| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 16:21 - Jan 28 with 768 views | Ewan_Oozami |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 15:03 - Jan 28 by Cafe_Newman |
So what you're saying is that it's better to trust blokes on footy forums than blokes on Tiktok?
Or is it better to trust neither and speak to a real doctor face to face in a proper medical establishment?
The point I'm making is that neither should be trusted despite who they claim to be, or whether they "shout" in CAPS LOCK or link articles to advice from 28-year-old mums in regional online newspapers. |
Don't hear what I didn't say.
If what someone is saying anywhere, doesn't matter where, aligns with the medical consensus that currently exists and which I may well have diligently researched (maybe because I have an interest in it) which I believed would also align with advice that would be given by real doctors face to face in a real medical establishment, then I would tend to to trust it.
The key point here is diligent research, say, something like these:
https://library.hee.nhs.uk/pat
...and not just looking for something anywhere that aligns with my existing views. I know that's not always easily possible for people , which is why they will turn to Facebook or Tiktok.
Mrs O and I agonised for a while when our kids were due the MMR vaccine because this bloke Wakefield had said it causes autism. I asked a doctor friend about it, face to face in a real hospital, and he said Wakefield's an idiot and a fraudster - give them the MMR. I did do a bit more reading and yes, it seemed that what Wakefield was saying wasn't really backed up by any other studies. So we gave them the MMR and everything was fine.
In terms of trusting people online, how does one know who to trust? Should we trust nobody (especially those who give the Gatwick parking advice)? Or evaluate information put in front of you, see if it's something that you may want to act on or promote, then look a bit further to see how valid that information is?
And herein lies the problem: it probably two minutes for you to type out your questions, it took me well over 20 mins to construct this reply - that imbalance in communication time is one of the main reasons why people look for simpler solutions on social media. One asks a simple question, why can't one have a simple answer? |  |
|  |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 16:44 - Jan 28 with 718 views | BlueBadger |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 12:00 - Jan 28 by Cafe_Newman |
It baffles me that people are so reckless with the health of their children that they would take medical advice from Facebook and Tiktok.
It makes far more sense to trust a bloke on a footy forum claiming to be a nurse at Redacted Hospital who posts about 1,500 times a year about politics and vaccinations under the name of BlueBadger and calls most people who disagree with him, a massive fanny or an edgelord.
For the record, the Holocaust did happen, the world isn't flat and I respect people's personal decisions to get vaccinated or otherwise. |
Well, this is entirely normal thing to be doing. |  |
| |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 17:22 - Jan 28 with 672 views | Cafe_Newman |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 16:21 - Jan 28 by Ewan_Oozami |
Don't hear what I didn't say.
If what someone is saying anywhere, doesn't matter where, aligns with the medical consensus that currently exists and which I may well have diligently researched (maybe because I have an interest in it) which I believed would also align with advice that would be given by real doctors face to face in a real medical establishment, then I would tend to to trust it.
The key point here is diligent research, say, something like these:
https://library.hee.nhs.uk/pat
...and not just looking for something anywhere that aligns with my existing views. I know that's not always easily possible for people , which is why they will turn to Facebook or Tiktok.
Mrs O and I agonised for a while when our kids were due the MMR vaccine because this bloke Wakefield had said it causes autism. I asked a doctor friend about it, face to face in a real hospital, and he said Wakefield's an idiot and a fraudster - give them the MMR. I did do a bit more reading and yes, it seemed that what Wakefield was saying wasn't really backed up by any other studies. So we gave them the MMR and everything was fine.
In terms of trusting people online, how does one know who to trust? Should we trust nobody (especially those who give the Gatwick parking advice)? Or evaluate information put in front of you, see if it's something that you may want to act on or promote, then look a bit further to see how valid that information is?
And herein lies the problem: it probably two minutes for you to type out your questions, it took me well over 20 mins to construct this reply - that imbalance in communication time is one of the main reasons why people look for simpler solutions on social media. One asks a simple question, why can't one have a simple answer? |
Diligent research is the way to go. I have never done anything less when it comes to my kid's health, so I would never resort to trusting a 2-minute morsel of "science" from any source. I'm not the sort of person to say, "everyone else was doing it, so I did too". I take full responsibility for my decisions, vaxxed or unvaxxed. More important than anything though is individual sovereignty so I baulk a little when people on football forums tell others what to do, irrespective of whether I agree and irrespective of a non-scientific, first hand story by 28-year-old mum of Levi down in Little-Mugwomp-on-Sea, Cornwall.
EDIT: And thanks for spending the time to construct a sensible response. [Post edited 28 Jan 17:27]
|  | | |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 19:09 - Jan 28 with 607 views | armchaircritic59 |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 15:16 - Jan 28 by J2BLUE |
Sorry to be so blunt but they DID consider you. They just decided that the elderly and vulnerable were expendable.
