Looks like anti vax was the right call

[supremeyingyang]

59 minutes ago, Consept said:

The only reason people really had was emotional in that there was a distrust of the medical establishment and the government but thats almost a separate issue to the actual facts.  

G, but now you expect them to be rational after their emotions brought 'em to a problematic decisions?

Let them loose their face (is there such an saying in english??? == loose your good reputation) and drove 'em further down. You don't need to say their where somehow right on vaxxing in general or C faux. I they push, push back for what you believe in. 

Let us crush the numbers and discuss what they say. Let us not us 'em as weapons to silence who we happen to dislike. One time you could sit on the other side of the table. Live and let live.

G, I think we need Soziotherapy (societal pendant to Psychology) to process all these repressed neuroses. I think about researching it.

[Consept]

19 minutes ago, supremeyingyang said:

G, but now you expect them to be rational after their emotions brought 'em to a problematic decisions?

Let them loose their face (is there such an saying in english??? == loose your good reputation) and drove 'em further down. You don't need to say their where somehow right on vaxxing in general or C faux. I they push, push back for what you believe in. 

Let us crush the numbers and discuss what they say. Let us not us 'em as weapons to silence who we happen to dislike. One time you could sit on the other side of the table. Live and let live.

G, k we need Soziotherapy (societal pendant to Psychology) to process all these repressed neuroses. I think about researching it.

Yeah now i dont really care they can say whatever they want even though i still dont think the numbers are in their favour, but my central point would still stand in that, they (anti vaxx people) think that there is a nefarious intent on behalf of the government. So that being said whatever is said by the government will be rejected, in fact I have a suspicion that if the government had taken an anti vaxx stance, conspiracy theorists wouldve been pro vaxx and got angry about the government keeping the cure from the people when many are dying. So the science is secondary or even irrelevant, primary is the perceived battle for 'freedom' against the government.  

Now being anti-government is not necessarily problematic in normal, but during a health crises it definitely can be and lives are on the line. That being said the government still has to communicate in a transparent and honest way and they have to consider those that are against them, in some ways they did fail with this. But either way if lives are on the line then of course they have to make decisions that could be restrictive to people, it is a very hard thing to balance. 

Also you have to appreciate the difficulty at talking with those that are primarily running on emotion. For example its hard to reason with a child that is wants to eat ice-cream for dinner, you can explain the science of how bad it is for him and how much better vegetables are but he is making the emotional decision that youre being unfair and any punishment or restriction will add even more injustice in the mind of the child. So you cant really win you have to just set boundaries and the child can either accept them or continually fight them but the boundary is the boundary. Any discussion is an attempt to manipulate into dropping that boundary, maybe he finds the one scientist that says ice-cream is healthy, maybe he pulls up a story about how someone ate too many vegetables and died, but either way he is not looking for the truth he is trying to manipulate you. He may even protest and have a tantrum, but all of this is just emotional and about getting what he wants. 

So its the same with anti-vaxx people im not sure what you could present them with that would get them to change their mind and so your only option is to keep the boundary but still have compassion for the fearful emotions. 

 

[supremeyingyang]

29 minutes ago, Consept said:

So its the same with anti-vaxx people im not sure what you could present them with that would get them to change their mind and so your only option is to keep the boundary but still have compassion for the fearful emotions. 

 

You can't change anyone, you can only make them aware. Regarding your proposition of refering to them as children. This will yield the opposite of what you want. I tell you, we need *Sociotherapy*. Think about THE PROBLEM as a Family.

Mom is a Vaxxer, Dad not.You are the child. You side with your mom to guilttrip your dad to change him. He gets angry and more stubborn. Normal life becomes a torture - all the fighting. Over shit that's through. Did you saw such a constelation work out? EVER? It's fundamentally disrespectful and THATS WHY IT WONT WORK AT ALL even though one side might be right. And BTW I'm on you side, G.

See, it's dificult. You need to be strategic to make dad aware. Maybe he had a bad exp. with needles?

Edited March 28, 2023 by supremeyingyang
correction

[Consept]

3 hours ago, supremeyingyang said:

You can't change anyone, you can only make them aware. Regarding your proposition of refering to them as children. This will yield the opposite of what you want. I tell you, we need *Sociotherapy*. Think about THE PROBLEM as a Family.

Mom is a Vaxxer, Dad not.You are the child. You side with your mom to guilttrip your dad to change him. He gets angry and more stubborn. Normal life becomes a torture - all the fighting. Over shit that's through. Did you saw such a constelation work out? EVER? It's fundamentally disrespectful and THATS WHY IT WONT WORK AT ALL even though one side might be right. And BTW I'm on you side, G.

