I identify as vaccinated

As long as it doesn't have a rotating tip with dado cutters....
 
moke123 said:
Did you know they save the long dull needles for conservatives?
Slap on a BLM button and save yourself some discomfort.
Click to expand...
I just might do that if I have to, but I'm not a conservative. However, they might profile me so maybe...
 
moke123 said:
Did you know they save the long dull needles for conservatives?
Click to expand...

I am neither conservative nor labour, republican nor democrat. I am on the side of the people that listen without judgment. People prepared to work together, without fighting.
 
Fully vaccinated, hoping that most of California gets vaccinated soon.
 
This is looking like a very covid safe forum!
 
@Jon for some reason I thought I remembered you were vaccinated a while ago. either way, @Jon and @kevlray congrats, and I sincerely hope you take it well and do not get sick! I had a VERY rough 24 hours, (which didn't start until about 15-18 hours after the vaccine) - but then it was all over.
Now they are talking about boosters, 6-mo. immunity timeframes, etc. And I am like.....Ok, I tried to be reasonable here and was persuaded to get the vaccine, but don't push it.
I'm not sure I would go through that on a regular basis, TWO times a year, FOUR jabs, just to avoid the already-low risk of COVID, by way of an unproven vaccine.

But, I am OK with doing so in order to help get the world out of pandemic-levels, but probably would say "no" if it became a never-ending thing and also if at the same time COVID was not at pandemic levels any more in future years.
 
@Jon for some reason I thought I remembered you were vaccinated a while ago.
Click to expand...
I was. In the UK, we have a 3 month gap between 1st and 2nd jabs.

Regarding the boosters etc., I do get confused by lots of peoples views on this. No one is making anything compulsory. It is entirely up to the individual. However, if you don't take the vaccine, you are putting yourself and others at risk.

I've always taken the view that if someone had say flu and went into work, they could infect one other person, who then infects 2, both of which each infect 2 and so on. The exponential growth from these infections is likely to lead to the death of people further down the line. Therefore, the reckless spreader is partially culpable for the death of others. They are in the chain of dominos, through personal choice.

Ok, I tried to be reasonable here and was persuaded to get the vaccine, but don't push it.
Click to expand...
If you decide to refuse the vaccine and boosters, you perpetuate your own and others risk. Risk accumulates with every 'No', leading to ever increasing exposure.

That is how I think about all this, although many view it as a infringement into their personal liberties. Then again, do these same people think the speed limit should be 100mph in a current 30mph zone? If not, then they do accept that persistent reductions in liberties are necessary to reduce their own and others risk of death. The argument may lead onto: "What are considered reasonable liberties?" So, who should set the speed limits, an individual member of the public or the government?
 
Interesting - I did not realize there was a 3 mo gap.

I agree that people ought to take reasonable steps to protect illness from spreading, but I also respect those who have learned to be skeptical of the possibility that what they are putting into their bodies is harmful.

Medicines have a long and proven history of many of them doing harm to people who were told "It's OK, it's safe, you should take it".
Watch a few hours of American TV, you will hear dozens of commercials from law firms advertising their services to people who experienced life-altering harms from taking medicines that they were told to take, and felt they ought to take to improve some condition or possibility.

Therefore, I cannot be totally honest if I exclusively frame the issue upon the assumption that there is no chance the COVID vaccine is going to do me harm - since there are plenty of reasons to believe that assumption may not end up being true.

This is why I have said from the beginning of this issue: "I respect people on either side of the decision, and feel a reasonable, rational person could end up deciding either way".

As to flu vaccines, I'm a little more ambivalent on that. Here in the US, the flu vaccine makers frequently admit their effectiveness rate is quite low - I believe in a recent year it was 30-40% effective. I have known many people who have gotten ill from getting the vaccine, and I have known many people (like my parents, my siblings, and myself) who have not gotten the vaccine for 20 years in a row, and never gotten a flu. (Full disclosure: I did finally get one last year, and also didn't get the flu. Not sure why I changed my mind - mostly just because I was near the pharmacy in a grocery store and was bored).

