I feel so frustrated about people refusing vaccination…

[BronzeTurtle]

1 hour ago, KSera said:

I don't think that's the main message at all. There may be some people who say that, but the message is that people who don't get vaccinated are at risk.

I don't think any of this discussion has been about vaccinating kids. That's not the problem we are having. The problem is that grown adults, who are very definitely at risk, have been convinced by bad actors and misinformation that the vaccine is a higher risk to them than the disease. And at this point ~200,000 of those people are dead who would have lived had they gotten the shot. I can't for the life of me figure out why that reality seems to have zero impact or sense of tragedy for the bulk of the anti-vax people out there. It seems like a big old "*shrug* they shouldn't have been old or fat" nothing burger to all the people who are have bought into all the vaccine scare tactics.

Very little of the argument here is based on "people who don't vaccinate are selfish" and it's not an argument that I have ever made. My point is that people who don't vaccinate (contraindications aside) are putting themselves and those around them at much higher risk. That's a data-based fact. The lie is that there is any kind of close call for most people in deciding which decision the data supports. For the overwhelming majority of people, the facts are clear that being vaccinated is far and away the safest choice for them.

I don't know that it's the bulk of anti-vax people. People here seem very certain that it is but it seems like a caricature to me of the worst of the worst. I know they are out there, I can't reconcile it with it being most people. I don't know how one would know that is the bulk of them. I think your interpretation of what people who aren't vaxxed yet is really uncharitable. I think there are a lot of people who are skeptical and worried about this vax but have up to this point gotten most other vaccines for themselves and their kids. The anti-vax people I knew up to this point, pre-covid, thought themselves very thoughtful and well educated and used delayed and selective vaxxing for their kids for reasons that were always a mystery to me but made sense to them. Now if someone feels that way about a covid shot it means they want to die and hate old people and fat people.

I think there is a poster here who has a husband who got covid and got the vax and now is on disability, maybe permanantly. and the woman mentioned earlier who died from j&j. The obviously aren't the only ones. THOSE people are written off too, a nothingburger, if you will when it comes to getting absolutly everyone vaccinated for covid. The rare side effects are the price people are willing to pay for society, but individuals have to make these choices. And for people who are scared of the shot, that can't be easy to see things like that dismissed and reassured that well, it probably won't happen to them

The discussion about 12-15yo boys (although really, males under 30 or so from what I can see) was an example of one reason why some people may be hesitant to induce a vaccine side effect and how there are various highly studied people who don't agree that the black and white guidance from various US agencies and in public sentiment is the best messaging. There is a big psychological difference between deliberately injecting yourself with someone that might cause a huge problem for you and yours and simply going to work everyday and catching something. I was scared of the vaccine in that same way. it was a big hurdle to overcome that i could get a clot and leave my family suffering EVEN IF data was on my side. I can easily put myself into a position of how a different choice might be made if I was  single mom or still had young ones that relied on me. EVEN WITH the risk of covid out there, but especially if I had already gotten it and gotten through it. I would not appreciate being characterized as a moron who just doesn't see 200,000 deaths. or doesn't care about anyone else. It wouldn't make me think that the person thinking of me that way really had my best interest at heart.

Anyway I just don't think it's as black and white or good vs evil that everyone is making these groups out to be. I think there are a ton of individual components and variables that go into decision making. I think for a lot of people on the wary side become even more so when the people claiming to want them to be healthy and live full and productive lives also say they shouldn't be out in public spaces, or be employable, or travel, without this shot. Especially when they see people with shots getting sick still. It crosses a lot of wires that I can see even if it makes absolute sense to everyone here.

[Sneezyone]

4 minutes ago, MercyA said:

Huh. Speaking for myself, I never said or even thought that. If you truly don't believe embryos are living human beings, then there is no hypocrisy for you personally. 

I *do* think it's hypocritical for people who claim to care about life from the womb to the grave to seemingly not care about the hundreds of thousands of people unnecessarily and preventably dying from COVID in this country. That is one of the points I was trying to make. That, and that we as a society de-value life in many ways. 

Either I don't communicate well, or people are reading way too much into what I actually say. Probably a little of both. 😉 

When you said this:

Quote

"Right? Haven't we seen people here--time and again, and fairly so--criticize the hypocrisy of "pro-lifers" for not protecting others during pandemic? I didn't see anyone calling foul then. The point was that if you're going to say you value life, do it consistently. And we as a country do not."

It's fair to believe that you were painting hypocrisy with a broad brush. The assumption was/is that we all share the same definition of life. We don't.

[KSera]

8 minutes ago, BronzeTurtle said:

Now if someone feels that way about a covid shot it means they want to die and hate old people and fat people.

I didn't say that at all. The hyperbole is unhelpful to discussion. I don't think any of these people want to die, and I don't think (hardly) any of them hate old or fat people. I'm commenting that I don't see acknowledgement of the loss of all those people being unnecessary and tragic. It's the tragic and exceedingly rare cases of vaccine side effects that they bring up, but never all the people dying of covid. That's the part I'm trying to understand. What is the story people tell themselves that makes them worry more about people being hurt by the shot than by covid, when covid death is rampant and shot deaths are not?

11 minutes ago, BronzeTurtle said:

the woman mentioned earlier who died from j&j. The obviously aren't the only ones. THOSE people are written off too, a nothingburger, if you will when it comes to getting absolutly everyone vaccinated for covid.

Did you read my post about the woman who died from J&J? Did you read that I literally spent a sleepless night after reading about her, because I found the story so tragic and couldn't stop thinking about her and her family? Hardly a nothing burger to me.  I'm wondering where the similar compassion and care is for all the people that have and will continue to die of covid, because people have put the fear of the shot into them. Over and over we read of these people who realize only after they are sick that they shouldn't have believed all that stuff and they should have gotten vaccinated. I don't want that to keep happening to people. It's awful and I'm not hearing anti-vaxers speaking up for those people.

 

[BronzeTurtle]

7 minutes ago, Jaybee said:

Then last week, a friend brought over a new acquaintance to meet me. We chit-chatted a good bit, then the friend had to leave. The new acquaintance stayed longer because of a child pickup she needed to do afterward and didn't want to head in the other direction. I had mentioned something earlier to my close friend about a vaccine situation, and after she had left, this new lady mentioned that she felt it really should be a personal choice. I don't think I was ever obnoxious about it, and she wasn't either, but it was definitely awkward. I said that I guess I felt strongly about it because I know eleven people who have died of it, and also one dd worked in a covid unit at the worst of things. She then proceeded to tell me of three people she knew that had died. I just kept thinking, "Then why wouldn't you want to get vaccinated? And why wouldn't you have wanted those three to be encouraged to get vaccinated?" 