I hope you're ok and avoid all the bugs going around! |
Hey, that's not blunt at all, it's stating facts. Better than sugar coating. I'm good thanks, just keep taking the tablets! Hope to be around to see ITFC back in Europe! I'm almost 71, so I'd like them to get a wiggle on ! |  | | |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 19:57 - Jan 28 with 567 views | Clapham_Junction |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 17:22 - Jan 28 by Cafe_Newman |
Diligent research is the way to go. I have never done anything less when it comes to my kid's health, so I would never resort to trusting a 2-minute morsel of "science" from any source. I'm not the sort of person to say, "everyone else was doing it, so I did too". I take full responsibility for my decisions, vaxxed or unvaxxed. More important than anything though is individual sovereignty so I baulk a little when people on football forums tell others what to do, irrespective of whether I agree and irrespective of a non-scientific, first hand story by 28-year-old mum of Levi down in Little-Mugwomp-on-Sea, Cornwall.
EDIT: And thanks for spending the time to construct a sensible response. [Post edited 28 Jan 17:27]
|
"More important than anything though is individual sovereignty"
Perhaps to you (and the more arseholish end of the libertarian spectrum), but I personally think that in quite a lot of circumstances, wider societal needs trump individual needs, and that is the done thing in many cultures. |  | | |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 20:14 - Jan 28 with 557 views | Cafe_Newman |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 19:57 - Jan 28 by Clapham_Junction |
"More important than anything though is individual sovereignty"
Perhaps to you (and the more arseholish end of the libertarian spectrum), but I personally think that in quite a lot of circumstances, wider societal needs trump individual needs, and that is the done thing in many cultures. |
Is that why you have a picture of Kim Jong Un as your avatar pic? | | | |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 21:19 - Jan 28 with 502 views | BlueOura |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 19:57 - Jan 28 by Clapham_Junction |
"More important than anything though is individual sovereignty"
Perhaps to you (and the more arseholish end of the libertarian spectrum), but I personally think that in quite a lot of circumstances, wider societal needs trump individual needs, and that is the done thing in many cultures. |
Disagree. There is no situation I can think of where any individual should lose sovereignty over chosing what they put into their own body. Who gets to decide what is best for everybody else? The State? I don't think so, that would be a very dangerous path to go down. |  | | |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 22:32 - Jan 28 with 455 views | reusersfreekicks |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 21:19 - Jan 28 by BlueOura |
Disagree. There is no situation I can think of where any individual should lose sovereignty over chosing what they put into their own body. Who gets to decide what is best for everybody else? The State? I don't think so, that would be a very dangerous path to go down. |
Spose that's ok.
But should the state have to look after people who ignore overriding scientific evidence |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Perhaps take a look at the Measles outbreak in South Carolina? on 22:58 - Jan 28 with 444 views | unstableblue |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 20:39 - Jan 27 by JackNorthStand |
Or how about respecting other people have different opinions and views on vaccines
Edit - I just read the second story link you shared - awful and for no reason. [Post edited 27 Jan 20:47]
|
Because it only takes 5% of the population to start having different opinions on vaccines to cause a whole heap of pain.
Science and facts are real. Not algorithm amplified fake news on the internet. |  |
| |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 23:19 - Jan 28 with 417 views | Kievthegreat |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 21:19 - Jan 28 by BlueOura |
Disagree. There is no situation I can think of where any individual should lose sovereignty over chosing what they put into their own body. Who gets to decide what is best for everybody else? The State? I don't think so, that would be a very dangerous path to go down. |
You're right, the state can't and shouldn't force a person to vaccinate themselves. Even though there are appreciable risks both their lives and to wider society.
However that does not mean there should not be knock-on effects from those actions. That person should not be allowed to work with those now at increased risk because of their actions such as in medical fields, care environments, etc...
They should also be ridiculed for being absolute morons, but that much is obvious.
The difficult situation is Children as their rights are at the whim of their parents. Those who choose not to vaccinate their children are incredibly irresponsible. Whether that crosses a line and makes them an unfit parent? It's difficult. The probabilities of harm are still very small, but it is a deliberate decision by the parent to endanger their child. I lean more to the 'it makes them morons, not bad people' position. |  | | |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 23:59 - Jan 28 with 398 views | armchaircritic59 |
I wonder if these people ever ask themselves, what's in the foods that I eat, what's in the water that I drink, what's in the air that I breathe? I can tell them if you don't know what's in a vaccine, you most certainly don't know everything that's in any of the above, unless in the foods case, you grew it yourself. There is a risk in almost everything in life, some small, some great.
