8 ms·

but why are you so adamant on making everybody so perfectly safe? there used to be something about freedom and risk; heck, about life and risk. it's risky to

by bsedlm 5y ago

but why are you so adamant on making everybody so perfectly safe? there used to be something about freedom and risk; heck, about life and risk. it's risky to be alive but it was more risky live way back in the day at what point does safety begin to stifle the drive to live? we as humans originally evolved in a risky environment, we thrived in it, we made it safer for ourselves; but maybe, just maybe, we also acquired a need for this risky behavior and without it our lives feel emptier? the point I am trying to make (granted not very eloquently) starts out from this idea [1] that humans are kind of crazy, and that maybe this crazyness is what makes us so successful; so I put that too much safety may undo this crazyness, it puts it to sleep? see also anti-fragility [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97jBvbmY03g&t=252s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97jBvbmY03g&t=252s

guidoism 5y ago
Less about making those people safe and more about making you safe by making those other not spread the disease to you. For example: Go ahead and drive drunk, I don’t care, just do it on your private property so you don’t kill me. Similarly: Go and don’t get vaxed, honestly I don’t care. But viruses don’t respect borders like cars do, so if you are going to do it then make sure you are isolated on a private island where you don’t leave, or Antarctica, or mars or something.
- EB-Barrington 5y ago
  "Our vaccines are working exceptionally well. They continue to work well for Delta with regard to severe illness and death - they prevent it, but what they can't do anymore is prevent transmission," CDC Director Rochelle Walensky
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - shkkmo 5y ago
    Preventing transmission != reducing transmission rates. The vaccines absolutely do the later.
    - ejb999 5y ago
      are you sure about that? - seems right now the most vaccinated states also seem to have the largest spike in cases - I agree the vaccine, at this point anyway, seems to be reducing deaths - but not sure I agree on transmission - seems like it it still spreading worse than before. And no, I am not an antivaxxer i I am triple vaxxed myself and work in the healthcare field.
      - shkkmo 5y ago
        The only real overlap right now is new england, places like the PNW have high vaccinations and low case rates. Regardless, there are so many factors that affect transmission, you can't easily learn much from geographic comparisons due to the impossibility of eliminating the confounds. However the science is clear, all else being equal, covid vaccines reduce transmission rates.
    - jayrot 5y ago
      This seems to be so hard for some to understand that it smacks of dis-ingenuity.
  - NavinF 5y ago
    Hmm did he mean that it doesn’t affect transmission (as in reduce R0) or that it literally can’t prevent transmission (R0 reduced, but still >>0)? The latter is trivially true. I’m guessing he said it anyway because it was intended for a different audience.
    - tshaddox 5y ago
      I don’t think they literally reduce illness and death to zero, but just pretty close. I would assume they were using the same definition of “prevent” in both places in that sentence.
- the_doctah 5y ago
  Vaccines don't prevent spread of Covid.
  - jiggawatts 5y ago
    They do reduce it, by a lot, enough to avoid overwhelming hospitals -- which are borderline right now in many countries and being filled up by anti-vaxxers. Those freedom loving people are taking up valuable beds, putting the lives of people at risk that have other medical issues. Essentially, all of these anti-vax arguments boil down to: "You cannot definitively, absolutely, completely prove that the vaccines are 100.00% effective AND 100.00% safe for everyone always. I mean sure, you're not technically forcing me to take it, but your suggestion that I do my duty to society is too authoritarian. I would prefer to think of myself as a universe onto myself and take the personal chance of death comparable to climbing Mount Everest or driving F1 cars. Because freedom! Or something..." Also: "Grandma can take her chances with getting COVID from me on the odd occasion that I visit her in the cheapest hospice I could find to offload her onto."
    - ejb999 5y ago