 

This is what I don't understand.

Why can't people believe it should be a personal choice and also want as many people as possible to be vaccinated? Why are those two things at odds? I don't think they are.

If I say I think it should be someone's personal choice, do people assume I mean I am not vaxxed and don't think others should be? Is it some kind of code?
 

[MercyA]

2 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

When you said this:

It's fair to believe that you were painting hypocrisy with a broad brush. The assumption was/is that we all share the same definition of life. We don't.

Yeah, I didn't communicate well. What I meant was:

1. No one seemed to mind me linking the abortion issue and the COVID issue when the purpose was to point out pro-lifers' hypocrisy.

2. I would never in a million years assume everyone here shares my views on human life. We've had too many conversations for that.

3. *I* believe that we do not value life consistently or well in this country, based on the examples I gave earlier, but I most emphatically was not thinking "pro-vax people here are hypocrites" when I made that statement. The thought never crossed my mind.

I do think it's worth noting that people were basically telling me to shut up before I said much of anything at all. But, whatever, I can take it. I do.not.like talking about abortion. At all. But I still think someone should. I'm more than happy to drop it in this thread.

[frogger]

7 minutes ago, BronzeTurtle said:

I don't know that it's the bulk of anti-vax people. People here seem very certain that it is but it seems like a caricature to me of the worst of the worst. I know they are out there, I can't reconcile it with it being most people. I don't know how one would know that is the bulk of them. I think your interpretation of what people who aren't vaxxed yet is really uncharitable. I think there are a lot of people who are skeptical and worried about this vax but have up to this point gotten most other vaccines for themselves and their kids. The anti-vax people I knew up to this point, pre-covid, thought themselves very thoughtful and well educated and used delayed and selective vaxxing for their kids for reasons that were always a mystery to me but made sense to them. Now if someone feels that way about a covid shot it means they want to die and hate old people and fat people.

I think there is a poster here who has a husband who got covid and got the vax and now is on disability, maybe permanantly. and the woman mentioned earlier who died from j&j. The obviously aren't the only ones. THOSE people are written off too, a nothingburger, if you will when it comes to getting absolutly everyone vaccinated for covid. The rare side effects are the price people are willing to pay for society, but individuals have to make these choices. And for people who are scared of the shot, that can't be easy to see things like that dismissed and reassured that well, it probably won't happen to them

The discussion about 12-15yo boys (although really, males under 30 or so from what I can see) was an example of one reason why some people may be hesitant to induce a vaccine side effect and how there are various highly studied people who don't agree that the black and white guidance from various US agencies and in public sentiment is the best messaging. There is a big psychological difference between deliberately injecting yourself with someone that might cause a huge problem for you and yours and simply going to work everyday and catching something. I was scared of the vaccine in that same way. it was a big hurdle to overcome that i could get a clot and leave my family suffering EVEN IF data was on my side. I can easily put myself into a position of how a different choice might be made if I was  single mom or still had young ones that relied on me. EVEN WITH the risk of covid out there, but especially if I had already gotten it and gotten through it. I would not appreciate being characterized as a moron who just doesn't see 200,000 deaths. or doesn't care about anyone else. It wouldn't make me think that the person thinking of me that way really had my best interest at heart.

Anyway I just don't think it's as black and white or good vs evil that everyone is making these groups out to be. I think there are a ton of individual components and variables that go into decision making. I think for a lot of people on the wary side become even more so when the people claiming to want them to be healthy and live full and productive lives also say they shouldn't be out in public spaces, or be employable, or travel, without this shot. Especially when they see people with shots getting sick still. It crosses a lot of wires that I can see even if it makes absolute sense to everyone here.

I think it is easy to confuse the "loud" people with the bulk of people.

 

OTOH, I hate the lies. It is one thing for my 74 year old mother who has a medical degree and believes it safe to choose not to get it because she takes pride in her stubbornness.

It is something entirely different for my step-mom to not allow my middle aged brother with Down Syndrome which comes with many risk factors, to not get it because of stupid lies which is also very different than someone nervous and doing a wait and see for a teen. 

I see both sides use examples from the extremes to make a caricature of the other side but my reality seems to indicate that the being lied to and brainwashed is much more common than the other. Out of my six (counting step and inlaws) elderly parents one is vaccinated, one knows better and is stubborn and four are lied to and angry at those who try to help. These 4 brainwashed also are responsible for two middle aged mentally disabled brothers who just listen to their parents as they are under their guardianship. 

 

My experience is anecdotal but I think the lies and disinformation crowd is bigger when I look all around me. I doubt the OPs vent was based on some 16 year old. It was based on the fact that many people are dying needlessly. 

[kbutton]

4 hours ago, Evelyn2108 said:

This thread is about people and the choices they make and how those choices impact the pandemic.  

Saying that I’m not going to win a popularity contest doesn’t refute the issue that obesity is more likely to land you in the hospital with COVID and in many cases that obesity is preventable. 

We've all discussed that to death on here already, and we mostly didn't bash the obese.  

[frogger]

And yes, I have heard the "risk factors" and "people need to take better care of their health" over and over. I have also heard the "the weak should take care of themselves." comments and a push to just isolate the vulnerable. Which of course is something we don't even do to prisoners unless absolutely necessary. 

[Dmmetler]

40 minutes ago, SKL said:

I do believe some on WTM want vax mandates for minors, including basically every age for which there is FDA approval.

My 16 yr old attends a college that requires vaccination or a medical waiver for all students, faculty, and staff (and also mandates masks and testing). So far, this semester has been extremely normal. They also mandate the flu vaccine and will be vaccinating students who do not have a medical waiver when they return from fall break. 
 

I am thrilled. The difference between my 16 yr old college student’s life and my 15 yr old BK’s life in a public high school has been dramatically different this year. And it comes down to the difference between a school with strict vaccine, masking, and testing mandates-and a school where if a kid takes their mask off, a teacher might tell them to pull it up. Maybe. 

Edited October 12, 2021 by Dmmetler

[Pam in CT]

re evolution from Pot-stirrer to Beloved Contributor

3 hours ago, MercyA said:

Maybe. Although, to be fair, I think one of my first posts here almost ten years ago was an anti-vax one. (Please, no one go back and look. It's embarrassing. I'm looking at you, @Not_a_Number.) 

