Anti-vaxxers

growleaves · 02-12-2020 2:55pm

Igotadose wrote: »

Most anti-vaxxers, at their core, are failures and idiots. Especially the average joe-on-the-street anti-vaxxer who is frustrated with the reminders that they really aren't as successful as those advocating for vaccinations (chiefly doctors and scientists.)

They're just lashing out. Heck, their high-priest Wakefield's been struck off and is a laughingstock. They think by pretending to know something they can make up for a life of skating along stupidly without actually succeeding at anything that required diligence or intelligence.

They smell bad too. Ban them from employment problem solved and a win for science.

Regis779 · 02-12-2020 3:23pm

It's really frustrating that in the age of information where can access info at any moment with just a few clicks, people like anti-vaxxers choose to be ignorant, create a bubble of their own 'facts' and endanger not only their children and PETS even, but also other people around them.

Hector Savage · 02-12-2020 3:30pm

My issue is the definition of anti vaxxer seems to have changed a lot since covid.

I'd rather wait before I take the Oxford vaccine, i'd rather wait as it's new , this is the first vaccine in history to be developed so quickly.
I am 100% behind the vaccines that they give to kids as standard, they are decades old and have been proven as safe as they possibly can.

So because of this i'd rather wait approach - especially for my children's sake too - why would I give them something that regular flu is more dangerous to ?

But because of this I'm lumped in with the David Icke types that won't even vaccinate their kids against meningitis ...

Sure.

Gooey Looey · 02-12-2020 3:37pm

Hector Savage wrote: »

My issue is the definition of anti vaxxer seems to have changed a lot since covid.

I'd rather wait before I take the Oxford vaccine, i'd rather wait as it's new , this is the first vaccine in history to be developed so quickly.
I am 100% behind the vaccines that they give to kids as standard, they are decades old and have been proven as safe as they possibly can.

So because of this i'd rather wait approach - especially for my children's sake too - why would I give them something that regular flu is more dangerous to ?

But because of this I'm lumped in with the David Icke types that won't even vaccinate their kids against meningitis ...

Sure.

What about any other children in your children's class that are unable to get the vaccine for one reason or another? Not everyone can get the vaccine, that why we try to protect these who are vulnerable by vaccinating everyone else

Howard Beale · 02-12-2020 3:38pm

Igotadose wrote: »

Most anti-vaxxers, at their core, are failures and idiots. Especially the average joe-on-the-street anti-vaxxer who is frustrated with the reminders that they really aren't as successful as those advocating for vaccinations (chiefly doctors and scientists.)

They're just lashing out. Heck, their high-priest Wakefield's been struck off and is a laughingstock. They think by pretending to know something they can make up for a life of skating along stupidly without actually succeeding at anything that required diligence or intelligence.

Get out of bed the wrong way?

Could argue most pro vaxxers are idiots and failures too when they never ever ever engage critical reasoning and take any ould ****e in injection form and spend all day on boards.ie calling anyone who disagrees with them idiots and failures.

Anyone who disagrees with me is a an idiot and failure. Jaysus talk about insecurity!

Anyway professor Dolores Cahill is as against vaccine as they come has more education than a University combined and could buy and sell you in a heartbeat. Bought a castle in Athy recently from chump change to her but I guess a multi millionairess University professor is a 'idiot' and 'failure' as she disagrees with you eh!
:rolleyes:

ancapailldorcha · 02-12-2020 3:41pm

Howard Beale wrote: »

Get out of bed the wrong way?

Could argue most pro vaxxers are idiots and failures too when they never ever ever engage critical reasoning and take any ould ****e in injection form and spend all day on boards.ie calling anyone who disagrees with them idiots and failures.

Anyone who disagrees with me is a an idiot and failure. Jaysus talk about insecurity!

Anyway professor Dolores Cahill is as against vaccine as they come has more education than a University combined and could buy and sell you in a heartbeat. Bought a castle in Athy recently from chump change to her but I guess a multi millionairess University professor is a 'idiot' and 'failure' as she disagrees with you eh!
:rolleyes:

Still not evidence. Just a panegyric about some grifter.

Maxpfizer · 02-12-2020 3:42pm

Hector Savage wrote: »

My issue is the definition of anti vaxxer seems to have changed a lot since covid.

