GetBuLLish wrote:
Why don't you put a little effort into figuring out why people who are vaccinated against other diseases would be against getting a covid vaccine. Also, your label of these people as "anti-vax" is obtuse when you yourself admit these people accept many other vaccines. If you wanted to be honest, why not call these people "anti-Covid vaccine"? Wouldn't be as condescending, though, would it?
On a related note, it's hard to take seriously anyone who brings up other vaccines without at least acknowledging the obvious, massive differences between the those vaccines and the Covid ones. In fact, I assume anyone who fails to do so is operating in bad faith.
Couple of items.
1: The statement and post is meant in isolation with reference to those I was talking about. I clearly stated individuals who are anti-vax. This is in direct reference to those individuals who are against vaccines in general, but are they themselves vaccinated.
2: I would also be remiss to comment on the notion that anti-vax positioning and false information has also led to a lowered confidence with the COVID vaccines most likely.
3: What exactly do you believe are the massive differences between COVID vaccines and other vaccines with regards to their primary purpose? Yes, they focus on different types of pathogens, but again, that's kind of the point. When it came down to a "risk" assessment most people felt that vaccines against certain types of diseases were worth any such risk.
4: I was in no way attempting to be condescending, but merely highlighting a flaw in critical thinking assessments individuals make with regards to their personal choices. The issue is that people want to be set off. They want to be triggered. They want to have an emotional reaction. The fact that someone takes something as condescending when it conflicts with their world view is honestly their choice. I stand by my logic and will continually live a life highlighting the flaws in others and my own when it is warranted.
5: This argument is pretty moot because the data is fairly clear at this point. If the goal is to lower death rates and keep people out of the ICU, then the vaccines are doing a great job at doing that. The majority of those currently occupying those positions are unvaccinated. This is the personal responsibility I associate with personal liberty. I believe in liberty, but it also includes the notion that choices have consequences. Apparently the fear of death and long term health damage is not enough of a deterrent for most people to choose to take a vaccine that has systemically proven to have little to no risk when all the potential benefits are so high. When people consistently make those choices, they are being foolish. Calling them so is not cruel, but rather a functional assessment of their choice which they are entitled to make. My issue becomes when they cry foul play when organizations like employers or restaurants or whatever goods and service wants to deny them service or a job based on their personal choice. Again, choices require acceptance of possible outcomes.
I have fought all my life against ignorance. I am not a fan of it, nor do I attempt to be one who engages in said ignorance. However, my question is how should we feel sympathetic to those who are supporting a position that is literally resulting in the deaths of others?
How many people who have died in those beds, in those ICUs would not have died had they just gotten the vaccine? 40%? 50%? 80%?
Tell me, if you will, how many need to die to validate this point? How many deaths need to be prevented before others listen?
The position against vaccination is causing others to die. That's my problem with it.
84% of patients who are being hospitalized should not even be there all the while it is costing billions of dollars every month.
https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/brief/unvaccinated-covid-patients-cost-the-u-s-health-system-billions-of-dollars/This spreads resources and also prevents other people from getting critical care they need NOT related to COVID19.
That's my problem with it.
https://www.sciencenews.org/article/covid-coronavirus-vaccines-hospital-cases-rates-unvaccinatedHow many comparisons must we do? This really isn't a debate about efficacy. It's about the spread of ignorance. When I hear an argument that makes good points in the other direction, I will listen. I will open my mind.
What I have I have found is ultimately unconvincing. It does not stack up well against the data.
But by all means, convince me.