I wasn't trying to troll. I just thought I knew what I was talking about (I didn't) and that Someone Was Wrong on the Internet. 

I'm glad I stuck around.

Yes, well, the rest of us are glad as well.

 

vs Pot Stirrer Comin' In Swingin'

3 hours ago, TCB said:

...It’s a bit hard to have a productive discussion, by the way, when you move the goal posts. To be fair though, I don’t really get the impression that you are after a productive discussion.

Indeed, all evidence thus far points the other direction. 

(To those for whom Evidence Matters, LOL)

 

Disagreement is great.  

One-line sniping-and-running, and dumped links without context or reaction, and aggrieved I'm Such a Victim flounces in the face of disagreement, aren't disagreement.  That's just pot-stirring.

[BronzeTurtle]

3 minutes ago, KSera said:

I didn't say that at all. The hyperbole is unhelpful to discussion. I don't think any of these people want to die, and I don't think (hardly) any of them hate old or fat people. I'm commenting that I don't see acknowledgement of the loss of all those people being unnecessary and tragic. It's the tragic and exceedingly rare cases of vaccine side effects that they bring up, but never all the people dying of covid. That's the part I'm trying to understand. What is the story people tell themselves that makes them worry more about people being hurt by the shot than by covid, when covid death is rampant and shot deaths are not?

Did you read my post about the woman who died from J&J? Did you read that I literally spent a sleepless night after reading about her, because I found the story so tragic and couldn't stop thinking about her and her family? Hardly a nothing burger to me.  I'm wondering where the similar compassion and care is for all the people that have and will continue to die of covid, because people have put the fear of the shot into them. Over and over we read of these people who realize only after they are sick that they shouldn't have believed all that stuff and they should have gotten vaccinated. I don't want that to keep happening to people. It's awful and I'm not hearing anti-vaxers speaking up for those people.

 

Hyperbole? After using the phrase "It seems like a big old "*shrug* they shouldn't have been old or fat" nothing burger to all the people who are have bought into all the vaccine scare tactics." That is fun that you say I'm using hyperbole when my post was literally trying to diffuse the use of hyperbole like that.

This post continues to persist in the idea that anti-vaxers (again, I don't think someone who is scared or skeptical of this particular shot is an anti-vaxer across the board, but I'll use your terms) don't care about people who die from covid. Where is all the compassion and care? How do you even define what that would mean when it seems you define someone who has not gotten the shot as someone who doesn't care at all or have compassion. If that's the definition, then no one who is reluctant to get vaxxed could possibly have care or compassion. It's totally circular and hyperbolic.

I think it is possible to be reluctant to be vaxed and still care about the effects of covid. If you don't know anyone like that in your life, then I don't know how I could describe someone like that.

You said you lost sleep but your post ultimately went on to describe her death as something akin to a seatbelt malfunctioning. We can all live with that because what can you do if a safety device malfunctions? It's tragic but we can be rest assured it's rare and won't happen to us.

[SKL]

15 minutes ago, BronzeTurtle said:

This is what I don't understand.

Why can't people believe it should be a personal choice and also want as many people as possible to be vaccinated? Why are those two things at odds? I don't think they are.

If I say I think it should be someone's personal choice, do people assume I mean I am not vaxxed and don't think others should be? Is it some kind of code?
 

I am not sure how people aound us IRL feel, but I suspect a lot of people on WTM read "personal choice" and see "anti-vax."

That's where I am also, and I think it is a fairly common opinion.  I am vaxed.  I required my kids to get vaxed.  I want most people to choose vaccination, once they confirm that it isn't contraindicated for them.  But I still believe it should be their choice.  And I still don't look down on people who haven't gotten comfortable with the vax yet, or who may never do so.

The problem is that this position is subject to rather vicious attack from both sides online.  So I suspect a large % of people are just being quiet about it.

[frogger]

4 minutes ago, SKL said:

I am not sure how people aound us IRL feel, but I suspect a lot of people on WTM read "personal choice" and see "anti-vax."

That's where I am also, and I think it is a fairly common opinion.  I am vaxed.  I required my kids to get vaxed.  I want most people to choose vaccination, once they confirm that it isn't contraindicated for them.  But I still believe it should be their choice.  And I still don't look down on people who haven't gotten comfortable with the vax yet, or who may never do so.

The problem is that this position is subject to rather vicious attack from both sides online.  So I suspect a large % of people are just being quiet about it.

I believe it should be a choice but I also believe that you can't ban businesses and other from choosing mandate it for their individual purposes.

 

Freedom means I should have freedom of association. It means I should be able to CHOOSE a nursing home where employees are vaccinated or choose one that doesn't require it. 

I also wish people could make those decisions based off real information. I know that is a pipe dream if we also believe in freedom of speech but there you have it. 

I also understand externalities and during times of emergency perhaps there should be limits on what the unvaccinated can do temporarily. It isn't like you can just say they aren't allowed in your hospital. So the hospitals get totally overwhelmed with unvaccinated people and others end up suffering because of their choices.

[wathe]

3 hours ago, Evelyn2108 said:

This is not a strictly USA forum, I’m from Canada and 12yo are mandated with vaccine passports in most of the country.  
 

If your definition of productive means I have to agree with you, then I’m afraid I will fall short.
 

I’m not anti vax, I’m not pro vax.  There are reasonable arguments to be made for both.  Someone on this thread called me “crazy”, which is very childish. 
 

I’m pro choice, anti mandate.  If that is crazy, then so be it.  

Mandated with passports to access non-essentials - movie theatres, sports events, indoor dining in restaurants.  Not for school anywhere that I'm aware of, or to access any essential services.

[Guest]

7 hours ago, PeterPan said:

nd what is sad to me is that in fact it *was* a kind of rebellion, not some kind of data driven, calm rational thing. And it left her not living out her political values at the end. To me, being a fiscal conservative who takes personal responsibility means you TAKE the vaccine so you don't COST the gov't unnecessarily. Instead, she refused a cheap shot that would have been a nothing burger for her and spent weeks in ICU costing the medicare system tons. Makes zero sense to me.

This was a point I was making with dh in a recent conversation/argument. He was banging on about how the "free" vaccine isn't "free". I said, "Neither is two months in the ICU." 

[lewelma]

47 minutes ago, KSera said:

 It's the tragic and exceedingly rare cases of vaccine side effects that they bring up, but never all the people dying of covid. That's the part I'm trying to understand. What is the story people tell themselves that makes them worry more about people being hurt by the shot than by covid, when covid death is rampant and shot deaths are not?

