3 ms·

Being dishonest isn't a hallmark of rational thinking either. The Covid-19 vaccines are observably dangerous to some persons[1], however rare that danger may be

by User23 5y ago

Being dishonest isn't a hallmark of rational thinking either. The Covid-19 vaccines are observably dangerous to some persons[1], however rare that danger may be. The rational thing to do is to weigh the risk versus the benefit. If you really want hesitant persons to get vaccinated, you're going to get a lot farther by being honest about the risks of the vaccines, the risks of Covid-19, and showing why, for their circumstances, getting the vaccine is the correct risk management strategy. And frankly, for young persons with acquired natural immunity, the risk of myocarditis and other adverse effects isn't worth it for a disease they are already immune to. And I'm going to annoy people by saying that. I'm baffled why the existence of natural immunity, which is completely settled science, has somehow become controversial. If the mechanism for natural immunity didn't work, then the mechanism for vaccinated immunity also wouldn't be able to work. Believing that the vaccines can work but the immune system response to the live virus doesn't is some serious irrationality. Edit: And the response is a wonderful demonstration of Aristotle's ancient observation that those in the grips of fear cannot be persuaded by facts or reason. [1] https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/vaers.html https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/va...

hammock 5y ago
Amen
void_mint 5y ago
> The Covid-19 vaccines are observably dangerous Generally when people refer to something as "dangerous", they don't mean "To a very very small subset of people, and in very very specific and rare circumstances".
- mdp2021 5y ago
  They probably have reasons to believe that the subset is not so small, and would like to obtain credible studies determining the specificity of those circumstances ( = under which conditions adverse events are more likely to appear. Similarly to the circulating "Females under 60 / Males under 30", but with more detail).
- honkycat 5y ago
  Bees are dangerous, kill them all.
zozbot234 5y ago
The risk of myocarditis and other adverse effects from getting COVID itself is multiple orders of magnitude higher than anything related to the vaccine. This should be a no-brainer if there ever was one. You do not want to be wihout vaccine immunity, even if you have been infected in the past.
- User23 5y ago
  > You do not want to be wihout vaccine immunity, even if you have been infected in the past. Why? I don't understand how that claim can be true unless somehow being exposed to the spike protein from the virus will fail to produce immunity while at the same time being exposed to the spike protein from having the mRNA make your cells synthesize it will. I'm genuinely curious so if there is some new science you can point me to I'd be grateful. Edit: The Covid-19 vaccine is by far the most dangerous prescribed vaccine, accounting for 80.53% of reported vaccine deaths[1], so if natural acquired immunity is a real thing then how is it irrational for those who are already immune to decline to take it? And what's with the hostility to curiosity? [1] https://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/datarequest/D8;jsessionid=6C2CE8077FC6BBFCCA50E881309C?stage=results&action=sort&direction=MEASURE_DESCEND&measure=D8.M2 https://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/datarequest/D8;jsessionid=... In case that link dies when the session expires, here's the top 10: COVID19 VACCINE (COVID19) 5,595 80.53% PNEUMOCOCCAL, 13-VALENT VACCINE (PREVNAR) (PNC13) 322 4.63% HAEMOPHILUS B CONJUGATE VACCINE (HIBV) 255 3.67% ROTAVIRUS VACCINE, LIVE, ORAL, PENTAVALENT (RV5) 251 3.61% INFLUENZA VIRUS VACCINE, TRIVALENT (INJECTED) (FLU3(SEASONAL)) 210 3.02% DIPHTHERIA AND TETANUS TOXOIDS AND ACELLULAR PERTUSSIS VACCINE + HEPATITIS B + INACTIVATED POLIOVIRUS VACCINE (DTAPHEPBIP) 201 2.89% INFLUENZA VIRUS VACCINE, NO BRAND NAME (FLUX(SEASONAL)) 186 2.68% ZOSTER VACCINE (VARZOS) 184 2.65% HEPATITIS B VACCINE (HEP) 173 2.49% PNEUMOCOCCAL, 7-VALENT VACCINE (PREVNAR) (PNC) 171 2.46%
honkycat 5y ago
Linking to a page to report adverse effects is not an adequate citation that they happen with any reasonable consistency to be opposed to getting a vaccine.

by User23 5y ago

hammock 5y ago

Amen

void_mint 5y ago

> The Covid-19 vaccines are observably dangerous Generally when people refer to something as "dangerous", they don't mean "To a very very small subset of people, and in very very specific and rare circumstances".

mdp2021 5y ago
They probably have reasons to believe that the subset is not so small, and would like to obtain credible studies determining the specificity of those circumstances ( = under which conditions adverse events are more likely to appear. Similarly to the circulating "Females under 60 / Males under 30", but with more detail).
honkycat 5y ago
Bees are dangerous, kill them all.

zozbot234 5y ago

The risk of myocarditis and other adverse effects from getting COVID itself is multiple orders of magnitude higher than anything related to the vaccine. This should be a no-brainer if there ever was one. You do not want to be wihout vaccine immunity, even if you have been infected in the past.

User23 5y ago
> You do not want to be wihout vaccine immunity, even if you have been infected in the past. Why? I don't understand how that claim can be true unless somehow being exposed to the spike protein from the virus will fail to produce immunity while at the same time being exposed to the spike protein from having the mRNA make your cells synthesize it will. I'm genuinely curious so if there is some new science you can point me to I'd be grateful. Edit: The Covid-19 vaccine is by far the most dangerous prescribed vaccine, accounting for 80.53% of reported vaccine deaths[1], so if natural acquired immunity is a real thing then how is it irrational for those who are already immune to decline to take it? And what's with the hostility to curiosity? [1] https://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/datarequest/D8;jsessionid=6C2CE8077FC6BBFCCA50E881309C?stage=results&action=sort&direction=MEASURE_DESCEND&measure=D8.M2 https://wonder.cdc.gov/controller/datarequest/D8;jsessionid=... In case that link dies when the session expires, here's the top 10: COVID19 VACCINE (COVID19) 5,595 80.53% PNEUMOCOCCAL, 13-VALENT VACCINE (PREVNAR) (PNC13) 322 4.63% HAEMOPHILUS B CONJUGATE VACCINE (HIBV) 255 3.67% ROTAVIRUS VACCINE, LIVE, ORAL, PENTAVALENT (RV5) 251 3.61% INFLUENZA VIRUS VACCINE, TRIVALENT (INJECTED) (FLU3(SEASONAL)) 210 3.02% DIPHTHERIA AND TETANUS TOXOIDS AND ACELLULAR PERTUSSIS VACCINE + HEPATITIS B + INACTIVATED POLIOVIRUS VACCINE (DTAPHEPBIP) 201 2.89% INFLUENZA VIRUS VACCINE, NO BRAND NAME (FLUX(SEASONAL)) 186 2.68% ZOSTER VACCINE (VARZOS) 184 2.65% HEPATITIS B VACCINE (HEP) 173 2.49% PNEUMOCOCCAL, 7-VALENT VACCINE (PREVNAR) (PNC) 171 2.46%

honkycat 5y ago

Linking to a page to report adverse effects is not an adequate citation that they happen with any reasonable consistency to be opposed to getting a vaccine.