Discussion:
OT - Anti vax or not?
Add Reply
Andy Evans
2021-11-21 11:34:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Just throwing this out there for all your opinions. Anti-vax is a worldwide protest movement right now. It goes into some fundamental questions about the individual versus the common good. Where do you stand on this?
Herman
2021-11-21 11:41:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Pro life.

Increasingly it's getting clear that the antivax mvt is a pro death mvt - of course pro other people dying. The idea is some people think they're invulnerable superhumans (the notion of being genetically superior to others is voiced quite ferequently), and they see this as a culling moment.
Todd M. McComb
2021-11-22 03:31:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
They see casualties as a part of war.
And I'm quite serious about this. It's not only about being
"irrational" or about being a parasite on other people's risk.

The leaders (most of whom are vaccinated, btw) who send these "foot
soldiers" out there to spread covid are doing it with the knowledge
that shit always flows downhill, that the poor & various minorities
will be -- on average -- more adversely affected. Yes, some of
"their own" (about whom they don't actually care) will die too, but
they feel the calculus is good for them overall: It puts most
everyone on their heels, etc., and it disproportionately kills the
people they hate. It also makes governing more difficult, so bad
actors can get away with more, across an array of domains. Those
things are clearly coming to pass, so there's nothing really "crazy"
going on there. Rather, for some people, this is a war. If you
want crazy, yeah, talk to the foot soldiers themselves.
Chris J.
2021-11-21 13:04:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Andy Evans
Just throwing this out there for all your opinions. Anti-vax is a
worldwide protest movement right now. It goes into some fundamental
questions about the individual versus the common good. Where do you
stand on this?
Anti-vaxxers are irrational, ignorant, anti-science, and very stupid.
Perhaps when I'm in a more gentle mood I could call these destructive
morons pitiable victims of bad education or gullible "social" media
addicts.

Chris
frankwm
2021-11-21 13:14:43 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Chris J.
Anti-vaxxers are irrational, ignorant, anti-science, and very stupid.
Perhaps when I'm in a more gentle mood I could call these destructive
morons pitiable victims of bad education or gullible "social" media
addicts.
......................................
Bloody Hell!

I'd never take Covid injections (peddled me mid-Feb) with their >already known< heart/blood-clot issues after having/recovering from a truly massive Stroke.

Lifelong never been on Any 'medication' (nor taken the slightest 'precaution' -face-rags, et al, these near 2 years) so obviously have a different approach to those pre-disposed to accept the relentless indoctrination.

Presumably they believe "Pfizer macht frei": but the various injections will ultimately (there being no end-point for 'boosters') damage the immune system - making them more at risk - and more Big Pharma Dependant.

Best of luck!!
Herman
2021-11-21 14:14:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by frankwm
Post by Chris J.
Anti-vaxxers are irrational, ignorant, anti-science, and very stupid.
Perhaps when I'm in a more gentle mood I could call these destructive
morons pitiable victims of bad education or gullible "social" media
addicts.
......................................
Bloody Hell!
I'd never take Covid injections (peddled me mid-Feb) with their >already known< heart/blood-clot issues after having/recovering from a truly massive Stroke.
Lifelong never been on Any 'medication' (nor taken the slightest 'precaution' -face-rags, et al, these near 2 years) so obviously have a different approach to those pre-disposed to accept the relentless indoctrination.
Presumably they believe "Pfizer macht frei": but the various injections will ultimately (there being no end-point for 'boosters') damage the immune system - making them more at risk - and more Big Pharma Dependant.
Best of luck!!
Wow. You have had 'a massive stroke' and you never take any medication.

Best of luck, indeed, with that.
frankwm
2021-11-21 15:16:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
AFIAC, anyone who doesn't take medicine as a matter of policy******* is a nut.* But I wish you well.
*******considered opinion based on obtaining knowledge.
Well, Sweetie-Pie, as you already Despise Me - I CAN LIVE WITHOUT YOUR 'GOOD WISHES'...
(Typical Mr Burger interjection..)
HT
2021-11-21 15:53:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by frankwm
AFIAC, anyone who doesn't take medicine as a matter of policy******* is a nut.* But I wish you well.
*******considered opinion based on obtaining knowledge.
Well, Sweetie-Pie, as you already Despise Me - I CAN LIVE WITHOUT YOUR 'GOOD WISHES'...
(Typical Mr Burger interjection..)
<g>It is a gamble. Let's hope you can live as long without as with medicine.

Henk
Frank Berger
2021-11-21 16:20:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by HT
Post by frankwm
AFIAC, anyone who doesn't take medicine as a matter of policy******* is a nut.* But I wish you well.
*******considered opinion based on obtaining knowledge.
Well, Sweetie-Pie, as you already Despise Me - I CAN LIVE WITHOUT YOUR 'GOOD WISHES'...
(Typical Mr Burger interjection..)
<g>It is a gamble. Let's hope you can live as long without as with medicine.
Henk
There are people who smoke cigarettes, don't wear seat belts and drive race cars. Possibly some people are addicted to risk. Certainly they view the risk-reward trade-off differently than the rest of us. I can understand being anti-medicine for religious reasons (people can believe in anything), but not for medical reasons. Regarding vaccination, the risk of vaccination is near zero, the result of vaccination is a near-zero chance of serious illness or death from Covid. There is no bigger no-brainer than choosing vaccination. And yet.....
HT
2021-11-21 16:53:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by HT
Post by frankwm
AFIAC, anyone who doesn't take medicine as a matter of policy******* is a nut.* But I wish you well.
*******considered opinion based on obtaining knowledge.
Well, Sweetie-Pie, as you already Despise Me - I CAN LIVE WITHOUT YOUR 'GOOD WISHES'...
(Typical Mr Burger interjection..)
<g>It is a gamble. Let's hope you can live as long without as with medicine.
Henk
There are people who smoke cigarettes, don't wear seat belts and drive race cars. Possibly some people are addicted to risk. Certainly they view the risk-reward trade-off differently than the rest of us. I can understand being anti-medicine for religious reasons (people can believe in anything), but not for medical reasons. Regarding vaccination, the risk of vaccination is near zero, the result of vaccination is a near-zero chance of serious illness or death from Covid. There is no bigger no-brainer than choosing vaccination. And yet.....
Perhaps I didn't understand Frank's post correctly. I believed his 'no medicine' lifestyle to be a question of identity.

Identities used to be quite simple: you were your job, religion and/or political party. These days, there are far more and far more different kinds of identity.

It's as with taste: it's difficult to understand the how and why of an identity if it is not yours.

Henk
HJ
2021-11-21 17:22:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
In the UK (subsequent to a Wuhan family eating their Bat Surprise) it is assessed that 93% have been infected.

As mentioned by Mr.Gavin: natural immunity is considered superior: but the problem initially was those who were (and still are) immuno-compromised -particularly due to age.

But having 'your jabs' means you still get infected/transmit this virus (+ the myriad mutations): so it's the 'logic' behind attempting to get everyone vaccinated.

But why would people with decent immune systems allow a lifetime of Covid injections/pills to be forced on them.
It isn't about being 'anti-vax': people can't be expected to be vaccinated just because someone may be 'at risk'....that person should be innoculated.

However; in the UK some 7 million people are on Statins (and similar for anti-depressants) with 20 million last year taking Influenza shots - so I'm obviously in the non-fucked-up uncaring category.

Re: 'identity': my approach has never changed - as a 10yo refused 'eyedrops' - because was given no good reason - 12yo refused the 40yo BCG (TB) jab as declined to be Tattooed on my shoulder. 7 months back 'the doc' phoned (never seen in <7 years since the Stroke) who was peddling a 'Pneumonia' jab: I said "that's a new one" - she was obviously rattled by the response.

If you wish to live your live/s as an endless source of income for the medical profession - that's your business - to me it's Slavery.


(Mr Burger wrote that biblical-style 'I despise you': I don't forget!)..he also apparently caught covid anyway - so hardly needed the additional protection at that point..
Herman
2021-11-21 18:24:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
If you wish to live your live/s as an endless source of income for the medical profession - that's your business - to me it's Slavery.
It's this black-white, me vs the world thinking that's IMHO the real virus.
The notion that receiving medical help equals slavery is infantile thinking, you know, the way kids "run away from home" because they need to prove something, and come back thirty mins later.
I don't see why people in the medical profession should not make a good living. Most of them work terrible hours doing disgusting stuff, and if they happen to be front line workers, like first aid and ambulance staff, they get treated horribly by some patients (particuarly the drunk ones)
Frank Berger
2021-11-21 18:44:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Herman
If you wish to live your live/s as an endless source of income for the medical profession - that's your business - to me it's Slavery.
It's this black-white, me vs the world thinking that's IMHO the real virus.
The notion that receiving medical help equals slavery is infantile thinking, you know, the way kids "run away from home" because they need to prove something, and come back thirty mins later.
I don't see why people in the medical profession should not make a good living. Most of them work terrible hours doing disgusting stuff, and if they happen to be front line workers, like first aid and ambulance staff, they get treated horribly by some patients (particuarly the drunk ones)
The technical term for people who think like that is that they are nuts.
Steven Bornfeld
2021-11-21 19:18:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by HJ
In the UK (subsequent to a Wuhan family eating their Bat Surprise) it is assessed that 93% have been infected.
The jury is still out on this, depending upon the vaccine regimen, and
indeed on the individual, and the particular variant that caused the
infection vs. the variant challenging the existing immunity.

but the problem initially was those who were (and still are)
immuno-compromised -particularly due to age.
Post by HJ
But having 'your jabs' means you still get infected/transmit this virus (+ the myriad mutations): so it's the 'logic' behind attempting to get everyone vaccinated.
There is copious published evidence that the vaccinated not only have a
far lower chance of severe illness, but also transmit less well and for
a shorter period of time.
Post by HJ
But why would people with decent immune systems allow a lifetime of Covid injections/pills to be forced on them.
It is not established that a "lifetime" of covid vaccines or
therapeutics will be necessary.
Post by HJ
It isn't about being 'anti-vax': people can't be expected to be vaccinated just because someone may be 'at risk'....that person should be innoculated.
You may be aware that large swaths of the world's population has not had
the opportunity to be vaccinated; and many even in the developed world
can not at this time be vaccinated. There is a long, court-tested (at
least in the U.S.) history of mandatory vaccinations.
Post by HJ
However; in the UK some 7 million people are on Statins (and similar for anti-depressants) with 20 million last year taking Influenza shots - so I'm obviously in the non-fucked-up uncaring category.
I fail to see how whether others are on statins or antidepressants (not
meds for communicable disease) says anything about your fuck-uptness one
way or another.
Post by HJ
Re: 'identity': my approach has never changed - as a 10yo refused 'eyedrops' - because was given no good reason - 12yo refused the 40yo BCG (TB) jab as declined to be Tattooed on my shoulder. 7 months back 'the doc' phoned (never seen in <7 years since the Stroke) who was peddling a 'Pneumonia' jab: I said "that's a new one" - she was obviously rattled by the response.
Mazel tov. Unlike covid-19, pneumococcal pneumonia in the older
populations has a high mortality rate:

https://www.medscape.com/answers/225811-121174/what-are-the-mortality-rates-for-pneumococcal-infections
Post by HJ
If you wish to live your live/s as an endless source of income for the medical profession - that's your business - to me it's Slavery.
Well, that's money--you pay for something you think has value. Even the
tax man.
Post by HJ
(Mr Burger wrote that biblical-style 'I despise you': I don't forget!)..he also apparently caught covid anyway - so hardly needed the additional protection at that point..
Herman
2021-11-21 19:48:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by HJ
As mentioned by Mr.Gavin: natural immunity is considered superior: but the problem initially was those who were (and still are) immuno-compromised -particularly due to age.
we don't even know what "natural immunity" is (it may also just mean the naturally immune guy just didn't run into the virus yet), but there are a lot of findings that the the vaccines offer better protection.
JohnGavin
2021-11-21 21:05:59 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Herman
Post by HJ
As mentioned by Mr.Gavin: natural immunity is considered superior: but the problem initially was those who were (and still are) immuno-compromised -particularly due to age.
we don't even know what "natural immunity" is (it may also just mean the naturally immune guy just didn't run into the virus yet), but there are a lot of findings that the the vaccines offer better protection.
Just to clarify - An individual becomes infected with COVID-19, and then produces antibodies which fight the infection. I have heard from medical sources that this person will likely then have stronger immunity on a longer term basis than a vaccinated individual. I have no idea if this is permanent or deals with other strains of the virus.

