5 ms·

The right response is not “no, your concerns are actually illegitimate.” That direction only ends in war, because you will discover that I don’t care whether y

• maxerickson 5y ago
  I didn't say your concerns were illegitimate, I said your analysis was insufficient. Being concerned about exposure to spike proteins is fine, whatever. Infection results in far more exposure to those proteins and is basically inevitable for people that aren't vaccinated, so any analysis of the risk of vaccination needs to include that context, the risk due to infection (which is as I have said, is essentially a 100% chance of a larger exposure to the spike protein).
  • guscost 5y ago
    You don’t fully understand the risks or benefits - nobody does. Where are you going with this?
    • maxerickson 5y ago
      I'm not going anywhere, I was just pointing out that your analysis was incomplete, and tacked on the obvious extension of it, where natural infection results in much higher exposure to spike protein than vaccination.
      • guscost 5y ago
        You either misunderstood or ignored the point I was trying to make, and filled in some additional details about risk... to what end? None of this is relevant to the conversation, unless your goal is to imply (without actually claiming) that the risk/reward is in fact robustly understood, and that the choices made by the out-group are indefensible?
• nkozyra 5y ago
  Well that isn't a good faith interpretation of that poster's comment.
  • guscost 5y ago
    We’re so far past good faith at this point, try to at least wake up to that fact. My good faith expired around week twelve of the original two weeks.
    • nkozyra 5y ago
      > My good faith expired around week twelve of the original two weeks. This is a non sequitur. Someone was responding to you specifically about spike proteins and was demonstrating why your assumption was based on some incomplete understanding. Why talk about the two weeks thing? If you're frustrated about covid, well ... join the club. It includes literally everyone.
      • furgooswft13 5y ago
        We're not frustrated about covid. Covid is not a threat of any significance. It never was. The threat, from the beginning, is the absurd hysteria around it.
        • nkozyra 5y ago
          It strikes me that a lot of people died from something that's no threat. If instead you mean little (not no) threat to you, sure. If you mean the response was not commensurate with the threat, you might be able to make that case. But not a threat? Sorry. Once you know someone in their late 30s with no comorbidities who dies from this your perspective changes a bit. To be honest I find the histrionics about this horrible, draconian fascist response a bit ludicrous.
          • deleted 5y ago
            [deleted]
• bootwoot 5y ago
  You're ready to die to defend them? That seems like a pretty extreme escalation.
  • guscost 5y ago
    I didn’t start any of this shit, someone else is barging into my life and saying that I need to comply with paranoid hypochondriac fascism, or else. I have tried arguing rationally with these folks, but this is one of the situations where the right strategy is simply: “No, fuck you too!”
    • JetAlone 5y ago
      You're too right. I'd hardly even blame the "someone else", they're victims too. This is just what paranoid hypochondriac fascism does.
    • Pyramus 5y ago
      Now think of the people that actually live or lived in a fascist regime - is that really what you are comparing your life to? Ironically people who do live under fascist regimes don't even get access to Covid vaccines...