The flu vaccine probably does some good (net), although not a whole lot, and enough people get it to satisfy the situation and provide a benefit. Those who do not get it are seeking the legitimate peace they get from avoiding something that may do harm. Their concerns are not to be dismissed IMO.

Obviously, for diseases that are much more severe, (TB, smallpox, polio) the entire calculation changes - and I am not addressing them at all in this post.

So all in all, I agree with your assessment that people should try to cooperate with things that reduce suffering in society.
But I would diverge from the viewpoint that getting every recommended vaccine simply must be done, with no allowance for the possibility that a vaccine may do harm, and it is also not unreasonable for people to seek to avoid that harm.
 
People can seek to avoid harm from the vaccine, but like with every decision, there is an opportunity cost. So let us look at some of the facts.

How many people have been vaccinated and how many of those died due to vaccination? Or if you want to a skeptical, how many died at all after vaccination? Next, compare the deaths with how many died from Covid. The comparison is likely to be stark.

So, from my perspective, those who don't take the vaccine are uninformed, uneducated on the data or perhaps have trouble assessing risk. Or, they buy into rumours spread through social media and conspiracy theorists, similar to what happened in South Africa when the president said HIV was a myth and others views that condoms spread the virus. There are exceptions to that statement of course, like some people might want to behave in a certain way based on principle, religion and so on.

To my mind, seeking the difference in death rates between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated is evidence enough for me. An exception to this could be in circumstances where your risk of catching a disease, such as Covid, is so low that the effort to get vaccinated is outweighted by the tiny risk. Think living as a hermit in a remote area where you get your post through carrier pigeon.

Does anyone have approximate data on the percentage of vaccinated people dying from Covid + adverse reactions?
 
Jon said:
People can seek to avoid harm from the vaccine, but like with every decision, there is an opportunity cost. So let us look at some of the facts.

How many people have been vaccinated and how many of those died due to vaccination? Or if you want to a skeptical, how many died at all after vaccination? Next, compare the deaths with how many died from Covid. The comparison is likely to be stark.

So, from my perspective, those who don't take the vaccine are uninformed, uneducated on the data or perhaps have trouble assessing risk. Or, they buy into rumours spread through social media and conspiracy theorists, similar to what happened in South Africa when the president said HIV was a myth and others views that condoms spread the virus. There are exceptions to that statement of course, like some people might want to behave in a certain way based on principle, religion and so on.

To my mind, seeking the difference in death rates between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated is evidence enough for me. An exception to this could be in circumstances where your risk of catching a disease, such as Covid, is so low that the effort to get vaccinated is outweighted by the tiny risk. Think living as a hermit in a remote area where you get your post through carrier pigeon.

Does anyone have approximate data on the percentage of vaccinated people dying from Covid + adverse reactions?
Click to expand...
You are putting a really big weight on data that doesn't exist yet. The vaccine has only been here for a few months.
I'm all about using numbers, but you have to factor in the time it takes for any meaningful amount of observation to occur. For a vaccination that alters DNA (and other extremely substantial things), I would be interested in, say, the 20 year data.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

J
Ouch # 2
2 3
Replies
46
Views
1,664
Isaac
Isaac
J
Identifying whether Shift is pressed during opening a Runtime
2
Replies
30
Views
887
Pat Hartman
P
J
Interesting artical about what government can and can't do. It's a bit longish, but worth the read.
2 3
Replies
43
Views
2,633
Thales750
T
K
Solved Why is calculating MIN excluding Zeros so difficult?
Replies
4
Views
236
CJ_London
C
P
Why my custom VB.Net class file is giving an "Expected :Identifier" Error? What's wrong?
Replies
3
Views
305
prabha_friend
P

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top Bottom