5 ms·

Indeed. People who raise this argument tend to ignore the fact that the most important impact of the vaccine is the systemic protection it offers against the ir

Indeed. People who raise this argument tend to ignore the fact that the most important impact of the vaccine is the systemic protection it offers against the irresponsibility of individual choice. The vaccine does not in fact guarantee person X will not be infected or hospitalized. Widespread vaccination does result in systemic reduction in community spread. Ponder that.

mfer 5y ago
> The vaccine does not in fact guarantee person X will not be infected or hospitalized. Widespread vaccination does result in systemic reduction in community spread. We aren't going to wipe out COVID. It's here to stay. From people to animals. At some point most of us will likely get it. There has been a fair amount written on this. If we look at past times we had pandemics (e.g., pandemic of 1889-90) we can see patterns. There the virus hit people and was bad the first year and gradually was less and less until they stopped tracking it. When we get hit the first time we get some immunity. For the virus from that pandemic it happens today as kids. Antibodies fade over time (while T cells remain). That means our nose and throat can easily get reinfected but after the first time we usually just get a simple cold (and first time is usually a simple cold, too). That situation moved from pandemic to endemic. The same will happen here. Yet, every year ~40k people in the US die from cold/flu. We can't stop it. How we treat people along the way will say a lot about us and impact our relationships once we hit the endemic stage. We'll get to endemic without or without the vaccine. The vaccine will help. Forcing people is going to create enemies and the side effect will live beyond the pandemic. Just a thought to ponder.
- jonahbenton 5y ago
  "How we treat people along the way" is super important. Associating public health mandates with (EDIT correcting typo) "forcing people is going to create enemies" is the opposite of being respectful of people. Best wishes to you.
  - ctrlp 5y ago
    Put your reading glasses on. He said "forcing people is going to create enemies".
    - jonahbenton 5y ago
      Fixed, typo. The idea that enemies are made by enforcement of a public health mandate, and that that enemy creation is evidence of poor example of how to treat people and will redound....elides the rather obvious point that those who refuse to volunteer for vaccination in this context are exhibiting...poor treatment of others. In any kind of social context it is grotesque sociopathy. To accede to this notion of "enemy creation" is irrational and cowardly. Cheers.
- SpicyLemonZest 5y ago
  Did the MMR vaccine mandates from the 70s and 80s create permanent enemies? Lots of people say this is a huge world-shaking issue for them, and I believe that they believe that, but politically active people are heavily incentivized to learn how to see everything in maximalist terms. If most businesses begin mandating the vaccine and infection rates are low next year, I'm confident the vast majority of people won't remember why it was supposed to be a big deal.
sitkack 5y ago
I get branch of questions you are raising, but I don't see anyone educated raising opposition to the vaccine. There could be lots of reasons for this to be true, not seeing them, they are staying quiet, etc. What we are witnessing in a distrust of non-demogogic power that has been instilled into the Republican base over the last 40 years. The multigrade attack on intellectualism, science, logic. That is like your opinion man. The same qualities of Fascism, the hero worship, the sacrifice of the individual, emotionally charged thinking, all of that is at the opposite end of the spectrum from the tools of the enlightenment. If folks had better understanding of how vaccines work from a mathematical/statistical level their internal framing of "should I get it or not" would be altered. It isn't whether this is a benefit to me directly, but is it good for the heard. For society as a whole. Thinking of the heard is socialist. Self-centered, me vs the world is another Republican strategy. All of them actually weaken the individual vs the state and the corporation. Choice, responsibility, individualism are great concepts, but they have been perverted into a form of control that divides and distracts.
- TechBro8615 5y ago
  The “for the herd” moral argument only makes sense for a vaccine that stops transmission of the virus. In that case, the individualistic argument for not vaccinating is “I’m going to leech off hers immunity.” Ironically, because COVID vaccinated individuals still transmit the virus, the individualistic argument now favors the vaccine. Since anyone vaccinated is going to reduce social distancing and try to “return to normal,” they will spread the virus. So now the individualistic argument is that you should get the vaccine because the virus will become endemic and on a long enough timeline you will become infected.