I'd have no problems at all with anti vaxxers if their decisions could affect only them. Unfortunately it isn't the case. | | | |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 07:46 - Jan 29 with 323 views | iamatractorboy |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 23:59 - Jan 28 by armchaircritic59 |
I wonder if these people ever ask themselves, what's in the foods that I eat, what's in the water that I drink, what's in the air that I breathe? I can tell them if you don't know what's in a vaccine, you most certainly don't know everything that's in any of the above, unless in the foods case, you grew it yourself. There is a risk in almost everything in life, some small, some great.
I'd have no problems at all with anti vaxxers if their decisions could affect only them. Unfortunately it isn't the case. |
They definitely do wonder about the water (specifically fluoride). For the air I guess it could be the infamous 'chem trails'. Not sure about food but I bet there's some nutty conspiracy theory out there. | | | |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 08:33 - Jan 29 with 282 views | DJR |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 21:19 - Jan 28 by BlueOura |
Disagree. There is no situation I can think of where any individual should lose sovereignty over chosing what they put into their own body. Who gets to decide what is best for everybody else? The State? I don't think so, that would be a very dangerous path to go down. |
I am passionately pro-vaccine but I would never agree with making vaccines compulsory. |  | | |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 14:11 - Jan 29 with 215 views | Clapham_Junction |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 20:14 - Jan 28 by Cafe_Newman |
Is that why you have a picture of Kim Jong Un as your avatar pic? |
It's a Cold War Steve collage. He ridicules dictators and pompous/cruel/corrupt politicians. I found this one particularly amusing. | | | |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 14:18 - Jan 29 with 198 views | leitrimblue |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 07:46 - Jan 29 by iamatractorboy |
They definitely do wonder about the water (specifically fluoride). For the air I guess it could be the infamous 'chem trails'. Not sure about food but I bet there's some nutty conspiracy theory out there. |
I really miss chem trail conspiracy theorists. Them and the layliness crowd, seem so harmless compared to their modern equivalent |  | | |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 14:27 - Jan 29 with 181 views | Clapham_Junction |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 21:19 - Jan 28 by BlueOura |
Disagree. There is no situation I can think of where any individual should lose sovereignty over chosing what they put into their own body. Who gets to decide what is best for everybody else? The State? I don't think so, that would be a very dangerous path to go down. |
In this case we're talking about children. They do not have an active say in this – it's either going to have to be the decision of the parents or the state, and the state does overrule parents where it is considered they are negligent in some way or another (for example, giving blood transfusions to children of Jehovah's Witnesses whose parents have refused to allow it). While it might be hard for the state to take this step for vaccination, it could indirectly enforce it by schools requiring children to be vaccinated against things like measles to attend.
Capable adults are free to choose, but again, I don't think it's unreasonable to place restrictions on those who are putting others at risk by refusing to vaccinate (for example by refusing them entry to certain things where they may put others at risk). | | | |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 14:49 - Jan 29 with 127 views | Cafe_Newman |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 14:11 - Jan 29 by Clapham_Junction |
It's a Cold War Steve collage. He ridicules dictators and pompous/cruel/corrupt politicians. I found this one particularly amusing. |
Fair enough, my eyesight isn't that sharp so the image isn't easy to make out, especially when you're offline. | | | |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 15:13 - Jan 29 with 99 views | phillymark |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 21:19 - Jan 28 by BlueOura |
Disagree. There is no situation I can think of where any individual should lose sovereignty over chosing what they put into their own body. Who gets to decide what is best for everybody else? The State? I don't think so, that would be a very dangerous path to go down. |
I think broadly you are right but wouldn’t you try and stop someone from killing themselves (in most circumstances)? If someone wants to cut their leg off (not advised by a doctor), wouldn’t you say that the state should intervene to prevent them? | | | |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 15:27 - Jan 29 with 75 views | DJR |
| Anti vaxxers are terrible See You Next Tuesdays part 59235667120649761658681586 on 14:27 - Jan 29 by Clapham_Junction |
In this case we're talking about children. They do not have an active say in this – it's either going to have to be the decision of the parents or the state, and the state does overrule parents where it is considered they are negligent in some way or another (for example, giving blood transfusions to children of Jehovah's Witnesses whose parents have refused to allow it). While it might be hard for the state to take this step for vaccination, it could indirectly enforce it by schools requiring children to be vaccinated against things like measles to attend.
Capable adults are free to choose, but again, I don't think it's unreasonable to place restrictions on those who are putting others at risk by refusing to vaccinate (for example by refusing them entry to certain things where they may put others at risk). |
There is something in what you say but for virtually all decisions relating to children we leave it up to the parents. And of course during Covid, people (including adults) couldn't do quite a few things without proof of the vaccination or a negative test. [Post edited 29 Jan 15:28]
| | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