But this can’t be counted on for a person of advanced age or immuno-deficiencies from various illnesses.
Herman
2021-11-21 21:12:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by JohnGavin
I have no idea if this is permanent or deals with other strains of the virus.
it is not permanent.
Frank Berger
2021-11-21 21:42:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Herman
Post by JohnGavin
I have no idea if this is permanent or deals with other strains of the virus.
it is not permanent.
The problem here, I think, is that these studies only look at one type of antibody. Thee body has other defense mechanisms - T-cells, other types of antibodies. I don't think they really know, even if the measured antibodies fall to zero, that the person is unprotected.
Steven Bornfeld
2021-11-22 03:45:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Frank Berger
Post by Herman
Post by JohnGavin
I have no idea if this is permanent or deals with other strains of the virus.
it is not permanent.
The problem here, I think, is that these studies only look at one type
of antibody.  Thee body has other defense mechanisms - T-cells, other
types of antibodies.  I don't think they really know, even if the
measured antibodies fall to zero, that the person is unprotected.
I think everyone making absolute judgments about this have to take a
step back and treat this with humility it deserves. I actually saw a
tweet from a European institute this morning that flatly said that the
J&J/Janssen vaccine stimulates less antibody response BECAUSE it's
supposed to--and did so because it provoked a more robust cellular response.
And they say it with such certainty!
Steven Bornfeld
2021-11-22 03:51:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Steven Bornfeld
Post by Frank Berger
Post by Herman
Post by JohnGavin
I have no idea if this is permanent or deals with other strains of the virus.
it is not permanent.
The problem here, I think, is that these studies only look at one type
of antibody.  Thee body has other defense mechanisms - T-cells, other
types of antibodies.  I don't think they really know, even if the
measured antibodies fall to zero, that the person is unprotected.
I think everyone making absolute judgments about this have to take a
step back and treat this with humility it deserves.  I actually saw a
tweet from a European institute this morning that flatly said that the
J&J/Janssen vaccine stimulates less antibody response BECAUSE it's
supposed to--and did so because it provoked a more robust cellular response.
And they say it with such certainty!
And just in case you're interested:

https://twitter.com/CheckOrphan/status/1462187663029538816
Frank Berger
2021-11-21 21:35:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Herman
Post by HJ
As mentioned by Mr.Gavin: natural immunity is considered superior: but the problem initially was those who were (and still are) immuno-compromised -particularly due to age.
we don't even know what "natural immunity" is (it may also just mean the naturally immune guy just didn't run into the virus yet), but there are a lot of findings that the the vaccines offer better protection.
I'm no expert, but there is an Israeli study that reportedly concludes immunity from having recovered from Covid is stronger or longer-lasting than that from vaccination. The CDC found (or reported on someone else's study) the opposite. I saw a review (by a scientist - I think an epidemiologist) that concluded the CDC study was defective methodologically. I'll try to find it.
mswd...@gmail.com
2021-11-21 21:39:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Herman
Post by HJ
As mentioned by Mr.Gavin: natural immunity is considered superior: but the problem initially was those who were (and still are) immuno-compromised -particularly due to age.
we don't even know what "natural immunity" is (it may also just mean the naturally immune guy just didn't run into the virus yet), but there are a lot of findings that the the vaccines offer better protection.
I'm no expert, but there is an Israeli study that reportedly concludes immunity from having recovered from Covid is stronger or longer-lasting than that from vaccination. The CDC found (or reported on someone else's study) the opposite. I saw a review (by a scientist - I think an epidemiologist) that concluded the CDC study was defective methodologically. I'll try to find it.
I don't think the answer matters, because nobody has to choose between to two. And those that suggest that we should are idiots.
Frank Berger
2021-11-21 22:41:55 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Herman
Post by HJ
As mentioned by Mr.Gavin: natural immunity is considered superior: but the problem initially was those who were (and still are) immuno-compromised -particularly due to age.
we don't even know what "natural immunity" is (it may also just mean the naturally immune guy just didn't run into the virus yet), but there are a lot of findings that the the vaccines offer better protection.
I'm no expert, but there is an Israeli study that reportedly concludes immunity from having recovered from Covid is stronger or longer-lasting than that from vaccination. The CDC found (or reported on someone else's study) the opposite. I saw a review (by a scientist - I think an epidemiologist) that concluded the CDC study was defective methodologically. I'll try to find it.
I don't think the answer matters, because nobody has to choose between to two. And those that suggest that we should are idiots.
Yes. You'd have to be nuts to get Covid on purpose in order to make vaccination unnecessary. Wait.....
Steven Bornfeld
2021-11-22 03:53:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Frank Berger
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Frank Berger
Post by Herman
Post by HJ
but the problem initially was those who were (and still are)
immuno-compromised -particularly due to age.
we don't even know what "natural immunity" is (it may also just mean
the naturally immune guy just didn't run into the virus yet), but
there are a lot of findings that the the vaccines offer better
protection.
I'm no expert, but there is an Israeli study that reportedly
concludes immunity from having recovered from Covid is stronger or
longer-lasting than that from vaccination. The CDC found (or reported
on someone else's study) the opposite. I saw a review (by a scientist
- I think an epidemiologist) that concluded the CDC study was
defective methodologically. I'll try to find it.
I don't think the answer matters, because nobody has to choose between
to two. And those that suggest that we should are idiots.
Yes. You'd have to be nuts to get Covid on purpose in order to make
vaccination unnecessary.   Wait.....
Well, there used to be "chickenpox parties", which is silly, but at
least it's a mild disease for most children. Then they started with
measles parties--can covid parties be far behind?
Paul A
2021-11-22 04:33:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Steven Bornfeld
Well, there used to be "chickenpox parties", which is silly, but at
least it's a mild disease for most children. Then they started with
measles parties--can covid parties be far behind?
Indeed, I was a participant in such a "chickenpox party" (or was it measles?) in the 1950's, and apparently, my mother and her sisters didn't think it was silly at the time... chickenpox and/or measles were not very dangerous to children but potentially deadly to adults, so I guess the thinking was to infect all of us early and be done with it for life... and it seems like it worked out OK! We all still survive to this day!

On the other hand, my exp-wife did contract whooping cough a few years ago, despite having been vaccinated 50+ years previously... I don't know what that is all about, but she is fine now...
Steven Bornfeld
2021-11-22 04:55:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Paul A
Post by Steven Bornfeld
Well, there used to be "chickenpox parties", which is silly, but at
least it's a mild disease for most children. Then they started with
measles parties--can covid parties be far behind?
Indeed, I was a participant in such a "chickenpox party" (or was it measles?) in the 1950's, and apparently, my mother and her sisters didn't think it was silly at the time... chickenpox and/or measles were not very dangerous to children but potentially deadly to adults, so I guess the thinking was to infect all of us early and be done with it for life... and it seems like it worked out OK! We all still survive to this day!
On the other hand, my exp-wife did contract whooping cough a few years ago, despite having been vaccinated 50+ years previously... I don't know what that is all about, but she is fine now...
Have to disagree about measles. I was very ill with measles; my brother
was worse. Mortality has declined since then, but is on the same order
of magnitude as covid-19, but worst for young children and adults (we
were 4 when we caught it). We both managed to get measles, mumps and
rubella--we thankfully missed diphtheria.
Paul A
2021-11-22 05:32:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Steven Bornfeld
Post by Paul A
Post by Steven Bornfeld
Well, there used to be "chickenpox parties", which is silly, but at
least it's a mild disease for most children. Then they started with
measles parties--can covid parties be far behind?
Indeed, I was a participant in such a "chickenpox party" (or was it measles?) in the 1950's, and apparently, my mother and her sisters didn't think it was silly at the time... chickenpox and/or measles were not very dangerous to children but potentially deadly to adults, so I guess the thinking was to infect all of us early and be done with it for life... and it seems like it worked out OK! We all still survive to this day!
On the other hand, my exp-wife did contract whooping cough a few years ago, despite having been vaccinated 50+ years previously... I don't know what that is all about, but she is fine now...
Have to disagree about measles. I was very ill with measles; my brother
was worse. Mortality has declined since then, but is on the same order
of magnitude as covid-19, but worst for young children and adults (we
were 4 when we caught it). We both managed to get measles, mumps and
rubella--we thankfully missed diphtheria.
I really don't remember, I was very young... but I do know that I had both chickenpox and measles (and mumps) because I was told as much by my mom...and I do remember the "party" with my cousins but cannot say for which disease... but I'm still here at 75!
Frank Berger
2021-11-22 15:04:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Paul A
Post by Steven Bornfeld
Well, there used to be "chickenpox parties", which is silly, but at
least it's a mild disease for most children. Then they started with
measles parties--can covid parties be far behind?
Indeed, I was a participant in such a "chickenpox party" (or was it measles?) in the 1950's, and apparently, my mother and her sisters didn't think it was silly at the time... chickenpox and/or measles were not very dangerous to children but potentially deadly to adults, so I guess the thinking was to infect all of us early and be done with it for life... and it seems like it worked out OK! We all still survive to this day!
Interesting point, but I suspect the reason was to get all the kids sick and recovered at the same time for the convenience of the parents. I could be wrong. As I said, there were 10,000 hospitalizations and 100 deaths per year from chicken pox before vaccination. It occurs to me that I don't know how that breaks down by age. I guess 100 deaths is low no matter who was dying.
Post by Paul A
On the other hand, my exp-wife did contract whooping cough a few years ago, despite having been vaccinated 50+ years previously... I don't know what that is all about, but she is fine now...
Frank Berger
2021-11-22 14:42:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Herman
Post by HJ
As mentioned by Mr.Gavin: natural immunity is considered superior: but the problem initially was those who were (and still are) immuno-compromised -particularly due to age.
we don't even know what "natural immunity" is (it may also just mean the naturally immune guy just didn't run into the virus yet), but there are a lot of findings that the the vaccines offer better protection.
I'm no expert, but there is an Israeli study that reportedly concludes immunity from having recovered from Covid is stronger or longer-lasting than that from vaccination. The CDC found (or reported on someone else's study) the opposite. I saw a review (by a scientist - I think an epidemiologist) that concluded the CDC study was defective methodologically. I'll try to find it.
I don't think the answer matters, because nobody has to choose between to two. And those that suggest that we should are idiots.
Yes. You'd have to be nuts to get Covid on purpose in order to make vaccination unnecessary.   Wait.....
Well, there used to be "chickenpox parties", which is silly, but at least it's a mild disease for most children.  Then they started with measles parties--can covid parties be far behind?
I remember this, when my own children were little. Some of my wife's friends were doing this - in order to get Chicken Pox "out of the way" so their own lives would be less complicated and they would be less inconvenienced. I refused to let my children be exposed. Prior to the vaccine (introduced in 1995) there were around 10,000 hospitalizations and 100 deaths from chicken pox every year. I don't know whether those numbers are low enough to justify risking your children from a convenience/economic point of view. I have no idea if the people who exposed their children on purpose had an accurate view of the risks.
mswd...@gmail.com
2021-11-21 21:32:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by HJ
natural immunity is considered superior
The key word here is "considered". It's not that "natural immunity" is more effective, it is that certain people value it more. And if that valuation means denying the possible practical benefits of the COVID shot, then those people are dangerous fools.