      I don't think there is any proof of that - look at VT, or in fact most of the New England states - among the highest percent of vaccinated people anywhere in the US and yet for many of those states, the cases are at a much, much higher level than at any time during the pandemic. Look at Florida, decent % of people are vaxxed, but nearly as many (as a %) as in most new england states and yet the spread of cases is much more muted on a population adjusted basis. These data anomalies need better explanation from non-political scientists - one is not an anti-vaxxer for pointing these inconsistencies out. I agree vaccine seems to be keeping people alive and that is a good thing, and despite your snide remarks, it is actually possible to be in favor of people getting the vaccine (I am tripled vaxxed myself) and yet still valid to question the official (and always changing) narrative we are being fed that this is only a pandemic of the unvaccinated - the facts don't back that up.
  - samatman 5y ago
    Vaccines didn't prevent the spread of smallpox either, until they finally did. We're not smallpoxing Covid out of existence without a much better vaccine.
- imgabe 5y ago
  But if you've already gotten the shot, you're protected from the disease. So, what is someone else not getting the shot going to do to you?
  - TimTheTinker 5y ago
    This ^. If the shots are truly protective, I don't understand what the hubbub is all about. Is it really all about protecting those who truly can't get the shot for whatever reason? I doubt it.
    - Ensorceled 5y ago
      The shots are NOT truly protective. The Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine has an effectiveness of about 91%. That means in about 9% of cases it is not protective. I'm amazed we are this deep into this pandemic and people still have black and white thinking wrt to vaccinces.
      - imgabe 5y ago
        I think most people consider 91% to be “truly” protective. Nothing is 100%. The vaccine is more than effective enough to reduce the risk of Covid to the general background risk level of life in general (things like car accidents, slipping in the shower, eating red meat, contracting a flesh eating amoeba from swimming in a lake etc.)
        Ensorceled 5y ago
        Car crashes kill 30K people a year in the US. COVID has killed 400K in the US in 2021. It's literally 10x worse than cars and 30K from cars is horrific.
        imgabe 5y ago
        How many vaccinated people have been killed by Covid? I’m talking about the risk after you’re vaccinated.
- raxxorrax 5y ago
  Why does someone unvaccinated pose a risk to you?
arrow7000 5y ago
Ok but what's the point of taking risks for its own sake? It makes sense to take risks if you stand to gain something. But a risk with only downside is just a bad idea.
- bsedlm 5y ago
  some people, mostly young people, might consider it 'fun'. also, at a certain point, a real experiment may yield nothing in return, i.e. a risk was undertaken yet nothing at all was gained.
johnchristopher 5y ago
> the point I am trying to make (granted not very eloquently) starts out from this idea [1] that humans are kind of crazy, and that maybe this crazyness is what makes us so successful; so I put that too much safety may undo this crazyness, it puts it to sleep? You are blurring the lines between taking a personal risk in one occasion at a specific time and taking the risk of not wearing a mask or washing hands or cooking meat every day all year long. Craziness for the sake of craziness is just random trial and error.
- the-dude 5y ago
  What is wrong with cooking meat?
  - kixiQu 5y ago
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2769029/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2769029/
  - johnchristopher 5y ago
    there should be a "not" in front of it :/. I should have used "washing vegetables" or "not cooking chicken" or something less ambiguous.
agentdrtran 5y ago
sure, but on one hand, you have being mildly inconvenienced by a shot, and on the other hand, you have conspiracy theories that can get loads of people filled. People are crazy, we should embrace that, but that doesn't mean you let everyone drive drunk.
handrous 5y ago
What does this have to do with the actual topic of the parent post?
llbeansandrice 5y ago
Because it brings the healthcare system crashing down with them. It's not a personal liberty if it's at the direct expense of the lives of others. Get the fucking shot.
ikr678 5y ago
If 'You' is a goverment in a country with socialised healthcare, you want your population as healthy as possible to keep costs down. Preventative care (vaccines) is much cheaper.

