7 ms·

What is it about vaccines? Lots of anti-vaxxers are fine with other kinds of drugs and use them liberally, even in many cases street drugs. They'll eat fast fo

• tedeh 2y ago
  Fear of needles and having your skin pierced is my guess, at least for some.
  • yesco 2y ago
    I think it's simply the enforcement mechanisms make people paranoid, especially since they are usually directed at children (by schools), it all then snowballs from there. I agree the needles don't help though.
• anovikov 2y ago
  It's about taking a drug when not sick, and doing so because government says you to.
• profsummergig 2y ago
  RFK Jr. is such a case. Anti-vaxx, but uses something to boost his "jackedness". The dude is jacked for a >70 years old guy. Supposedly it's testosterone. If anyone knows what he uses to look so jacked, please share.
  • rqtwteye 2y ago
    That's what he says: “I’m on an anti-aging protocol from my doctor that includes testosterone replacement,” Kennedy said. “I don’t take any anabolic steroids or anything like that and the TRT I use is bioidentical to what my body produces.” I wouldn't be surprised if he mixed in a few other "vitamins"
    • ceejayoz 2y ago
      He's been convicted of heroin possession in the past.
    • amanaplanacanal 2y ago
      The man is confused if he doesn't think testosterone is an anabolic steroid.
  • aphantastic 2y ago
    He is vaccinated and all of his children are as well. What specifically of his statements do you consider “anti-vax”?
    • 9dev 2y ago
      Maybe the fact that he wants to let people choose whether to get vaccinated. That isn’t how we eradicated polio. It’s irresponsible.
      • aphantastic 2y ago
        So not “anti-vax” but rather “pro-choice”.
        • llamaimperative 2y ago
          "anti-vaccinating people at the scale required to yield good public health outcomes" is sufficient to qualify for the label, IMO.
          • noworriesnate 2y ago
            To be fair, vaccinating all humans, dogs, cats and other animals that can carry COVID-19 was never going to happen before the virus mutated, so you could also apply the label to reality itself.
            • llamaimperative 2y ago
              To be fair, that’s not required to yield extremely strong public health outcomes, as evidenced by the extremely strong public health outcomes we saw in reality. (If you’re about to go on some statistically illiterate sidebar about how the COVID vaccines weren’t actually that effective, you can save your breath)
    • dekhn 2y ago
      Not sure if you're "playing dumb" (sometimes people do that on chat boards). Kennedy isn't just "pro-choice on vaccines", he's repeatedly amplified nonscientific views about vaccine safety. For example, as recently as 2023, "Autism comes from vaccines". Then he pivots to a more useful comment, that vaccines are exempt from the normal requirements on drugs to go through full clinical trials. If you want to claim "autism comes from vaccines" you really have to put up some sort of evidence that supports the claim, and the reality is that there is no reliable evidence for the claim. Also, which vaccine? They use a wide range of technologies? Is it thimerosol... which isn't in any of the major vaccines used in the US today (and was unlikely to be a cause of autism in the first place, and is also still used in many contexts). Ultimately, what RFK Jr is doing is sowing doubt in established science. I think he's doing it because he thinks the established science is corrupt, but I fail to see how he could possibly correct that while also casting doubt. If he ends up in a public health leadership position, he's going to find very quickly just how poorly his approach to public health works.
• aphantastic 2y ago
  Yes, people can choose to do some things without wanting authorities to force them to do other things. Astutely observed.
  • svara 2y ago
    So tired of this framing. We get it, you don't like the government. So what? If you're spreading lies about medicine because you distrust authority... Well, first of all, you're dumb because you believe falsehoods. But more importantly, you're a danger to my health, my friends and my families' health, and to your own health as well. Why would we have any patience for this? Your rugged self-important individualism is not worth more than any of that. You appear to be thinking that you're taking some heroic stand on principle. Your principle is leading you astray. It makes you antisocial, a danger to your neighbors.
    • insane_dreamer 2y ago
      >We get it, you don't like the government. So what? Well, if you don't trust the government, then the likelihood that you'll be willing to follow their "orders" is pretty low. > But more importantly, you're a danger to my health, my friends and my families' health, and to your own health as well. And __this__ response is exactly why people can become anti-vaxx without having a problem with medicine or science in general (which is the question being put forward by the OP). You're coming at it from a "the gov said its safe, so it's safe, and you're an idiot for not trusting the gov" (even though governments have shown themselves to be un-trustworthy many many times -- not in the area of vaccines necessarily -- but in other domains. So this type of urging to "do it because we're all doing it because Uncle Sam said so" is highly counter productive.
