7 ms·

That's fair, my apologies for proclaiming that you don't understand. I should have known better especially on this forum. I see where you're coming from and I

That's fair, my apologies for proclaiming that you don't understand. I should have known better especially on this forum. I see where you're coming from and I don't entirely disagree with your conclusion. The post you linked, makes a strong case for not jumping to conclusions based on grey matter studies, which I think is sound advice. That said, I maintain that given the option to get COVID or not get COVID, I would greatly prefer the later. You similarly won't find me gaming long hours, and I make sure to get plenty of sleep. In other words, taking precautions that avoid injury is generally a good idea. And FWIW, I don't find the controls in that study to be terrible? I'm not exactly an authority of statistical analysis though, so I'll trust that this is outside my scope of understanding. Where it sounds like we disagree most is whether or not the risk of COVID causing injury is worth something as small (or large) as asking for proof of vaccination. It just so happens that I think asking for proof of vaccination is a relatively minor thing given the possibilities of COVID.

jjgreen 5y ago
It's not "asking for proof of vaccination" though is it? It's denying access to restaurants, bars and so-on to those do not or will not accede to such a demand. I don't see that social apartheid as minor thing.
- datameta 5y ago
  I had all these concerns prior to this announcement. I wouldn't say all of those are now gone. However I must point out that the vaccine, at least in the US, is not being hoarded by the elite and wealthy. It is in most urban areas being made as readily available as possible. NYC even started providing a pre-paid $100 debit card which offsets time lost from work for those who could not afford that. Perhaps I am missing it - what sort of divide is being drawn?
- nindalf 5y ago
  Please let’s not throw around words like apartheid and Holocaust in situations that don’t warrant it. Both of those are commonly used by anti-vax community to draw attention to their perceived pain at being requested to vaccinate. But they trivialise the incredible violence done to millions of people, some of the worst crimes committed by our species. Trivialising these just to score points is unconscionable. And let me be clear, taking a shot that is safe and effective is not an unreasonable ask. Restricting access to leisure to people who are willing to take this precaution isn’t unreasonable. And no, it’s in no way comparable to some of the worst crimes committed by humans.
  - jjgreen 5y ago
    There's no "holocaust" in my post, please don't tar me with that brush. Apartheid, "separateness" in Afrikaans, seems entirely appropriate here. Except that there won't be vaccinated bars and non-vaccinated bars, there will just be vaccinated bars, those who refuse to show a vaccine passport will just have to go sit in the park or something. For the record, I'm fully vaccinated, but if/when bars start demanding vaccine passports in the UK, I stop going to bars.
    - nindalf 5y ago
      Don’t play semantic games. “I was just using an Afrikaans word” is a sorry excuse. We know exactly what that word means and what specific historical crimes it refers to. You are trying to evoke the memory of those crimes to make this situation look unjust. It’s exactly that behaviour that I’m requesting you not engage in. > they will have to go sit in a park Seems fine to me. That’s hardly the worst thing that could happen. If you’re already vaccinated, like nearly everyone aged 30+ in the UK is and refuse to open an app on your phone to show that … I can only hope that you’re in a small minority. I guess most people just want to get on with it, rather than sticking to some principle. Im not even sure what the principle is here. Hardly anyone will be negatively affected by this mandate because nearly everyone is vaccinated. > i stop going to bars Cool. Parks are better for your health anyway. Good day.
      - jjgreen 5y ago
        Well it seems we won't agree on the substantive point, but in case you're interested, that principle is a hostility to ID cards and demands from the state to provide them in various circumstances. And refused entry to a bar I wouldn't dream of going to the park, I head home with two bottles of decent white wine. Good day to you too.
      - dbsmith83 5y ago
        @jjgreen (can't reply another layer of nesting) > that principle is a hostility to ID cards and demands from the state to provide them in various circumstances Can't a bartender legally obligate you to show your id to prove you are old enough to drink? Your argument makes no sense.
- acdha 5y ago