 

 

When it comes to vaccines, you are *choosing* to accept the risk by proactively accepting the shot. When it comes to getting covid, that is just being unlucky. 

The mind is a funny thing because it doesn't see the complete risk profile of each choice. It is kind of like the psychology of opting in vs opting out, just a strange quirk of how our minds perceive of risk.

 

Edited October 12, 2021 by lewelma

[wathe]

1 minute ago, Quill said:

This was a point I was making with dh in a recent conversation/argument. He was banging on about how the "free" vaccine isn't "free". I said, "Neither is two months in the ICU." 

It's an especially relevant point for those of us n countries with universal healthcare.

[Guest]

Just now, wathe said:

It's an especially relevant point for those of us n countries with universal healthcare.

Yeah, but I'm still jelly of universal healthcare, lol. 

 

[SKL]

1 minute ago, frogger said:

I also understand externalities and during times of emergency perhaps there should be limits on what the unvaccinated can do temporarily. It isn't like you can just say they aren't allowed in your hospital. So the hospitals get totally overwhelmed with unvaccinated people and others end up suffering because of their choices.

Interesting that you mention this.  Our local news had a story yesterday about a guy who had been scheduled for a kidney transplant after a very long wait and all that goes with that.  The transplant was to happen this month, I'm not sure exactly what day.  The hospital just made a new rule that unvaccinated people would not be allowed transplant surgery.  The logic being that organ transplant recipients have to take immunity suppressants.  So far reasonable.  But in this case, the person who isn't vaccinated is the donor.  (Obviously they would have to test the donor for Covid before transplanting an organ ... but that would presumably be done regardless of vaccination, wouldn't it?)

[Sneezyone]

49 minutes ago, MercyA said:

Yeah, I didn't communicate well. What I meant was:

1. No one seemed to mind me linking the abortion issue and the COVID issue when the purpose was to point out pro-lifers' hypocrisy.

2. I would never in a million years assume everyone here shares my views on human life. We've had too many conversations for that.

3. *I* believe that we do not value life consistently or well in this country, based on the examples I gave earlier, but I most emphatically was not thinking "pro-vax people here are hypocrites" when I made that statement. The thought never crossed my mind.

I do think it's worth noting that people were basically telling me to shut up before I said much of anything at all. But, whatever, I can take it. I do.not.like talking about abortion. At all. But I still think someone should. I'm more than happy to drop it in this thread.

I do not think you said nothing at all, Mercy. What I quoted wasn’t your first post. I think what you’ve observed is that the people who usually claim the ‘pro-life’ label define life as egg meeting sperm so the hypocrisy is more evident. You might assume a similarly black/white view on the other side. In reality, the pro-choice side includes people who define life that way (but also want safe/legal/rare), people who don’t define life that way, and people for whom there are no religious or ethical issues at play (and everything in between). It’s a lot more diverse than you allowed. So when you say ‘people don’t value life enough’, yes, the question of ‘what is life?’ is critically important.

Edited October 12, 2021 by Sneezyone

[frogger]

2 minutes ago, SKL said:

Interesting that you mention this.  Our local news had a story yesterday about a guy who had been scheduled for a kidney transplant after a very long wait and all that goes with that.  The transplant was to happen this month, I'm not sure exactly what day.  The hospital just made a new rule that unvaccinated people would not be allowed transplant surgery.  The logic being that organ transplant recipients have to take immunity suppressants.  So far reasonable.  But in this case, the person who isn't vaccinated is the donor.  (Obviously they would have to test the donor for Covid before transplanting an organ ... but that would presumably be done regardless of vaccination, wouldn't it?)

At first glance that sounds unreasonable but I don't take second hand reasons so I would have to hear the actual reason for the decision. 

It does feel a red herring to the point that during hospital overwhelm there is valid reasons for limiting unvaccinated activities. This should only be during times when overwhelmed systems are causing death or harm to the wider community. 

[Pam in CT]

re perceived risks

4 minutes ago, lewelma said:

When it comes to vaccines, you are *choosing* to accept the risk by proactively accepting the shot. When it comes to getting covid, that is just being unlucky. 

The mind is a funny thing because it doesn't see just the complete risk profile of each choice. It is kind of like the psychology of opting in vs opting out, just a strange quirk of how our minds perceive of risk.

 

It's very much like the psychology of opting in v opting out.  Or relatedly, of how we perceive acts of commision vs acts of omission.  

(I saw somewhere -- I think here, but maybe elsewhere, the vax choice as "100% chance of a risk of side effects vs a very small chance of contracting serious COVID."  Well, OK, [ expected value ] .  Is basic statistics required for a high school diploma in New Zealand?  If I could wave a magic wand I would swap out pre-calc and leave that to the STEM-y kids, and up the % of Americans with a basic grasp of basic statistics.)

The mind is funny.

[Guest]

BTW, I just learned moments ago, through Facebook, that the client I have mentioned here before who had been in the ICU since early August, sick with COVID, died. A woman in her fifties, nice-looking, tall, strong mom of three kids, gone now because of COVID. I do not know for a fact she was unvaccinated but it seems likely the case. It's just so senseless. I seriously wish I could post her picture here because she looks so very *regular* - she could easily have been a mom in my book club or my bunko group or my homeschool co-op. I did show her picture to my husband, because I think this is the reality he isn't seeing and doesn't know about. He thinks COVID deaths are old people and sick people. It might give him pause to see this beautiful woman, a mom pretty similar to his *wife* or his *sisters*, gone senselessly. 

[lewelma]

4 minutes ago, Pam in CT said:

 Is basic statistics required for a high school diploma in New Zealand? 

Yes. 🙂

[SKL]

6 minutes ago, frogger said:

At first glance that sounds unreasonable but I don't take second hand reasons so I would have to hear the actual reason for the decision. 

It does feel a red herring to the point that during hospital overwhelm there is valid reasons for limiting unvaccinated activities. This should only be during times when overwhelmed systems are causing death or harm to the wider community. 

Hospital overwhelm is not a factor in this situation.

[KSera]

57 minutes ago, BronzeTurtle said:

Why can't people believe it should be a personal choice and also want as many people as possible to be vaccinated? Why are those two things at odds? I don't think they are.
 

I think it should be a personal choice, but I also am upset and frustrated, as the OP stated, that so many people are not choosing to get vaccinated, precisely because for most of them, that is due to misinformation. Yes, I realize there are people who have reasons other than misinformation, but when you look at polls and you read people's arguments and you hear what is on talk radio and all that, misinformation is the biggest reason. That is beyond frustrating, because that "personal choice" has very real world impacts on both the person and those around them and society as a whole.

