5 ms·

This is true only in hindsight. The only reason you say that is because we actually kind of lucked out that COVID didn't turn out to be any deadlier, especially

This is true only in hindsight. The only reason you say that is because we actually kind of lucked out that COVID didn't turn out to be any deadlier, especially to younger folks. But when those decisions were made, that was not known clearly.

anon291 4y ago
By the time the vaccine was available we knew this.
- didibus 4y ago
  When I took the vaccine, it was the beginning of Delta variant, I don't remember it being known at that time that the original strain would stop circulating or what the effects of Delta would be, and especially not long COVID related symptoms. I also didn't know a less virulent strain, Omicron would come and spread and take over the others. There was also the issue of ICUs reaching their max capacity, you can't have everyone be treated for severe COVID at the same time, so you needed a lot of people vaccinated fast to relive the medical system from that load. And finally, it wasn't known that it would still allow spread, or that it wouldn't work as well from Delta and Omicron as the original variant. When I took it as a 30 year old in very good health, I did so to protect my parents, my older coworkers, my friends that are immunocompromised, and to hope to avoid a bad time and possible long Covid symptoms. I'd already known two people who had died from COVID, one my age by obese, and one elderly. I wasn't worried of dying from COVID myself, but I still didn't want to get it, and I was worried of long term effects, still am on that. Even now, I don't think anyone can claim a unanimous decision was better or worse, even in hindsight. The positive second order effects of vaccination are not clearly quantified, the negative effects of Covid long term are not clearly quantified, and the negative effects of the various vaccines are not clearly quantified. The reason we're even all arguing about it is because it's very ambiguous knowing which is best, vaccination or not. If it was obvious one was a better decision we wouldn't be having all these debates of opinion.
  - anon291 4y ago
    Forcing people to take it whether by threatening their jobs, their access to family, etc was morally bankrupt. We should all be able to agree on that.
    - didibus 4y ago
      Even though it is my opinion, I don't agree that it's morally bankrupt to think otherwise. Agreeing on values is one of the hardest things to achieve. Some people have a collectivist leaning, others an individualist leaning (and this can depend on a per-issue basis even within the same individual). Some people think the morally correct goal is to save as many lives as possible in the short term, while others think individual autonomy and personal choice is more important. Some are in the middle, putting the threshold slightly lower or higher in either direction. You and me simply lean more towards favoring personal autonomy and choice, at least on this issue apparently. Luckily, our societies have evolved diplomatic methods to solve these conflicts of values, through the democratic process and pre-agreed on laws. Instead of going to useless war or leaning on force, we put the elected officials in charge of the decision on the effective policies, and each one looked at the tradeoffs, looked at their constituency, looked at the limited data available, and made a decision.
wikitopian 4y ago
I'm middle aged and obese. It appears that it was indeed suboptimal for people younger and healthier than myself to take it. It's a complex question that involved a lot of rumsfeldian known unknowns and unknown unknowns at the time and even now. What I do know is that the certainty was not at the threshold which justified mandatory vaccination.
- cromwellian 4y ago
  "It appears that it was indeed suboptimal for people younger and healthier than myself to take it." Maybe it was suboptimal for them, but isn't the point that when you vaccine yourself, you're not just protecting yourself, but other people? Isn't limiting the active population that's infected a way of protecting both those who are immunocompromised, but in general, lowering the probability of everyone of exposure? Even if you're protected by vaccine as an old/obese person, would you feel safe walking around in a large population of young people with raging infections? "What I do know is that the certainty was not at the threshold which justified mandatory vaccination." 2 million people are dead. That's more than the Spanish Flu of 1918, Polio, and Smallpox outbreaks in the US combined. It's equal to the total number of flu deaths over the last 40 years combined. And you don't think public health officials had reason to want mandatory vaccination? I thank the gods those that came before my generation had the wherewithal to ignore this kind of logic and use widespread vaccination to eradicate Smallpox from the earth. I was born in 1971, a year after they stopped mandatory vaccinations. My wife is not from the US, and she has the smallpox "scar" from her vaccination. If the remaining samples were to get out of the lab, I have my doubts as to whether or not the world will respond the same way it did 60 years ago.
  - wikitopian 4y ago
    Your argument could perhaps hold water if it were centered on the Johnson & Johnson formulation. There is no precedent for a relatively novel technology being injected into everybody in a blind panic before a great deal of testing has been performed. It was a huge gamble. It could have gone much worse than it did.
    - 4y ago

anon291 4y ago

By the time the vaccine was available we knew this.