I'd rather wait before I take the Oxford vaccine, i'd rather wait as it's new , this is the first vaccine in history to be developed so quickly.
I am 100% behind the vaccines that they give to kids as standard, they are decades old and have been proven as safe as they possibly can.

So because of this i'd rather wait approach - especially for my children's sake too - why would I give them something that regular flu is more dangerous to ?

But because of this I'm lumped in with the David Icke types that won't even vaccinate their kids against meningitis ...

Sure.

Of course.

How else could you be shamed into taking the Covid vaccine as soon as possible?

The ground work has already been laid down. Look at all these anti-vax idiots in the US and on social media etc. You're not one of them are you? You're not one of those people we've been ridiculing for years are you?

Some people just get so TRIGGERED at being asked to have the smallest consideration for others. Tee Hee. Why are you such a terrible person who doesn't care about others? Now, if you'd just roll up your sleeve and not think about silly things like personal freedoms...

shameless liberal · 02-12-2020 3:47pm

Most people aren't scientists. By definition, 50% of people have below average intelligence.

I genuinely feel the true anti-vaxx community is just a small group of cynical anti-establishment nay-sayers who probably don't even believe their own bo***cks. But they have megaphones (thank you facebook, twitter) and people who are genuinely trying to make the best decisions for themselves and their dependents then have come across an argument that sews doubt in their minds and perhaps haven't had the time or understanding to recognise BS when they see it.

It's going to be really problematic if the same group of idiots who have protested outside the Dail, torn masks off the elderly, intermittently called me a sheep for wearing a mask walking past them... and denied the Covid at every opportunity... actually propagate the virus both directly by this ignorance and indirectly by convincing people to not take the vaccine, maintaining a Covid reservoir in the community and keeping this horrendous situation going on for even longer.

I am usually a liberal fella. But in this instance, I'd be all for cutting ALL social welfare benefits and also banning people from flying without proof of vaccination. Hit both ends of this group. Better for society. Better for public health and the economy.

Dohnjoe · 02-12-2020 4:01pm

Howard Beale wrote: »

Anyway professor Dolores Cahill is as against vaccine as they come

And there is a doctor who believes that a Covid vaccination will include a secret microchip implant, and that implant will connect to a neural A.I. network. Likewise, there's a doctor with a PhD in materials science who believes the 9/11 towers were zapped by some energy weapon and has even written a book about it.

Individual experts and doctors and professionals can be loons and fruitcakes. Which is why we look at the overwhelmingly majority of these experts are saying, not just a cherry-picked handful.

begbysback · 02-12-2020 4:07pm

Gooey Looey wrote: »

What about any other children in your children's class that are unable to get the vaccine for one reason or another? Not everyone can get the vaccine, that why we try to protect these who are vulnerable by vaccinating everyone else

What? Are u going first, let us know how you get on chief.

Maxpfizer · 02-12-2020 4:16pm

Gooey Looey wrote: »

What about any other children in your children's class that are unable to get the vaccine for one reason or another? Not everyone can get the vaccine, that why we try to protect these who are vulnerable by vaccinating everyone else

The problem is that it becomes an unresolvable problem at this point.

So the government wants to inject this substance into you.
Their intentions are good and they promise that it's all perfectly safe and fine.

What if you don't trust them?
I think history proves that we can ALWAYS trust our governments, right?

Should citizens be allowed to say "actually, no thanks"?

For those people who do say "no thanks" should we then move into a focused campaign to "convince" them to take it? How far should that go?

There is obviously a problem once we hit that conflict between "I have a right to bodily autonomy" and "but we want you to take this injection". Even more complicated when we throw children into the mix since it becomes a conflict between authorities and the child's guardian to make a decision on behalf of the child.

I don't see any reasonable way to untangle the knot?

Criminalize people who won't accept the vaccine?
Name and shame? Block them from employment or travel etc?

To give some kind of context it's worth noting that in California a few years ago the act of knowingly donating HIV infected blood was downgraded from a felony to a misdemeanor. A misdemeanor for knowingly trying to infect someone with a potentially deadly virus. Obviously that's America but it does give an idea of where our western societies were at just a few years ago.

So with that in mind what would we seriously suggest for someone who just doesn't want to be vaccinated? They aren't willingly infecting people.

It seems like this would be almost impossible to resolve?

Do people have a right to refuse a vaccination?
Should they?

What should we do with people who refuse?
Is that fair or even ethical?