 

For the next part, I'm going to have to use italics to respond within your quote because it's too far back to multiquote each part.

47 minutes ago, BronzeTurtle said:

Hyperbole? After using the phrase "It seems like a big old "*shrug* they shouldn't have been old or fat" nothing burger to all the people who are have bought into all the vaccine scare tactics." That is fun that you say I'm using hyperbole when my post was literally trying to diffuse the use of hyperbole like that.

The hyperbole I referred to was suggesting that I said that people hate old and fat people because I said that people seem to shrug about all the people who have died and point to them being old or overweight.

If that's the definition, then no one who is reluctant to get vaxxed could possibly have care or compassion. It's totally circular and hyperbolic.

I don't think that at all. As I've said repeatedly, I think the majority of people who are reluctant to get vaccinated have been victims of misinformation. That says nothing about their care and compassion. It's largely the people spreading that misinformation who are the ones that I think lack care and compassion. Even worse with the sizable portion of them who are vaccinated themselves, but contribute to the spread of anti vax propaganda.

You said you lost sleep but your post ultimately went on to describe her death as something akin to a seatbelt malfunctioning. We can all live with that because what can you do if a safety device malfunctions? It's tragic but we can be rest assured it's rare and won't happen to us.

I still don't see the problem with that comparison. A seatbelt malfunction is a terrible tragedy as well. That's not making little of something at all. On the contrary. As far as we can all live with that, I wish we didn't have to. I hate it that things like that happen in life and wish they didn't. It's horrible. My point was that the rare circumstances like that don't dictate what is the safest choice overall. To make other people think that the rare tragic cases are what they should base their choice on rather than the much more common tragic cases of Covid death will result in far, far more Covid deaths. I expect the US will have over 1000 more of them today alone, most of them preventable. 😞

 

Edited October 12, 2021 by KSera

[frogger]

2 minutes ago, SKL said:

Hospital overwhelm is not a factor in this situation.

It is where I live. I take it you are in a more vaccinated state? 

Or perhaps you meant that the kidney thing was a totally off subject thing and didn't relate to my quote? In which case, you wanted to be able to respond but didn't have anything to respond with?

 

I just can't figure out what it had to do with my quote.

[SKL]

7 minutes ago, Pam in CT said:

re perceived risks

It's very much like the psychology of opting in v opting out.  Or relatedly, of how we perceive acts of commision vs acts of omission.  

(I saw somewhere -- I think here, but maybe elsewhere, the vax choice as "100% chance of a risk of side effects vs a very small chance of contracting serious COVID."  Well, OK, [ expected value ] .  Is basic statistics required for a high school diploma in New Zealand?  If I could wave a magic wand I would swap out pre-calc and leave that to the STEM-y kids, and up the % of Americans with a basic grasp of basic statistics.)

The mind is funny.

Well this was more logical, especially for the younger age groups, when cases were declining prior to Delta.  And it will be more logical again when case levels go back down.

But that's a different point from the opt-in vs. opt-out mindset.

[kiwik]

8 hours ago, TechWife said:

Actions have consequences. People who think and act selfishly like children do are thought of as immature and treated by others as if they are immature. This is true across the board - personal life, public life, work life, spiritual life. I've seen grown ups have adult temper tantrums at work - no they didn't scream, throw themselves on the floor, etc. - but they let people know where they stood in very immature ways. They have all gotten fired for misconduct. You simply don't have a temper tantrum at work, in public, at church or anywhere else and not have a very real consequence - loss of a job, loss of friendships, loss of respect, loss of dignity. Those who are refusing to vaccinate only because the government wants them to are losing some freedom, maybe a job, maybe friendships, definitely respect (at least my respect, anyway).

If you don't the government to do the equivalent of sending adults to their room until they are ready to calm down and follow the rules, I assume that you are generally against the criminal justice system and the concept of justice overall? Because if ever there were an example of government sending someone to their room, it's the prison system.

Living in a community means following an agreed upon set of rules. Our elections are the way that we decide who is setting the rules for us. Sometimes we like the rules, sometimes we don't.  It's the price we pay for living in a community.  People who don't want to follow the rules shouldn't expect to enter and stay in the community unchallenged. This is community, this is culture. If you want to fight to change the rules, go through the appropriate channels - protest for the purpose of affecting the change you want to see  -  but realize that changing a culture is a long haul operation and think through the cost of promoting the "everyone decided for themselves" way of life because it can truly lead to things that will change the very nature of the country and make vaccine discussions completely irrelevant.

There isn't a benefit to me, to you or to our community here to us continuing this back and forth conversation, so I am likely bowing out at this point. That, plus I have to go to work soon. Thankfully, all employees there are required by law to vaccinate against a multitude of illnesses, including covid.

 

I agree.  Humans decided to live as a society.  They decided society needs rules more detailed than "everyone be nice to each other" and they accepted there would need to be some system to deal with those who don't follow those rules. We don't always like the rules and there should be a way of objecting and trying to change them - but we don't get to do things that can be society as a whole.  In this case the benefit to society over rules the desires of the individual.  No one is going to hold you down and forcibly vaccinate you but society is going to take steps to minimise the damage you can cause.  All decisions have consequences.

[lewelma]

Can't quote in the quote. But I'm responding to this: My point was that the rare circumstances like that don't dictate what is the safest choice overall. To make other people think that the rare tragic cases are what they should base their choice on rather than the much more common tragic cases 

My niece is a paraplegic because of an airbag. I'm sure if people focused on cases like hers there would be strong opposition to installing them in all cars without consent. People simply can't understand risk.

Edited October 12, 2021 by lewelma

[kiwik]

27 minutes ago, lewelma said:

 

When it comes to vaccines, you are *choosing* to accept the risk by proactively accepting the shot. When it comes to getting covid, that is just being unlucky. 

The mind is a funny thing because it doesn't see the complete risk profile of each choice. It is kind of like the psychology of opting in vs opting out, just a strange quirk of how our minds perceive of risk.

 

I think that is it.  Something going wrong as a result of inaction somehow seems less bad on the surface than something as a result of an action.  I feel it myself and have to remind myself that it is not logical.

The arguments about weight are irrelevant but come up alot.  I really don't think many overweight people would turn down a weight gain vaccine that was as safe and effective as the Covid ones. I would take one with a 50% efficacy.  When I am stressed and short of sleep I gain weight and the last 5 years have been exceeding successful with at least 4 days a week on less than 4 hours sleep.