  “Apartheid” is a very serious term referring to a brutal system of racial discrimination. I think you are being extremely disrespectful to its victims by using the same term to describe people who suffer inconsequential consequences because they’re unwilling to be safe around other people. The vaccines are available free to everyone, take minimal time to get, and extremely safe. This is an inconvenience on the level of having to wear pants on a hot day or wash your hands (which takes far more time in aggregate), and it’s only for voluntary activities which nobody needs to do to function. Apartheid was being shut out of decent schools or jobs, packed into bad housing conditions, and being beaten if you complained about it, all enforced by a brutal prison system.
  - AuryGlenz 5y ago
    The vaccines aren’t safe for everyone. Lupus runs in my family, I already have an autoimmune condition, and I’ve already had COVID. For me, getting the vaccine would be all risk (even if it’s unlikely) with no gain.
    - acdha 5y ago
      I said “extremely safe” for that reason - there are always people who have problems with just about anything, but from a population perspective the numbers look quite good. People like you, young children, etc. are also why it’s important for the rest of us to do our part – as long as there’s so much community spread, they don’t have a safe alternative.
    - xjlin0 5y ago
      really? which strain/mutant of COVID did you get? There are quite some people get COVID twice, I hope you won't. One way to reduce such chance is to get the vaccine.
    - randerson 5y ago
      From https://www.lupus.org/resources/covid19-vaccine-and-lupus https://www.lupus.org/resources/covid19-vaccine-and-lupus: "The American College of Rheumatology COVID-19 Vaccine Clinical Guidance recommends that people with autoimmune and inflammatory rheumatic disease (which includes lupus) get the vaccine unless they have an allergy to an ingredient in the vaccine." and "In general, you should get the vaccine even if you have already had COVID-19."
- ryantgtg 5y ago
  Obviously it’s not just asking. What would be the point of asking if the response to any answer was the same?
nradov 5y ago
No matter what you do, at some point you'll likely catch a SARS-CoV-2 infection (or maybe you already have). This is pretty much inevitable, just like with the other endemic common cold coronaviruses. Fortunately vaccination can greatly reduce the risk of having clinical COVID-19 symptoms.
- briefcomment 5y ago
  This implies that getting the vaccine for the sake of others is far more pointless than we thought right? This would make getting the vaccine a much more personal matter, rather than a societal one.
  - Arainach 5y ago
    No, it's not. Vaccinated individuals - even those who catch the virus - have far lower levels of the virus in their bodies, which means fewer chances for mutations.
    - johncearls 5y ago
      > CDC Director Rochelle Walensky said recent studies had shown that those vaccinated individuals who do become infected with Covid have just as much viral load as the unvaccinated, making it possible for them to spread the virus to others. This is why the CDC started recommending masks again. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/biden-administration-recommend-vaccinated-wear-masks-areas-low-vaccination-rates-n1275012 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/biden-administr...
      - foolinaround 5y ago
        right, so in reality, the vaccine is little more than an invisible, permanent but intrusive mask that protects yourself, and not necessarily others...
      - briefcomment 5y ago
        So the vaccine is for people who want to protect themselves against a serious reaction. Makes the case for vaccination far less compelling than what most people believe.
foolinaround 5y ago
> You similarly won't find me gaming long hours, and I make sure to get plenty of sleep. In other words, taking precautions that avoid injury is generally a good idea. That's awesome for you, but not what we are discussing here. What we are discussing here is you mandating that all drivers of cars gets to bed by 10PM and have a good sleep, on the chance that lack of sleep leads to bad driving which leads to higher chances of accidents, including to those who slept well last night, yet were involved in the accident.
- rubicon33 5y ago
  The post I was replying to included links to studies, in which grey matter was assessed in people who play too many video games, don't sleep enough, etc. I was merely making the point that evidence of gray matter reduction in other studies, isn't reason alone to write off the one I linked. We should probably take them all seriously (assuming sound practices). >What we are discussing here is you mandating that all drivers of cars gets to bed by 10PM and have a good sleep, on the chance that lack of sleep leads to bad driving which leads to higher chances of accidents, including to those who slept well last night, yet were involved in the accident Not even close to the reality of the situation, but you wouldn't be the first to take a very hyperbolic approach to it.
  - foolinaround 5y ago
    It is indeed rhetoric, but the underlying difference of opinion that is being highlighted is the agency that is being denied. We are not disagreeing on the benefits of a practice ( vaccination or taking a nap ).