The plain fact is that even if you thought you had natural immunity, you'd be smart to get the shot. It can't hurt, and it could help.
Frank Berger
2021-11-21 22:32:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by HJ
natural immunity is considered superior
The key word here is "considered". It's not that "natural immunity" is more effective, it is that certain people value it more. And if that valuation means denying the possible practical benefits of the COVID shot, then those people are dangerous fools.
The plain fact is that even if you thought you had natural immunity, you'd be smart to get the shot. It can't hurt, and it could help.
I think you are misunderstanding the term "natural immunity." Or I am. I thought it meant the immunity you get as a result of recovering from Covid. As I said, an Israeli study found this is superior to immunity from vaccines.
Frank Berger
2021-11-21 17:27:39 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by HT
Post by HT
Post by frankwm
AFIAC, anyone who doesn't take medicine as a matter of policy******* is a nut.* But I wish you well.
*******considered opinion based on obtaining knowledge.
Well, Sweetie-Pie, as you already Despise Me - I CAN LIVE WITHOUT YOUR 'GOOD WISHES'...
(Typical Mr Burger interjection..)
<g>It is a gamble. Let's hope you can live as long without as with medicine.
Henk
There are people who smoke cigarettes, don't wear seat belts and drive race cars. Possibly some people are addicted to risk. Certainly they view the risk-reward trade-off differently than the rest of us. I can understand being anti-medicine for religious reasons (people can believe in anything), but not for medical reasons. Regarding vaccination, the risk of vaccination is near zero, the result of vaccination is a near-zero chance of serious illness or death from Covid. There is no bigger no-brainer than choosing vaccination. And yet.....
Perhaps I didn't understand Frank's post correctly. I believed his 'no medicine' lifestyle to be a question of identity.
I drew no conclusion about why he is anti-medicine. I don't understand your point about "identity." If you consider your "self" to be equal to your job (or whatever), what kind of self do you have if you are dead from disease?
Post by HT
Identities used to be quite simple: you were your job, religion and/or political party. These days, there are far more and far more different kinds of identity.
It's as with taste: it's difficult to understand the how and why of an identity if it is not yours.
Henk
HT
2021-11-21 18:07:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by HT
Post by HT
Post by frankwm
AFIAC, anyone who doesn't take medicine as a matter of policy******* is a nut.* But I wish you well.
*******considered opinion based on obtaining knowledge.
Well, Sweetie-Pie, as you already Despise Me - I CAN LIVE WITHOUT YOUR 'GOOD WISHES'...
(Typical Mr Burger interjection..)
<g>It is a gamble. Let's hope you can live as long without as with medicine.
Henk
There are people who smoke cigarettes, don't wear seat belts and drive race cars. Possibly some people are addicted to risk. Certainly they view the risk-reward trade-off differently than the rest of us. I can understand being anti-medicine for religious reasons (people can believe in anything), but not for medical reasons. Regarding vaccination, the risk of vaccination is near zero, the result of vaccination is a near-zero chance of serious illness or death from Covid. There is no bigger no-brainer than choosing vaccination. And yet.....
Perhaps I didn't understand Frank's post correctly. I believed his 'no medicine' lifestyle to be a question of identity.
I drew no conclusion about why he is anti-medicine. I don't understand your point about "identity." If you consider your "self" to be equal to your job (or whatever), what kind of self do you have if you are dead from disease?
Post by HT
Identities used to be quite simple: you were your job, religion and/or political party. These days, there are far more and far more different kinds of identity.
It's as with taste: it's difficult to understand the how and why of an identity if it is not yours.
Henk
<g> I will give it another try. To claim that you are not a slave to the medical establishment and to adapt your lifestyle to that is to identify your "self" with that lifestyle. If you die prematurely as a result, you cannot claim that it is because you have been true to your self (you have not got out of your self what you could have got out), but you have been true to what you identify with: your identity.

Henk
Frank Berger
2021-11-21 18:13:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by HT
Post by HT
Post by HT
Post by frankwm
AFIAC, anyone who doesn't take medicine as a matter of policy******* is a nut.* But I wish you well.
*******considered opinion based on obtaining knowledge.
Well, Sweetie-Pie, as you already Despise Me - I CAN LIVE WITHOUT YOUR 'GOOD WISHES'...
(Typical Mr Burger interjection..)
<g>It is a gamble. Let's hope you can live as long without as with medicine.
Henk
There are people who smoke cigarettes, don't wear seat belts and drive race cars. Possibly some people are addicted to risk. Certainly they view the risk-reward trade-off differently than the rest of us. I can understand being anti-medicine for religious reasons (people can believe in anything), but not for medical reasons. Regarding vaccination, the risk of vaccination is near zero, the result of vaccination is a near-zero chance of serious illness or death from Covid. There is no bigger no-brainer than choosing vaccination. And yet.....
Perhaps I didn't understand Frank's post correctly. I believed his 'no medicine' lifestyle to be a question of identity.
I drew no conclusion about why he is anti-medicine. I don't understand your point about "identity." If you consider your "self" to be equal to your job (or whatever), what kind of self do you have if you are dead from disease?
Post by HT
Identities used to be quite simple: you were your job, religion and/or political party. These days, there are far more and far more different kinds of identity.
It's as with taste: it's difficult to understand the how and why of an identity if it is not yours.
Henk
<g> I will give it another try. To claim that you are not a slave to the medical establishment and to adapt your lifestyle to that is to identify your "self" with that lifestyle. If you die prematurely as a result, you cannot claim that it is because you have been true to your self (you have not got out of your self what you could have got out), but you have been true to what you identify with: your identity.
Henk
\


I reiterate that I consider such people nuts. The very premise choosing to use medicine enslaves yourself to the medical industry is preposterous and requires no further thought.
Steven Bornfeld
2021-11-21 19:20:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by HT
Post by HT
Post by HT
Post by frankwm
AFIAC, anyone who doesn't take medicine as a matter of policy******* is a nut.* But I wish you well.
*******considered opinion based on obtaining knowledge.
Well, Sweetie-Pie, as you already Despise Me - I CAN LIVE WITHOUT YOUR 'GOOD WISHES'...
(Typical Mr Burger interjection..)
<g>It is a gamble. Let's hope you can live as long without as with medicine.
Henk
There are people who smoke cigarettes, don't wear seat belts and drive race cars. Possibly some people are addicted to risk. Certainly they view the risk-reward trade-off differently than the rest of us. I can understand being anti-medicine for religious reasons (people can believe in anything), but not for medical reasons. Regarding vaccination, the risk of vaccination is near zero, the result of vaccination is a near-zero chance of serious illness or death from Covid. There is no bigger no-brainer than choosing vaccination. And yet.....
Perhaps I didn't understand Frank's post correctly. I believed his 'no medicine' lifestyle to be a question of identity.
I drew no conclusion about why he is anti-medicine. I don't understand your point about "identity." If you consider your "self" to be equal to your job (or whatever), what kind of self do you have if you are dead from disease?
Post by HT
Identities used to be quite simple: you were your job, religion and/or political party. These days, there are far more and far more different kinds of identity.
It's as with taste: it's difficult to understand the how and why of an identity if it is not yours.
Henk
<g> I will give it another try. To claim that you are not a slave to the medical establishment and to adapt your lifestyle to that is to identify your "self" with that lifestyle. If you die prematurely as a result, you cannot claim that it is because you have been true to your self (you have not got out of your self what you could have got out), but you have been true to what you identify with: your identity.
Henk
\
I reiterate that I consider such people nuts. The very premise choosing to use medicine enslaves yourself to the medical industry is preposterous and requires no further thought.
It looks as if you have lost some of your sense of nuance in these chaotic times, Frank.
Henk
LOL!
mswd...@gmail.com
2021-11-21 21:20:33 UTC
Reply
Permalink
I reiterate that I consider such people nuts. The very premise choosing to use medicine enslaves yourself to the medical industry is preposterous and requires no further thought.
I don't think you needed any correction, Frank. You are cleaning up well here.

The current discussion about the "risks" of the vaccine strikes me as particularly hysterical. What if I told you that there was a chemical that would kill your flesh if it came in contact with your skin, and that you should inject it in your veins? You'd say I was nuts. But that is what a lot of chemotherapy is, and it saved my life. And the risks of the vaccine are what, again? Nothing that has been documented. Thank goodness that the vax has no measurable side effects- imagine the added difficulty if it did.
Herman
2021-11-21 21:28:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
Thank goodness that the vax has no measurable side effects- imagine the added difficulty if it did.
well, there were side-effects in women under age sixty with the Astra Zeneca vaccin which quickly was taken off the market in the EU, I believe. Guitarist Eric Clapton, formerly known as God, is still mad about it - even though he is not a woman under age sixty.
Steven Bornfeld
2021-11-22 03:59:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
I reiterate that I consider such people nuts. The very premise choosing to use medicine enslaves yourself to the medical industry is preposterous and requires no further thought.
I don't think you needed any correction, Frank. You are cleaning up well here.
The current discussion about the "risks" of the vaccine strikes me as particularly hysterical. What if I told you that there was a chemical that would kill your flesh if it came in contact with your skin, and that you should inject it in your veins? You'd say I was nuts. But that is what a lot of chemotherapy is, and it saved my life. And the risks of the vaccine are what, again? Nothing that has been documented. Thank goodness that the vax has no measurable side effects- imagine the added difficulty if it did.
When people speak like that, they're usually talking about doxyrubicin
(the Red Devil). Yeah, bad stuff. But you surely know that the
landscape of chemo (they don't even like to call it "chemo" anymore) has
changed. Certainly glad it worked for you.
Frank Berger
2021-11-21 21:24:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by HT
Post by HT
Post by HT
Post by frankwm
AFIAC, anyone who doesn't take medicine as a matter of policy******* is a nut.* But I wish you well.
*******considered opinion based on obtaining knowledge.
Well, Sweetie-Pie, as you already Despise Me - I CAN LIVE WITHOUT YOUR 'GOOD WISHES'...
(Typical Mr Burger interjection..)
<g>It is a gamble. Let's hope you can live as long without as with medicine.
Henk
There are people who smoke cigarettes, don't wear seat belts and drive race cars. Possibly some people are addicted to risk. Certainly they view the risk-reward trade-off differently than the rest of us. I can understand being anti-medicine for religious reasons (people can believe in anything), but not for medical reasons. Regarding vaccination, the risk of vaccination is near zero, the result of vaccination is a near-zero chance of serious illness or death from Covid. There is no bigger no-brainer than choosing vaccination. And yet.....
Perhaps I didn't understand Frank's post correctly. I believed his 'no medicine' lifestyle to be a question of identity.
I drew no conclusion about why he is anti-medicine. I don't understand your point about "identity." If you consider your "self" to be equal to your job (or whatever), what kind of self do you have if you are dead from disease?
Post by HT
Identities used to be quite simple: you were your job, religion and/or political party. These days, there are far more and far more different kinds of identity.
It's as with taste: it's difficult to understand the how and why of an identity if it is not yours.
Henk
<g> I will give it another try. To claim that you are not a slave to the medical establishment and to adapt your lifestyle to that is to identify your "self" with that lifestyle. If you die prematurely as a result, you cannot claim that it is because you have been true to your self (you have not got out of your self what you could have got out), but you have been true to what you identify with: your identity.
Henk
\
I reiterate that I consider such people nuts. The very premise choosing to use medicine enslaves yourself to the medical industry is preposterous and requires no further thought.
It looks as if you have lost some of your sense of nuance in these chaotic times, Frank.
Henk
Sometimes there is no nuance. I do have a theory about why (some) people are conspiracy theorists. It's a kind of paranoia, I think. People who have low self-esteem, have accomplished little, no money, unsuccessful love life, whatever. Some people like that end of blaming others for their troubles. Like the Illuminati. That probably doesn't account for all conspiracy theorists, I'm sure. The only thing I am sure of is that they are all nuts.
Herman
2021-11-21 21:31:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Sometimes there is no nuance. I do have a theory about why (some) people are conspiracy theorists. It's a kind of paranoia, I think. People who have low self-esteem, have accomplished little, no money, unsuccessful love life, whatever. Some people like that end of blaming others for their troubles. Like the Illuminati. That probably doesn't account for all conspiracy theorists, I'm sure. The only thing I am sure of is that they are all nuts.
A large factor is the internet, which obviously has become a bigger factor during lockdowns. People will just not take no for an answer anymore, because the word no does not exist on the internet. You just click the incipient no away and go and look for a bubble that says, Yes, Bill Gates is guilty!. And, alas, there are well-funded troll farms feeding people lies they want to hear.
mswd...@gmail.com
2021-11-21 21:37:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Sometimes there is no nuance. I do have a theory about why (some) people are conspiracy theorists. It's a kind of paranoia, I think. People who have low self-esteem, have accomplished little, no money, unsuccessful love life, whatever. Some people like that end of blaming others for their troubles. Like the Illuminati. That probably doesn't account for all conspiracy theorists, I'm sure. The only thing I am sure of is that they are all nuts.
On the side of fairness, I would bet it is possible to find a conspiracy theorist who don't sport all those negative traits. But nuts is nuts.
Frank Berger
2021-11-21 22:39:56 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
Sometimes there is no nuance. I do have a theory about why (some) people are conspiracy theorists. It's a kind of paranoia, I think. People who have low self-esteem, have accomplished little, no money, unsuccessful love life, whatever. Some people like that end of blaming others for their troubles. Like the Illuminati. That probably doesn't account for all conspiracy theorists, I'm sure. The only thing I am sure of is that they are all nuts.
On the side of fairness, I would bet it is possible to find a conspiracy theorist who don't sport all those negative traits. But nuts is nuts.
I didn't mean that a CT had to have all (or more than one) of those bad experiences. Also that other factors could make a CT. I know a fellow who is a CT par excellance. I don't know what makes him that way. He's not too bright, scratches out a middle income living, is divorced and remarried, seems reasonably happy. My theory doesn't really fit him so well. I guess he's just a nut. He believes that the Illuminati control world leaders and events. He believes aliens are among us (He offered to show me Youtube videos that clearly prove it). He believe that airplane jet trails are often "Chem trails" - poisonous stuff designed to dumb us down. I asked him if he thought the Jews controled the Vatican and Federal Reserve (he is Jewish). He said that those theories are not very popular any more. Oh.
Frank Berger
2021-11-21 16:14:21 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by frankwm
AFIAC, anyone who doesn't take medicine as a matter of policy******* is a nut.* But I wish you well.
*******considered opinion based on obtaining knowledge.
Well, Sweetie-Pie, as you already Despise Me - I CAN LIVE WITHOUT YOUR 'GOOD WISHES'...
(Typical Mr Burger interjection..)
I don't despise you. I just think you're a not. I have over 13,000 CDs. I'm a nut too, just a different kind.

