Cryptowen Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 i'm not getting the vaccine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcom Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 (edited) 15 minutes ago, Valleyfold said: Being against vaccines that have been proven to be safe for years is stupid. Not being a beta tester with your health when a new vaccine comes out is common sense. The swine flu vaccine gave people narcolepsy. You do not understand how medicine and pharmacology (the science of them) works. There are no 100 % safe medicines, vaccines included. There are no 100 % safe non-trivial medical procedures. There are always extreme edge cases (unknown unknowns) with probabilities outside any normal distribution. Completely avoiding adverse side-effects, including possibly fatal ones, is impossible. People die from tried and tested vaccines that have been in use for decades because of an unforeseen interaction with a pre-existing or latent condition. Edited January 10, 2021 by dcom 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian trageskin Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 1 minute ago, Valleyfold said: Sorry I’d rather not take the vaccine that can give you narcolepsy the only thing that matters is the percentage of people who contracted narcolepsy, otherwise the number is meaningless flol at your edit btw 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcom Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Valleyfold said: Sorry I’d rather not take the vaccine that can give you narcolepsy You're talking about Pandemrix; it was a big deal here in Finland, because there were about 150 cases where the vaccine seems to have caused narcolepsy. That particular product hasn't been used not manufactured since the 2009-2010 flu season, and the products that have replaced it are safe. The incidence of narcolepsy in Pandemrix-vaccinated children and adolescents was 1 in 18400. 10 minutes ago, Valleyfold said: Actually I did take it tho and was lucky. A friend of my relative wasn’t. That sounds wonderfully vague - did the friend of your relative get a Pandemrix shot a decade ago? Edited January 10, 2021 by dcom 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian trageskin Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 15 minutes ago, Valleyfold said: I’ll let my relative know you find his friend’s life ruining illness funny. i wasn't laughing at that guy's condition, i was laughing at you saying you'd rather not take that vaccine when you actually took it. quite hilarious imo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcom Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 (edited) 27 minutes ago, Valleyfold said: Yes, I’m Finnish too. That’s my point, it was a new vaccine that was pulled because of side effects. Unforeseen side-effect, and the vaccine was pulled and never used again. Every case of narcolepsy is a human tragedy, and I'm really sorry for the friend of your relative; nevertheless, regardless of the tragedies, in the annals of medicine that's just another statistic. It might sound callous and insensitive, but pharmacology deals in statistics and the statistical fact is that everything can - and will - cause adverse side-effects, even disabling and fatal ones, and there's nothing anyone can do about it. No-one's forcing you to take any vaccinations or medicines you don't want to take. You make the decisions and accept the risks of whatever you choose. The thing is to make an informed choice based on factual information. Edited January 10, 2021 by dcom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcom Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 (edited) 20 minutes ago, Valleyfold said: Yep, I’m not an antivaxxer, just saying there are shades between vaccines implanting autism chips and inject everything new into me now i fucking love science-ism People usually add the -ism suffix to things they don't understand, and scienceism is what theists - religious people - call science, because they're claiming it's just another belief system like their own. But science is not a belief, it's a robust system of checks and balances - and you seem to be classifying science, and trust in science, as an extreme position of blind faith - via reductio ad absurdum - making it seem as ridiculous as anti-vaxxer beliefs are. It's probable that you aren't, but possible. Edited January 10, 2021 by dcom 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcom Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Valleyfold said: And it's very naive to assume science works as some perfectly pure ideal not prone to misuse, especially when pharma industry and money is involved. I'm definitely not naive, and that is a straw man. I'm done here, enjoy. Edited January 10, 2021 by dcom 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian trageskin Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 science doesn't make mistakes, humans do. by that i mean it's a tool that can be used in all sorts of ways, proper and improper. On 7/4/2020 at 1:51 PM, Silent Member said: lol no, science is a feeling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
user Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 2 hours ago, dingformung said: pls share I chose the timeless medium of the sticker as a platform to spread your important message. Finally all those years of studying graphic design and printers in business school start to pay off, they turned out beautifully. Hope you’re ok with having your face distributed freely. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dingformung Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 oh god lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Braintree Posted January 10, 2021 Share Posted January 10, 2021 16 hours ago, NewYorkNowhere said: My uncle is anti-vaxx and actually thinks that 5g is causing covid. What should I do about this? Roll him up in a carpet and drop him off in Wyoming. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 11, 2021 Share Posted January 11, 2021 19 hours ago, dcom said: The thing is to make an informed choice based on factual information. https://wonder.cdc.gov/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcom Posted January 22, 2021 Share Posted January 22, 2021 Quote In the years that followed, fourteen separate groups of researchers evaluated the records of more than six hundred thousand children, looking for an autism-vaccination link. Unlike Wakefield’s study, the results were convincing, clear, and repeated: no link existed. The Wakefield paper should never have been published and was eventually retracted. But it had an impact nonetheless. In the months after the paper came out, one hundred thousand parents in the UK chose not to vaccinate their children. In Swansea in the UK, one-third of the population went unvaccinated against measles and more than twelve hundred people were infected in an outbreak. Measles returned to France, where an outbreak led to five thousand hospitalizations and ten deaths. Vaccination rates fell in Ireland, too, and three