Thinking of getting vaccinated?

[Katman]

I am communicating in picktchers mainly because that is the level of the discourse.

More likely because you wouldn't recognise a scientific medical study if it fucked you up the arse.

[sugilite:Me]

More likely because you wouldn't recognise a scientific medical study if it fucked you up the arse.

Your posts are about as classy as a Katana with a rickman fairing adapted to it.

[mashman]

That's not my experience. Nobody told me that the vaccine was a cure (or a 100% guaranteed way of not getting Covid), every time I took the vaccine I was told about the side effects (and asked to wait just in case anything unexpected happened) and warned to see a doctor if I felt unwell. I listened to a lot of interviews during the pandemic, where a lot of academics were saying they weren't sure how effective the pandemic response would be but that a vaccine was usually the best option for treating a disease like Covid, and that they were tracking the results as they came in (including the fact that the vaccine wasn't preventing transmission long before this was some kind of revelation).

I can understand, however, that the pandemic response seriously fucked up a lot of people's lives, and they're justifiably angry about it. For those who were unfortunate enough to experience serious side effects from the vaccine, they're entitled. That's a high price to pay for the sake of the rest of us and brings up an interesting ethical dilemma. Maybe it's time the medical profession re-examined their assumptions on that point, given it's impossible to predict exactly how any treatment of any kind with affect every single individual.

The vaccine was billed as a preventative cure (along with get it or don't go out and potentially lose your job, or else... yours sincerely, society). I think everyone can agree that 100% coverage wasn't going to happen among those who chose to be vaccinated, with 90% (from memory, might have been higher) being touted as the likely figure in terms of preventing covid or at the very least minimizing it. The data didn't support either of those outcomes. Bare in mind that we're talking about a product, and associated kits (arse kit also) that was mass manufactured, that were supposed to have been tested and been given the ok... then turning out to be one of the worst vaccines in history in terms of doing what it said it was supposed to do on the tin. Throw into the mix, that while all of this was going on, a large enough number of doctors globally were asking questions, with many of them using a multi drug approach that had been found to work (submitted for peer review but dismissed as ridiculous coz Ivermectin was involved... why the need for the mass production if clinics had been saving people already using widely available and cheap drugs?) to actually treat people way before a vaccine had been mentioned. "Duty of Care", in lieu of the science not fitting anymore, became the weapon of choice. The greatest irony being that Duty Of Care was being displayed by 'both' sides... albeit with one side (the majority that had accepted that thing were alright) deciding that anything other than the vaccine was guaranteed to cause people death and therefore people not complying should be forced to lose a job or take a vaccine or never leave the house again etc...

All of that considered, I'd say that fear did most of the heavy lifting, from hiding the science in the face of glaringly bad results, in comparison to other vaccination damage/efficacy, to "Duty Of Care" being the last bastion of the myopic. I agree that some exceptionally big questions need to be asked, but hey, war, economy, epstein, love island etc... The downside being that if 1 pillar trembles, the other pillars are going to have to go back under the microscope.

[flyingcrocodile46]

The vaccine was billed as a preventative cure (along with get it or don't go out and potentially lose your job, or else... yours sincerely, society). I think everyone can agree that 100% coverage wasn't going to happen among those who chose to be vaccinated, with 90% (from memory, might have been higher) being touted as the likely figure in terms of preventing covid or at the very least minimizing it. The data didn't support either of those outcomes. Bare in mind that we're talking about a product, and associated kits (arse kit also) that was mass manufactured, that were supposed to have been tested and been given the ok... then turning out to be one of the worst vaccines in history in terms of doing what it said it was supposed to do on the tin. Throw into the mix, that while all of this was going on, a large enough number of doctors globally were asking questions, with many of them using a multi drug approach that had been found to work (submitted for peer review but dismissed as ridiculous coz Ivermectin was involved... why the need for the mass production if clinics had been saving people already using widely available and cheap drugs?) to actually treat people way before a vaccine had been mentioned. "Duty of Care", in lieu of the science not fitting anymore, became the weapon of choice. The greatest irony being that Duty Of Care was being displayed by 'both' sides... albeit with one side (the majority that had accepted that thing were alright) deciding that anything other than the vaccine was guaranteed to cause people death and therefore people not complying should be forced to lose a job or take a vaccine or never leave the house again etc...

All of that considered, I'd say that fear did most of the heavy lifting, from hiding the science in the face of glaringly bad results, in comparison to other vaccination damage/efficacy, to "Duty Of Care" being the last bastion of the myopic. I agree that some exceptionally big questions need to be asked, but hey, war, economy, epstein, love island etc... The downside being that if 1 pillar trembles, the other pillars are going to have to go back under the microscope.

A great summation of facts without bias. Such a shame that so few can manage critical thinking without bias.

[F5 Dave]

Least of all you. But you can't see that.

[pritch]

Least of all you. But you can't see that.

Recently the algorithm thought I needed to see a flat earther item. Since that many more have been suggested. The anti vaxxers and the flat earthers have a lot in common. Flat earthers belief that Antarctica is controlled by military and nobody is permitted to land there. The midnight sun is an impossibility in their view.

A guy with more money than most arranged to fly a group of these idiots to Antarctica to see for themselves. The net result is that the experiments were all faked and the group are all sell outs - or something. That one of the crew made a simple but dumb mistake with his green screen app didn't help. The "logic" employed by the flat earthers is nothing short of desperate.

In case you have some spare time. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JsETzrRr3is&t=2074s

[Laava]

I had a conversation with a lunar landing denier (passionate!) which is one of the more understandable conspiracies. And I asked him what kind of proof would make him change his mind. He admitted that if someone was to go there now and take some photos on the moon to prove that the lunar landing modules were still there as left….
So it is an endless circular argument, where you could never provide enough proof, much like the 9/11 conpiracy theories

[Katman]

The anti vaxxers and the flat earthers have a lot in common.

Only in your feeble mind.