“The overwhelming consensus of the global medical community is suspect because doctors are just in it for the money. I’d rather put my trust in a man whose medical license was revoked for fraud and malpractice and a former supermodel who happens to be selling a book.”
12 Likes
By this logic, there are all sorts of fairness issues that our social contract demands addressing. From armed citizens walking around without firearm insurance, to outdoor smokers standing upwind of nonsmokers to owners of dangerously loud stereo systems. This land of “rugged individualism” is not particularly keen on protecting some people from other people.
4 Likes
For the record, I am not in any way anti-vax. I take my mandated vaccines and think we all should do so, for the greater good.
What I am on about, is that while it is easy and quick to dismiss anti-vaxxer as lunatics or idiots, I do it myself most of the time. The distrust is real and not entirely unwarranted either. And while I find it silly to believe in a grand conspiracy to cause widespread autism or whatever, I do get that ordinary people are fearful that the profit motive is able to poison even the vaccine industry. And I think that the state can take steps on its own to better the health of the general trust in the system, even more independent audits and regulation and enforcement of said regulation specifically. This is true for other fields than the vaccine industry too, of course.
We have a fairly accurate database of exactly who is unvaccinated, thanks to all the self-reporting done on social media. Combine that with facial-recognition tech and businesses could keep them out of quasi-public spaces. In public spaces, we could get alerts on our phones reminding us to steer clear of the unvaccinated. It’s an amazing business opportunity for a company with the right resources and know-how. The tech could be easily adapted to exclude people who engage in almost any “undesirable” online behaviour. Bullying, gun-nuttery, misogyny, racism, science denial, etc. Imagine being the first venue that could advertise, “AI Enforced Vax Zone”, “AI Enforced Gun Free Zone”. Sure, there are very serious issues with how this tech could be abused, but it would certainly push dangerously stubborn people out of public spaces until they get it through their heads that pragmatism is a real thing.
2 Likes
Is that supposed to communicate a point?
1 Like
Whatever… please dont waste my time in the future.
Have a nice day
you are making a circular argument about antivaxxers somehow having real and justified paranoia when the same people who “validate” the paranoia are themselves or people with equal levels of stupid.
you are wasting everyone’s time with the illogical fallacies.
I guess you are misunderstanding what I am trying to say then. I’ll try and clarify later if I can muster the motivation, but you are not making it easy.
The part of this that gives me the screaming heebeejebees, is when I raise the question, “are we giving too many different shots at once?”. Which - to the majority of right thinking people - sounds just like saying, “all vaccines are bad”.
In this climate, it is impossible to raise this question without being branded an anti-science knownothing. Which is deeply ironic in my book. How dare anyone ask questions about moderation? That only just feeds the immoderates!
It’s kinda funny, in a sad way.
Uninformed and worried people asking questions to ease their worries and make the best informed choice they can, being met with ridicule and anti-science knownothing labels by authoritarian simpletons who themselves could be labeled knownothings.
It is what I have come to expect from our species
1 Like
Spreading out vaccinations is SOP among pediatricians nowadays, from what I understand by way of pediatrician shopping for our newborn 3 years ago. Are you seeing info that suggests otherwise? Straw man arguments do tend to meet justified resistance, I wouldn’t read too much into it.
2 Likes
It is only “impossible to raise the question” because it has been answered, again and again and again and etc. The studies are there. The proof is there. The people who say “I do my own research and know more than you do” choose to pretend it is a great unknown, or that because there are no randomized double blind studies that “We can’t know this.” We can and we do. The number of antigens we expose kids to now is a tiny fraction of the number we used back in the 80s. There is absolutely no epidemiological evidence suggesting that fully vaccinated kids have more autoimmune problems, developmental problems or any of the other issues that have been laid at the feet of “evil vax.” The only thing they have is a dramatically lower incidence of vaccine preventable illnesses. And yes, there are references, I have posted a bunch previously. Not blasting you personally, understand, but this is a question that just never seems to go away. No matter how many times it is answered, it is never enough.
17 Likes
Yup. People keep asking the “too many too soon” question as if the AMA hasn’t already made statements on it.
It’s not hard to search reputable medical institutions like the CDC or AMA and actually have your basic questions answered.
At this point it’s a bit like people asking about the risk of sea monsters when you take a ferry.
15 Likes
Couldn’t agree more!
2 Likes
So being a free-rider becomes a privilege for the rich. No. Just make it mandatory.
2 Likes
This complicated and baroque technical market-based solution simply will not work. Just do the right thing. Make it mandatory even if the gibbertarians screech and ook about “slavery”.
I mean, we do enforce other fairness expenses on people, like car insurance.
I’d expect firearms insurance to be at least as important, seeing as guns are machines specifically for killing people and animals.
4 Likes