      • svara 2y ago
        > You're coming at it from a "the gov said its safe, so it's safe, ... What makes you think so? I don't need a government to make up my mind on scientific topics, and neither should you. Ironically, it's the person who believes the opposite of what some government says that is doing so.
• Eumenes 2y ago
  [flagged]
  • ceejayoz 2y ago
    > My body my choice? If being pregnant was contagious, we'd treat it as a very different issue.
    • Eumenes 2y ago
      [flagged]
      • ceejayoz 2y ago
        Your right to bodily autonomy must always be balanced with your impact on others' rights. You can drink, but you can't drive drunk. You can shoot guns, but not at someone. Example abound in our society.
        • nradov 2y ago
          Bodily autonomy for free adults of sound mind is absolute. There is no "right" to be protected against infectious disease. I am absolutely pro-vaccine and getting vaccinated is the best option for the vast majority of patients but let's not distort the discussion by inventing fake rights that appear nowhere in the US Constitution. I think a lot of the recent backlash was based on false claims by politicians and public health officials that COVID-19 vaccine mandates were necessary to protect others. But in reality the scientific evidence indicated that the vaccines had little or no benefit for reducing the risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. That discrepancy in messaging eroded public trust and made some people believe that authorities had ulterior motives.
          • ceejayoz 2y ago
            > Bodily autonomy for free adults of sound mind is absolute. There's no jurisdiction on the planet in which this is true. Certainly not the USA. > let's not distort the discussion by inventing fake rights that appear nowhere in the US Constitution The Constitution itself openly and clearly shoots down this idea in the Bill of Rights, in the Ninth Amendment: "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." George Washington himself instituted a vaccine mandate. https://www.nps.gov/articles/000/smallpox-inoculation-revolutionary-war.htm https://www.nps.gov/articles/000/smallpox-inoculation-revolu...
• Lutger 2y ago
  Of course, in the pandemic we saw extreme versions of this. Anything to avoid vaccination, but ivermectin and other risky drugs were no problem. If vaccination would be alternative medicine and ivermection government mandated, we might see the reverse. So I don't think its vaccination perse, at least not on its own, but vaccines have various things going against them. Like someone else in this thread said, government mandate + preventative medicine has the right ingredients to form a conspiracy theory with, religious doctrine has historically amplified that as well. Additionally, there's also a distrust of 'big pharma' in general, and especially with minority groups a history of dubious or even malevolent medical experimentation by the government. A big part of the antivaxxers are now also anti 5G, advocate against the use of sunscreen, are against wind energy and EV, sometimes pro-russia, anti-deepstate, etc. Some of this is fossil lobby, some of it is the result of Russian propaganda and other parts are just organic whackyness, like the flat earthers.
  • niceice 2y ago
    [flagged]
    • ceejayoz 2y ago
      Other items on the "essential medicine" list include propofol, morphine, and fentanyl. Each can very easily kill if incorrectly used, and each has serious dangers if used for the wrong conditions. Ivermectin is specifically listed in the "anthelminthics" section, i.e. for worms. It's an essential medicine because it's good at killing worms, which widely affect billions of people in developing nations. It didn't win the Nobel prize and hasn't been used for decades to treat COVID-19. Water is essential, too, but that doesn't mean a tsunami is good for you. Hydrating a sick person can save a life; waterboarding them can be a war crime. Context matters.
  • TheFreim 2y ago
    > Anything to avoid vaccination, but ivermectin and other risky drugs were no problem. This sort of language makes problems worse and even further decreases trust. Casting a wide net and calling ivermectin a "risy drug" when a quick search engine query will show it is used safely in humans as an antiparasite drug. When someone who is skeptical about vaccines reads these sorts of blatant falsehoods why in the world would they believe anything else you say? If you wanted to warn people against using forms formulated for animal consumption then you could've just said that, instead you painted with a wide brush which justifies someone to not trust you.
• insane_dreamer 2y ago
  > Something about vaccines creeps a lot of people out for reasons I don't understand. I think it's the fact that vaccines are heavily pushed on everyone, which is very different than a medication that you choose to take, or your doctor specifically prescribes for you, to address a medical condition. Taking chemicals to cure some disease is different than taking chemicals when you're healthy simply to decrease a risk that you may or may not consider relevant to you. Also, often vaccines are administered not for your own sake but to protect the community, and so again it's a different calculation where you're injecting chemicals (or injecting your kids with chemicals) not because you think you need them but to potentially protect others should you become ill. Also there often isn't as much explanation around vaccines (besides COVID) as to their makeup, etc., compared to some medication that your doctor prescribes to you (i.e., if my Dr prescribes a blood thinner I'm going to get a pretty thorough explanation of it and can ask questions, whereas with vaccines it feels mandatory without much explanation other than "the surgeon general said to". So it's not at all surprising to me that there is strong resistance to vaccines from some people who have no problem with medications in general.