[heartlikealion]

I don't know the statistics, so take my post with a grain of salt. I would guess that a lot of people avoiding vaccination are not doing it due to misinformation, but rather, due to lack of motivation. They could think, "I'm healthy, why inject myself?" "I don't work with the public" "I am scared of side effects" "I was exposed and never got sick... what's the point?" and a whole slew of things like that. 

Or maybe they have an anecdotal story like, "my friend's brother was healthy then died soon after the vaccine" or "went to the hospital" etc. I've heard a few of these things through the grapevine. 

[KSera]

12 minutes ago, lewelma said:

My niece is a paraplegic because of an airbag. I'm sure if people focused on cases like hers there would be strong opposition to installing them in all cars without consent. People simply can't understand risk.

I'm really sorry to hear that. I definitely think the rare cases such as that should be cause for seeing how we can make things safer (in the case of airbags, it took a long time for them to take people other than an average size adult male into consideration, and cars are still built for them rather than for small women).

 

6 minutes ago, kiwik said:

I think that is it.  Something going wrong as a result of inaction somehow seems less bad on the surface than something as a result of an action.  I feel it myself and have to remind myself that it is not logical.

I get this as well. It was why I struggled with vaccinations for my kids when they were babies. Here I had this healthy baby and I hated to think that I might do something to them by choice that would then cause a problem. Had we been in the middle of an outbreak of any of those diseases though, it would have been an easier decision to make (as it was as soon as I found out that pertussis is most often spread by older people to those infants who aren't able to produce a strong enough immune response via the vaccine yet--at that point I made sure everyone in the family, adults included, was up to date). The fact that I get this and yet now we find ourselves in a situation where the calculus is different has changed my perspective.

[Evelyn2108]

There are plenty of good reasons not to vaccinate.  Read the below link from recent icu whistle blower Dr Patricia Lee.  Probably not going to be front page news.  
 

I’ll summarize the main points.

 

Dr. Patricia Lee is a distinguished, expert physician, who has worked at Harvard and Georgetown, and she overcame her fear of reprisals to report to the  FDA and CDC multiple harms she personally observed that were caused by the jab. 

 

“...serious harms, including quadriplegia, organ failure, and brain blood clots.  As Dr. Lee explains..., it is ‘statistically improbable that any one physician should witness this many Covid-19 vaccine injuries if the federal...claims regarding...vaccine safety were accurate.’”

 

“...she has ‘spoken with colleagues who have also had similar experiences in treating patients’ but none would publicly acknowledge these injuries because they thought doing so would ‘fuel vaccine hesitancy’ or result in ‘backlash.’ This approach to medicine is the real danger.”

 

In other words, folks, many relevant specialists have significant personal experience with the disastrous side-effects of the jab, but will not report them out of fear of damage to their careers.

 

Thanks to Dr. Lee for her courage, but frankly her colleagues, through their silence, are partly responsible for the deaths of thousands of people.

 

What about your Hippocratic Oath, professionals?

 

If you do not start speaking out *now*, you’re moral monsters.

 

Here is her letter. Important. Life-saving. Deserves to be shared far and wide.

 

https://twitter.com/lsanger/status/1447975174234595336?s=20

[MercyA]

7 hours ago, MercyA said:

The abortion numbers are likely even worse than that, unfortunately, since California, New Hampshire, and Maryland do not report abortions to the CDC. Adding information from the Guttmacher Institute's surveys (the GI is a pro-choice organization), the total number of abortions in 2019 was about 888,000. I haven't seen 2020 numbers yet. 

I agree with your sentiments completely!

The above was my first post. A stat, and a statement of agreement. This was the immediate response:

7 hours ago, FuzzyCatz said:

And this is irrelevant to this discussion and a straw man so please stop. 

45 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

I do not think you said nothing at all, Mercy. What I quoted wasn’t your first post. I think what you’ve observed is that the people who usually claim the ‘pro-life’ label define life as egg meeting sperm so the hypocrisy is more evident. You might assume a similarly black/white view on the other side. I

I've spent years studying both pro-life and pro-choice views and the reasons for them, so, no, I don't assume it's always black and white for those claiming either label. Sorry if it came across that way.

Lots more that I could say, but I'm gonna let it drop. 🙂 

Edited October 12, 2021 by MercyA

[kbutton]

 

1 hour ago, BronzeTurtle said:

If I say I think it should be someone's personal choice, do people assume I mean I am not vaxxed and don't think others should be? Is it some kind of code?

It is code around here, and the people who want "medical freedom" mean they don't even want healthcare workers to have it mandated. They don't see that medical freedom could also mean being able to see a healthcare worker without risk of having them infect you. Many of the people who use this code also mean that they want to repeal vaccine requirements for all diseases, not just Covid. Some of these people are nurses and are literally asking people they know to fast and pray for laws to pass that will make it illegal to ask anyone their vaccine status for ANY disease. Pregnant and want to be safe? No more--now your OB/GYN or midwife can refuse to vaccinate for rubella, and if you're exposed, your kid might be born with congenital rubella syndrome. But so sorry for your luck.

49 minutes ago, frogger said:

Freedom means I should have freedom of association. It means I should be able to CHOOSE a nursing home where employees are vaccinated or choose one that doesn't require it. 

I also wish people could make those decisions based off real information. I know that is a pipe dream if we also believe in freedom of speech but there you have it. 

I would settle for accurate information when you ask for it specifically. I asked about Covid precautions for a minor but more complicated than usual surgery my son needed. The office let me think they are Covid-cautious. They are not. They don't mask except during procedures. I regret giving them a single penny, and we're giving them thousands of dollars even after insurance pays up. 

Worse yet, my son has had minor complications twice, but other surgeons will not see him because they didn't do the original surgery. So, we've been exposed THREE times to their non-existent Covid protocols. 

I am pretty sure the county will not bust them, and I'm not sure if they can. I need to see if the state medical board will censure this office. I might be able to report them to the insurance company too. I am so done. 

That's not medical freedom; that's deception. 

[Guest]

10 minutes ago, heartlikealion said:

I don't know the statistics, so take my post with a grain of salt. I would guess that a lot of people avoiding vaccination are not doing it due to misinformation, but rather, due to lack of motivation. They could think, "I'm healthy, why inject myself?" "I don't work with the public" "I am scared of side effects" "I was exposed and never got sick... what's the point?" and a whole slew of things like that. 