Hector Savage · 02-12-2020 4:16pm

Gooey Looey wrote: »

What about any other children in your children's class that are unable to get the vaccine for one reason or another? Not everyone can get the vaccine, that why we try to protect these who are vulnerable by vaccinating everyone else

As soon as I feel confident it's safe, ill have my kids take it ...
let's see the vulnerable and elderly take it first .. we aren't going to be prioritised anyway (at least in Spain we're not)

sbsquarepants · 02-12-2020 4:19pm

I'm in no way an anti vaxxer, i have all the normal vaccines, my kids have all the normal vaccines. Access to vaccinations is an absolute blessing as far as i'm concerned.....however, i'm in no hurry to take any covid vaccine.

I'll sit it out for at least a year or two and see how it effects people first. And maybe it makes me a self centered bastard but i'm just not particularly concerned how that affects others, i still want to know it's safe before taking it and certainly before volunteering my kids to take it.

Dohnjoe · 02-12-2020 4:26pm

Maxpfizer wrote: »

The problem is that it becomes an unresolvable problem at this point.

The only problem here is ignorance, literally.

So the government wants to inject this substance into you.

No, stupid people want to inject their ignorance and baseless fantasies to create disinformation about medical science.

CramCycle · 02-12-2020 4:31pm

Hector Savage wrote: »

My issue is the definition of anti vaxxer seems to have changed a lot since covid.

I'd rather wait before I take the Oxford vaccine, i'd rather wait as it's new , this is the first vaccine in history to be developed so quickly.
I am 100% behind the vaccines that they give to kids as standard, they are decades old and have been proven as safe as they possibly can.

No issue with that, you probably won't get a choice anyway as delivery is not going to be immediate, it will be many months before most of us are even given the opportunity. Also the regular flu is incredibly dangerous for many people.

Maxpfizer wrote: »

Should citizens be allowed to say "actually, no thanks"?

They are and that will not change here.

For those people who do say "no thanks" should we then move into a focused campaign to "convince" them to take it? How far should that go?

Depends on the percentages, rates of infectivity, how long the vaccine immunity lasts and do they put pressure on our healthcare system. If most people take it anyway, and immunity is relatively long lived, there probably won't be a point in a targeted campaign, but if these things are not the case, as in numbers are not high enough or immunity is not long lived, then it would seem reasonable to have slightly high restrictions on those who have opted out or have not received it yet until infection rates are in the toilet.

There is obviously a problem once we hit that conflict between "I have a right to bodily autonomy" and "but we want you to take this injection". Even more complicated when we throw children into the mix since it becomes a conflict between authorities and the child's guardian to make a decision on behalf of the child.

Again, not an issue here

I don't see any reasonable way to untangle the knot?

There is no knot, if you don't want it, don't take it, there are plenty who will take it in your place, but respect that you should have to restrict yourself more than those who have taken it until it is near eradicated or herd immunity is reached

Criminalize people who won't accept the vaccine?
Name and shame? Block them from employment or travel etc?

We aren't in a dystopian sci fi novel. Not the first , not the second but blocking from travel may not be an Irish Government choice, other countries may make that choice for you, public transport might make that choice for you, although realistically if we keep restrictions up, t should make no difference. In fact, everything in that sentence is BS scaremongernig at its finest.

So with that in mind what would we seriously suggest for someone who just doesn't want to be vaccinated? They aren't willingly infecting people.

No one said that, but they must respect they may slow the return to normality and that they should continue to behave as if they are potential carriers as we do now, all it really means is that they should act liek they are meant to now.

It seems like this would be almost impossible to resolve?

Nope, incredibly simple as explained

Do people have a right to refuse a vaccination?
Should they?

They do

What should we do with people who refuse?
Is that fair or even ethical?

Nothing, do our best to insure they social distance and wear face masks until infection rates are close to zero

hmmm · 02-12-2020 4:35pm

shameless liberal wrote: »

I am usually a liberal fella. But in this instance, I'd be all for cutting ALL social welfare benefits and also banning people from flying without proof of vaccination. Hit both ends of this group. Better for society. Better for public health and the economy.

I agree, there's no debating with the hardcore. If they want to opt out of society let them, but keep the rest of us safe (and don't ask us to pay for it).