didibus 4y ago
When I took the vaccine, it was the beginning of Delta variant, I don't remember it being known at that time that the original strain would stop circulating or what the effects of Delta would be, and especially not long COVID related symptoms. I also didn't know a less virulent strain, Omicron would come and spread and take over the others. There was also the issue of ICUs reaching their max capacity, you can't have everyone be treated for severe COVID at the same time, so you needed a lot of people vaccinated fast to relive the medical system from that load. And finally, it wasn't known that it would still allow spread, or that it wouldn't work as well from Delta and Omicron as the original variant. When I took it as a 30 year old in very good health, I did so to protect my parents, my older coworkers, my friends that are immunocompromised, and to hope to avoid a bad time and possible long Covid symptoms. I'd already known two people who had died from COVID, one my age by obese, and one elderly. I wasn't worried of dying from COVID myself, but I still didn't want to get it, and I was worried of long term effects, still am on that. Even now, I don't think anyone can claim a unanimous decision was better or worse, even in hindsight. The positive second order effects of vaccination are not clearly quantified, the negative effects of Covid long term are not clearly quantified, and the negative effects of the various vaccines are not clearly quantified. The reason we're even all arguing about it is because it's very ambiguous knowing which is best, vaccination or not. If it was obvious one was a better decision we wouldn't be having all these debates of opinion.
- anon291 4y ago
  Forcing people to take it whether by threatening their jobs, their access to family, etc was morally bankrupt. We should all be able to agree on that.
  - didibus 4y ago
    Even though it is my opinion, I don't agree that it's morally bankrupt to think otherwise. Agreeing on values is one of the hardest things to achieve. Some people have a collectivist leaning, others an individualist leaning (and this can depend on a per-issue basis even within the same individual). Some people think the morally correct goal is to save as many lives as possible in the short term, while others think individual autonomy and personal choice is more important. Some are in the middle, putting the threshold slightly lower or higher in either direction. You and me simply lean more towards favoring personal autonomy and choice, at least on this issue apparently. Luckily, our societies have evolved diplomatic methods to solve these conflicts of values, through the democratic process and pre-agreed on laws. Instead of going to useless war or leaning on force, we put the elected officials in charge of the decision on the effective policies, and each one looked at the tradeoffs, looked at their constituency, looked at the limited data available, and made a decision.

wikitopian 4y ago

I'm middle aged and obese. It appears that it was indeed suboptimal for people younger and healthier than myself to take it. It's a complex question that involved a lot of rumsfeldian known unknowns and unknown unknowns at the time and even now. What I do know is that the certainty was not at the threshold which justified mandatory vaccination.

cromwellian 4y ago
"It appears that it was indeed suboptimal for people younger and healthier than myself to take it." Maybe it was suboptimal for them, but isn't the point that when you vaccine yourself, you're not just protecting yourself, but other people? Isn't limiting the active population that's infected a way of protecting both those who are immunocompromised, but in general, lowering the probability of everyone of exposure? Even if you're protected by vaccine as an old/obese person, would you feel safe walking around in a large population of young people with raging infections? "What I do know is that the certainty was not at the threshold which justified mandatory vaccination." 2 million people are dead. That's more than the Spanish Flu of 1918, Polio, and Smallpox outbreaks in the US combined. It's equal to the total number of flu deaths over the last 40 years combined. And you don't think public health officials had reason to want mandatory vaccination? I thank the gods those that came before my generation had the wherewithal to ignore this kind of logic and use widespread vaccination to eradicate Smallpox from the earth. I was born in 1971, a year after they stopped mandatory vaccinations. My wife is not from the US, and she has the smallpox "scar" from her vaccination. If the remaining samples were to get out of the lab, I have my doubts as to whether or not the world will respond the same way it did 60 years ago.
- wikitopian 4y ago
  Your argument could perhaps hold water if it were centered on the Johnson & Johnson formulation. There is no precedent for a relatively novel technology being injected into everybody in a blind panic before a great deal of testing has been performed. It was a huge gamble. It could have gone much worse than it did.
  - 4y ago