Or maybe they have an anecdotal story like, "my friend's brother was healthy then died soon after the vaccine" or "went to the hospital" etc. I've heard a few of these things through the grapevine. 

I do think lack of motivation can be a factor, but I think misinformation also plays a role *in* the inertia. 
So, in my insider study of one, I have said to dh: “I will get on the phone right this minute and make a vax appointment for you; I’ll even drive you there myself if you will just agree to carry it out.” But this has not worked so far. He comes up with excuses. Misinformation plays a role, too, because he believes it may turn out that 500 million people will develop permanent side effects in the future and he has “natural immunity” that is “28% more effective than the vaccine.” I have no idea where he hears this stuff, but it plays a role for certain. So yes I think misinformation plays a role even when it’s also an inertia problem. 

[PeterPan]

14 minutes ago, Evelyn2108 said:

good reasons

You cannot be serious in citing TWITTER for your medical information. Now it's clear you're a spammer, troll, whatever. 

2 minutes ago, Quill said:

he has “natural immunity” that is “28% more effective than the vaccine.” I have no idea where he hears this stuff, but it plays a role for certain.

Not to point out the obvious, but there *is* data showing that *if* the person continues to have antibodies (you saw the IF, right?) that *statistically* it compares well. I'm not sure I want to RISK MY LIFE on that, but hey if he's young and not overweight and wants to risk things, there are people going with that logic. But those people are RUNNING LABELS TO CONFIRM that that scenario is happening. Doesn't happen for everyone.

And there are also studies showing that if a person who had the disease gets the vax, effectiveness goes up EVEN HIGHER. That's wacky to me, but that Campbell dude on youtube has data on that all the time. 

I don't think it's necessary to *argue* and try to *persuade* him, but I do think there are questions there that could be answered. If he's just *hoping* his antibody levels stay up, that's not the same as taking the responsibility to test them and KNOW they're up.

[Jaybee]

1 hour ago, BronzeTurtle said:

This is what I don't understand.

Why can't people believe it should be a personal choice and also want as many people as possible to be vaccinated? Why are those two things at odds? I don't think they are.

If I say I think it should be someone's personal choice, do people assume I mean I am not vaxxed and don't think others should be? Is it some kind of code?
 

Well, sadly, in my circles, the way it has played out is that nearly all the people I have heard advocate for personal choice have also been those who are against vaccines. Not all--but by far most. I don't even know how I feel about government mandates; but I do feel a bit of a stranger in a world where vaccines against a deadly disease are possible, but not taken advantage of. I wish there was not even any reason to consider mandates because everybody who could get vaccinated, would. (Usual caveat allowances for those for whom a vaccine is not a good medical choice.) I understood the hesitancies at the beginning. I don't understand them anymore.

[Jaybee]

Also, my elderly mil passed away last week. She had been living in a nursing home since a few months before covid happened. So ever since, for all that long time, there were very few times when she could see any family for any length of time, and when she could, we couldn't actually touch her or give her a hug. Once she and all family members were vaccinated, we still couldn't. But nursing home HCW didn't have to be vaccinated. And they were coming in and out, with kids in the schools, etc., and continuing to cause covid cases that continued to cause restrictions. Thankfully, when she was hospitalized and death was imminent, we could be with her, touch her, and hold her hand. But yes, I am struggling with so many (at least where I live and where extended family lives) who still think the vaccine (edit--I meant covid) is nbd and that everybody is just trying to control their lives. I'm trying not to rant too much, but it's just so hard. 

ETA: She did not die of covid, but she experienced a lot of loneliness and lack of physical contact due to it in the last year and a half of her life.

Edited October 13, 2021 by Jaybee

[Evelyn2108]

3 minutes ago, PeterPan said:

You cannot be serious in citing TWITTER for your medical information. Now it's clear you're a spammer, troll, whatever. 

Most people on this thread shared anecdotal stories about “some person they knew who got sick and they were pretty sure weren’t vaccinated “.  I share a letter from an actual Dr and I’m the spammer?  
 

Nobody on this thread ever addresses my points, they just call me a spammer or crazy or whatever and run.  
 

I don’t think people who vaccinate are crazy, or spammers.  But I also don’t think vaccines are the slam dunk the pharmaceutical companies want us to think they are.  

Show me the studies that prove this new mRNA technology and these vaccines have no LONG TERM side effects please.  Prove it. 

[ChickaDeeDeeDee]

8 minutes ago, Quill said:

He comes up with excuses.

Would he be willing to get an antibody test?  Then you can both know what's happening with his immunity / be able to make informed decisions?

 

3 minutes ago, PeterPan said:

You cannot be serious in citing TWITTER

The Dr's Lawyer (Aaron Siri from Siri Gilmstad) posted this on his substack today so lots of people posting it on twitter: https://aaronsiri.substack.com/p/whistleblower-fda-and-cdc-ignore?token=eyJ1c2VyX2lkIjoxODkxMDIxOSwicG9zdF9pZCI6NDI0OTkxODcsIl8iOiJqd0hxaiIsImlhdCI6MTYzNDA4MjgwNywiZXhwIjoxNjM0MDg2NDA3LCJpc3MiOiJwdWItNTE2MzYwIiwic3ViIjoicG9zdC1yZWFjdGlvbiJ9.25BIiWtC5KliCzSMFYZT26jfZa-1oS80eLoWzsDOhpk

 

 

 

 

 

[historically accurate]

@Jaybee, I am so sorry for your loss. 

[lewelma]

39 minutes ago, KSera said:

I'm really sorry to hear that. I definitely think the rare cases such as that should be cause for seeing how we can make things safer (in the case of airbags, it took a long time for them to take people other than an average size adult male into consideration, and cars are still built for them rather than for small women).

Yes, she was 4'11" and 95 lbs. The force when it deployed permanently bruised/severed the spinal cord. The point is that she is just a very unusual case -- air bags save way way more lives than destroy them. But all you have to do is focus on her misfortune to build up the case against them. This is exactly what the antivaxers are doing. Focus on the 3 deaths from vaccines rather than the 200,000 lives that could have been saved. I listened to a podcast once years ago called "the case against empathy". And his point was that when we focus on individual stories of woe rather than the numbers and facts, we make poor decisions. We need to be cold and purely logical with some of our decision making.

[Guest]

21 minutes ago, PeterPan said:

You cannot be serious in citing TWITTER for your medical information. Now it's clear you're a spammer, troll, whatever. 