And I don't know who Mr. Burger is.
mswd...@gmail.com
2021-11-21 21:14:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by frankwm
AFIAC, anyone who doesn't take medicine as a matter of policy******* is a nut.* But I wish you well.
*******considered opinion based on obtaining knowledge.
Well, Sweetie-Pie, as you already Despise Me - I CAN LIVE WITHOUT YOUR 'GOOD WISHES'...
(Typical Mr Burger interjection..)
I don't despise you. I just think you're a not. I have over 13,000 CDs. I'm a nut too, just a different kind.
And I don't know who Mr. Burger is.
Short for Burgermeister Meisterburger, of course.
Frank Berger
2021-11-21 21:55:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by frankwm
AFIAC, anyone who doesn't take medicine as a matter of policy******* is a nut.* But I wish you well.
*******considered opinion based on obtaining knowledge.
Well, Sweetie-Pie, as you already Despise Me - I CAN LIVE WITHOUT YOUR 'GOOD WISHES'...
(Typical Mr Burger interjection..)
I don't despise you. I just think you're a not. I have over 13,000 CDs. I'm a nut too, just a different kind.
And I don't know who Mr. Burger is.
Short for Burgermeister Meisterburger, of course.
If you look in the phone book (I have) Berger is about as common as Burger. People who assume the spelling is Burger are ignorant. Long after we had gone to a digital phone book where I worked, someone decided to update the out-of-date print version. After 20 years of my name being spelled right, some idiot changed it to Burger.
Steven Bornfeld
2021-11-22 04:01:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Frank Berger
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by frankwm
AFIAC, anyone who doesn't take medicine as a matter of
policy******* is a nut.* But I wish you well.
*******considered opinion based on obtaining knowledge.
Well, Sweetie-Pie, as you already Despise Me - I CAN LIVE WITHOUT
YOUR 'GOOD WISHES'...
(Typical Mr Burger interjection..)
I don't despise you. I just think you're a not. I have over 13,000
CDs. I'm a nut too, just a different kind.
And I don't know who Mr. Burger is.
Short for Burgermeister Meisterburger, of course.
If you look in the phone book (I have) Berger is about as common as
Burger.  People who assume the spelling is Burger are ignorant.  Long
after we had gone to a digital phone book where I worked, someone
decided to update the out-of-date print version.  After 20 years of my
name being spelled right, some idiot changed it to Burger.
After all this time, my daughter tells me how annoyed she is that people
insist upon putting an "i" after the f in my name.
Frank Berger
2021-11-22 14:58:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by frankwm
AFIAC, anyone who doesn't take medicine as a matter of policy******* is a nut.* But I wish you well.
*******considered opinion based on obtaining knowledge.
Well, Sweetie-Pie, as you already Despise Me - I CAN LIVE WITHOUT YOUR 'GOOD WISHES'...
(Typical Mr Burger interjection..)
I don't despise you. I just think you're a not. I have over 13,000 CDs. I'm a nut too, just a different kind.
And I don't know who Mr. Burger is.
Short for Burgermeister Meisterburger, of course.
If you look in the phone book (I have) Berger is about as common as Burger.  People who assume the spelling is Burger are ignorant.  Long after we had gone to a digital phone book where I worked, someone decided to update the out-of-date print version.  After 20 years of my name being spelled right, some idiot changed it to Burger.
After all this time, my daughter tells me how annoyed she is that people insist upon putting an "i" after the f in my name.
I've always been fascinated with names. Berger is French for "shepherd", Burger is German for "city dweller." Almost opposites. My family name was changed to Berger in the 1930s by great uncles who thought, I guess, that Berger was more American sounding than Biegun, a very common Russian/Polish name meaning "runner." I don't know if my ancestors were athletes or draft dodgers.

I looked up Bornfeld and found little. I guess your ancestor were born in fields.
Steven Bornfeld
2021-11-21 19:04:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by frankwm
Post by Chris J.
Anti-vaxxers are irrational, ignorant, anti-science, and very stupid.
Perhaps when I'm in a more gentle mood I could call these destructive
morons pitiable victims of bad education or gullible "social" media
addicts.
......................................
Bloody Hell!
I'd never take Covid injections (peddled me mid-Feb) with their >already known< heart/blood-clot issues after having/recovering from a truly massive Stroke.
Lifelong never been on Any 'medication' (nor taken the slightest 'precaution' -face-rags, et al, these near 2 years) so obviously have a different approach to those pre-disposed to accept the relentless indoctrination.
Presumably they believe "Pfizer macht frei": but the various injections will ultimately (there being no end-point for 'boosters') damage the immune system - making them more at risk - and more Big Pharma Dependant.
Best of luck!!
You may think comparing vaccines to the Holocaust is clever; it is not.
But it is totally in line with what the extreme right-wing is
spouting--congratulations!
HJ
2021-11-21 19:18:12 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Steven Bornfeld
You may think comparing vaccines to the Holocaust is clever; it is not.
..............

More typical RMCR BS - so Typical over the years.

Perhaps you see the comment immediately below (obviously typed before mine appeared)..

"After I had my second vaccination, the nurse said, "Now you are free!"

Idiot comments: this place deserves to fold.
HJ
2021-11-21 19:28:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Stick to posting about Classical Music: this lot are getting Desperate
HJ
2021-11-21 19:30:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sunday, 21 November 2021 at 19:27:32 UTC, ***@xs4all.nl wrote:
I wasn't referring TO YOU! - just the baldy guy with a Holocaust Complex.
HT
2021-11-21 19:37:57 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by HJ
I wasn't referring TO YOU! - just the baldy guy with a Holocaust Complex.
<g> Okay!

Henk
HJ
2021-11-21 19:32:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sunday, 21 November 2021 at 19:27:32 UTC, hvt...xs4all.nl wrote:
I wasn't referring TO YOU - just to the baldy guy with the Holocaust Complex
Todd M. McComb
2021-11-21 20:59:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Anti-Vax wasn't a hype yet.
Coincidentally (I suppose?), riding public transit through affluent
Marin County (just north of San Fransciso), I started seeing posters
addressing this issue 10 years ago: Seemingly well off white couples
were portrayed with messages like "I'm choosing vaccination for my
kids!" in an ad campaign from the health department. I found this
odd and inquired. At that time, the county said that it had already
become an issue (obviously, I guess) for parents to decline
vaccinations there. I've consequently been through a variety of
rehashes of this issue over several years.
Herman
2021-11-21 21:11:32 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Todd M. McComb
Anti-Vax wasn't a hype yet.
Coincidentally (I suppose?), riding public transit through affluent
Marin County (just north of San Fransciso), I started seeing posters
addressing this issue 10 years ago: Seemingly well off white couples
were portrayed with messages like "I'm choosing vaccination for my
kids!" in an ad campaign from the health department. I found this
odd and inquired. At that time, the county said that it had already
become an issue (obviously, I guess) for parents to decline
vaccinations there. I've consequently been through a variety of
rehashes of this issue over several years.
Yes, this is a new development, in Western Europe too. The apparent contradiction is that well-educated, relatively affluent, health-obsessed (and of course predominantly white) people choose not to take the precaution of vaccinating.
The thing is, as one listens to these people talking, they consider themselves to be in such superior health they don't need vaccination. They eat better food (they think), they do yoga or other forms of mind-body exercise; these are the people who think they have some inherently superior "natural immunity", again, a concept that doesn't really exist if you're talking about a 'novel virus'. They talk about their organic food being their medicine.
Maybe I'm overly sensitive about these things, but I keep hearing a lot of shades of Uebermensch in this chatter. I'm very uncomfortable looking at the interminable youtube videos these people (mostly women) post talking about trusting their instincts / gut feelings and "staying close to themselves" and seeing these women revel in their blonde haleness.
Frank Berger
2021-11-21 21:39:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Herman
Post by Todd M. McComb
Anti-Vax wasn't a hype yet.
Coincidentally (I suppose?), riding public transit through affluent
Marin County (just north of San Fransciso), I started seeing posters
addressing this issue 10 years ago: Seemingly well off white couples
were portrayed with messages like "I'm choosing vaccination for my
kids!" in an ad campaign from the health department. I found this
odd and inquired. At that time, the county said that it had already
become an issue (obviously, I guess) for parents to decline
vaccinations there. I've consequently been through a variety of
rehashes of this issue over several years.
Yes, this is a new development, in Western Europe too. The apparent contradiction is that well-educated, relatively affluent, health-obsessed (and of course predominantly white) people choose not to take the precaution of vaccinating.
The thing is, as one listens to these people talking, they consider themselves to be in such superior health they don't need vaccination. They eat better food (they think), they do yoga or other forms of mind-body exercise; these are the people who think they have some inherently superior "natural immunity", again, a concept that doesn't really exist if you're talking about a 'novel virus'. They talk about their organic food being their medicine.
Maybe I'm overly sensitive about these things, but I keep hearing a lot of shades of Uebermensch in this chatter. I'm very uncomfortable looking at the interminable youtube videos these people (mostly women) post talking about trusting their instincts / gut feelings and "staying close to themselves" and seeing these women revel in their blonde haleness.
There are all kinds of nuts. This may simply be a free-rider problem. If you think everyone else is vaccinated, there is no pont in you being vaccinated, thus avoiding whatever risk you (the nut) think there is from being vaccinated.
Steven Bornfeld
2021-11-21 22:11:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Todd M. McComb
Anti-Vax wasn't a hype yet.
Coincidentally (I suppose?), riding public transit through affluent
Marin County (just north of San Fransciso), I started seeing posters
addressing this issue 10 years ago: Seemingly well off white couples
were portrayed with messages like "I'm choosing vaccination for my
kids!" in an ad campaign from the health department. I found this
odd and inquired. At that time, the county said that it had already
become an issue (obviously, I guess) for parents to decline
vaccinations there. I've consequently been through a variety of
rehashes of this issue over several years.
It re-emerges periodically, but never goes away. And it stretches back
to Jenner.
Frank Berger
2021-11-21 21:29:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by frankwm
Post by Steven Bornfeld
You may think comparing vaccines to the Holocaust is clever; it is not.
..............
More typical RMCR BS - so Typical over the years.
Perhaps you see the comment immediately below (obviously typed before mine appeared)..
"After I had my second vaccination, the nurse said, "Now you are free!"
Idiot comments: this place deserves to fold.
I don't believe you're that stupid.
Why not? Do you have evidence to the contrary?
mswd...@gmail.com
2021-11-21 21:38:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
I don't believe you're that stupid.
Why not? Do you have evidence to the contrary?
Exactly- I found this far too generous.
HJ
2021-11-21 21:56:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
Exactly- I found this far too generous.
.............Maybe you guys should simply find a suitable replacement so you can re-enact all the 'jews'n'nazis' posts from years gone by: you are only really content when being abusive.

