4 ms·

I merely explained a local colloquialism. I am vaccinated and boosted and no longer have minors that I have to make medical decisions for, but if I did I would

I merely explained a local colloquialism. I am vaccinated and boosted and no longer have minors that I have to make medical decisions for, but if I did I would be weighing all information on the subject available to me before I made a decision to vaccinate my children against Covid-19. The rate of severe disease in healthy children was already so low and—if I am being perfected honest—the fact that the pharma companies behind the vaccines in the US are completely indemnified against lawsuits arising from harm that their vaccines may do would be a big factor in my decision making. It’s one thing to take a risk with a newly developed medication with my own body, it’s quite another for me to take an unnecessary risk with a new medication with my children’s body.

eesmith 5y ago
I merely pointed out that that interpretation doesn't seem correct. Since your definition of "children" is 11-and-younger, you appear to agree with the recommendation of Sweden's health authority to vaccinate all teens, and you appear to disagree with the recommendation mentioned on the JRE. While you may doubt the US medical system, does not the combined views of the rest of the world's medical systems provide a backstop significantly stronger than your and Rogan's non-expert opinion?
- kcplate 5y ago
  I said what I said, If I needed to vaccinate my children I would want all information I can get available to me before I make the decision, pro, con, and otherwise. Since it’s a decision I don’t have to make, my opinion whether I agree with the US medical system, Sweden, or Joe Rogan doesn’t matter. However, it is undeniable that the manufacturers have indemnification against any harm their vaccines may cause. If the vaccines are statistically safe, the manufacturers don’t need indemnification. If they are not statistically safe, or if their safety is unknown…they do, otherwise they would not release the product. That fact has to be considered. These companies are making billions at zero risk to them. Healthcare providers have zero risk in the recommendation. Government has zero risk at recommendations. At this point the only person assuming any risk is the patient getting the shot. And if that patient is young and healthy and statistically unlikely to have severe disease from Covid that risk assessment is important, especially for a parent.
  - eesmith 5y ago
    But we aren't talking about you, and your extraordinary ability - far beyond mine! - to read and understand all of the information about every vaccine, medicine, and medical treatment your child might receive. Instead, we're talking about two musicians exercising their right of free association to no longer be affiliated with a company who hosts an interview show recommending medical treatment that is at odds with the medical advice of a large number of independent medical systems. And we're talking about the presumed hypocrisy of those musicians selling songs in Sweden based on the (IMO very wrong) assertion that the position presented in the JRE is the same as that of the Swedish medical authorities. But if you want to talk about you - what is your solution to the DTP issue that introduced the vaccine courts in the first place? And why do you think the adversarial court model is a better solution than the no-fault system we have?
    - kcplate 5y ago
      Interesting…here I thought all along that we were talking about on this little comment spur about who constitutes a “child” and whether or not those children should or should not get vaccinated and which opinions on that subject were popular where. I frankly don’t care what any musician does with their art and for whatever reason they choose to do it and I have said that elsewhere on this greater thread. I do care about attempts to suppress information and…whether I agree with that information or not. I don’t care that Neil Young wants his music pulled, but I would definitely care if Spotify pulled Joe Rogan off the air because Neil young wanted him off because of their conflicting opinions. Ultimately you took umbrage with my explanation of a colloquial definition of “children” that is used where I am from (without even knowing where that is) and then proceeded down a rant about how I am wrong because you are apparently the gatekeeper of the English language or something (I guess). And now you decide to end with a smartass commentary. I have said what I said, if that doesn’t interest you…oh well, don’t care. If you don’t agree with it…oh well, don’t care. If it offends or upsets you that I would approach vaccinating my own children with an experimental and novel vaccine by wanting to learn everything I can about it, oh well, don’t care.
      - eesmith 5y ago

eesmith 5y ago

I merely pointed out that that interpretation doesn't seem correct. Since your definition of "children" is 11-and-younger, you appear to agree with the recommendation of Sweden's health authority to vaccinate all teens, and you appear to disagree with the recommendation mentioned on the JRE. While you may doubt the US medical system, does not the combined views of the rest of the world's medical systems provide a backstop significantly stronger than your and Rogan's non-expert opinion?

kcplate 5y ago
I said what I said, If I needed to vaccinate my children I would want all information I can get available to me before I make the decision, pro, con, and otherwise. Since it’s a decision I don’t have to make, my opinion whether I agree with the US medical system, Sweden, or Joe Rogan doesn’t matter. However, it is undeniable that the manufacturers have indemnification against any harm their vaccines may cause. If the vaccines are statistically safe, the manufacturers don’t need indemnification. If they are not statistically safe, or if their safety is unknown…they do, otherwise they would not release the product. That fact has to be considered. These companies are making billions at zero risk to them. Healthcare providers have zero risk in the recommendation. Government has zero risk at recommendations. At this point the only person assuming any risk is the patient getting the shot. And if that patient is young and healthy and statistically unlikely to have severe disease from Covid that risk assessment is important, especially for a parent.
- eesmith 5y ago
  But we aren't talking about you, and your extraordinary ability - far beyond mine! - to read and understand all of the information about every vaccine, medicine, and medical treatment your child might receive. Instead, we're talking about two musicians exercising their right of free association to no longer be affiliated with a company who hosts an interview show recommending medical treatment that is at odds with the medical advice of a large number of independent medical systems. And we're talking about the presumed hypocrisy of those musicians selling songs in Sweden based on the (IMO very wrong) assertion that the position presented in the JRE is the same as that of the Swedish medical authorities. But if you want to talk about you - what is your solution to the DTP issue that introduced the vaccine courts in the first place? And why do you think the adversarial court model is a better solution than the no-fault system we have?
  - kcplate 5y ago
    Interesting…here I thought all along that we were talking about on this little comment spur about who constitutes a “child” and whether or not those children should or should not get vaccinated and which opinions on that subject were popular where. I frankly don’t care what any musician does with their art and for whatever reason they choose to do it and I have said that elsewhere on this greater thread. I do care about attempts to suppress information and…whether I agree with that information or not. I don’t care that Neil Young wants his music pulled, but I would definitely care if Spotify pulled Joe Rogan off the air because Neil young wanted him off because of their conflicting opinions. Ultimately you took umbrage with my explanation of a colloquial definition of “children” that is used where I am from (without even knowing where that is) and then proceeded down a rant about how I am wrong because you are apparently the gatekeeper of the English language or something (I guess). And now you decide to end with a smartass commentary. I have said what I said, if that doesn’t interest you…oh well, don’t care. If you don’t agree with it…oh well, don’t care. If it offends or upsets you that I would approach vaccinating my own children with an experimental and novel vaccine by wanting to learn everything I can about it, oh well, don’t care.
    - eesmith 5y ago