See, it's dificult. You need to be strategic to make dad aware. Maybe he had a bad exp. with needles?

I agree with you it's a difficult situation, I only use the child analogy to illustrate the point to you, I probably wouldn't use it to change anyone's mind. 

I think it's near on impossible to change peoples mind on certain issues. The only thing I've seen that's effective is when something serious happens ie someone close to them dying or them getting really ill, even then it's not a guarantee that they'll change their mind. Essentially you are questioning someone's whole reality, at which point it's better just to accept them as they are, in this case the dad and not really entertain their talking points. I also think the government and social media companies really messed up by not communicating the message properly and then also by allowing wild conspiracies to proliferate especially in the early days. 

[supremeyingyang]

2 hours ago, Consept said:

I also think the government and social media companies really messed up by not communicating the message properly and then also by allowing wild conspiracies to proliferate especially in the early days. 

I guess we have to learn to live with it. And sometimes a conspiracy theory proved to be true, for example last year I was looking down the edge of our flat earth, I would not believe it before I saw it with my own two eyes.

[supremeyingyang]

2 hours ago, Consept said:

I agree with you it's a difficult situation, I only use the child analogy to illustrate the point to you, I probably wouldn't use it to change anyone's mind. 

I think it's near on impossible to change peoples mind on certain issues. The only thing I've seen that's effective is when something serious happens ie someone close to them dying or them getting really ill, even then it's not a guarantee that they'll change their mind. Essentially you are questioning someone's whole reality, at which point it's better just to accept them as they are, in this case the dad and not really entertain their talking points.

Yeah, that's true.

[ZenAlex]

On 3/13/2023 at 1:52 PM, Danioover9000 said:

@ZenAlex

   ABSOLUTELY NOT POSSIBLE! Flipping that coin already assumes risks are 50/59, which highly not the case. This level of dumb has killed much more than saved lives. I would only agree if I hate humanity and want to reduce it's population, which your strategy is leaning to more than saving people.

@leogura.

You guys are missing the point of what I'm saying. You're taking the coin flip comparison too literally. I'm saying an uninformed person could have chosen the right side here, and I don't believe all the info regarding this virus was made available to make a truly informed decision. 

I'm saying that there was info available to take a risk on, but it was a risk either way, which is a reasonable position to have.

Whether you took the vaccine or didn't take it, you were taking a risk. There are smart and dumb people on each side.

[ZenAlex]

@Leo Gura

[Israfil]

On 24/03/2023 at 5:58 PM, Carl-Richard said:

Damn, what did you see?

I woke up in a dream and asked for water, looking around me I saw my bedroom completely okay and freaked out as I realized I was having a vivid dream. Then I actually woke up and sat EXACTLY as I did in the dream, which gave me a weird inception feeling.

Besides I thought I would die from the gastrointestinal reaction I had to it. I nearly crapped myself to the point of dehydration.  

[Jwayne]

On 3/15/2023 at 2:58 PM, Leo Gura said:

Nobody has ever claimed that vax is absolutely great for everyone. I posted on my blog early into Covid that the vaccine has risks, but that those risks are outweighed by the risks of getting Covid. That you cannot understand this is truly sad from an intelligence point of view.

If the vax killed 100,000 people, I would still tell you to get vaccinated. Because Covid killed more. How you do not understand this is beyond me.

Until you provide evidence that the vaccine killed over 1 million people, all your anti-vax rhetoric is meaningless.

The mRNA vaccines have far more risks than the traditional vaccine. Even countries which used traditional vaccine have realized it only had temporary immune-modulating properties, didn't prevent transmission and wasn't as reliable in reducing severity as expected. Just as masks don't really help as they were promised to but they still linger as a preventative recommendation.

[zurew]

5 hours ago, Jwayne said:

The mRNA vaccines have far more risks than the traditional vaccine.

Based on what?

[Jwayne]

1 hour ago, zurew said:

Based on what?

The mRNA vaccines are known to be cardiotoxic. You can look at data on injuries and side effects (i.e. from the CDC, or VAERS) to compare/contrasts the risk profiles of each.

At the societal level, see elevated rates, such as in the data from the United States where there is lots of information available, of All Cause Mortality (up around 6%) or Excess Non-Covid Natural Cause Mortality (up over 15%) which are higher than even during the peaks of the pandemic and started rising with the implementation of mass vaccination.