by bsedlm 5y ago

guidoism 5y ago

Less about making those people safe and more about making you safe by making those other not spread the disease to you. For example: Go ahead and drive drunk, I don’t care, just do it on your private property so you don’t kill me. Similarly: Go and don’t get vaxed, honestly I don’t care. But viruses don’t respect borders like cars do, so if you are going to do it then make sure you are isolated on a private island where you don’t leave, or Antarctica, or mars or something.

EB-Barrington 5y ago
"Our vaccines are working exceptionally well. They continue to work well for Delta with regard to severe illness and death - they prevent it, but what they can't do anymore is prevent transmission," CDC Director Rochelle Walensky
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- shkkmo 5y ago
  Preventing transmission != reducing transmission rates. The vaccines absolutely do the later.
  - ejb999 5y ago
    are you sure about that? - seems right now the most vaccinated states also seem to have the largest spike in cases - I agree the vaccine, at this point anyway, seems to be reducing deaths - but not sure I agree on transmission - seems like it it still spreading worse than before. And no, I am not an antivaxxer i I am triple vaxxed myself and work in the healthcare field.
    - shkkmo 5y ago
      The only real overlap right now is new england, places like the PNW have high vaccinations and low case rates. Regardless, there are so many factors that affect transmission, you can't easily learn much from geographic comparisons due to the impossibility of eliminating the confounds. However the science is clear, all else being equal, covid vaccines reduce transmission rates.
  - jayrot 5y ago
    This seems to be so hard for some to understand that it smacks of dis-ingenuity.
- NavinF 5y ago
  Hmm did he mean that it doesn’t affect transmission (as in reduce R0) or that it literally can’t prevent transmission (R0 reduced, but still >>0)? The latter is trivially true. I’m guessing he said it anyway because it was intended for a different audience.
  - tshaddox 5y ago
    I don’t think they literally reduce illness and death to zero, but just pretty close. I would assume they were using the same definition of “prevent” in both places in that sentence.
the_doctah 5y ago
Vaccines don't prevent spread of Covid.
- jiggawatts 5y ago
  They do reduce it, by a lot, enough to avoid overwhelming hospitals -- which are borderline right now in many countries and being filled up by anti-vaxxers. Those freedom loving people are taking up valuable beds, putting the lives of people at risk that have other medical issues. Essentially, all of these anti-vax arguments boil down to: "You cannot definitively, absolutely, completely prove that the vaccines are 100.00% effective AND 100.00% safe for everyone always. I mean sure, you're not technically forcing me to take it, but your suggestion that I do my duty to society is too authoritarian. I would prefer to think of myself as a universe onto myself and take the personal chance of death comparable to climbing Mount Everest or driving F1 cars. Because freedom! Or something..." Also: "Grandma can take her chances with getting COVID from me on the odd occasion that I visit her in the cheapest hospice I could find to offload her onto."
  - ejb999 5y ago
    I don't think there is any proof of that - look at VT, or in fact most of the New England states - among the highest percent of vaccinated people anywhere in the US and yet for many of those states, the cases are at a much, much higher level than at any time during the pandemic. Look at Florida, decent % of people are vaxxed, but nearly as many (as a %) as in most new england states and yet the spread of cases is much more muted on a population adjusted basis. These data anomalies need better explanation from non-political scientists - one is not an anti-vaxxer for pointing these inconsistencies out. I agree vaccine seems to be keeping people alive and that is a good thing, and despite your snide remarks, it is actually possible to be in favor of people getting the vaccine (I am tripled vaxxed myself) and yet still valid to question the official (and always changing) narrative we are being fed that this is only a pandemic of the unvaccinated - the facts don't back that up.
- samatman 5y ago
  Vaccines didn't prevent the spread of smallpox either, until they finally did. We're not smallpoxing Covid out of existence without a much better vaccine.
imgabe 5y ago
But if you've already gotten the shot, you're protected from the disease. So, what is someone else not getting the shot going to do to you?
- TimTheTinker 5y ago
  This ^. If the shots are truly protective, I don't understand what the hubbub is all about. Is it really all about protecting those who truly can't get the shot for whatever reason? I doubt it.
  - Ensorceled 5y ago
    The shots are NOT truly protective. The Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine has an effectiveness of about 91%. That means in about 9% of cases it is not protective. I'm amazed we are this deep into this pandemic and people still have black and white thinking wrt to vaccinces.
    - imgabe 5y ago
      I think most people consider 91% to be “truly” protective. Nothing is 100%. The vaccine is more than effective enough to reduce the risk of Covid to the general background risk level of life in general (things like car accidents, slipping in the shower, eating red meat, contracting a flesh eating amoeba from swimming in a lake etc.)
      - Ensorceled 5y ago
        Car crashes kill 30K people a year in the US. COVID has killed 400K in the US in 2021. It's literally 10x worse than cars and 30K from cars is horrific.
        imgabe 5y ago
        How many vaccinated people have been killed by Covid? I’m talking about the risk after you’re vaccinated.
raxxorrax 5y ago
Why does someone unvaccinated pose a risk to you?

arrow7000 5y ago

Ok but what's the point of taking risks for its own sake? It makes sense to take risks if you stand to gain something. But a risk with only downside is just a bad idea.

bsedlm 5y ago
some people, mostly young people, might consider it 'fun'. also, at a certain point, a real experiment may yield nothing in return, i.e. a risk was undertaken yet nothing at all was gained.

johnchristopher 5y ago

> the point I am trying to make (granted not very eloquently) starts out from this idea [1] that humans are kind of crazy, and that maybe this crazyness is what makes us so successful; so I put that too much safety may undo this crazyness, it puts it to sleep? You are blurring the lines between taking a personal risk in one occasion at a specific time and taking the risk of not wearing a mask or washing hands or cooking meat every day all year long. Craziness for the sake of craziness is just random trial and error.

the-dude 5y ago
What is wrong with cooking meat?
- kixiQu 5y ago
  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2769029/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2769029/
- johnchristopher 5y ago
  there should be a "not" in front of it :/. I should have used "washing vegetables" or "not cooking chicken" or something less ambiguous.

agentdrtran 5y ago

sure, but on one hand, you have being mildly inconvenienced by a shot, and on the other hand, you have conspiracy theories that can get loads of people filled. People are crazy, we should embrace that, but that doesn't mean you let everyone drive drunk.

handrous 5y ago

What does this have to do with the actual topic of the parent post?

llbeansandrice 5y ago

Because it brings the healthcare system crashing down with them. It's not a personal liberty if it's at the direct expense of the lives of others. Get the fucking shot.

ikr678 5y ago

If 'You' is a goverment in a country with socialised healthcare, you want your population as healthy as possible to keep costs down. Preventative care (vaccines) is much cheaper.