Not to point out the obvious, but there *is* data showing that *if* the person continues to have antibodies (you saw the IF, right?) that *statistically* it compares well. I'm not sure I want to RISK MY LIFE on that, but hey if he's young and not overweight and wants to risk things, there are people going with that logic. But those people are RUNNING LABELS TO CONFIRM that that scenario is happening. Doesn't happen for everyone.

And there are also studies showing that if a person who had the disease gets the vax, effectiveness goes up EVEN HIGHER. That's wacky to me, but that Campbell dude on youtube has data on that all the time. 

I don't think it's necessary to *argue* and try to *persuade* him, but I do think there are questions there that could be answered. If he's just *hoping* his antibody levels stay up, that's not the same as taking the responsibility to test them and KNOW they're up.

Well that’s exactly it. If he was making a reasoned choice to have titres done periodically or was even willing to be a case study on natural immunity (living where we do, I’m sure he could find a study going on at Hopkins or NIH), that would be different. I think it is *likely* he has *some* level of protection, which is why I only beat that drum once in a while, but from a scientific standpoint, he really has no idea. 
 

Also, he’s seemingly pretty healthy for his age, but he’s not that young; the same age, in fact, as the client I mentioned who just died of covid. He’s not much overweight but he’s certainly not as fit as when he was 30. So it’s hard to really say, except for he has had COVID and was not sick enough to be hospitalized. I don’t know what the stats are, but I doubt getting covid a second time would increase your likelihood of dying. 

[KSera]

1 hour ago, Evelyn2108 said:

There are plenty of good reasons not to vaccinate.  Read the below link from recent icu whistle blower Dr Patricia Lee.  Probably not going to be front page news.  
 

 

Why do you take the word of this one doctor (who I so far can't find any reference to anywhere but in reference to this letter, so I can't even verify the veracity at this point) over the hundreds and hundreds of doctors and nurses all over the world speaking out about what they are seeing with covid patients in their ICUs? Or even just the raw numbers of people who have died from Covid? It would literally not be possible to hide that many people with life-threatening vaccine side effects. And it would have shown up in the trials were it happening like that. What makes you believe this doctor over everything else? I'll share my own link. These are unfortunately super easy to find right now:

Former anti-vax woman shares husband's COVID-19 ICU horror story

Excerpt:

Quote

Once he gets better, “if he gets better,” she added, she plans to share her story with the anti-vaxxers she used to follow. She says she doesn’t want others to learn her lesson the hard way — firsthand — and hopes to save them from grief by changing their minds instead.

“But it’s so hard to try and turn somebody’s mind around,” she said, “because I know how stubborn we were, and no one was going to tell us to get the shot.”

In the meantime, she’s thinking about how to counter misinformation offline and closer to home.

After exposing her children to false information about COVID-19 vaccine causing infertility, Carla says she’s concerned that she might have   misinformed them and is thinking about how to course correct.

58 minutes ago, Evelyn2108 said:

Nobody on this thread ever addresses my points, they just call me a spammer or crazy or whatever and run. 

Show me the studies that prove this new mRNA technology and these vaccines have no LONG TERM side effects please.  Prove it. 

I've addressed a number of your points. People didn't engage on the Robert Malone thing because it's super tiring and you can look it up yourself if you're actually interested.

 

Have you looked at the long term side effects of having Covid? The short term effects of covid are bad enough. We have no idea what it will mean long term for all those who have had covid. We have far more examples of diseases that cause long term effects throughout the lifespan than we do of vaccines that do the same. As I said in a reply to a previous post of yours, the vaccine does not persist in the body long term. Therefore, I'm much more comfortable with it than with a disease with a higher mortality and morbidity rate than I would ever voluntarily assume.

[Pam in CT]

re opt in/ out... acts of commission / omission

2 hours ago, SKL said:

Well this was more logical, especially for the younger age groups, when cases were declining prior to Delta.  And it will be more logical again when case levels go back down.

But that's a different point from the opt-in vs. opt-out mindset.

Yeah, it was the "100% chance of a risk of side effects" that... threw me.  I mean, I can read every individual word, but what does "100% chance of a risk" mean? 

Not in numerical terms, that's hard even in ordinary times and much more so when the data is soft and variants like Delta are changing the trends of the past... but in meaning. 

The only meaning I could glean from it was, if I take this action (commission) then I have 100% responsibility for the risks; whereas if I roll the dice on not-acting (omission) then I am not responsible for whatever outcome may roll my why.

{That's not a criticism -- there's a lot of research that most folks DO evaluate acts of commission and omission differently; that's the trolley problem.  Just the only meaning I was able to extract from the statement.  Otherwise "100% chance of a risk" is... incomprehensible to me.  Like, I literally couldn't see meaning in the words.}

[Spy Car]

7 hours ago, Sneezyone said:

Oh dear God! That is the same idiotic snippet my Dad found via tik tok. Meanwhile, his pulmonologist and GP are urging him to get the vax.

There is a whole industry of this moronic nonsense.

Bill

[Evelyn2108]

12 minutes ago, KSera said:

We have far more examples of diseases that cause long term effects throughout the lifespan than we do of vaccines that do the same. 

That’s because vaccines normally undergo 3-7 years testing for long term side effects.  MANY vaccines do not go pass the trial phase because they not meet safety standards.  The mRNA have not undergone the normal testing and therefore can’t be held to the same standards.  
 

Yes, I have looked into the long term effects of COVID.  I’ve simply come to a different conclusion then you.  There’s plenty of data to support both sides.  Ultimately, people can make data driven decisions to not get the mRNA.  It’s not “crazy” or “idiotic” and implying that I’ve been “tricked” and that social media needs to be “censored” (as many have suggested on this thread) is the height of infantilization.  Trying to coerce me with mandates to get the jab is fascist and has no place in a free society.  
 

Saying that you’re tired of discussing dr Malone isn’t an argument.  
 

Just because the vaccine doesn’t stay in your body doesn’t mean there are no long term effects. You’ve made a data driven choice, others will come to different conclusions.
 

 Both are reasonable, however one side is trying to force the vaccine with coercion (some people on this thread have advocated for that).  I’m not trying to prevent anyone from getting the mRNA if they want it. 

[KSera]

4 minutes ago, Evelyn2108 said:

That’s because vaccines normally undergo 3-7 years testing for long term side effects.  MANY vaccines do not go pass the trial phase because they not meet safety standards.  The mRNA have not undergone the normal testing and therefore can’t be held to the same standards.

Did you read my earlier response to this assertion? This is not true.