There's a larger group who are being told there is a "debate" about vaccines which there really isn't and it's making them uncertain - they can be persuaded. The Internet can give the impression that one shouty person on Youtube is equivalent to the overwhelming majority of the medical and scientific community.

shameless liberal · 02-12-2020 4:37pm

sbsquarepants wrote: »

I'm in no way an anti vaxxer, i have all the normal vaccines, my kids have all the normal vaccines. Access to vaccinations is an absolute blessing as far as i'm concerned.....however, i'm in no hurry to take any covid vaccine.

I'll sit it out for at least a year or two and see how it effects people first. And maybe it makes me a self centered bastard but i'm just not particularly concerned how that affects others, i still want to know it's safe before taking it and certainly before volunteering my kids to take it.

IMO yes that DOES make you a selfish bastard. If too many think like you, we will indeed be stuck with this relentless cycle for years to come.

sbsquarepants · 02-12-2020 4:41pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

The only problem here is ignorance, literally.

No, stupid people want to inject their ignorance and baseless fantasies to create disinformation about medical science.

I'm not concerned about microchips, or 5G receivers so the man can reprogram my mind or any of that bull****.

But why would you possibly assume that something rushed through at breakneck speed would be perfectly safe? That's reckless to say the least. There are side effects to every medicine, some of which only become apparent over time.

Maybe they test this on 1000 people and they are all fine, but that's because none of them we're taking "X" at the time, or had a certain medical condition, if you do happen to take it with "X" or have condition "Y" you die a horrible excruciating death, or maybe just get an itchy flute - who knows. Only volume and time will tell things like that.

And with that in mind...i'll wait, thanks all the same.

sbsquarepants · 02-12-2020 4:42pm

shameless liberal wrote: »

IMO yes that DOES make you a selfish bastard. If too many think like you, we will indeed be stuck with this relentless cycle for years to come.

Well stock up on toilet role so, because you'll be going nowhere anytime soon if you're waiting on me!

Seth Brundle · 02-12-2020 4:43pm

Maxpfizer wrote: »

Should citizens be allowed to say "actually, no thanks"?
...
Criminalize people who won't accept the vaccine?
Name and shame? Block them from employment or travel etc?

You are completely free to say no. However, as they say, all decisions have repurcussions.
Ok then maybe you tell us what you think with these two scenarios:
If your kids were not vaccinated, should they be allowed into their creche where there may be vulnerable children or carers?
Should you as an unvaccinated adult (which is your choice) be allowed visit your elderly relatives in a nursing home or hospital?

Maxpfizer · 02-12-2020 4:45pm

Dohnjoe wrote: »

The only problem here is ignorance, literally.

No, stupid people want to inject their ignorance and baseless fantasies to create disinformation about medical science.

So the focus should be on informing people and doing something about their ignorance?

Do you think our government have shown enough competence to have earned the trust of the people? This would surely be a factor in encouraging the public to comply?

Same with mainstream media outlets. If they have eroded the nations trust then how can we really blame people for not wanting to trust them.

I'm not seeing any attempt at solution there.
If you don't want the vaccine then you must be stupid and ignorant, that's it?
Not encouraging. Not likely to sway people, is it?

ohnonotgmail · 02-12-2020 4:50pm

sbsquarepants wrote: »

I'm not concerned about microchips, or 5G receivers so the man can reprogram my mind or any of that bull****.

But why would you possibly assume that something rushed through at breakneck speed would be perfectly safe? That's reckless to say the least. There are side effects to every medicine, some of which only become apparent over time.

Maybe they test this on 1000 people and they are all fine, but that's because none of them we're taking "X" at the time, or had a certain medical condition, if you do happen to take it with "X" or have condition "Y" you die a horrible excruciating death, or maybe just get an itchy flute - who knows. Only volume and time will tell things like that.

And with that in mind...i'll wait, thanks all the same.

the phrase 3 trial for Modernas vaccine had 30,000 people in it.

shameless liberal · 02-12-2020 4:50pm

I sincerely hope that RTE doesn't feel the need to offer a platform for a "balanced debate" on this matter.

Extremist degenerate anti-vaxxers have done enough damage already. I'm certain their Venn diagram will overlap with Gemma and her crew, xenophobes, neofascist ultra conservatives... they don't deserve the microphone.

Cut all access to social welfare, ban from flying, without legitimate proof of vaccinated status. See how far they get.