Really sad sickos.. (IMO) So typical of Americans
Steven Bornfeld
2021-11-21 22:09:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by HJ
Post by ***@gmail.com
Exactly- I found this far too generous.
.............Maybe you guys should simply find a suitable replacement so you can re-enact all the 'jews'n'nazis' posts from years gone by: you are only really content when being abusive.
Really sad sickos.. (IMO) So typical of Americans
Right. Then explain "Pfizer macht frei" if not a reference to Auschwitz.
Steven Bornfeld
2021-11-21 22:06:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by frankwm
Post by Steven Bornfeld
You may think comparing vaccines to the Holocaust is clever; it is not.
..............
More typical RMCR BS - so Typical over the years.
Perhaps you see the comment immediately below (obviously typed before mine appeared)..
"After I had my second vaccination, the nurse said, "Now you are free!"
Idiot comments: this place deserves to fold.
I don't believe you're that stupid.
Why not?  Do you have evidence to the contrary?
No, but frankly I don't think stupidity is the problem here.
Frank Berger
2021-11-21 22:51:31 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Steven Bornfeld
Post by frankwm
Post by Steven Bornfeld
You may think comparing vaccines to the Holocaust is clever; it is not.
..............
More typical RMCR BS - so Typical over the years.
Perhaps you see the comment immediately below (obviously typed before mine appeared)..
"After I had my second vaccination, the nurse said, "Now you are free!"
Idiot comments: this place deserves to fold.
I don't believe you're that stupid.
Why not?  Do you have evidence to the contrary?
No, but frankly I don't think stupidity is the problem here.
Stupid people are more likely to be ignorant.
Steven Bornfeld
2021-11-22 04:00:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Frank Berger
Post by Steven Bornfeld
Post by frankwm
Post by Steven Bornfeld
You may think comparing vaccines to the Holocaust is clever; it is not.
..............
More typical RMCR BS - so Typical over the years.
Perhaps you see the comment immediately below (obviously typed
before mine appeared)..
"After I had my second vaccination, the nurse said, "Now you are free!"
Idiot comments: this place deserves to fold.
I don't believe you're that stupid.
Why not?  Do you have evidence to the contrary?
No, but frankly I don't think stupidity is the problem here.
Stupid people are more likely to be ignorant.
I'm sure you're right.
Frank Berger
2021-11-21 21:31:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by frankwm
Post by Steven Bornfeld
You may think comparing vaccines to the Holocaust is clever; it is not.
..............
More typical RMCR BS - so Typical over the years.
Perhaps you see the comment immediately below (obviously typed before mine appeared)..
"After I had my second vaccination, the nurse said, "Now you are free!"
Idiot comments: this place deserves to fold.
It wasn't idiotic at that time. Anti-Vax wasn't a hype yet.
Henk
Not sure what he thinks the problem was with the statement, "Now you are free."
She clearly meant he was free of the fear or likelihood of getting seriously ill. This was an exaggeration. Big deal.
Steven Bornfeld
2021-11-21 22:12:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by frankwm
Post by Steven Bornfeld
You may think comparing vaccines to the Holocaust is clever; it is not.
..............
More typical RMCR BS - so Typical over the years.
Only a deranged narcissist a$%^&* could believe that the inconvenience, discomfort and risk associated with getting a COVID shot resembled the Holocaust.
I've in fact frequently heard just that comparison.
Todd M. McComb
2021-11-21 23:35:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Among our friends are anti-vaxxers ("well-to-do white couples"
<g>) with a firm belief in the beneficial nature of all things
"natural".
Yes, Marin is very "natural." Many former 60s hippies-turned-rich
there....
They mean well and want nothing to do with that growing group of
anti-vaxxers who demonstrate, make our cities unsafe and overburden
health services in the name of their freedom.
Then they are kidding themselves.
mswd...@gmail.com
2021-11-22 02:48:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Among our friends are anti-vaxxers ("well-to-do white couples" <g>) with a firm belief in the beneficial nature of all things "natural". We have known each other for decades. They feel guilty, not because they are not vaccinated, but because they cannot stop others from doing so.
They mean well and want nothing to do with that growing group of anti-vaxxers who demonstrate, make our cities unsafe and overburden health services in the name of their freedom.
Henk
In my personal experience, people's idea "natural" often doesn't bear much scrutiny. It's a framework for following a set of habits, and occasionally not much more.
JohnGavin
2021-11-21 14:19:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Andy Evans
Just throwing this out there for all your opinions. Anti-vax is a worldwide protest movement right now. It goes into some fundamental questions about the individual versus the common good. Where do you stand on this?
After I had my second vaccination, the nurse said, "Now you are free!" Anti-vaxxers deny me that freedom, in the name of their freedom. As long as they only restrict my movements, it is not really a problem.
It does become a problem when their freedom is life-threatening to someone else. That is what is happening now.
I cannot (or don't want to) understand why Dutch politicians cannot agree on saving lives under these circumstances.
Henk
This pandemic could be taken as a wake up call to really evaluate one’s health. At least in America, the average diet is highly deficient in vitamins and enzymes. If a healthy body has to deal with a virus like Covid, it will create its own antibodies which will be markedly superior to anything gotten through a vaccination. There is too much obesity along with compromised immune systems in the general population. Dr. Norman Walker who was an early advocate of a diet high in Raw Vegetables and fruits grown in organically fertilized soil and who lived to be 100 years old, Disease free, opposed vaccinations On the grounds that nature filters everything (Through the liver kidneys etc.) many times over before it enters into the bloodstream. By bypassing these filters with a needle one may be taking a risk.

People may not realize that at least in the past, vaccine serum‘s, like any other liquid had to be preserved, particularly when The serum bottles were of a multi dose size. Does anyone ever inquire whether the dosage contains A preservative that very well might be toxic?

Personally, I’ve received both vaccines plus the booster, after taking everything into consideration, so I am not a blanket anti-VAXer. I would also point out to anti-VAXers that in the country‘s history many vaccines were requirements for school attendance in the past. Smallpox and polio come to mind as well as others.

Just pointing out that both sides have some valid concerns. I also would say that freedom implies freedom of all people and not just once own selfish concerns so my own view liars more in favor of the vaccines, While understanding the concerns of others.
JohnGavin
2021-11-21 14:25:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Andy Evans
Just throwing this out there for all your opinions. Anti-vax is a worldwide protest movement right now. It goes into some fundamental questions about the individual versus the common good. Where do you stand on this?
After I had my second vaccination, the nurse said, "Now you are free!" Anti-vaxxers deny me that freedom, in the name of their freedom. As long as they only restrict my movements, it is not really a problem.
It does become a problem when their freedom is life-threatening to someone else. That is what is happening now.
I cannot (or don't want to) understand why Dutch politicians cannot agree on saving lives under these circumstances.
Henk
This pandemic could be taken as a wake up call to really evaluate one’s health. At least in America, the average diet is highly deficient in vitamins and enzymes. If a healthy body has to deal with a virus like Covid, it will create its own antibodies which will be markedly superior to anything gotten through a vaccination. There is too much obesity along with compromised immune systems in the general population. Dr. Norman Walker who was an early advocate of a diet high in Raw Vegetables and fruits grown in organically fertilized soil and who lived to be 100 years old, Disease free, opposed vaccinations On the grounds that nature filters everything (Through the liver kidneys etc.) many times over before it enters into the bloodstream. By bypassing these filters with a needle one may be taking a risk.
People may not realize that at least in the past, vaccine serum‘s, like any other liquid had to be preserved, particularly when The serum bottles were of a multi dose size. Does anyone ever inquire whether the dosage contains A preservative that very well might be toxic?
Personally, I’ve received both vaccines plus the booster, after taking everything into consideration, so I am not a blanket anti-VAXer. I would also point out to anti-VAXers that in the country‘s history many vaccines were requirements for school attendance in the past. Smallpox and polio come to mind as well as others.
Just pointing out that both sides have some valid concerns. I also would say that freedom implies freedom of all people and not just once own selfish concerns so my own view liars more in favor of the vaccines, While understanding the concerns of others.
Apologies for random capitalizations. Laziness abetted by voice recognition.
Frank Berger
2021-11-21 14:27:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Andy Evans
Just throwing this out there for all your opinions. Anti-vax is a worldwide protest movement right now. It goes into some fundamental questions about the individual versus the common good. Where do you stand on this?
It's not so simple as pro and anti-vax. Many people have bought into the idea that this particular vaccine is dangerous because of its new technology and/or because it was "rushed" into production. Personally I consider this conspiracy theory mumbo jumbo, but many of those not vaccinated for Covod ARE vaccinated for the usual other stuff.

There is, as you say, the question of individual liberty as well. Just because the vaccine is safe and effective and in the public interest doesn't mean it should be forced on people. You can lower the number of automobile deaths by lowering interstate highway speed limits to 35 MPH, but no one favors that. The cost is not worth the saved lives (proving that from society's point of view, life is not priceless).

The media rarely distinguishes these ideas sufficiently. Another point of confusion is private vs. government mandated vaccination. The right wing talk show hosts are aghast that private companies are conditioning employment on vaccination, saying it is a violation of employee rights. This is ridiculous, of course. Libertarians would never take that position, not sure why Conservatives seem to. Private firms condition employment on all sorts of things, most notably clean drug tests. I have not seen explanations from the Texas and Florida governors who are trying to ban private mandated vaccination in their states. If this issue doesn't clarify the difference between Libertarians and Conservatives, nothing will.

The Federal government's role in this will be decided in the courts. It seems to me the basic view is that the President has executive power over Federal government employees. Whether he can withhold Federal aid from private companies who don't conform to his executive orders is a legal question outside of my pay grade.
mswd...@gmail.com
2021-11-21 21:12:29 UTC
Reply
Permalink
There is, as you say, the question of individual liberty as well. Just because the vaccine is safe and effective and in the public interest doesn't mean it should be forced on people. You can lower the number of automobile deaths by lowering interstate highway speed limits to 35 MPH, but no one favors that. The cost is not worth the saved lives (proving that from society's point of view, life is not priceless).
Seat belts. Did liberty evaporate when states made seat belts law? No. Where are the protests? Where are the people reminding me that I became a slave under a socialist state because we have to wear seatbelts? There are none, because you get used to it, and it doesn't matter after that. And the ridiculous thing is that the inconvenience of a shot is arguably far less than that of wearing seatbelts, but as a benefit, you can save even more than one life.
The media rarely distinguishes these ideas sufficiently.
There are very few real ideas that the popular media does, are there?

