6 ms·

What people with this mindset need to hear is "even if the vaccine has terrible side effects, we will take care of you as well as we can and as well as you coul

by 2ion 5y ago

What people with this mindset need to hear is "even if the vaccine has terrible side effects, we will take care of you as well as we can and as well as you could wish, even if the side effects are exctremely rare". In my country at least, if you get any of those vaccines and get Capillary leak syndrome as in some cases, a thrombosis that leaves you mentally incapitated as in some cases, a retinal detachment issue that may leave you blind as in some cases, a myocarditis that may leave you dead in some cases --- then you've lost. You will be a pauper for the rest of your life, as you will have to use up all your assets to pay for care cost until social insurance kicks in. The privilege of getting appropriate financial relief for not being able to work in your profession anymore is reserved for civil servants for life. You're finished. In the UK at least they're planning care facilities for those who suffer from long covid -- here it's not even a formally acknowledged disease, you're treated as any other handicapped person or worse, as a patient with a mental problem rather than phyiscal illness. If you leave people who are afraid of a virus and a vaccine both the choice and tell them taking or not taking the vaccine is their responsibility alone together with the consequences, it's easy to fall into decision fatigue and just do nothing, and ratinalising that behaviour.

ericmay 5y ago
> "even if the vaccine has terrible side effects, we will take care of you as well as we can and as well as you could wish, even if the side effects are exctremely rare" I don’t think this will work, because if it did then people would be taking the vaccine right now. The issue is multi-faceted of course, but the discussion of “extremely rare events” is a red herring and a wink wink to vaccine skepticism. It’s like why would we even talk about these extremely rare events and taking care of someone if those events happen, when instead they’re millions of times more likely to suffer from Covid-19? I mean why aren’t you saying “if you drive to the clinic to get a vaccine and get in a car wreck we’ll take care of you” when that is far more likely to occur? Let alone any number of other things like walking outside and getting struck by lightning. The probabilistic case for the vaccine is well beyond settled and even if there was some long-term unknown boogeyman vaccine issue that for some reason causes this vaccine (even the “natural” JnJ one) to behave unlike any other vaccine you would still get the vaccine because of the known probabilities of contracting and suffering/dying from Covid-19 versus an unknown and unknowable probability of some unknown thing occurring at an unknown future date.
- listless 5y ago
  I think the problem is that 1) we don't know the long-term effects 2) There is no FDA approval (although there is now!) and 3) There is no recompense for people hurt by the vaccine - even if that number is 0. 2 & 3 are easily fixable and we should do it now. We don't have hold pharma liable, but we can setup funds for people with side-effects. 1 is an argument from ignorance. There is no long-term data so we can't refute it. It's literally an unfalsifiable premise. I don't know how you fix this one.
  - citizenpaul 5y ago
    > There is no FDA approval Yet you still have to sign a liability waiver........
  - ericmay 5y ago
    > 1) we don't know the long-term effects Of what? Vaccines? > 2) There is no FDA approval (although there is now!) Which is just a matter of bureaucracy. The emergency authorization and deployment is a de-facto approval. > 3) There is no recompense for people hurt by the vaccine - even if that number is 0. And? There's also no recompense for many things. > but we can setup funds for people with side-effects. The problem is that this makes no sense. Why would you set up funds for people with side-effects? What about funds for people who die in car wrecks on the way to get their vaccines or trip and fall down a flight of stairs? > 1 is an argument from ignorance. Ain't that the truth. Can you articulate the exact long-term effects that you're worried about or that anybody should be worried about? Why are you (or anybody) concerned about these specific unknown and unknowable long-term effects? What's the likelihood of those effects and how do they compare against the likelihood of contracting and dying from COVID-19? It's like all of a sudden there's these spooky and mysterious "but what about the long term effects!1!" without any scientific justification. Even if there were potentially long-term effects, those effects are equally likely to be of no-consequence as they are to have us all turned into zombies or something. The search space of "effects" are unknown and have an unknown probability distribution. The only purpose of talking about "long-term effects" by any pundit or layperson who can't even describe the mechanics of an mRNA vaccine (why not take the JnJ one if you're worried about that anyway?) is to introduce fear, uncertainty, and doubt either out of ignorance or malice. If you're a virologist, by all means educate us. If not, stop spouting bullshit and hurting people.

by 2ion 5y ago

ericmay 5y ago

> "even if the vaccine has terrible side effects, we will take care of you as well as we can and as well as you could wish, even if the side effects are exctremely rare" I don’t think this will work, because if it did then people would be taking the vaccine right now. The issue is multi-faceted of course, but the discussion of “extremely rare events” is a red herring and a wink wink to vaccine skepticism. It’s like why would we even talk about these extremely rare events and taking care of someone if those events happen, when instead they’re millions of times more likely to suffer from Covid-19? I mean why aren’t you saying “if you drive to the clinic to get a vaccine and get in a car wreck we’ll take care of you” when that is far more likely to occur? Let alone any number of other things like walking outside and getting struck by lightning. The probabilistic case for the vaccine is well beyond settled and even if there was some long-term unknown boogeyman vaccine issue that for some reason causes this vaccine (even the “natural” JnJ one) to behave unlike any other vaccine you would still get the vaccine because of the known probabilities of contracting and suffering/dying from Covid-19 versus an unknown and unknowable probability of some unknown thing occurring at an unknown future date.

listless 5y ago
I think the problem is that 1) we don't know the long-term effects 2) There is no FDA approval (although there is now!) and 3) There is no recompense for people hurt by the vaccine - even if that number is 0. 2 & 3 are easily fixable and we should do it now. We don't have hold pharma liable, but we can setup funds for people with side-effects. 1 is an argument from ignorance. There is no long-term data so we can't refute it. It's literally an unfalsifiable premise. I don't know how you fix this one.
- citizenpaul 5y ago
  > There is no FDA approval Yet you still have to sign a liability waiver........
- ericmay 5y ago
  > 1) we don't know the long-term effects Of what? Vaccines? > 2) There is no FDA approval (although there is now!) Which is just a matter of bureaucracy. The emergency authorization and deployment is a de-facto approval. > 3) There is no recompense for people hurt by the vaccine - even if that number is 0. And? There's also no recompense for many things. > but we can setup funds for people with side-effects. The problem is that this makes no sense. Why would you set up funds for people with side-effects? What about funds for people who die in car wrecks on the way to get their vaccines or trip and fall down a flight of stairs? > 1 is an argument from ignorance. Ain't that the truth. Can you articulate the exact long-term effects that you're worried about or that anybody should be worried about? Why are you (or anybody) concerned about these specific unknown and unknowable long-term effects? What's the likelihood of those effects and how do they compare against the likelihood of contracting and dying from COVID-19? It's like all of a sudden there's these spooky and mysterious "but what about the long term effects!1!" without any scientific justification. Even if there were potentially long-term effects, those effects are equally likely to be of no-consequence as they are to have us all turned into zombies or something. The search space of "effects" are unknown and have an unknown probability distribution. The only purpose of talking about "long-term effects" by any pundit or layperson who can't even describe the mechanics of an mRNA vaccine (why not take the JnJ one if you're worried about that anyway?) is to introduce fear, uncertainty, and doubt either out of ignorance or malice. If you're a virologist, by all means educate us. If not, stop spouting bullshit and hurting people.