccines. It seems unlikely you’re running into this ratio without some major biasing factor. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/02/09/heres-how-many-americans-are-actually-anti-vaxxers/?outputType=amp https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/02/09/he... https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2021/03/05/growing-share-of-americans-say-they-plan-to-get-a-covid-19-vaccine-or-already-have https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2021/03/05/growing-share... (I’ll admit the numbers in September from the Pew poll are surprising to me) Granted, you’re further assuming the person asks questions about vaccines. In your description it seems to me that we’re already far away from scientific thinking as a society if the way we can confirm someone is anti-science is by whether they exhibit symptoms of any kind of curiosity. This sounds like what the previous commenter is talking about. Maybe you’re saying, “people who spread doubt in the form of a disingenuous question frequently do so in a particular social environment I’m a part of.”
- IvyMike 5y ago
  There is a major biasing factor; it's trivial to ask a question like "Have you looked at the data in VAERS that shows tens of thousands of adverse vaccine reactions??" It's not so trivial to answer the question in a way that explains how VAERS works, and why this conclusion is incorrect. This is the same with many possible questions. This specific scenario happens on my local Nextdoor groups all the time. I've answered responded with what I think is pretty clear and concise information, and then seem that same person ask the same question the very next day in a new thread. (And the next day, and the next...) I cannot help but conclude they're not really looking for an answer.
  - AnimalMuppet 5y ago
    > This specific scenario happens on my local Nextdoor groups all the time. I've answered responded with what I think is pretty clear and concise information, and then seem that same person ask the same question the very next day in a new thread. (And the next day, and the next...) I cannot help but conclude they're not really looking for an answer. Maybe I'm a jerk, but I'd be inclined to answer the second question with "I answered that yesterday. Why do you keep asking if you aren't going to listen to the answers?" And reply with that every single time they re-asked the question. But... Nextdoor... does that mean it's your physical neighbors? That might make me hesitate to do so. Or maybe I'd still do something like the same, but worded more gently and politely.

chris_wot 5y ago

Is that a book?

IvyMike 5y ago
Yes: https://www.wiley.com/en-us/How+the+Immune+System+Works%2C+6th+Edition-p-9781119542124 https://www.wiley.com/en-us/How+the+Immune+System+Works%2C+6...
cwt137 5y ago
Yes. https://www.amazon.com/How-Immune-System-Works-dp-111954212X/dp/111954212X/ https://www.amazon.com/How-Immune-System-Works-dp-111954212X...

newsbinator 5y ago

That's fine- whether or not their question is disingenuous, it's almost always a reasonable question that has been asked and answered by researchers, or that has been asked and not been able to be answered (e.g. what are the long term effects of mRNA vaccines?). It's perfectly fine to say, "we don't know what are the long term effects of mRNA vaccines but we can guess they're unlikely to be worse than the long term effects of the thing they're vaccinating against, which you're almost certain to catch sooner or later".

walrus01 5y ago

> There are a LOT of anti-vaxxers who disingenuously couch their advocacy as "I'm only asking questions" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sealioning

canadianfella 5y ago
I’ve been accused of this before and it’s fucking bullshit.
- hashkb 5y ago
  Were you saying something racist? I'm just asking.
  - krastanov 5y ago
    Come on, really!? In a discussion about how trolls use "I am just asking", you decided that doing the same is a good idea. I am not op, but I have been accused of sealioning in the exact opposite direction: I was defending some curriculum based on ideas from critical race theory. Edit: Well, as the comment below alluded to, I probably missed a pretty obvious piece of sarcasm... This is certainly funny in hindsight.
    - walrus01 5y ago
      One of the difficult parts of text based debate and discussion is that it's impossible to determine from vocal inflection, tone of voice and method of delivery whether someone is genuinely a fool, simply cosplaying as one, being sarcastic or facetious, etc.
      - hashkb 5y ago
        Oh, I'm definitely, genuinely a fool. For ever trying to get a point across on the internet.
    - hashkb 5y ago

jmspring 5y ago

Most of the Q-idiots are of the same mindset. "Go do the research" is a common phrase.

sjansen 5y ago

> There are a LOT of anti-vaxxers who disingenuously couch their advocacy as "I'm only asking questions". And they quickly reveal their bad faith, at which point they can safely be ignored. Or, if you don't feel like discussing it, it's easy enough to say "I don't know about that, but the anti-vaccine stuff sounds like lies to scare people so I decided to trust my doctor." If honest questions are met with hostility, while the anti-vaxxers are friendly and "helpful", guess who's going to be more influential?

IvyMike 5y ago
I agree, and that's why I try to answer questions with friendly answers. It wasn't so much that I was advocating for dismissing the question, I was just trying to explain why experts have gotten really, really tired, and might do so. (Also: My local county facebook group has no shortage of very vindictive, angry, and seeming inexhaustible anti-vaxxers.)

GPerson 5y ago

I’m having a hard time believing you’ve met worse than a 10:1 ratio, with respect to interest in vaccines, of “bad actors” to “good actors”. Here are some links to polls about American views on vaccines. It seems unlikely you’re running into this ratio without some major biasing factor. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/02/09/heres-how-many-americans-are-actually-anti-vaxxers/?outputType=amp https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/02/09/he... https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2021/03/05/growing-share-of-americans-say-they-plan-to-get-a-covid-19-vaccine-or-already-have https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2021/03/05/growing-share... (I’ll admit the numbers in September from the Pew poll are surprising to me) Granted, you’re further assuming the person asks questions about vaccines. In your description it seems to me that we’re already far away from scientific thinking as a society if the way we can confirm someone is anti-science is by whether they exhibit symptoms of any kind of curiosity. This sounds like what the previous commenter is talking about. Maybe you’re saying, “people who spread doubt in the form of a disingenuous question frequently do so in a particular social environment I’m a part of.”

IvyMike 5y ago
There is a major biasing factor; it's trivial to ask a question like "Have you looked at the data in VAERS that shows tens of thousands of adverse vaccine reactions??" It's not so trivial to answer the question in a way that explains how VAERS works, and why this conclusion is incorrect. This is the same with many possible questions. This specific scenario happens on my local Nextdoor groups all the time. I've answered responded with what I think is pretty clear and concise information, and then seem that same person ask the same question the very next day in a new thread. (And the next day, and the next...) I cannot help but conclude they're not really looking for an answer.
- AnimalMuppet 5y ago
  > This specific scenario happens on my local Nextdoor groups all the time. I've answered responded with what I think is pretty clear and concise information, and then seem that same person ask the same question the very next day in a new thread. (And the next day, and the next...) I cannot help but conclude they're not really looking for an answer. Maybe I'm a jerk, but I'd be inclined to answer the second question with "I answered that yesterday. Why do you keep asking if you aren't going to listen to the answers?" And reply with that every single time they re-asked the question. But... Nextdoor... does that mean it's your physical neighbors? That might make me hesitate to do so. Or maybe I'd still do something like the same, but worded more gently and politely.