The general debate right now is basically between the government's ability to mandate a medical procedure and those who insist on the right to be stupid and selfish. Admittedly, we have a strong tradition of the latter.
Frank Berger
2021-11-21 21:52:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
There is, as you say, the question of individual liberty as well. Just because the vaccine is safe and effective and in the public interest doesn't mean it should be forced on people. You can lower the number of automobile deaths by lowering interstate highway speed limits to 35 MPH, but no one favors that. The cost is not worth the saved lives (proving that from society's point of view, life is not priceless).
Seat belts. Did liberty evaporate when states made seat belts law? No. Where are the protests? Where are the people reminding me that I became a slave under a socialist state because we have to wear seatbelts? There are none, because you get used to it, and it doesn't matter after that. And the ridiculous thing is that the inconvenience of a shot is arguably far less than that of wearing seatbelts, but as a benefit, you can save even more than one life.
Unless you are nut and think the vaccine is risky, unproven, an alien weapon, whatever.
Aside: the fact that you get used to a loss of liberty doesn't mean there isn't a loss of liberty. And there are still some people who don't wear seat belts.
Post by ***@gmail.com
The media rarely distinguishes these ideas sufficiently.
There are very few real ideas that the popular media does, are there?
The general debate right now is basically between the government's ability to mandate a medical procedure and those who insist on the right to be stupid and selfish. Admittedly, we have a strong tradition of the latter.
Suppose there was no government. All institutions are private. Every institution can set whatever rules it wants for people to be employed, attend, or whatever. Schools can require all students to be vaccinated in order to attend. In all cases individuals can choose not to be vaccinated. They just have to find a school that doesn't require it (perhaps banding together with others who feel the same way to start their own schools). You don't want to work for a company that requires vaccination? Work somewhere else. It's your CHOICE. Choice equals liberty. Now say the government comes along and requires seat belts, vaccination, charity (welfare). This represents a loss of liberty to some people. This doesn't mean it's a bid thing, necessarily. If it aligns with your politics it's a good thing. If not it's a bad thing. You are simply saying that the loss of liberty experienced by some doesn't matter to you.
Steven Bornfeld
2021-11-21 22:05:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Frank Berger
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Frank Berger
There is, as you say, the question of individual liberty as well.
Just because the vaccine is safe and effective and in the public
interest doesn't mean it should be forced on people. You can lower
the number of automobile deaths by lowering interstate highway speed
limits to 35 MPH, but no one favors that. The cost is not worth the
saved lives (proving that from society's point of view, life is not
priceless).
Seat belts. Did liberty evaporate when states made seat belts law? No.
Where are the protests? Where are the people reminding me that I
became a slave under a socialist state because we have to wear
seatbelts? There are none, because you get used to it, and it doesn't
matter after that. And the ridiculous thing is that the inconvenience
of a shot is arguably far less than that of wearing seatbelts, but as
a benefit, you can save even more than one life.
Unless you are nut and think the vaccine is risky, unproven, an alien weapon, whatever.
Aside:  the fact that you get used to a loss of liberty doesn't mean
there isn't a loss of liberty.  And there are still some people who
don't wear seat belts.
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Frank Berger
The media rarely distinguishes these ideas sufficiently.
There are very few real ideas that the popular media does, are there?
The general debate right now is basically between the government's
ability to mandate a medical procedure and those who insist on the
right to be stupid and selfish. Admittedly, we have a strong tradition
of the latter.
Suppose there was no government.  All institutions are private.  Every
institution can set whatever rules it wants for people to be employed,
attend, or whatever.  Schools can require all students to be vaccinated
in order to attend.  In all cases individuals can choose not to be
vaccinated.  They just have to find a school that doesn't require it
(perhaps banding together with others who feel the same way to start
their own schools).  You don't want to work for a company that requires
vaccination?  Work somewhere else.  It's your CHOICE.  Choice equals
liberty.   Now say the government comes along and requires seat belts,
vaccination, charity (welfare).  This represents a loss of liberty to
some people.  This doesn't mean it's a bid thing, necessarily.  If it
aligns with your politics it's a good thing.  If not it's a bad thing.
You are simply saying that the loss of liberty experienced by some
doesn't matter to you.
...just as the associated illness, disability and death secondary to not
following the best scientific evidence to prevent them apparently
doesn't matter to many.
Even so, I can understand the mistrust of vaccines far more easily than
I can the rage engendered by masks--totally incomprehensible to me.
Frank Berger
2021-11-21 22:50:50 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Frank Berger
Post by ***@gmail.com
There is, as you say, the question of individual liberty as well. Just because the vaccine is safe and effective and in the public interest doesn't mean it should be forced on people. You can lower the number of automobile deaths by lowering interstate highway speed limits to 35 MPH, but no one favors that. The cost is not worth the saved lives (proving that from society's point of view, life is not priceless).
Seat belts. Did liberty evaporate when states made seat belts law? No. Where are the protests? Where are the people reminding me that I became a slave under a socialist state because we have to wear seatbelts? There are none, because you get used to it, and it doesn't matter after that. And the ridiculous thing is that the inconvenience of a shot is arguably far less than that of wearing seatbelts, but as a benefit, you can save even more than one life.
Unless you are nut and think the vaccine is risky, unproven, an alien weapon, whatever.
Aside:  the fact that you get used to a loss of liberty doesn't mean there isn't a loss of liberty.  And there are still some people who don't wear seat belts.
Post by ***@gmail.com
The media rarely distinguishes these ideas sufficiently.
There are very few real ideas that the popular media does, are there?
The general debate right now is basically between the government's ability to mandate a medical procedure and those who insist on the right to be stupid and selfish. Admittedly, we have a strong tradition of the latter.
Suppose there was no government.  All institutions are private.  Every institution can set whatever rules it wants for people to be employed, attend, or whatever.  Schools can require all students to be vaccinated in order to attend.  In all cases individuals can choose not to be vaccinated.  They just have to find a school that doesn't require it (perhaps banding together with others who feel the same way to start their own schools).  You don't want to work for a company that requires vaccination?  Work somewhere else.  It's your CHOICE.  Choice equals liberty.   Now say the government comes along and requires seat belts, vaccination, charity (welfare).  This represents a loss of liberty to some people.  This doesn't mean it's a bid thing, necessarily.  If it aligns with your politics it's a good thing.  If not it's a bad thing. You are simply saying that the loss of liberty experienced by some doesn't matter to you.
...just as the associated illness, disability and death secondary to not following the best scientific evidence to prevent them apparently doesn't matter to many.
It's not that it doesn't matter. There is a trade-off between one's personal liberty (which many value) and other people's welfare. Are you in favor of reducing the speed limit on the nation's highways in order to save lives? How low? 35? Didn't think so.
Even so, I can understand the mistrust of vaccines far more easily than I can the rage engendered by masks--totally incomprehensible to me.
I feel exactly the opposite. When the scientists tell me the vaccine is safe, I believe them. The mask makes it hard for me to breathe and steams up my glasses, and it's effectiveness from a societal point of view is dubious. Making kids in school wear masks? When they constantly take them down or off, put their hands in their mouth every two seconds. Ridiculous.
Steven Bornfeld
2021-11-22 04:08:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Steven Bornfeld
Post by Frank Berger
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Frank Berger
There is, as you say, the question of individual liberty as well.
Just because the vaccine is safe and effective and in the public
interest doesn't mean it should be forced on people. You can lower
the number of automobile deaths by lowering interstate highway
speed limits to 35 MPH, but no one favors that. The cost is not
worth the saved lives (proving that from society's point of view,
life is not priceless).
Seat belts. Did liberty evaporate when states made seat belts law?
No. Where are the protests? Where are the people reminding me that I
became a slave under a socialist state because we have to wear
seatbelts? There are none, because you get used to it, and it
doesn't matter after that. And the ridiculous thing is that the
inconvenience of a shot is arguably far less than that of wearing
seatbelts, but as a benefit, you can save even more than one life.
Unless you are nut and think the vaccine is risky, unproven, an alien weapon, whatever.
Aside:  the fact that you get used to a loss of liberty doesn't mean
there isn't a loss of liberty.  And there are still some people who
don't wear seat belts.
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Frank Berger
The media rarely distinguishes these ideas sufficiently.
There are very few real ideas that the popular media does, are there?
The general debate right now is basically between the government's
ability to mandate a medical procedure and those who insist on the
right to be stupid and selfish. Admittedly, we have a strong
tradition of the latter.
Suppose there was no government.  All institutions are private.
Every institution can set whatever rules it wants for people to be
employed, attend, or whatever.  Schools can require all students to
be vaccinated in order to attend.  In all cases individuals can
choose not to be vaccinated.  They just have to find a school that
doesn't require it (perhaps banding together with others who feel the
same way to start their own schools).  You don't want to work for a
company that requires vaccination?  Work somewhere else.  It's your
CHOICE.  Choice equals liberty.   Now say the government comes along
and requires seat belts, vaccination, charity (welfare).  This
represents a loss of liberty to some people.  This doesn't mean it's
a bid thing, necessarily.  If it aligns with your politics it's a
good thing.  If not it's a bad thing. You are simply saying that the
loss of liberty experienced by some doesn't matter to you.
...just as the associated illness, disability and death secondary to
not following the best scientific evidence to prevent them apparently
doesn't matter to many.
It's not that it doesn't matter.  There is a trade-off between one's
personal liberty (which many value) and other people's welfare.  Are you
in favor of reducing the speed limit on the nation's highways in order
to save lives?  How low?  35? Didn't think so.
There are clearly circumstances in which lowering the speed limit makes
sense. There are other circumstances in which it does not. On Ocean
Parkway in Brooklyn, I think the 25 mph speed limit is stupid; a better
case could easily be made for lowering the speed limit on the Hutchinson
River Parkway. Actually looking at accident statistics might inform
decisions like this.
Post by Steven Bornfeld
Even so, I can understand the mistrust of vaccines far more easily
than I can the rage engendered by masks--totally incomprehensible to me.
I feel exactly the opposite.  When the scientists tell me the vaccine is
safe, I believe them.  The mask makes it hard for me to breathe and
steams up my glasses, and it's effectiveness from a societal point of
view is dubious.  Making kids in school wear masks?  When they
constantly take them down or off, put their hands in their mouth every
two seconds.  Ridiculous.
Perhaps. Given that I wore a mask at work 8 hours a day for 44 years, I
didn't invest it in a whole lot of emotional energy. In NYC schools,
some of the case statistics seem to relate more closely to whether there
is active ventilation, rather than relying only on open windows.
Frank Berger
2021-11-22 15:01:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Frank Berger
Post by ***@gmail.com
There is, as you say, the question of individual liberty as well. Just because the vaccine is safe and effective and in the public interest doesn't mean it should be forced on people. You can lower the number of automobile deaths by lowering interstate highway speed limits to 35 MPH, but no one favors that. The cost is not worth the saved lives (proving that from society's point of view, life is not priceless).
Seat belts. Did liberty evaporate when states made seat belts law? No. Where are the protests? Where are the people reminding me that I became a slave under a socialist state because we have to wear seatbelts? There are none, because you get used to it, and it doesn't matter after that. And the ridiculous thing is that the inconvenience of a shot is arguably far less than that of wearing seatbelts, but as a benefit, you can save even more than one life.
Unless you are nut and think the vaccine is risky, unproven, an alien weapon, whatever.
Aside:  the fact that you get used to a loss of liberty doesn't mean there isn't a loss of liberty.  And there are still some people who don't wear seat belts.
Post by ***@gmail.com
The media rarely distinguishes these ideas sufficiently.
There are very few real ideas that the popular media does, are there?
The general debate right now is basically between the government's ability to mandate a medical procedure and those who insist on the right to be stupid and selfish. Admittedly, we have a strong tradition of the latter.
Suppose there was no government.  All institutions are private. Every institution can set whatever rules it wants for people to be employed, attend, or whatever.  Schools can require all students to be vaccinated in order to attend.  In all cases individuals can choose not to be vaccinated.  They just have to find a school that doesn't require it (perhaps banding together with others who feel the same way to start their own schools).  You don't want to work for a company that requires vaccination?  Work somewhere else.  It's your CHOICE.  Choice equals liberty.   Now say the government comes along and requires seat belts, vaccination, charity (welfare).  This represents a loss of liberty to some people.  This doesn't mean it's a bid thing, necessarily.  If it aligns with your politics it's a good thing.  If not it's a bad thing. You are simply saying that the loss of liberty experienced by some doesn't matter to you.
...just as the associated illness, disability and death secondary to not following the best scientific evidence to prevent them apparently doesn't matter to many.
It's not that it doesn't matter.  There is a trade-off between one's personal liberty (which many value) and other people's welfare.  Are you in favor of reducing the speed limit on the nation's highways in order to save lives?  How low?  35? Didn't think so.
There are clearly circumstances in which lowering the speed limit makes sense.  There are other circumstances in which it does not.  On Ocean Parkway in Brooklyn, I think the 25 mph speed limit is stupid; a better case could easily be made for lowering the speed limit on the Hutchinson River Parkway.  Actually looking at accident statistics might inform decisions like this.
Avoiding my point?
Even so, I can understand the mistrust of vaccines far more easily than I can the rage engendered by masks--totally incomprehensible to me.
I feel exactly the opposite.  When the scientists tell me the vaccine is safe, I believe them.  The mask makes it hard for me to breathe and steams up my glasses, and it's effectiveness from a societal point of view is dubious.  Making kids in school wear masks?  When they constantly take them down or off, put their hands in their mouth every two seconds.  Ridiculous.
Perhaps.  Given that I wore a mask at work 8 hours a day for 44 years, I didn't invest it in a whole lot of emotional energy.  In NYC schools, some of the case statistics seem to relate more closely to whether there is active ventilation, rather than relying only on open windows.
Someone in our synagogue was smart enough to see to it that the windows and emergency exits were open during services for that reason when we started "congregating" again. Not so much anymore.
mswd...@gmail.com
2021-11-22 02:43:01 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Frank Berger
Unless you are nut and think the vaccine is risky, unproven, an alien weapon, whatever.
Aside: the fact that you get used to a loss of liberty doesn't mean there isn't a loss of liberty. And there are still some people who don't wear seat belts.
Yes, you are absolutely correct, but I'd personally prefer a rational discussion about what kinds of liberty loss matters and strop treating the topic like it is the body of Christ. The problem is fetishizing "liberty" and treating it like a domino theory where any compromise at all puts us all in labor camps.

