4 ms·

I'm not getting the H1N1 vaccine for the same reason I didn't sign up to go breathe the air at ground zero. Apologies, but I'm not very good at guessing what p

by gloob 17y ago

I'm not getting the H1N1 vaccine for the same reason I didn't sign up to go breathe the air at ground zero. Apologies, but I'm not very good at guessing what people mean when they construct sentences of this general form. Could you say explicitly what your reason is?

fake_pg 17y ago
The commenter is trying to say that you can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig.
- gloob 17y ago
  I'll rephrase, I guess. The impression I'm getting from the commenter's reasoning is more-or-less a "The government is trying to kill us all" type of thing. I assume I'm wrong, because I like to pretend that people are rational, and because this is HN, where most people generally are. On the assumption that I'm wrong, I've asked for an explicit clarification. I respect your attempt, but (unfortunately) providing me with another ambiguous metaphor doesn't really help my confusion.
- evgen 17y ago
  No, the commenter is saying that at some point in the past the government put lipstick on a pig, so now he will assume that anything he sees wearing lipstick is probably a pig (unless of course it is something of direct benefit to him in which case his selfish rationalization does not need to mask itself behind moronic rhetoric.)
Alex3917 17y ago
I'm saying that I don't trust what the government says about health, because they lie about health all the time. That has nothing to do with pseudo-science, that's just being an intelligent and rational person. For example, after September 11th the EPA and NYC government said that the air at ground zero was perfectly safe to breathe. What's more, no one is being held accountable even though dozens or hundreds are dying horrible deaths because of these lies. This is just one example, there are literally hundreds of cases like this that we can point to in the last fifty years. Therefor, it's A) Reasonable to assume that the government may be lying about the safety of this vaccine. B) Reasonable to assume that if they are lying about the safety, no one will be held accountable.
- gloob 17y ago
  Thanks. From that perspective, what you said makes sense. That said, I'm taking the opposite position. My story is roughly as follows: I'm a twenty year old Canadian who has had open heart surgery twice, maybe half a dozen day surgeries of various natures, and gotten the government-distributed flu vaccine every year for as long as I can remember. All of this was organized and (mostly) paid for by the government, since that's the way the health care system works up here. I haven't died a horrible death yet. Why would this particular case be any different?
- cedsav 17y ago
  Honestly, you don't sound that reasonable. EPA, NYC, HSS are not "The Government", they are different entities with different roles and goals. Perhaps someone lied about the air at ground zero (I don't know the facts, is that even proven?), but how is that related to the decisions made by the HSS? You're claiming that there's a pattern, but it doesn't make any sense. The US government lied about the Tonkin incident, therefore the Nasa never landed on the moon?
  - Alex3917 17y ago
    "The US government lied about the Tonkin incident, therefore the Nasa never landed on the moon?" I believe NASA landed on the moon because I've thought about it for myself. I don't automatically believe it because the government said it happened. If the data says the the H1N1 vaccine is safe and effective then I'll get it, but I'm not going to put something into my body just because Donald Rumsfeld or whoever says its a good idea. All I'm saying is that you shouldn't abdicate your thinking to someone else, especially when they may have an incentive to mislead you.
    - nollidge 17y ago
      If the data says the the H1N1 vaccine is safe and effective then I'll get it Well, the data do say the H1N1 vaccine is safe and effective. Discussing anything else is a red herring.
      - 17y ago

by gloob 17y ago

fake_pg 17y ago

The commenter is trying to say that you can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig.

gloob 17y ago
I'll rephrase, I guess. The impression I'm getting from the commenter's reasoning is more-or-less a "The government is trying to kill us all" type of thing. I assume I'm wrong, because I like to pretend that people are rational, and because this is HN, where most people generally are. On the assumption that I'm wrong, I've asked for an explicit clarification. I respect your attempt, but (unfortunately) providing me with another ambiguous metaphor doesn't really help my confusion.
evgen 17y ago
No, the commenter is saying that at some point in the past the government put lipstick on a pig, so now he will assume that anything he sees wearing lipstick is probably a pig (unless of course it is something of direct benefit to him in which case his selfish rationalization does not need to mask itself behind moronic rhetoric.)

Alex3917 17y ago

I'm saying that I don't trust what the government says about health, because they lie about health all the time. That has nothing to do with pseudo-science, that's just being an intelligent and rational person. For example, after September 11th the EPA and NYC government said that the air at ground zero was perfectly safe to breathe. What's more, no one is being held accountable even though dozens or hundreds are dying horrible deaths because of these lies. This is just one example, there are literally hundreds of cases like this that we can point to in the last fifty years. Therefor, it's A) Reasonable to assume that the government may be lying about the safety of this vaccine. B) Reasonable to assume that if they are lying about the safety, no one will be held accountable.

gloob 17y ago
Thanks. From that perspective, what you said makes sense. That said, I'm taking the opposite position. My story is roughly as follows: I'm a twenty year old Canadian who has had open heart surgery twice, maybe half a dozen day surgeries of various natures, and gotten the government-distributed flu vaccine every year for as long as I can remember. All of this was organized and (mostly) paid for by the government, since that's the way the health care system works up here. I haven't died a horrible death yet. Why would this particular case be any different?
cedsav 17y ago
Honestly, you don't sound that reasonable. EPA, NYC, HSS are not "The Government", they are different entities with different roles and goals. Perhaps someone lied about the air at ground zero (I don't know the facts, is that even proven?), but how is that related to the decisions made by the HSS? You're claiming that there's a pattern, but it doesn't make any sense. The US government lied about the Tonkin incident, therefore the Nasa never landed on the moon?
- Alex3917 17y ago
  "The US government lied about the Tonkin incident, therefore the Nasa never landed on the moon?" I believe NASA landed on the moon because I've thought about it for myself. I don't automatically believe it because the government said it happened. If the data says the the H1N1 vaccine is safe and effective then I'll get it, but I'm not going to put something into my body just because Donald Rumsfeld or whoever says its a good idea. All I'm saying is that you shouldn't abdicate your thinking to someone else, especially when they may have an incentive to mislead you.
  - nollidge 17y ago
    If the data says the the H1N1 vaccine is safe and effective then I'll get it Well, the data do say the H1N1 vaccine is safe and effective. Discussing anything else is a red herring.
    - 17y ago