jjgreen 5y ago

It's not "asking for proof of vaccination" though is it? It's denying access to restaurants, bars and so-on to those do not or will not accede to such a demand. I don't see that social apartheid as minor thing.

datameta 5y ago
I had all these concerns prior to this announcement. I wouldn't say all of those are now gone. However I must point out that the vaccine, at least in the US, is not being hoarded by the elite and wealthy. It is in most urban areas being made as readily available as possible. NYC even started providing a pre-paid $100 debit card which offsets time lost from work for those who could not afford that. Perhaps I am missing it - what sort of divide is being drawn?
nindalf 5y ago
Please let’s not throw around words like apartheid and Holocaust in situations that don’t warrant it. Both of those are commonly used by anti-vax community to draw attention to their perceived pain at being requested to vaccinate. But they trivialise the incredible violence done to millions of people, some of the worst crimes committed by our species. Trivialising these just to score points is unconscionable. And let me be clear, taking a shot that is safe and effective is not an unreasonable ask. Restricting access to leisure to people who are willing to take this precaution isn’t unreasonable. And no, it’s in no way comparable to some of the worst crimes committed by humans.
- jjgreen 5y ago
  There's no "holocaust" in my post, please don't tar me with that brush. Apartheid, "separateness" in Afrikaans, seems entirely appropriate here. Except that there won't be vaccinated bars and non-vaccinated bars, there will just be vaccinated bars, those who refuse to show a vaccine passport will just have to go sit in the park or something. For the record, I'm fully vaccinated, but if/when bars start demanding vaccine passports in the UK, I stop going to bars.
  - nindalf 5y ago
    Don’t play semantic games. “I was just using an Afrikaans word” is a sorry excuse. We know exactly what that word means and what specific historical crimes it refers to. You are trying to evoke the memory of those crimes to make this situation look unjust. It’s exactly that behaviour that I’m requesting you not engage in. > they will have to go sit in a park Seems fine to me. That’s hardly the worst thing that could happen. If you’re already vaccinated, like nearly everyone aged 30+ in the UK is and refuse to open an app on your phone to show that … I can only hope that you’re in a small minority. I guess most people just want to get on with it, rather than sticking to some principle. Im not even sure what the principle is here. Hardly anyone will be negatively affected by this mandate because nearly everyone is vaccinated. > i stop going to bars Cool. Parks are better for your health anyway. Good day.
    - jjgreen 5y ago
      Well it seems we won't agree on the substantive point, but in case you're interested, that principle is a hostility to ID cards and demands from the state to provide them in various circumstances. And refused entry to a bar I wouldn't dream of going to the park, I head home with two bottles of decent white wine. Good day to you too.
    - dbsmith83 5y ago
      @jjgreen (can't reply another layer of nesting) > that principle is a hostility to ID cards and demands from the state to provide them in various circumstances Can't a bartender legally obligate you to show your id to prove you are old enough to drink? Your argument makes no sense.
acdha 5y ago
“Apartheid” is a very serious term referring to a brutal system of racial discrimination. I think you are being extremely disrespectful to its victims by using the same term to describe people who suffer inconsequential consequences because they’re unwilling to be safe around other people. The vaccines are available free to everyone, take minimal time to get, and extremely safe. This is an inconvenience on the level of having to wear pants on a hot day or wash your hands (which takes far more time in aggregate), and it’s only for voluntary activities which nobody needs to do to function. Apartheid was being shut out of decent schools or jobs, packed into bad housing conditions, and being beaten if you complained about it, all enforced by a brutal prison system.
- AuryGlenz 5y ago
  The vaccines aren’t safe for everyone. Lupus runs in my family, I already have an autoimmune condition, and I’ve already had COVID. For me, getting the vaccine would be all risk (even if it’s unlikely) with no gain.
  - acdha 5y ago
    I said “extremely safe” for that reason - there are always people who have problems with just about anything, but from a population perspective the numbers look quite good. People like you, young children, etc. are also why it’s important for the rest of us to do our part – as long as there’s so much community spread, they don’t have a safe alternative.
  - xjlin0 5y ago
    really? which strain/mutant of COVID did you get? There are quite some people get COVID twice, I hope you won't. One way to reduce such chance is to get the vaccine.
  - randerson 5y ago
    From https://www.lupus.org/resources/covid19-vaccine-and-lupus https://www.lupus.org/resources/covid19-vaccine-and-lupus: "The American College of Rheumatology COVID-19 Vaccine Clinical Guidance recommends that people with autoimmune and inflammatory rheumatic disease (which includes lupus) get the vaccine unless they have an allergy to an ingredient in the vaccine." and "In general, you should get the vaccine even if you have already had COVID-19."
ryantgtg 5y ago
Obviously it’s not just asking. What would be the point of asking if the response to any answer was the same?