  • amanaplanacanal 2y ago
    It's the privilege of growing up in a society where most people are vaccinated. People have forgotten (or never seen) how horrifying some diseases can be.
• niceice 2y ago
  A lot of is the abuse of the label anti-vaxxer. It's being misapplied to people who aren't against vaccine technology. RFK, who is vaccinated along with his children: "I’ve been fighting 40 years to get mercury out of fish. Nobody calls me anti-fish."
  • mmastrac 2y ago
    I don't think quoting RFK is a good example of showcasing a rational view of vaccines.
  • supplied_demand 2y ago
    Can you explain what you mean by "people who aren't against vaccine technology?" I'm not sure I follow given that RFK has explicitly said he is against vaccines and that no vaccines are safe and effective. [0] ===In July, Kennedy said in a podcast interview that “There’s no vaccine that is safe and effective” and told FOX News that he still believes in the long-ago debunked idea that vaccines can cause autism. In a 2021 podcast he urged people to “resist” CDC guidelines on when kids should get vaccines.=== ===“I see somebody on a hiking trail carrying a little baby and I say to him, better not get them vaccinated,” Kennedy said.=== ===That same year, in a video promoting an anti-vaccine sticker campaign by his nonprofit, Kennedy appeared onscreen next to one sticker that declared “IF YOU’RE NOT AN ANTI-VAXXER YOU AREN’T PAYING ATTENTION.”=== [0] https://apnews.com/article/rfk-kennedy-election-2024-president-campaign-621c9e9641381a1b2677df9de5a09731 https://apnews.com/article/rfk-kennedy-election-2024-preside...
    • niceice 2y ago
      He should be more careful with his words, but they're resorting to cherry picked quotes and guilt by association to mislead: "appeared onscreen next to" It's unserious. To get his actual opinion, which is nuanced, you have to go long form.
      • supplied_demand 2y ago
        ==guilt by association to mislead: "appeared onscreen next to"== It was something produced by his own non-profit. Do you not think it is fair to associate him with the non-profit he founded and ran? He has had no trouble associating himself with the organization. I feel like we can make the same association without misleading anyone. This is still just a deflection from the question of what "people who aren't against vaccine technology" even means. Can you please define it? I am having trouble seeing the difference between being anti-vaccine and being anti-vaccine technology. NOTE: The comment I originally responded to has since been edited.
• naming_the_user 2y ago
  Anything that people are forced to do is going to cause this sort of visceral response. A lot of things that we were forced to do during COVID still stick with me and have basically made me intensely distrustful of authority to a degree that wasn't present before. It was just bullshit after bullshit enacted in law and forced on people. Walking in certain directions in the supermarket, going outside for only X minutes per day to exercise, only X people allowed at your table at the pub, etc. Just endless totally unscientific bollocks. It's like getting into a heated debate with someone. You start out and actually listen to what people are saying, but then eventually it's just like, come on man, fuck off, I don't even care if you're right, I'm tuned out. Fast food doesn't force me to eat it under penalty of imprisonment.
  • amanaplanacanal 2y ago
    Where do you live that people were imprisoned over COVID related stuff?
• GuB-42 2y ago
  Some reasons I can think of: - Vaccines are usually injected, injection makes most people uncomfortable. Most of them get over it, but it can be panic inducing for a small number. Among street drug users, injection is usually considered extreme, as in, the thing only true addicts do. - When you get vaccinated, you are fine, and then you get a few unpleasant side effects. That's the opposite of the usual drugs you take when you are sick and make you feel better. - Sometimes, vaccination is made mandatory, many people don't like to be told what to do with their bodies, even if there are good reasons for it. - You never know when a vaccine have saved someone. Someone didn't get sick, but is it because of the vaccine, natural immunity, luck, or simply a lack of exposure, maybe he will get sick eventually, you can't really tell, and you don't really notice when something doesn't happen. However, when a vaccine hurt someone, or failed to prevent the disease it should protect against, that's very noticeable. - The most successful vaccines are now often considered useless, because the disease they protect against is so rare, why go through the discomfort of the vaccination when it is so unlikely for you to get sick either way? It is a tragedy of the commons, as the reason the diseases is so rare is because of widespread vaccination.