children died as a result. On the Long, Baseless History of Anti-Vaccination Movements (LitHub) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satans Little Helper Posted January 22, 2021 Share Posted January 22, 2021 On 1/10/2021 at 3:07 PM, Valleyfold said: it's very naive to assume science works as some perfectly pure ideal not prone to misuse, especially when pharma industry and money is involved. And I wasn't even talking about intentional malicious misuse but a mistake where a bad vaccine was administered. This won't make me popular, I'm afraid, but the funny thing about the pharma industry here is that besides the economic aspects they will be hell bent on having these new vaccines being safe and effective. Why? If they're not, it will be obvious pretty soon. As these vaccines will be used by huge numbers of people, so their efficacy and safety better be good. Their business will be pretty much over otherwise. The entire world is watching intently. There's a clear risk vs reward here. Sure there might still be some unintended long term side effects. But when it comes to unintended long term side effects, I don't hear people crying about sugary drinks. Bets are, there's plenty of stuff available in regular supermarkets with worse long term side effects. Gotta light? I'm guessing these vaccines will probably sit somewhere between milk and soda, in terms of long term side effects. Feel free to call me naive though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sensitive Outsider Posted January 22, 2021 Share Posted January 22, 2021 (edited) 14 minutes ago, Satans Little Helper said: ..... but the funny thing about the pharma industry here is that besides the economic aspects they will be hell bent on having these new vaccines being safe and effective. Why? If they're not, it will be obvious pretty soon. As these vaccines will be used by huge numbers of people, so their efficacy and safety better be good. Their business will be pretty much over otherwise. .... I'm no expert or anti-vaxxer but in the US and UK the makers of the vaccines have been given total immunity for any unintentional side-effects of the vaccines. They cant be sued, you cant get compensation if injured by the vaccine. They have no skin in the game, its all up side for them to rush this out. Their business and the shareholders are protected. You are not. Edited January 22, 2021 by Sensitive Outsider 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satans Little Helper Posted January 22, 2021 Share Posted January 22, 2021 That's a rather one dimensional look at the amount of risk. Legally, sure. But in terms of business, who's going to trust them if their vaccines end up being shit? So yeah, I disagree, they have lots of skin in the game. Even though they might be less culpable legally speaking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sensitive Outsider Posted January 22, 2021 Share Posted January 22, 2021 Sure it simplistic but finance is the only place these operators could be hit, these guys don't trade on consumer confidence. Joe Public has zero influence whether they get their medication from Pfizer or Moderna et. al. They cant just go down the street and buy it from someone else. Even if it does go wrong they have this out from the politicians AND in this instance the public, who in the most are willing to accept the higher risk this time to try and get back some normality. That I can understand. Long term trials and wider real life distribution of the vaccination are the only way to find all potential significant side effects and in this instance most are willing to forego that in the hope of getting back to normal quicker. My main point was that the normal rules have been thrown out here, if in 12 months time we find that these vaccinations either don't provide any long term immunity or worse have side effects. "Big Pharma" will have lost nothing They'll move on to the next thing.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Limo Posted January 22, 2021 Share Posted January 22, 2021 (edited) Don’t be daft. Vaccines don’t have side effects you only find out about much later. They get broken down and cleaned out by the immune system very, very quickly and as a result their side effects, if any, also become apparent very quickly. Stop fear mongering. Edit: and before anyone brings up the swine flu vaccine narcolepsy scandal: those symptoms appeared within one or two months. Still very quickly. Edited January 22, 2021 by rhmilo 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satans Little Helper Posted January 22, 2021 Share Posted January 22, 2021 1 hour ago, Sensitive Outsider said: these guys don't trade on consumer confidence I'm sorry, but if consumers believe their products work, they simply earn more $$$. The placebo effect, for instance, is a well researched effect. Or in other words, consumer confidence is key. And these guys bloody well know it. I'm not here arguing the pharmaceutical industry are angels. But generally speaking, they're not doing business like some proverbial Trump. That's simply not a viable business model in a heavily regulated field as medicine. I'm not denying there's a strong commercial/economic bias in the industry, because there simply is. But that doesn't mean they don't have "skin in the game" when there are currently exceptions being made when it comes to legal liabilities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drome Posted January 22, 2021 Share Posted January 22, 2021 On 1/10/2021 at 12:30 PM, dcom said: You're appropriating the name used by the abortion-rights (pro-choice) movement in the US. You should also learn how to strip tracking parameters from your URLs. They don’t own the basic concept. People deserve the right to decide their own destiny. This is obvious to any society that calls itself civilised. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Braintree Posted January 22, 2021 Share Posted January 22, 2021 *wants to reap society's benefits but doesn't want to adhere to the society's social contract* 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markedone Posted January 22, 2021 Share Posted January 22, 2021 (edited) 19 minutes ago, drome said: People deserve the right to decide their own destiny. This is obvious to any society that calls itself civilised. (ditto what braintree said) also @dromeyou dont seem to understand that you denouncing 'maskers and vaxxers' is not a passive/defensive stance but rather active violence against society you live in Edited January 22, 2021 by markedone 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcom Posted January 22, 2021 Share Posted January 22, 2021 34 minutes ago, drome said: They don’t own the basic concept. And you don't understand sarcasm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dcom Posted January 22, 2021 Share Posted January 22, 2021 1 hour ago, rhmilo said: Edit: and before anyone brings up the swine flu vaccine narcolepsy scandal: those symptoms appeared within one or two months. Still very quickly. They already did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now