And that was your end-of-weekend metaphor free-for-all.
Post by Frank Berger
Suppose there was no government. All institutions are private. Every institution can set whatever rules it wants for people to be employed, attend, or whatever. Schools can require all students to be vaccinated in order to attend. In all cases individuals can choose not to be vaccinated. They just have to find a school that doesn't require it (perhaps banding together with others who feel the same way to start their own schools). You don't want to work for a company that requires vaccination? Work somewhere else. It's your CHOICE. Choice equals liberty. Now say the government comes along and requires seat belts, vaccination, charity (welfare). This represents a loss of liberty to some people. This doesn't mean it's a bid thing, necessarily. If it aligns with your politics it's a good thing. If not it's a bad thing. You are simply saying that the loss of liberty experienced by some doesn't matter to you.
It's not just about what I or someone else personally prefer- the objective effect of these choices on others is also relevant, even if some would insist that the choice is entirely private.
Frank Berger
2021-11-22 03:27:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Frank Berger
Unless you are nut and think the vaccine is risky, unproven, an alien weapon, whatever.
Aside: the fact that you get used to a loss of liberty doesn't mean there isn't a loss of liberty. And there are still some people who don't wear seat belts.
Yes, you are absolutely correct, but I'd personally prefer a rational discussion about what kinds of liberty loss matters and strop treating the topic like it is the body of Christ. The problem is fetishizing "liberty" and treating it like a domino theory where any compromise at all puts us all in labor camps.
And that was your end-of-weekend metaphor free-for-all.
Post by Frank Berger
Suppose there was no government. All institutions are private. Every institution can set whatever rules it wants for people to be employed, attend, or whatever. Schools can require all students to be vaccinated in order to attend. In all cases individuals can choose not to be vaccinated. They just have to find a school that doesn't require it (perhaps banding together with others who feel the same way to start their own schools). You don't want to work for a company that requires vaccination? Work somewhere else. It's your CHOICE. Choice equals liberty. Now say the government comes along and requires seat belts, vaccination, charity (welfare). This represents a loss of liberty to some people. This doesn't mean it's a bid thing, necessarily. If it aligns with your politics it's a good thing. If not it's a bad thing. You are simply saying that the loss of liberty experienced by some doesn't matter to you.
It's not just about what I or someone else personally prefer- the objective effect of these choices on others is also relevant, even if some would insist that the choice is entirely private.
When a public policy makes some people better off and others worse of it is completely about what is preferred. Say you make me wear a mask in public gatherings. It makes me unhappy. I prefer not to wear the mask. But wearing it makes me and everyone else statistically healthier. You have made a choice that my preference is less important.
Paul A
2021-11-22 03:14:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
Seat belts. Did liberty evaporate when states made seat belts law? No. Where are the protests? Where are the people reminding me that I became a slave under a socialist state because we have to wear seatbelts? There are none, because you get used to it, and it doesn't matter after that. And the ridiculous thing is that the inconvenience of a shot is arguably far less than that of wearing seatbelts, but as a benefit, you can save even more than one life.
And yet, there are those who still refuse to wear seat belts for various reasons, mostly, I suppose, because either they don't like being told what to do or because they are too lazy to buckle up... however...

https://www.thezebra.com/resources/research/seat-belt-statistics/

... it is estimated that 47% of auto deaths could have been prevented if only they had worn their belts! That is 14,955 lives wasted!

You can lead a horse to water... but , well, you know the rest, of course...
Frank Berger
2021-11-22 03:34:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Paul A
Post by ***@gmail.com
Seat belts. Did liberty evaporate when states made seat belts law? No. Where are the protests? Where are the people reminding me that I became a slave under a socialist state because we have to wear seatbelts? There are none, because you get used to it, and it doesn't matter after that. And the ridiculous thing is that the inconvenience of a shot is arguably far less than that of wearing seatbelts, but as a benefit, you can save even more than one life.
And yet, there are those who still refuse to wear seat belts for various reasons, mostly, I suppose, because either they don't like being told what to do or because they are too lazy to buckle up... however...
https://www.thezebra.com/resources/research/seat-belt-statistics/
... it is estimated that 47% of auto deaths could have been prevented if only they had worn their belts! That is 14,955 lives wasted!
You can lead a horse to water... but , well, you know the rest, of course...
The horse may prefer something other than water.
Paul A
2021-11-22 04:19:53 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Frank Berger
Post by Paul A
Post by ***@gmail.com
Seat belts. Did liberty evaporate when states made seat belts law? No. Where are the protests? Where are the people reminding me that I became a slave under a socialist state because we have to wear seatbelts? There are none, because you get used to it, and it doesn't matter after that. And the ridiculous thing is that the inconvenience of a shot is arguably far less than that of wearing seatbelts, but as a benefit, you can save even more than one life.
And yet, there are those who still refuse to wear seat belts for various reasons, mostly, I suppose, because either they don't like being told what to do or because they are too lazy to buckle up... however...
https://www.thezebra.com/resources/research/seat-belt-statistics/
... it is estimated that 47% of auto deaths could have been prevented if only they had worn their belts! That is 14,955 lives wasted!
You can lead a horse to water... but , well, you know the rest, of course...
The horse may prefer something other than water.
Indeed, he may... but the water is best for him, in the final analysis...
Frank Berger
2021-11-22 15:02:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Paul A
Post by Frank Berger
Post by Paul A
Post by ***@gmail.com
Seat belts. Did liberty evaporate when states made seat belts law? No. Where are the protests? Where are the people reminding me that I became a slave under a socialist state because we have to wear seatbelts? There are none, because you get used to it, and it doesn't matter after that. And the ridiculous thing is that the inconvenience of a shot is arguably far less than that of wearing seatbelts, but as a benefit, you can save even more than one life.
And yet, there are those who still refuse to wear seat belts for various reasons, mostly, I suppose, because either they don't like being told what to do or because they are too lazy to buckle up... however...
https://www.thezebra.com/resources/research/seat-belt-statistics/
... it is estimated that 47% of auto deaths could have been prevented if only they had worn their belts! That is 14,955 lives wasted!
You can lead a horse to water... but , well, you know the rest, of course...
The horse may prefer something other than water.
Indeed, he may... but the water is best for him, in the final analysis...
Says you.
Mandryka
2021-11-21 14:40:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Andy Evans
Just throwing this out there for all your opinions. Anti-vax is a worldwide protest movement right now. It goes into some fundamental questions about the individual versus the common good. Where do you stand on this?
I think it's being used to breed division. In European countries are talking about introducing lockdowns and vaccine mandates, claiming that their vaccination rate is unsustainably low. The lockdowns will fuel resentment OF those who haven't been vaccinated; the mandates will fuel resentment BY those who haven't been vaccinated.

Here are two questions:

1. Are the lockdown measures and vaccine mandates really necessary? I note in passing that in the UK we have neither and experts are saying that we'll be fine till 2022 -- after that I suppose it depends on the winter flu epidemic.

And if the answer to 1 is no, then the obvious next question is

2. Why do the political classes want to divide society?
raymond....@gmail.com
2021-11-21 23:27:16 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Andy Evans
Just throwing this out there for all your opinions. Anti-vax is a worldwide protest movement right now. It goes into some fundamental questions about the individual versus the common good. Where do you stand on this?
I am pro-vax, as it makes good sense, both individually and in a common good way.

Much of the present unrest emanates from a perceived sense of "being denied a freedom/s". And yet their "freedom" to do as they wish impacts the real freedoms of others, such as contributing to a more dangerous viral background and environment.

I also understand an individual's right to not be vaccinated, provided that they accept the limitations that government decrees as necessary to put into place because of their decision.

As for business, then this is a separate issue, and different countries have different social welfare.

Ray Hall, Taree
Frank Berger
2021-11-22 01:08:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by ***@gmail.com
Post by Andy Evans
Just throwing this out there for all your opinions. Anti-vax is a worldwide protest movement right now. It goes into some fundamental questions about the individual versus the common good. Where do you stand on this?
I am pro-vax, as it makes good sense, both individually and in a common good way.
Much of the present unrest emanates from a perceived sense of "being denied a freedom/s". And yet their "freedom" to do as they wish impacts the real freedoms of others, such as contributing to a more dangerous viral background and environment.
I also understand an individual's right to not be vaccinated, provided that they accept the limitations that government decrees as necessary to put into place because of their decision.
As for business, then this is a separate issue, and different countries have different social welfare.
Ray Hall, Taree
An "economic" solution would be to tax those who refuse to be vaccinated an amount equivalent to the damage the impose on others.
Dan Koren
2021-11-22 02:00:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Frank Berger
An "economic" solution would be to tax those who
refuse to be vaccinated an amount equivalent to
the damage the impose on others.
Putting price tags on the lives of dead people?
There are no "economic solutions" to survical
and ethical problems.

dk
Peter
2021-11-22 02:07:22 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Hey, I wrote about about that! (Markets and Mortality: Economics, Dangerous Work and the Value of Human Life) Never too proud to self-plug.
Post by Dan Koren
Post by Frank Berger
An "economic" solution would be to tax those who
refuse to be vaccinated an amount equivalent to
the damage the impose on others.
Putting price tags on the lives of dead people?
There are no "economic solutions" to survical
and ethical problems.
dk
Frank Berger
2021-11-22 02:39:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dan Koren
Post by Frank Berger
An "economic" solution would be to tax those who
refuse to be vaccinated an amount equivalent to
the damage the impose on others.
Putting price tags on the lives of dead people?
There are no "economic solutions" to survical
and ethical problems.
dk
???
Do you favor the reduction of speed limits on our nation's highways to, say, 35 MPH? A lot of lives will be saved. Merely at the cost of everyone taking longer to get anywhere. Assuming that you do not, you have just agreed that lives are not priceless. That is, the decision of determining the "best" speed limit is an economic one.
Dan Koren
2021-11-22 07:13:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Frank Berger
An "economic" solution would be to tax those who
refuse to be vaccinated an amount equivalent to
the damage the impose on others.
Putting price tags on the lives of dead people?
There are no "economic solutions" to survival
and ethical problems.

dk
Herman
2021-11-22 08:16:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dan Koren
Post by Frank Berger
An "economic" solution would be to tax those who
refuse to be vaccinated an amount equivalent to
the damage the impose on others.
Putting price tags on the lives of dead people?
There are no "economic solutions" to survival
and ethical problems.
dk
Unfortunately we'll just have to take this is yet another write-off on the ever-lowering education budgets of the past two generations. Bills like this are coming due in several areas (huge forest fires come to mind; more potholes than roads etc ad inf).
The only way the gap between the vaccinated and the aggressively non-vaccinated can be bridged is by information and gentleness.
A person getting sick and dying in your family is, alas, information, too.
MELMOTH
2021-11-21 23:42:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Andy Evans
Just throwing this out there for all your opinions. Anti-vax is a worldwide
protest movement right now. It goes into some fundamental questions about the
individual versus the common good. Where do you stand on this?
May I suggest that you go and talk about Covid here:
fr.misc.actualite.covid19
Frank Berger
2021-11-22 02:27:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
I’ve never posted anything to rmcr that wasn’t about music, and not even about that very much (although I write quite a lot in other venues). But this time I’ll make an exception.
1. Getting swept up in a perception/belief bubble is as old as the hills (look at some of the millenarian movements of the Middle Ages), but it seems to be a more widespread phenomenon today. Part of this is due to the way the internet developed, through eyeball monetization which depends on affinity linking. Then a second level, the cynical exploitation of this phenomenon by ruthlessly cynical political interests, kicked in. From this perspective, anti-vax is not much different from, say, QAnon.
2. It’s characteristic of our era that “freedom”, long understood as a social condition, is now defined largely individually.
The word "freedom" has no meaning if not conditioned - freedom to do this, freedom to do that. Hayek wrote about this and stressed the importance of definition. He equated liberty and freedom. The principle of libertarianism is that a person (yes, an individual) should be free to do as he chooses so long as his actions do not negatively impact others (in a non-market way). My buying a loaf of bread denies you that loaf, but there is a market and you could have outbid me, or in a macro sense clearing markets will mean that we can both buy all the bread we choose to at the market price. So that sort of thing is excluded from me harming you. If I pollute your air or transmit to you my germs, those are things I have no right to do under this definition of freedom. Freedom does not mean absence of want. I don't know what you mean by freedom as a social conditions.
There is little conception of what it might mean for a society to be free beyond the individual freedom of its members to separately do whatever they want.
Straw man. See above.


