6 ms·

Anecdata story time. My friends and I went skiing this past weekend. My friends very much subscribe to legacy media/political narratives and repeat back what th

Anecdata story time. My friends and I went skiing this past weekend. My friends very much subscribe to legacy media/political narratives and repeat back what they hear from NPR, CNN, and "hot" takes from social media influencers. (I've tried to get them to read/listen to Manufacturing Consent or Hate INC and I try not to be obnoxious about it since they're friends) On this ski trip I heard them talk about how they're ready to go back to normal. They are fed up with unvaccinated people but very interestingly they said... Screw them, they've made their choice so let them live and die if they get COVID. They weren't articulating an authoritarian policy prescription of making it painful/miserable for the unvaccinated like I have heard them say before. Now, their network of people (friends, family, coworkers) have mostly all had it and even the unvaccinated unhealthy people got through it. This is a big deal and a milestone. My friends want to go back to normal. They are finally willing to let people make their own risk assessment and they are finally willing to let people die in order to go back to normal. They want it so much they are even willing to forego hostilities to the 'other' group of unvaccinated people. That's huge! At least, in my opinion.

crispypotatoes 5y ago
> They want it so much they are even willing to forego hostilities to the 'other' group of unvaccinated people I find it interesting you use the word 'other' here, as usually this is said when trying to frame a dehumanisation argument, where the 'other' is a suppressed minority of sorts As someone that holds this opinion (sod the unvaccinated) and has done since the start of people doing this, I'm not surprised other people are now starting to go 'you made your bed' with this one The thing is, being unvaccinated is a choice and if you want to make that choice then go for it However, that choice has contributed to the deaths of people I know and extending the general disruption of the world for months on end for no other reason that unsubstantiated scepticism You can make that choice but as the article says, do NOT expect the rest of the world to respect it when it's blindingly obvious it's a really dumb choice to make for absolutely no gain to you or anyone around you When you see your mates grandmas dying and people are actively refusing the vaccine, I quite frankly do not care what happens to them, as they didn't care what happened to the people I know who have died
- peteradio 5y ago
  > However, that choice has contributed to the deaths of people I know It was not a choice many people took to get the virus prior to vaccine availability, and these people would be taking extra risk to get vaccinated (excluded from trials) so you are spewing rage at them for what? Because of an error of incorrect application of priors?
  - crispypotatoes 5y ago
    Availability has nothing to do with what I've said and I think you know I'm not speaking to that group If you have access and you deliberately turn it down over nothing AFTER the trial phase, that's who I'm raging at
    - peteradio 5y ago
      Recovered people were excluded from trials so conclusion of trials says nothing for them. What percent of vaccine holdouts do you reckon have already been infected? If that is a significant percentage, realize your anger is being channeled into restrictions against these people you are not speaking to.
      - crispypotatoes 5y ago
        > What percent of vaccine holdouts do you reckon have already been infected? I'm not going to sit here and guess You have the information to work this one out yourself if you like and none of these comments make any sense mate
        peteradio 5y ago
        So you don't have those numbers on hand? It seems crucial, if 100% of unvaccinated have already recovered then what is to be gained by vaccinating now?
        5y ago
Steltek 5y ago
Don't mistake your friends change in policy with a change in attitude about the individual vs society. Vaccine mandates, incentives, and restrictions were all done with paternalistic intent. However we've reached the point where the rotten child is a danger to the parents and they're being kicked out of the house. Patience and humanity are exhausted and it's been turned into anger. Few accept their "personal risk assessment" as an acceptable choice.
croon 5y ago
I don't wish ill on anyone, but it's hard not to note hospitals being filled with unvaccinated people, pushing out operations, cancer treatments, other appointments for people who actually have no choice. If that's a trolley problem where I'm forced to choose, I know what I'd choose. That said, I don't care about going back to normal, but I would prefer if hospitals weren't clogged up because people can't be arsed to listen to science.
- bad_username 5y ago
  Only a vert small fraction of covid hospitalizations are pure covid. The vast majority has comorbidities, notably obesity. Where does your trolley thinking lead now?
  - croon 5y ago
    A lot of people have comorbitives, yet unvaccinated are vastly overrepresented in hospitalizations. You changed nothing. You raised a variable that's independent of vaccinations. The trolley problem is unchanged.
    - bad_username 5y ago
      This does not make sense. Fewer obese people means (much) fewer covid hospitalizations and fewer hospital beds occupied. There is a clear causal link from both vaccination status AND obesity.
      - croon 5y ago
        X% of people are obese, Y% of people are vaccinated. An extremely outsized portion of hospitalizations are unvaccinated. Are you saying that obese people are more or less likely to be vaccinated? Otherwise, it's irrelevant. Yes, hospitalizations likely skews toward obese people, but what's relevant is whether they are vaccinated or not, and clearly most (hospitalizations) aren't. Let's take the Australia example in the thread. 92% of population vaccinated, 50% hospitalizations are unvaccinated. Unless there's a claim that obese people are less likely to be vaccinated, you would free up every other hospital bed by everyone getting vaccinated (minus the portion still going in, which here would be a ratio of 0.5 x total_beds out of 0.92 x population of those 8%). Yes, if less people were obese there would also be less hospitalizations, but that's an entirely separate problem. Maybe if no one was obese you would halve (as an example) the number of hospitalizations again, but that's much harder than getting a needle.