In general, any human cell which synthesizes non-self antigens becomes inevitably the target of the immune system.

[Danioover9000]

@Jwayne

On 2023-04-01 at 5:15 AM, Jwayne said:

The mRNA vaccines have far more risks than the traditional vaccine. Even countries which used traditional vaccine have realized it only had temporary immune-modulating properties, didn't prevent transmission and wasn't as reliable in reducing severity as expected. Just as masks don't really help as they were promised to but they still linger as a preventative recommendation.

   So is Covid-19, what you don't realize or want to admit is that the virus is far much worse in side effects than side effects of mRNA vaccines, which is worse than traditional vaccines, which is worse than other medical side effects, and so on. In this chain, Covid-19 effects are far more severe, and claim far more lives than mRNA vaccines could have. If you say mRNA vaccines have killed 100,000 people, covid-19 killed 10 million more. How this basic mathematics is flying over your head is amazing denial in favor for anti vaxxers.

[Danioover9000]

@ZenAlex

On 2023-03-30 at 3:57 PM, ZenAlex said:

@leogura.

You guys are missing the point of what I'm saying. You're taking the coin flip comparison too literally. I'm saying an uninformed person could have chosen the right side here, and I don't believe all the info regarding this virus was made available to make a truly informed decision. 

I'm saying that there was info available to take a risk on, but it was a risk either way, which is a reasonable position to have.

Whether you took the vaccine or didn't take it, you were taking a risk. There are smart and dumb people on each side.

   The problem is, if you want a fully informed decision, that's at least 5 years of tests and trails. 5 YEARS! Meanwhile, what's Covid-19 doing? Sitting around the clouds doing nothing? NO! It's spreading rapidly to other people, through social gatherings to import and export products, transmission is really high for Covid-19, and you're gambling that herd immunity is enough to shield you and the few from Covid-19. Have you seen what happened in China in Wuhan Province and how it crippled almost everything there quickly? Have you seen what happened to Italy when the majority thought it was a simple cold flu? Covid-19 nearly fucked up Italy and nearly overloaded their hospitals! And that's only under 2 years, and meanwhile you're waiting for confirmation of mRNA vaccines being safe for another 3 years mate. COME ON!

[Danioover9000]

   If Covid-19 was sentient it be so grateful to these anti vaxxers and conspiracy theorists, it would be so thankful for providing free human bodies it could jump to and infect, it would be sending thank you letters to these Anti vaxxers, and fuck you letters to the vaccinated and the germaphobes.

[Roy]

7 hours ago, Danioover9000 said:

COME ON!

It's not their fault they just have TFS - Terminal Fonzie Syndrome. They just want to look cool and not be told what to do. It's the same reason they'll probably be making an early donation to the worm feed salvation army for not taking their heart medication or exercising because the doctor told them it's a good idea. "HAH! Can you believe that nerd wants me to take these tic-tacs? I'm as strong as an ox!"

The literal black death could make a comeback and sweep across the Earth in weeks, and they would be bitching about kids being lazy or something because they can't get a big mac at the drive thru. Meanwhile car sized balls of tumbleweed are blowing across empty streets.

In an alternate universe I unironically think if the government told them NOT to get vaccinated and take precautions they would do the opposite. "SEE! The gubberment doesn't care about our health! We gotta do everything ourselves." Proceeds to clear the shelves of boxes of masks and hand sanitizer at the supermarket.

Edited April 3, 2023 by Roy

[zurew]

On 2023. 04. 01. at 1:32 PM, Jwayne said:

The mRNA vaccines are known to be cardiotoxic. You can look at data on injuries and side effects (i.e. from the CDC, or VAERS) to compare/contrasts the risk profiles of each.

I have looked at multiple studies and data, and those contradicted the points you made about how dangerous these mrna vaccines are, and how many people these vaccines killed.

I don't really know why we talk about VAERS, when thats literally just a reporting system and not a database where the causality is actually proven. I can have a headache or  a more serious problems after getting the vaccine and report those problems to that database, but that says nothing about what actually caused it. That database is only for a starting point for a further investigation, but that database alone proves nothing and says nothing about these issues.

There are a bunch of rigorous, peer reviewed studies that prove how unlikely it is, to get heart problems ,or  any other serious problem from these vaccines, and I have not seen any rigorous peer reviewed study that would prove otherwise. - I have only seen claims made and specualtion, but nothing that would actually rigorously prove the causality between mrna vaccines and a high likelyhood regarding serious problems and illnesses.

Edited April 3, 2023 by zurew