nradov 5y ago

No matter what you do, at some point you'll likely catch a SARS-CoV-2 infection (or maybe you already have). This is pretty much inevitable, just like with the other endemic common cold coronaviruses. Fortunately vaccination can greatly reduce the risk of having clinical COVID-19 symptoms.

briefcomment 5y ago
This implies that getting the vaccine for the sake of others is far more pointless than we thought right? This would make getting the vaccine a much more personal matter, rather than a societal one.
- Arainach 5y ago
  No, it's not. Vaccinated individuals - even those who catch the virus - have far lower levels of the virus in their bodies, which means fewer chances for mutations.
  - johncearls 5y ago
    > CDC Director Rochelle Walensky said recent studies had shown that those vaccinated individuals who do become infected with Covid have just as much viral load as the unvaccinated, making it possible for them to spread the virus to others. This is why the CDC started recommending masks again. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/biden-administration-recommend-vaccinated-wear-masks-areas-low-vaccination-rates-n1275012 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/biden-administr...
    - foolinaround 5y ago
      right, so in reality, the vaccine is little more than an invisible, permanent but intrusive mask that protects yourself, and not necessarily others...
    - briefcomment 5y ago
      So the vaccine is for people who want to protect themselves against a serious reaction. Makes the case for vaccination far less compelling than what most people believe.

foolinaround 5y ago

> You similarly won't find me gaming long hours, and I make sure to get plenty of sleep. In other words, taking precautions that avoid injury is generally a good idea. That's awesome for you, but not what we are discussing here. What we are discussing here is you mandating that all drivers of cars gets to bed by 10PM and have a good sleep, on the chance that lack of sleep leads to bad driving which leads to higher chances of accidents, including to those who slept well last night, yet were involved in the accident.

rubicon33 5y ago
The post I was replying to included links to studies, in which grey matter was assessed in people who play too many video games, don't sleep enough, etc. I was merely making the point that evidence of gray matter reduction in other studies, isn't reason alone to write off the one I linked. We should probably take them all seriously (assuming sound practices). >What we are discussing here is you mandating that all drivers of cars gets to bed by 10PM and have a good sleep, on the chance that lack of sleep leads to bad driving which leads to higher chances of accidents, including to those who slept well last night, yet were involved in the accident Not even close to the reality of the situation, but you wouldn't be the first to take a very hyperbolic approach to it.
- foolinaround 5y ago
  It is indeed rhetoric, but the underlying difference of opinion that is being highlighted is the agency that is being denied. We are not disagreeing on the benefits of a practice ( vaccination or taking a nap ).