crispypotatoes 5y ago

> They want it so much they are even willing to forego hostilities to the 'other' group of unvaccinated people I find it interesting you use the word 'other' here, as usually this is said when trying to frame a dehumanisation argument, where the 'other' is a suppressed minority of sorts As someone that holds this opinion (sod the unvaccinated) and has done since the start of people doing this, I'm not surprised other people are now starting to go 'you made your bed' with this one The thing is, being unvaccinated is a choice and if you want to make that choice then go for it However, that choice has contributed to the deaths of people I know and extending the general disruption of the world for months on end for no other reason that unsubstantiated scepticism You can make that choice but as the article says, do NOT expect the rest of the world to respect it when it's blindingly obvious it's a really dumb choice to make for absolutely no gain to you or anyone around you When you see your mates grandmas dying and people are actively refusing the vaccine, I quite frankly do not care what happens to them, as they didn't care what happened to the people I know who have died

peteradio 5y ago
> However, that choice has contributed to the deaths of people I know It was not a choice many people took to get the virus prior to vaccine availability, and these people would be taking extra risk to get vaccinated (excluded from trials) so you are spewing rage at them for what? Because of an error of incorrect application of priors?
- crispypotatoes 5y ago
  Availability has nothing to do with what I've said and I think you know I'm not speaking to that group If you have access and you deliberately turn it down over nothing AFTER the trial phase, that's who I'm raging at
  - peteradio 5y ago
    Recovered people were excluded from trials so conclusion of trials says nothing for them. What percent of vaccine holdouts do you reckon have already been infected? If that is a significant percentage, realize your anger is being channeled into restrictions against these people you are not speaking to.
    - crispypotatoes 5y ago
      > What percent of vaccine holdouts do you reckon have already been infected? I'm not going to sit here and guess You have the information to work this one out yourself if you like and none of these comments make any sense mate
      - peteradio 5y ago
        So you don't have those numbers on hand? It seems crucial, if 100% of unvaccinated have already recovered then what is to be gained by vaccinating now?
        5y ago

Steltek 5y ago

Don't mistake your friends change in policy with a change in attitude about the individual vs society. Vaccine mandates, incentives, and restrictions were all done with paternalistic intent. However we've reached the point where the rotten child is a danger to the parents and they're being kicked out of the house. Patience and humanity are exhausted and it's been turned into anger. Few accept their "personal risk assessment" as an acceptable choice.

croon 5y ago

I don't wish ill on anyone, but it's hard not to note hospitals being filled with unvaccinated people, pushing out operations, cancer treatments, other appointments for people who actually have no choice. If that's a trolley problem where I'm forced to choose, I know what I'd choose. That said, I don't care about going back to normal, but I would prefer if hospitals weren't clogged up because people can't be arsed to listen to science.

bad_username 5y ago
Only a vert small fraction of covid hospitalizations are pure covid. The vast majority has comorbidities, notably obesity. Where does your trolley thinking lead now?
- croon 5y ago
  A lot of people have comorbitives, yet unvaccinated are vastly overrepresented in hospitalizations. You changed nothing. You raised a variable that's independent of vaccinations. The trolley problem is unchanged.
  - bad_username 5y ago
    This does not make sense. Fewer obese people means (much) fewer covid hospitalizations and fewer hospital beds occupied. There is a clear causal link from both vaccination status AND obesity.
    - croon 5y ago
      X% of people are obese, Y% of people are vaccinated. An extremely outsized portion of hospitalizations are unvaccinated. Are you saying that obese people are more or less likely to be vaccinated? Otherwise, it's irrelevant. Yes, hospitalizations likely skews toward obese people, but what's relevant is whether they are vaccinated or not, and clearly most (hospitalizations) aren't. Let's take the Australia example in the thread. 92% of population vaccinated, 50% hospitalizations are unvaccinated. Unless there's a claim that obese people are less likely to be vaccinated, you would free up every other hospital bed by everyone getting vaccinated (minus the portion still going in, which here would be a ratio of 0.5 x total_beds out of 0.92 x population of those 8%). Yes, if less people were obese there would also be less hospitalizations, but that's an entirely separate problem. Maybe if no one was obese you would halve (as an example) the number of hospitalizations again, but that's much harder than getting a needle.