3 ms·

The initial safety trials for the vaccines involved tens of thousands and by the time you had the chance to get the vaccine it had been given to millions of peo

The initial safety trials for the vaccines involved tens of thousands and by the time you had the chance to get the vaccine it had been given to millions of people (with any adverse effects tracked). One of the vaccines was pulled off the market for super rare side effects! And at the same time, it was obviously, provably known that the vaccine was better than covid. Did you know covid causes myocarditis too? More often than the vaccine does? If your standard for informed consent is more information that was available for the covid vaccines then I assure you the other health decisions you are making in your life are not meeting that standard. You also aren't the best at evaluating risk. It's very much like being against seatbelt mandates because they sometimes cause injuries in car crashes. Now it is a separate question of whether the current vaccine policy makes any sense, but its a much less impactful question because the policies from 2021 mostly did the job of protecting people.

at_a_remove 4y ago
I know all of those things. It still doesn't matter. Informed consent must happen. We have a long and rich medical history of finding out what happens when that sort of thing is brushed off. "Hey, I'm doing you a big favor" doesn't matter, consent does.
- peter422 4y ago
  Given all the things the government is capable of doing (drafting you, imprisoning you, taxing you, taking your property, etc), you are putting way too high a standard on this. The government has an interest in the overall public health and will make controversial decisions to that effect. They've done it before and will do it again. There were also right in this case so that is kind of important. I agree they could have been wrong, and that would have sucked. But they weren't. The processes and safeguards to the very aggressive policies got to the correct endpoint, and saved a lot of people's lives (in some cases against their will).
  - at_a_remove 4y ago
    Okay, so someone in a labcoat tackles me, gives me a shot, tells me it is for my own good, then runs off. That's ... okay? The end result is irrelevant. It's the "she had an orgasm, so how could it be rape?" defense. The recipient must consent, and they must be in full possession of the facts for them to make that decision. Even if it is a decision you do not agree with, it is still theirs to make.
    - peter422 4y ago
      The government didn't do that though (even though they could have!). Tons of people remain unvaccinated, though I acknowledge in certain cases the person had to find a different job more compatible with their inability to do risk analysis. Remember also that if you get sick and go to an ER, they are required by law to treat you. The society has an interest in preserving this legally required service to be available to it's people. You weep at the lack of informed consent for the vaccine but have no concern for the person who bleeds out in a car accident because the EMTs were overwhelmed with COVID patients who had completely preventable serious disease. You don't want to take a measles vaccine due to the potential side effects (remember: nothing is perfectly safe), but yet want to live under the protection of everybody else who did take it. If you choose to live in a society you gotta take one for the team every now and again. Sometimes the government is wrong and it sucks, but this was not one of those times!
      - at_a_remove 4y ago
        Oh, I have taken the vaccines. I just believe that informed consent is always a must. I should be informed of the side effects, all of them. Hiding them from me is not an option. I guess we fundamentally disagree on the need for informed consent. I believe that "you don't get to know that" is not acceptable, no matter how well-meaning people are. We used to sterilize people without telling them, under the exact same auspices (Buck vs. Bell). I quote Oliver Wendell Holmes "The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes." So don't read about the side effects of anything you are prescribed, I would still like to.

at_a_remove 4y ago

I know all of those things. It still doesn't matter. Informed consent must happen. We have a long and rich medical history of finding out what happens when that sort of thing is brushed off. "Hey, I'm doing you a big favor" doesn't matter, consent does.

peter422 4y ago
Given all the things the government is capable of doing (drafting you, imprisoning you, taxing you, taking your property, etc), you are putting way too high a standard on this. The government has an interest in the overall public health and will make controversial decisions to that effect. They've done it before and will do it again. There were also right in this case so that is kind of important. I agree they could have been wrong, and that would have sucked. But they weren't. The processes and safeguards to the very aggressive policies got to the correct endpoint, and saved a lot of people's lives (in some cases against their will).
- at_a_remove 4y ago
  Okay, so someone in a labcoat tackles me, gives me a shot, tells me it is for my own good, then runs off. That's ... okay? The end result is irrelevant. It's the "she had an orgasm, so how could it be rape?" defense. The recipient must consent, and they must be in full possession of the facts for them to make that decision. Even if it is a decision you do not agree with, it is still theirs to make.
  - peter422 4y ago
    The government didn't do that though (even though they could have!). Tons of people remain unvaccinated, though I acknowledge in certain cases the person had to find a different job more compatible with their inability to do risk analysis. Remember also that if you get sick and go to an ER, they are required by law to treat you. The society has an interest in preserving this legally required service to be available to it's people. You weep at the lack of informed consent for the vaccine but have no concern for the person who bleeds out in a car accident because the EMTs were overwhelmed with COVID patients who had completely preventable serious disease. You don't want to take a measles vaccine due to the potential side effects (remember: nothing is perfectly safe), but yet want to live under the protection of everybody else who did take it. If you choose to live in a society you gotta take one for the team every now and again. Sometimes the government is wrong and it sucks, but this was not one of those times!
    - at_a_remove 4y ago
      Oh, I have taken the vaccines. I just believe that informed consent is always a must. I should be informed of the side effects, all of them. Hiding them from me is not an option. I guess we fundamentally disagree on the need for informed consent. I believe that "you don't get to know that" is not acceptable, no matter how well-meaning people are. We used to sterilize people without telling them, under the exact same auspices (Buck vs. Bell). I quote Oliver Wendell Holmes "The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes." So don't read about the side effects of anything you are prescribed, I would still like to.