5 ms·

In what sense is getting a vaccination that has been administered to literally billions of people, billions of times, with no serious adverse effects a signific

by arrrg 5y ago

In what sense is getting a vaccination that has been administered to literally billions of people, billions of times, with no serious adverse effects a significant sacrifice? That statement does not make sense under any possible rational interpretation.

mythrwy 5y ago
Because it's an infringement of bodily autonomy. This is very serious to many people (myself included). I'd be more receptive to sacrifice on behalf of others if it looked like it was more effective and less performative. "No serious adverse effects" < Nonsense. People have been injured and died from these vaccines. Perhaps you meant to say "side effects so far appear very rare"? (which I'd agree with). If there are no serious side effects we can remove the liability protections drug companies currently enjoy right? I do agree the vaccines work to an extent for some months. They have reduced deaths. I'm glad they exist and would encourage any vulnerable person to take them. But my risk profile is very low. My Covid experience was a short cold a week ago. And the statistics aren't showing they do a whole lot to prevent transmission. So I won't be playing any level of Russian roulette with unneeded pharma products, even if it's a 1 in a million chance of serious issues or death.
- arrrg 5y ago
  A one in a million adverse effect is not in any way serious, even if it sometimes leads to death. This is deeply irrational and highly antisocial behavior. It it disgusting and awful. Bodily autonomy is not that important, either.
  - jasonladuke0311 5y ago
    > Bodily autonomy is not that important, either. To you.
  - mythrwy 5y ago
    We'll have to agree to disagree on what is irrational, disgusting and anti social I suppose. Just know I feel exactly the same about your position (but wouldn't express the disgust if you hadn't brought it up first). If bodily autonomy isn't that import rape only lasts 10 minutes so what's the harm? Nope, it's of primary importance. Lose some weight and keep your D levels high, get vaccinated if you chose, and stop demanding that everyone engage in risky or unnecessary performative behavior to create an illusion of safety.
- ChrisLomont 5y ago
  >People have been injured and died from these vaccines. Really, how many? How many have died that didn't take it that could have? Those honestly medically unable to take it (which is a crazy small number) compared to those that don't out of willful ignorance is a drop in the ocean. >So I won't be playing any level of Russian roulette with unneeded pharma products, even if it's a 1 in a million chance of serious issues or death. hahhahaha.... Right now you'll not take something you claim affects under 1 in 1 million while helping spread something that has killed 1 in 400 in the US. That's a difference by a factor of 2500. 2500 - think about that. And has likely given millions lifelong permanent damage. You really prefer a 2500 times increased death rate, and view that as defensible for society? Really? Now, let's look for demonstrable numbers. About 500 million doses have been given in the US last year, 206 million people fully vaccinated, many partially vaccinated. Where are the hundreds dead by your claims? There are currently (as far as I can tell on Google scholar, CDC, etc.) exactly ZERO people whose death is attributed to the vaccine. So go ahead and show me your data. So it's not 1 in a million - it's likely more like 1 in 100 million or even fewer that die from the vaccine. 1 in 400 die from COVID. This clearly shows the lack of compassion, understanding, numeracy, that such arguments display.
  - mythrwy 5y ago
    You seem to be missing the part where my taking the vaccine helps others. Has this been quantified or is it just hand-waving? Because it's very obvious transmission is widely occurring regardless. I've already explained how the vaccine does not help me. Was not needed. We know short term risks exist from vaccination, we know people have died, we know that it is rare to have very serious side effects (like death). What about long term risks? More hand waving claims of "unlikely"? The end of your post is a long way of saying "well you are dumb". Ok, whatever. If you don't want to accept rationality or have different views of human agency, it's not my business. I've clarified my position on these vaccines. I'm glad they exist, I recommend vulnerable people take them. I don't need them and won't be taking them. Unless it can be clearly shown it would be of great benefit to others (we've already established minimal risk for myself). And that somehow taking the vaccines with immunity from previous infection already existing is needed to do that.
  - 5y ago

by arrrg 5y ago

mythrwy 5y ago

Because it's an infringement of bodily autonomy. This is very serious to many people (myself included). I'd be more receptive to sacrifice on behalf of others if it looked like it was more effective and less performative. "No serious adverse effects" < Nonsense. People have been injured and died from these vaccines. Perhaps you meant to say "side effects so far appear very rare"? (which I'd agree with). If there are no serious side effects we can remove the liability protections drug companies currently enjoy right? I do agree the vaccines work to an extent for some months. They have reduced deaths. I'm glad they exist and would encourage any vulnerable person to take them. But my risk profile is very low. My Covid experience was a short cold a week ago. And the statistics aren't showing they do a whole lot to prevent transmission. So I won't be playing any level of Russian roulette with unneeded pharma products, even if it's a 1 in a million chance of serious issues or death.

arrrg 5y ago
A one in a million adverse effect is not in any way serious, even if it sometimes leads to death. This is deeply irrational and highly antisocial behavior. It it disgusting and awful. Bodily autonomy is not that important, either.
- jasonladuke0311 5y ago
  > Bodily autonomy is not that important, either. To you.
- mythrwy 5y ago
  We'll have to agree to disagree on what is irrational, disgusting and anti social I suppose. Just know I feel exactly the same about your position (but wouldn't express the disgust if you hadn't brought it up first). If bodily autonomy isn't that import rape only lasts 10 minutes so what's the harm? Nope, it's of primary importance. Lose some weight and keep your D levels high, get vaccinated if you chose, and stop demanding that everyone engage in risky or unnecessary performative behavior to create an illusion of safety.
ChrisLomont 5y ago
>People have been injured and died from these vaccines. Really, how many? How many have died that didn't take it that could have? Those honestly medically unable to take it (which is a crazy small number) compared to those that don't out of willful ignorance is a drop in the ocean. >So I won't be playing any level of Russian roulette with unneeded pharma products, even if it's a 1 in a million chance of serious issues or death. hahhahaha.... Right now you'll not take something you claim affects under 1 in 1 million while helping spread something that has killed 1 in 400 in the US. That's a difference by a factor of 2500. 2500 - think about that. And has likely given millions lifelong permanent damage. You really prefer a 2500 times increased death rate, and view that as defensible for society? Really? Now, let's look for demonstrable numbers. About 500 million doses have been given in the US last year, 206 million people fully vaccinated, many partially vaccinated. Where are the hundreds dead by your claims? There are currently (as far as I can tell on Google scholar, CDC, etc.) exactly ZERO people whose death is attributed to the vaccine. So go ahead and show me your data. So it's not 1 in a million - it's likely more like 1 in 100 million or even fewer that die from the vaccine. 1 in 400 die from COVID. This clearly shows the lack of compassion, understanding, numeracy, that such arguments display.
- mythrwy 5y ago
  You seem to be missing the part where my taking the vaccine helps others. Has this been quantified or is it just hand-waving? Because it's very obvious transmission is widely occurring regardless. I've already explained how the vaccine does not help me. Was not needed. We know short term risks exist from vaccination, we know people have died, we know that it is rare to have very serious side effects (like death). What about long term risks? More hand waving claims of "unlikely"? The end of your post is a long way of saying "well you are dumb". Ok, whatever. If you don't want to accept rationality or have different views of human agency, it's not my business. I've clarified my position on these vaccines. I'm glad they exist, I recommend vulnerable people take them. I don't need them and won't be taking them. Unless it can be clearly shown it would be of great benefit to others (we've already established minimal risk for myself). And that somehow taking the vaccines with immunity from previous infection already existing is needed to do that.
- 5y ago