Covid vaccines - thread banned users in First Post

You cite this article as some kind of authority piece, whose opinion should be respected and listened to - and yet refuse to answer a simple question about its content where it relates to vaccines.

No, I cited this article as a welcome addition to the discourse in mainstream media. I didn't claim it was written by an acknowledged authority or expert. I specifically pointed out: No doubt the vaccine fanatics will rubbish him as just a student, what does he know etc etc, but just like the Emperor's New Clothes, it takes the confidence of youth to point out what the wise old heads are too afraid to say.

We have witnessed a massive and ongoing loss of life in America due to distrust of vaccines

Do we assume you agree? That more vaccinations in the US would have helped to prevent massive loss of life?

In the context of covid vaccines, depending on the age/health profile in question, yes I think there is certainly a plausible argument that the way in which the messaging was conducted and definitions of safe and effective were revised caused vaccine hesitancy in a large number of people who refused the vaccine and died, when they might not have if they were vaccinated.

I also agree with the statement as far as it refers to all vaccines. One of the points I have made repeatedly here is that the refusal to acknowledge any shortcomings in the covid vaccines has generated huge distrust in all vaccines and continues to do so. That will inevitably lead to loss of life.

And if don't agree, why do you disagree? And if you disagree with it, why should assign any weight to anything else said in the article when you cite it?

See above. And if you also agree with the statement, I assume you agree with everything else in the article? Or do you get a pass for needing to agree with everything?

This question has been asked of you already. It is an article you posted. And yet you refuse to engage in discussion of this part of its content.

I suspect the reason why you will not is that you know it refutes your central points about the article.

I am not refusing to engage with it. There was a flurry of replies to my post, but I simply don't have as much time as others to play whack-a-mole.

In the context of this thread such a statement this is certainly contrary to many of the posts on this thread some of which claim vaccines are responsible for more deaths than lived saved.

Great, if that's your beef, take it up with those many posters who have made these claims.

You are concerned about vaccine hesitancy yet you have no 'beef' with those who make unfounded accusations on the dangers of vaccines?

Yes, I am more concerned that the scientific community from the CDC to the WHO to the FDA and their representatives, repeatedly overstated the evidence and misled the public on vaccines, than some anonymous posters on discussion forums who say the vaccines have killed more than they saved. Absolutely. Anything else is totally irrational.

Oh and I will remind you of your agreement re plausible that massive numbers of lives saved if more people had gotten covid vaccinations should you make claims to the contrary in future.

Fire away, just don't forget the context - it is certainly plausible that if more vulnerable/elderly people had gotten vaccinations, then more vulnerable/elderly lives would have been saved.

I don't think vaccinating another few million 5 year olds against Covid would save any lives at all.

You have have provided zero evidence to support the position that the CDC messaging etc is more responsible for vaccine hesitancy than the concerted unprecdented anti vax campaign.

I believe the unprecedented anti vax feeling is a direct result of the CDC messaging. I have posted links to papers in the BMJ before supporting this position.

I would add you appear to show zero concern re anti vax propaganda. So to talk of 'more concern' implies a balance. Or indeed that one can only be concerned about either one or the other.

You are correct. I have zero concern about anti-vax propaganda. I only talk of more concern in response to incessant questions such as this:

You are concerned about vaccine hesitancy yet you have no 'beef' with those who make unfounded accusations on the dangers of vaccines?

That posting style is a hallmark of many posters on this forum. Total whataboutery. Rather than address the points I make, you ask me about the concerns I raise in posts relative to the concerns you have about points made in posts by other posters. And then claim my replies are without merit or foundation! Madness.

Some posts on this thread are one aspect of that anti vax propaganda.

To be concerned about such anti vax propaganda here is therefore entirely rational, and to challenge their content on a forum of which you are a member a demonstration of rationality.

Great if you want to challenge the content of "some posts" on that "one aspect", knock yourself out, but please stop badgering me about them.