This is extraordinarily wrongheaded. A society that mandates public health measures (not only about Covid but where you can dump your garbage or whether you can heat your urban house with a wood or coal stove) is not for that reason a less free society than one that doesn’t. (For more elaboration, read John Dewey on this topic, e.g. Individualism Old and New.)
3. The claim that mandated vaccines, masking and social distancing constitute the opening wedge of a new totalitarianism is a slippery slope argument. The test of slippery slopeness is whether it shows up in partial measures, such that those exposed to them are further down the slope than those not. So what’s the evidence? Yes, China is very authoritarian about Covid, but they were very authoritarian before the pandemic too. And what about, say, New Zealand? Are they so much further down the road to totalitarian hell than, say, the UK? Is Vermont or Washington State closer to the totalitarian abyss than Texas?
4. The “sovereign body” argument, or perhaps sensibility, is understandable given our zeitgeist but has no scientific support whatsoever. The body is not sovereign nor even entirely separate and contained. A body is a community of organisms, many of which live between bodies (at least at a population level). The coronavirus is just one example. It’s remarkable in particular that New Age types will enthuse about the Universal Oneness one moment and invoke the sovereign body the next.
5. A related New Age or alternative health claim is that right conduct—eating right, thinking right, using one’s body in the right way—controls health. If you do what you’re supposed to you won’t get sick. The corollary, of course, is that if you do get sick it’s your own fault. (This is what Susan Sontag railed against in Illness as Metaphor as she was battling cancer.) In the context of the pandemic, this translates to “I don’t need to get a vaccine because I have natural immunity [due to my virtuous health practices].” It’s true that people can alter the odds of disease and premature death to a considerable extent by their personal choices, but they are also subject to powerful external forces, including pure chance, beyond their control. It’s interesting that this rather simple understanding is so difficult for many to grasp.
6. I worry greatly about the resilience—grit if you will—of modern capitalist societies. Throughout their existence, human communities have faced massive threats that tested their ability to cooperate, overcome difficulties and endure. I imagine the sequence of ice ages must have weeded out quite a few. Plagues, wars and depressions are such tests for more modern humans, and we don’t always fail. I’m discouraged to see dissension and denial ascendent over matters like whether we have the fortitude to wear face masks indoors or forego a night at the pub as a contribution to public health. This does not bode well for the other, even larger challenges on the horizon, especially facing up to the crisis of climate change.
Peter
2021-11-22 02:44:00 UTC
Reply
Permalink
This isn't the place to get into a debate about libertarianism, which apparently includes you as an advocate. I admire Hayek for some of his contributions, but his understanding of liberty was not very well thought-through, to put it mildly. His individuals simple appear; they have little history or conditions of production. Their desires and actions are isolated and interact only through markets. I cited Dewey because I think he (and others) had cogent critiques of these assumptions.

A different entry point, by the way, is the observation that "free" individuals in the Hayekian sense exist only because they are taken care of by others (women mostly) as children, in times of sickness or need, etc. To the extent that one person's freedom requires actions by others that may impinge on *their* freedom, freedom is a social condition. Sorry you can't understand this.
I’ve never posted anything to rmcr that wasn’t about music, and not even about that very much (although I write quite a lot in other venues). But this time I’ll make an exception.
1. Getting swept up in a perception/belief bubble is as old as the hills (look at some of the millenarian movements of the Middle Ages), but it seems to be a more widespread phenomenon today. Part of this is due to the way the internet developed, through eyeball monetization which depends on affinity linking. Then a second level, the cynical exploitation of this phenomenon by ruthlessly cynical political interests, kicked in. From this perspective, anti-vax is not much different from, say, QAnon.
2. It’s characteristic of our era that “freedom”, long understood as a social condition, is now defined largely individually.
The word "freedom" has no meaning if not conditioned - freedom to do this, freedom to do that. Hayek wrote about this and stressed the importance of definition. He equated liberty and freedom. The principle of libertarianism is that a person (yes, an individual) should be free to do as he chooses so long as his actions do not negatively impact others (in a non-market way). My buying a loaf of bread denies you that loaf, but there is a market and you could have outbid me, or in a macro sense clearing markets will mean that we can both buy all the bread we choose to at the market price. So that sort of thing is excluded from me harming you. If I pollute your air or transmit to you my germs, those are things I have no right to do under this definition of freedom. Freedom does not mean absence of want. I don't know what you mean by freedom as a social conditions.
There is little conception of what it might mean for a society to be free beyond the individual freedom of its members to separately do whatever they want.
Straw man. See above.
This is extraordinarily wrongheaded. A society that mandates public health measures (not only about Covid but where you can dump your garbage or whether you can heat your urban house with a wood or coal stove) is not for that reason a less free society than one that doesn’t. (For more elaboration, read John Dewey on this topic, e.g. Individualism Old and New.)
3. The claim that mandated vaccines, masking and social distancing constitute the opening wedge of a new totalitarianism is a slippery slope argument. The test of slippery slopeness is whether it shows up in partial measures, such that those exposed to them are further down the slope than those not. So what’s the evidence? Yes, China is very authoritarian about Covid, but they were very authoritarian before the pandemic too. And what about, say, New Zealand? Are they so much further down the road to totalitarian hell than, say, the UK? Is Vermont or Washington State closer to the totalitarian abyss than Texas?
4. The “sovereign body” argument, or perhaps sensibility, is understandable given our zeitgeist but has no scientific support whatsoever. The body is not sovereign nor even entirely separate and contained. A body is a community of organisms, many of which live between bodies (at least at a population level). The coronavirus is just one example. It’s remarkable in particular that New Age types will enthuse about the Universal Oneness one moment and invoke the sovereign body the next.
5. A related New Age or alternative health claim is that right conduct—eating right, thinking right, using one’s body in the right way—controls health. If you do what you’re supposed to you won’t get sick. The corollary, of course, is that if you do get sick it’s your own fault. (This is what Susan Sontag railed against in Illness as Metaphor as she was battling cancer.) In the context of the pandemic, this translates to “I don’t need to get a vaccine because I have natural immunity [due to my virtuous health practices].” It’s true that people can alter the odds of disease and premature death to a considerable extent by their personal choices, but they are also subject to powerful external forces, including pure chance, beyond their control. It’s interesting that this rather simple understanding is so difficult for many to grasp.
6. I worry greatly about the resilience—grit if you will—of modern capitalist societies. Throughout their existence, human communities have faced massive threats that tested their ability to cooperate, overcome difficulties and endure. I imagine the sequence of ice ages must have weeded out quite a few. Plagues, wars and depressions are such tests for more modern humans, and we don’t always fail. I’m discouraged to see dissension and denial ascendent over matters like whether we have the fortitude to wear face masks indoors or forego a night at the pub as a contribution to public health. This does not bode well for the other, even larger challenges on the horizon, especially facing up to the crisis of climate change.
Frank Berger
2021-11-22 03:30:08 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Peter
This isn't the place to get into a debate about libertarianism, which apparently includes you as an advocate. I admire Hayek for some of his contributions, but his understanding of liberty was not very well thought-through, to put it mildly. His individuals simple appear; they have little history or conditions of production. Their desires and actions are isolated and interact only through markets. I cited Dewey because I think he (and others) had cogent critiques of these assumptions.
A different entry point, by the way, is the observation that "free" individuals in the Hayekian sense exist only because they are taken care of by others (women mostly) as children, in times of sickness or >need, etc. To the extent that one person's freedom requires actions by others that may impinge on *their* freedom, freedom is a social condition. Sorry you can't understand this.
When someone insults me, I stop talking to them.
Herman
2021-11-22 03:44:30 UTC
Reply
Permalink
6. I worry greatly about the resilience—grit if you will—of modern capitalist societies. Throughout their existence, human communities have faced massive threats that tested their ability to cooperate, overcome difficulties and endure. [...] I’m discouraged to see dissension and denial ascendent over matters like whether we have the fortitude to wear face masks indoors or forego a night at the pub as a contribution to public health. This does not bode well for the other, even larger challenges on the horizon, especially facing up to the crisis of climate change.
Yes, I feel the same way.
Frank Berger
2021-11-22 14:35:42 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Herman
6. I worry greatly about the resilience—grit if you will—of modern capitalist societies. Throughout their existence, human communities have faced massive threats that tested their ability to cooperate, overcome difficulties and endure. [...] I’m discouraged to see dissension and denial ascendent over matters like whether we have the fortitude to wear face masks indoors or forego a night at the pub as a contribution to public health. This does not bode well for the other, even larger challenges on the horizon, especially facing up to the crisis of climate change.
Yes, I feel the same way.
I don't think you can compare the failure of humans to "come together" over the Covid issue and the success in cooperating, say, during WWII. Worldwide, Covid has killed about 5 million people, most of them ill and/or elderly. WWII killed 75-80 million people, most in the prime of life, of whom at least 10 million were simply murdered. What was the single main cause of WWII? Put one way, it was the eventual reaction of the allied nations to the loss of their liberty to the Nazi regime. I think many people simply don't perceive the Covid threat as great enough to sacrifice their personal liberty. Call them what you will, but that's the way it is. If Covid morphs to something much more lethal or another, worse, pandemic, comes along, you will see our species rising to the same level of cooperation that we have in the past.
Steven Bornfeld
2021-11-22 04:20:17 UTC
Reply
Permalink
I’ve never posted anything to rmcr that wasn’t about music, and not even about that very much (although I write quite a lot in other venues). But this time I’ll make an exception.
1. Getting swept up in a perception/belief bubble is as old as the hills (look at some of the millenarian movements of the Middle Ages), but it seems to be a more widespread phenomenon today. Part of this is due to the way the internet developed, through eyeball monetization which depends on affinity linking. Then a second level, the cynical exploitation of this phenomenon by ruthlessly cynical political interests, kicked in. From this perspective, anti-vax is not much different from, say, QAnon.
2. It’s characteristic of our era that “freedom”, long understood as a social condition, is now defined largely individually. There is little conception of what it might mean for a society to be free beyond the individual freedom of its members to separately do whatever they want. This is extraordinarily wrongheaded. A society that mandates public health measures (not only about Covid but where you can dump your garbage or whether you can heat your urban house with a wood or coal stove) is not for that reason a less free society than one that doesn’t. (For more elaboration, read John Dewey on this topic, e.g. Individualism Old and New.)
3. The claim that mandated vaccines, masking and social distancing constitute the opening wedge of a new totalitarianism is a slippery slope argument. The test of slippery slopeness is whether it shows up in partial measures, such that those exposed to them are further down the slope than those not. So what’s the evidence? Yes, China is very authoritarian about Covid, but they were very authoritarian before the pandemic too. And what about, say, New Zealand? Are they so much further down the road to totalitarian hell than, say, the UK? Is Vermont or Washington State closer to the totalitarian abyss than Texas?
4. The “sovereign body” argument, or perhaps sensibility, is understandable given our zeitgeist but has no scientific support whatsoever. The body is not sovereign nor even entirely separate and contained. A body is a community of organisms, many of which live between bodies (at least at a population level). The coronavirus is just one example. It’s remarkable in particular that New Age types will enthuse about the Universal Oneness one moment and invoke the sovereign body the next.
5. A related New Age or alternative health claim is that right conduct—eating right, thinking right, using one’s body in the right way—controls health. If you do what you’re supposed to you won’t get sick. The corollary, of course, is that if you do get sick it’s your own fault. (This is what Susan Sontag railed against in Illness as Metaphor as she was battling cancer.) In the context of the pandemic, this translates to “I don’t need to get a vaccine because I have natural immunity [due to my virtuous health practices].” It’s true that people can alter the odds of disease and premature death to a considerable extent by their personal choices, but they are also subject to powerful external forces, including pure chance, beyond their control. It’s interesting that this rather simple understanding is so difficult for many to grasp.
One can always blame one's parents.
6. I worry greatly about the resilience—grit if you will—of modern capitalist societies. Throughout their existence, human communities have faced massive threats that tested their ability to cooperate, overcome difficulties and endure. I imagine the sequence of ice ages must have weeded out quite a few. Plagues, wars and depressions are such tests for more modern humans, and we don’t always fail. I’m discouraged to see dissension and denial ascendent over matters like whether we have the fortitude to wear face masks indoors or forego a night at the pub as a contribution to public health. This does not bode well for the other, even larger challenges on the horizon, especially facing up to the crisis of climate change.
You mean the COP26 meeting didn't fill you with hope?
Dan Koren
2021-11-22 00:39:46 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Andy Evans
Just throwing this out there for all your opinions.
Anti-vax is a worldwide protest movement right
now. It goes into some fundamental questions
about the individual versus the common good.
Where do you stand on this?
By far the most striaghtforward, easiest
and clearest to intepret intelligence test.

Get your shots folks, and stop whining
about individual freedoms. The latter
become irrelevant when one is dead!

dk
Frank Berger
2021-11-22 02:35:18 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Dan Koren
Post by Andy Evans
Just throwing this out there for all your opinions.
Anti-vax is a worldwide protest movement right
now. It goes into some fundamental questions
about the individual versus the common good.
Where do you stand on this?
By far the most striaghtforward, easiest
and clearest to intepret intelligence test.
Get your shots folks, and stop whining
about individual freedoms. The latter
become irrelevant when one is dead!
dk
I have no problem with private firms conditioning employment (or entry to stores or the like) on proof of vaccination. I have no problem with government agencies requiring their employees to be vaccinated as a condition of employment. I even have no problem with public schools requiring vaccination as a condition for attendance. I have a problem with idiot governors trying to prevent private firms from doing so (Texas and Florida). I have a problem when governments exceed their constitutional authority. I leave whether the Federal government can strong arm the private sector into requiring vaccinations to the courts.
Loading...