Is that another devil’s advocate position? Or does it really not make sense to you?
No, that argument does not make sense to me. If there wasn’t money in vaccines, drug companies wouldn’t make them.
Pfizer have agreed to supply the vaccine at cost…so no, there’s literally no money to be made curing acute disease.
But this thread is about vaccines in general.
(I’m not supporting the “they’ve got shares in XYZ therefore it’s all bollocks” argument btw. We’ve pretty much all got shares in XYZ, one way or another.)
If there wasn’t money in vaccines, drug companies wouldn’t make them.
There is money in vaccines. But vaccines save money. If all you wanted was to maximise profits for drugs companies and other healthcare suppliers, you wouldn’t develop a vaccine for anything.
There is money in vaccines. But vaccines save money.
What they are trying to say is that there is even more money in long-term treatment of acute illnesses
This will soon be sorted out when flat-roofed pubs and package holiday companies refuse entry to the unvaccinated.
Like the former will check for anything! I think one of the biggest dangers is this sort of statement to be honest. Looking down on people because of socioeconomic status is probably one of the things that drives them to believing conspiracies in the first place. Somewhere to belong and to be heard when the rest of society shuns you. I don’t know what the answer is, I wish I did. Arguing won’t get you anywhere but neither will ignoring them.
One thing (among countless things) that confuses me is how do the Trumpians square away Trumps anti-mask virtue-signaling with Trump’s actual pro-vaxx virtue-signaling?
Tramp had, and gave, no ideological reason for not wearing a mask. His supporters saw it as him leading by example and invented their own reasons for not wearing one.
The reason Trump didn't wear a mask was because its not compatible with wearing makeup.
Looking down on people because of socioeconomic status is probably one of the things that drives them to believing conspiracies in the first place. Somewhere to belong and to be heard when the rest of society shuns you. I don’t know what the answer is, I wish I did. Arguing won’t get you anywhere but neither will ignoring them.
One of the wisest things I've read on here for a while.
So, now I've had the virus, any need for me to have the vaccine?
Apart from big brother telling me I can't do shit unless I have it?
^^ Your immunity will wain in time just like the vaccine immunity will. That's before mutations like the flu vaccine has to deal with each year.
In reality though, ask your gp/ health professional when offered it mate. Like most on here, I'm not a doctor.lol
This thread has moved on a lot since I last checked in but @chrispo has a lot of questions.
We are adverse to anti-vaxxers not because they disagree with us but because as someone (Northwind? I forget) said a couple of pages back, they kill people. They literally kill people, totally needlessly and unavoidably. Just think about that for a moment.
Is it not almost laughably ironic that you're defending these nuggets as being statistically insignificant when their own arguments about harm from vaccinations is also statistically insignificant and almost certainly more so?
And sure, there are other crimes against society. Speeding motorists kill people. Passive smoking kills people. But... so what? There's plenty of forum threads talking about driving and there's at least a front page index's worth of brexit threads, are you rocking up in any of those going "yeah, but what about anti-vaxxers?" This is just irrelevant whataboutery, sorry.
It's perfectly understandable that a parent will be worried sick about doing the right thing, I get that. But they're just concerned mothers and fathers. The anti-vaxxers are a different breed, they're basically a cult, hitting the streets trying to kill as many people as they can.
And unrepentant see you next Tuesdays like Andrew Wakefield have blood on their hands and should be in jail.
The fact that vaccine hesitancy hasn’t stopped vaccines working would seem to undermine all the hatred for those people.
You do realise, don't you, that this isn't binary? A vaccine in this context does not either a) wholly eradicate a disease or b) is ineffectual? The fact is that your cuddly-sounding "vaccine hesitancy" which came about from the tabloids getting wind of Wakefield's MMR publication resulted in a massive upswing in infection rates in the UK (NB: and pretty much exclusively the UK). Which was stupid in itself because his fraudulent 'conclusion' was against the multi-inoculation rather than individual jabs, not against vaccination in general.
Mary Toft
Lol. That was new to me. Was that the inspiration for magicians pulling rabbits out of a hat?
Maybe it was just a pubic hare?
Wakefield’s MMR publication resulted in a massive upswing in infection rates in the UK (NB: and pretty much exclusively the UK). Which was stupid in itself because his fraudulent ‘conclusion’ was against the multi-inoculation rather than individual jabs, not against vaccination in general.
Aye, but it was all but impossible to get the individual injections as the GPs/NHS wouldn't provide them when asked. That resulted in many folk not getting any of the three. In fact, when asked, our GP claimed not to know anything at all about the Wakefield study and refused to read it when offered. While he may have been proven correct, he was simply not willing to even consider the possibility that there might be an issue. That sort of closed mind approach actually helped fuel the ire and determination of many folk against the MMR.
viciously attack anyone that doesn’t toe their virtue signalling line
Funny old world we live in as being virtuous and trying to promote the same is surely a good thing?
Just a pet dislike of mine, note I don't say hate.
Just a pet dislike of mine, note I don’t say hate.
There's nothing wrong with being virtuous. There's nothing wrong with trying to promote those virtues.