Literally can't permit people to keep the rest of us in lockdown and a relentless cycle of this based on their ignorance and anarchy.

sbsquarepants · 02-12-2020 4:58pm

shameless liberal wrote: »

I sincerely hope that RTE doesn't feel the need to offer a platform for a "balanced debate" on this matter.

Extremist degenerate anti-vaxxers have done enough damage already. I'm certain their Venn diagram will overlap with Gemma and her crew, xenophobes, neofascist ultra conservatives... they don't deserve the microphone.

Cut all access to social welfare, ban from flying, without legitimate proof of vaccinated status. See how far they get.

Literally can't permit people to keep the rest of us in lockdown and a relentless cycle of this based on their ignorance and anarchy.

This kind of bullshít false dichotomy is doing you no favours.

The world is not broken into 2 camps consisting of people who wholeheartedly yearn for the miracle that is this new vaccine and those who believe the illuminati are behind it in an attempt to usher in the new world order.

I'm happy to take a safe effective vaccine. However i have no reason to believe this is either of those things. Other than a man on the telly said it's 95% effective. What does that even mean?

If you know then enlighten me. I'd be willing to bet you don't though. So why are you so keen?

Maxpfizer · 02-12-2020 5:01pm

Seth Brundle wrote: »

You are completely free to say no. However, as they say, all decisions have repurcussions.
Ok then maybe you tell us what you think with these two scenarios:
If your kids were not vaccinated, should they be allowed into their creche where there may be vulnerable children or carers?
Should you as an unvaccinated adult (which is your choice) be allowed visit your elderly relatives in a nursing home or hospital?

I would take personal responsibility in a situation like that.
If I'm loaded up with the cold or flu then I won't be visiting my granny at the nursing home. Same as I would avoid the hospital. I wouldn't send my kid to school if they were obviously sick.

I think common sense dictates that we should not be allowing un-vaccinated people to enter facilities where there are known vulnerable people and where a virus like this can cause serious problems.

If the vulnerable people have been vaccinated themselves though then what's the issue?

If I am vaccinated and you are not then would it be possible for me to get sick if you have it? I mean, I'm vaccinated, right?

02-12-2020 5:07pm

Maxpfizer wrote: »

If I am vaccinated and you are not then would it be possible for me to get sick if you have it? I mean, I'm vaccinated, right?

5,000+ posts into the thread and this is the level we're at.

Maxpfizer · 02-12-2020 5:11pm

shameless liberal wrote: »

I'm certain their Venn diagram will overlap with Gemma and her crew, xenophobes, neofascist ultra conservatives... they don't deserve the microphone.

Hm.

Seems like a bit of jump there.

Someone questions the very speedy development of the vaccine and also the "first of it's kind" nature of an mRNA vaccine? They must be a xenophobic, neofascist!

It's laughable.

I suppose we are in for 6 to 12 months of this kind of argumentation though so it's nice to get a preview.

sbsquarepants · 02-12-2020 5:12pm

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

the phrase 3 trial for Modernas vaccine had 30,000 people in it.

You say that like it's a huge number!

It's about 0.0004% of the worlds population. And this trial was done when exactly? Last month, couple of months ago?

Who says whatever terrible side effect doesn't only manifest after 6 months, or 2 years, or only effects you when you go on to catch chickenpox after getting it, or any number of things. Look at thalidomide for example.

There is absolutely no reason to be assuming this thing is safe. None whatsoever!

Maxpfizer · 02-12-2020 5:12pm

Deleted User wrote: »

5,000+ posts into the thread and this is the level we're at.

LOL. You could have just said "yes".

To be fair, this is where we were at on Post #7 back in 2017.
"They think that the MMR vaccine causes autism."

So we are talking about COVID specifically now.

ohnonotgmail · 02-12-2020 5:21pm

sbsquarepants wrote: »

You say that like it's a huge number!

It's about 0.0004% of the worlds population. And this trial was done when exactly? Last month, couple of months ago?

Who says whatever terrible side effect doesn't only manifest after 6 months, or 2 years, or only effects you when you go on to catch chickenpox after getting it, or any number of things. Look at thalidomide for example.

There is absolutely no reason to be assuming this thing is safe. None whatsoever!

their phase 3 trial started in october. and 30,000 is a big trial. thalidomide was 50+ years ago and the drug is still in. science has improved in the meantime.

Anti-vaxxers

Comments