mfer 5y ago

> The vaccine does not in fact guarantee person X will not be infected or hospitalized. Widespread vaccination does result in systemic reduction in community spread. We aren't going to wipe out COVID. It's here to stay. From people to animals. At some point most of us will likely get it. There has been a fair amount written on this. If we look at past times we had pandemics (e.g., pandemic of 1889-90) we can see patterns. There the virus hit people and was bad the first year and gradually was less and less until they stopped tracking it. When we get hit the first time we get some immunity. For the virus from that pandemic it happens today as kids. Antibodies fade over time (while T cells remain). That means our nose and throat can easily get reinfected but after the first time we usually just get a simple cold (and first time is usually a simple cold, too). That situation moved from pandemic to endemic. The same will happen here. Yet, every year ~40k people in the US die from cold/flu. We can't stop it. How we treat people along the way will say a lot about us and impact our relationships once we hit the endemic stage. We'll get to endemic without or without the vaccine. The vaccine will help. Forcing people is going to create enemies and the side effect will live beyond the pandemic. Just a thought to ponder.

jonahbenton 5y ago
"How we treat people along the way" is super important. Associating public health mandates with (EDIT correcting typo) "forcing people is going to create enemies" is the opposite of being respectful of people. Best wishes to you.
- ctrlp 5y ago
  Put your reading glasses on. He said "forcing people is going to create enemies".
  - jonahbenton 5y ago
    Fixed, typo. The idea that enemies are made by enforcement of a public health mandate, and that that enemy creation is evidence of poor example of how to treat people and will redound....elides the rather obvious point that those who refuse to volunteer for vaccination in this context are exhibiting...poor treatment of others. In any kind of social context it is grotesque sociopathy. To accede to this notion of "enemy creation" is irrational and cowardly. Cheers.
SpicyLemonZest 5y ago
Did the MMR vaccine mandates from the 70s and 80s create permanent enemies? Lots of people say this is a huge world-shaking issue for them, and I believe that they believe that, but politically active people are heavily incentivized to learn how to see everything in maximalist terms. If most businesses begin mandating the vaccine and infection rates are low next year, I'm confident the vast majority of people won't remember why it was supposed to be a big deal.

sitkack 5y ago

I get branch of questions you are raising, but I don't see anyone educated raising opposition to the vaccine. There could be lots of reasons for this to be true, not seeing them, they are staying quiet, etc. What we are witnessing in a distrust of non-demogogic power that has been instilled into the Republican base over the last 40 years. The multigrade attack on intellectualism, science, logic. That is like your opinion man. The same qualities of Fascism, the hero worship, the sacrifice of the individual, emotionally charged thinking, all of that is at the opposite end of the spectrum from the tools of the enlightenment. If folks had better understanding of how vaccines work from a mathematical/statistical level their internal framing of "should I get it or not" would be altered. It isn't whether this is a benefit to me directly, but is it good for the heard. For society as a whole. Thinking of the heard is socialist. Self-centered, me vs the world is another Republican strategy. All of them actually weaken the individual vs the state and the corporation. Choice, responsibility, individualism are great concepts, but they have been perverted into a form of control that divides and distracts.

TechBro8615 5y ago
The “for the herd” moral argument only makes sense for a vaccine that stops transmission of the virus. In that case, the individualistic argument for not vaccinating is “I’m going to leech off hers immunity.” Ironically, because COVID vaccinated individuals still transmit the virus, the individualistic argument now favors the vaccine. Since anyone vaccinated is going to reduce social distancing and try to “return to normal,” they will spread the virus. So now the individualistic argument is that you should get the vaccine because the virus will become endemic and on a long enough timeline you will become infected.