There's plenty wrong with attacking people who don't adopt your personal views
This becomes even more relevant when maybe you aren't really as virtuous as you like people to believe you are.
That's not necessarily true of anyone in particular on here, but I'd wager a few aren't quite as virtuous as they like their public image to portray and certainly plenty just waiting to jump down your throat should you dare disagree with them.
I'm no anti-vaxxer - daughter had her MMR, without a moments consideration. I do however reserve the human right that I am entitled to make a considered decision whether I will be injected with anything
Looking down on people because of socioeconomic status is probably one of the things that drives them to believing conspiracies in the first place.
If you want respect then don't do/say stupid things.
I am entitled to make a considered decision whether I will be injected with anything
If course you are. But if that decision has a negative impact on society, then you may be treated differently by those around you or, in the extreme case, rules can be put in place that deny you some of the benefits of society. It’s like road use… your freedoms are restricted somewhat by the expectations of others and laws of the land… primarily to save lives. Forced injection should always be resisted… I don’t think a single person has said otherwise in this thread.
Freedom works for everyone. Someone is free to refuse a vaccine - someone else is free not to allow that first person into their shop, bar, restaurant or school.
Just seems a bit rich coming from a bunch of socialists talking about removing some of benefits of society if you don't do as you are told.
Think about it
Scotroute's point about some doctors not engaging with worried parents about individual injections is a good one. I had friends who paid for single injections privately (I didn't) because they were worried and could afford it.
One of the good things about the Covid vaccines is that all the major religions have pre-emptively stated that people of their faith can take the vaccines. Getting the problems (e.g. origin of the cell line used to produce the vaccine) out in the open is the best way to build consensus. Consensus is the best way to stop anti vaxxers.
Should we also scrap speed limits then? They're for the benefit of us all but limit our freedoms to do what we want. Most of the time the impact is on the speeders themselves, occasionally some collateral damage.
The anti-vaxxers are a different breed, they’re basically a cult, hitting the streets trying to kill as many people as they can.
The pubic hare joke was very funny to be fair, but this isn’t. There are plenty of people who quietly choose not to vaccinate and do not try to influence others.
Out of interest, can you tell me how many people these murderers actually kill?
I understand that any attempt to bring perspective to the debate will be dismissed as whataboutery, but every time we buy something for our bikes we are choosing not to feed or inoculate kids in the developing world who will then die. Does that make us murderers? Of course, this is a false equivalence. We are knowingly being selfish, whereas the antivaxxers for all their faults are trying to do the right thing.
As someone just said, it’s not black and white. I am not an antivaxxer but I am dealing with someone who is, and you still haven’t convinced me that I should join the baying mob.
Boris just needs to man up and do what Jacinda Ardern has done and pass a law that makes mandatory vaccinations possible.
Which ‘law’ is that please? I had a quick search(to no avail) but thought that maybe if you had a link then it could/would save me/others considerable time trying to locate/guess which law you’re referencing?
Just seems a bit rich coming from a bunch of socialists talking about removing some of benefits of society if you don’t do as you are told.
You mean, like paying taxes?
I am not an antivaxxer but I am dealing with someone who is, and you still haven’t convinced me that I should join the baying mob.
Assuming you are talking about the new vaccines… leave them to it, we’re a long way off having enough. If it’s the older vaccines, keep them the hell away from anyone who can’t have those vaccines for medical reasons.
You mean, like paying taxes?
Eh?
Paying your taxes… that’s something you do to benefit society, not just yourself, and there are social penalties for not doing so. You’ll find “socialists”, which seems to be the label for anyone to the left of Raab these days, are keen on people being encouraged to pay their taxes.
Erm, ok.....
Just seems a bit rich coming from a bunch of socialists talking about removing some of benefits of society if you don’t do as you are told.
It just seems a bit rich for individualists to think they should get all the benefits of society with none of the responsibilities.
I understand that any attempt to bring perspective to the debate will be dismissed as whataboutery, but every time we buy something for our bikes we are choosing not to feed or inoculate kids in the developing world who will then die.
Not just whataboutery but some kind of slippery slope/whataboutery/straw man hybrid - bravo!
Looking down on people because of socioeconomic status is probably one of the things that drives them to believing conspiracies in the first place.
If you want respect then don’t do/say stupid things.
The doing or saying stupid things comes after not before. Also plenty of people who say and do stupid things have respect. Trump, reality stars etc all have respect from some quarters. Belittling people doesn’t help them come around to your way of thinking. Far from it in fact, it seems to entrench existing views.
Not just whataboutery but some kind of slippery slope/whataboutery/straw man hybrid – bravo!
Thank you!
But are you not at all concerned about the double standard? (Not that you should live life according to my extreme example, but perhaps that the hatred of non-vaxxers is perhaps inappropriate/disproportionate?)
What's non-vax?
It's that like an anti-vaxxer trying earnestly not to look like they're against vaccination?
You're either for/compliant or against. There isn't room for nuances and shades in this debate.
There are plenty of people who quietly choose not to vaccinate and do not try to influence others.
They are not the anti-vaxxers that were being referred to. It's the incredibly vocal ones that insult or abuse anyone who disagrees with their misguided sense of self importance that are being talked about
It just seems a bit rich for individualists to think they should get all the benefits of society with none of the responsibilities.
Just so we are clear, you think that social benefits should be removed for people that don't stand up and take responsibilities for things?
Ooh, goodo, as long as this can be applied to a broader spectrum and not just the bits of life that suit your agenda
Who’s agenda? The agenda of those wanting the current medical emergency over, so that we can get society, the economy, families, travel, medical care… back to full strength? A pandemic can only be dealt with and done away with by most people talking their share of responsibility.
Or the agenda of those who want to protect those in society who can’t be vaccinated from age old viruses, by the rest of us ensuring we and our children are vaccinated?
Which “agenda”?
Which “agenda”?
Whichever agenda it is on any given day when you are applying your double standards.
I'll ask the question again. Are you advocating removing existing social benefits and liberties for people who don't do what they are told. Subject matter irrelevant, are you wanting to go down that road, because you are setting a precedent if you do?
Sounds a bit like communism to me
Just so we are clear, you think that social benefits should be removed for people that don’t stand up and take responsibilities for things?
If you don’t mind me saying, that has more than a whiff of...
...about it! Wouldn’t you say?
Are you advocating removing existing social benefits and liberties for people who don’t do what they are told. Subject matter irrelevant, are you wanting to go down that road, because you are setting a precedent if you do?
Is it a precedent? Just thinking of the speeding analogy again.
Ah, the strawman card when you can't be arsed to think of an argument. Well done.
If you don’t mind me saying, that has more than a whiff of…
…about it! Wouldn’t you say?
Not at all, we are talking about restricting social benefits (or at least that was mentioned) for people who won't do as they are told.
I've decided that anyone who can't find a job can go and do a bit of community work for their benefits. Don't want to - ok, let's remove your benefits, or some other social liberty. No? That would be against your human rights, or some other twaddle.
The speeding analogy isn't the same, you may as well just drag up any law you can think of.
Ah, the strawman card when you >>another strawman goes here<<
🙄
Subject matter irrelevant
Please explain why subject matter/specifics aren’t relevant? For example (to entertain the emerging ‘commulism’ dialogue) - I had to get jabs in order to apply for a US residency. This ‘allowed me the social benefits’ ie - I could work, buy a home, use domestic travel services, go to stores and bars, get healthcare, etc etc. But unless I had those vaccinations all of that would be unavailable to me.
(Amusing anecdote) the building I had to attend for the medical interview and document stamping was No. 777. I am generally skeptical of conspiracy and illuminati stuff but it gave me momentary pause for just long enough to imagine how a less skeptical mind might have processed that simple fact.
Q. Can I be forced to be vaccinated for immigration purposes?
A. If you refuse to receive the vaccines required for immigration purposes, as mandated by the immigration laws of the United States, your application for legal permanent resident status may be denied.https://www.uscis.gov/tools/designated-civil-surgeons/vaccination-requirements
Just seems a bit rich coming from a bunch of socialists talking about removing some of benefits of society if you don’t do as you are told.
The problem being that if you don't do as you're told in this instance there will be no society to benefit/milk funds from.
As long as the recalcitrant accept that they will not be permitted to rejoin society until they comply with the new rules I personally have no problem with them rejecting the vaccine. To be clear that goes for those also recovered from the virus as we are not sure that this confers long term immunity.
As long as the recalcitrant accept that they will not be permitted to rejoin society until they comply with the new rules I personally have no problem with them rejecting the vaccine.
Just f***ing wow
Just seems a bit rich coming from a bunch of socialists talking about removing some of benefits of society if you don’t do as you are told.
Think about it
If you think about it, some of the worst abuses of human rights have been under the cover of "socialist" regimes.
It's as if any policy or thought, taken to the extremes, might be dangerous.
But going along with a sensible middle of the road interpretation for the benefit of the majority will never catch on in this place. Too much fun to be had arguing from one extreme or the other 😀
I had to get jabs in order to apply for a US residency. This ‘allowed me the social benefits’ ie – I could work, buy a home, use domestic travel services, go to stores and bars, get healthcare, etc etc. But unless I had those vaccinations all of that would be unavailable to me.
You are adopting a set of pre-existing rules to make a change to your life. If you can't see the difference, then there is no point discussing.
Sounds a bit like communism to me
Well, the countries I know about that require vaccinations for full social rights are Australia and the USA… neither of which have a history of having much truck for communism. Public health isn’t really a left/right thing. Not sure why you think mass-vaccination is some kind of left wing conspiracy.
So if vaccination should be compulsory in the UK, why isn’t it?
You are adopting a set of pre-existing rules to make a change to your life. If you can’t see the difference, then there is no point discussing.
No, of course I’m aware of the difference. Ironically, what you missed was my ‘point’. Which is that there *is possibly no point* discussing if we do not discuss ‘specifics’. I gave you an instance of a specific, not of an equivalent. Now you can discuss how or not my requirement to be vaccinated was ‘communism’ or ‘not communism’. In fact please do. Without specifics this discussion is heading to the youtube comment thread where every antiwokewoker accuses everyone else of commulism or nazism
