They predicted mandates, year long restriction, lies about vaccine safety and information manipulation and were actually proved correct on many issues. PhD belong to the most skeptical group of people as do the most stupid ones.
People have predicted that vaccinated people will die in droves. They did not. One the other hand it was also predicted that the unvaccinated do the same. They did not either. Countries without access to vaccination did relatively fine. We will have this discussion again in next autumn.
I am just against vaccines mandates, good control groups (not optional in any scientific endeavour based on statistics) are necessary and I am for the freedom to choose. I am not responsible for the perceived safety of others. I am an anti-vaxxer now, I identify with this position and even support people that plainly deny the existence of the virus. Anti-vaxxer were not a problem, but some people made them one. Shame on them.
It’s ever so convenient to be against the mandates until you need to go to the hospital, and then whoops sorry it’s full of people who got their medical advice from the internet.
And to be clear, 100% of those who refuse the vaccine and get a bad case, immediately and ever so conveniently start trusting doctors again, tuck their tails between their legs and run to the nearest hospital.
Even the average flu season every year before Covid put hospitals in peril because they were streamlined to always run at 100% workload. So every disruption has this consequence.
Yeah or it's full because of people being treated for side effects, but the authorities don't want anyone to know about that, so they don't collect data on it or they collect fraudulent data.
See how in Germany the head of an insurance firm wrote an open letter saying his countries stats on vaccine injuries were wildly out of line with claims with vaccine injury billing codes. For pointing this out, his company fired him. Anyone making claims about hospital load change due to vaccines cannot be reliable, for this reason. The data just isn't there and sadly it's deliberate.
In Veneto, Italy, last months 8 out of 10 people in ICU were unvaccinated, or not completely vaccinated, there's plenty of news and studies about it, no question about it. Considering 80% of people is vaccinated, that's a lot. Anti-vaxxer have been a problem, a big one.
First three categories are talked about, the fourth category is seldom discussed. These are people who will let the dust settle before taking a call. What I mean by "dust settle"? Well, people would first like to see that the vaccines are stabilised, enough data is there to get a vaccine if there is no requirement from medical standpoint(a UK doctor went viral during pandemic when he confronted the UK health secretary on forced vaccination).
The way the pandemic was handled seemed like a panic and blame-game by politicians, play-safe by scientists, and money-making by pharma.
There are really good videos by Dr. Jay Bhattacharya on this topic.
Agree that it's very important to distinguish between the various categories of people. Clearly, having doubts about the wisdom of lockdowns is entirely different from believing that Covid is a hoax.
Abstract: Denial of the existence of Coronavirus, a distinct position from respectable critiques of lockdowns and extensions of vaccine rollouts, might be dismissed as unreasonable. Notwithstanding this, arguments that right-populist attitudes are unreasonable have clear limits, failing to appreciate the functions of right-populist views. For example, opposition to immigration promotes continuity of local conditions, low-education voters valuing this. If we are to understand the appeal of right-populist positions and decide whether certain positions should be excluded from public debate, we must establish the limits of reasonable debate.
> we must establish the limits of reasonable debate.
Not sure we need to do that for society as a whole. There's a difference between us, common people, and people with platforms, either private, or state-provided. These last two groups could be regulated, because misleading the public can have dire consequences to society.
I always suggest we should make lying or misrepresenting facts while representing a government (from school councils to president), should be considered a very serious criminal offence. Humanity cannot afford to have presidents who suggest drinking bleach may be a good idea or that COVID vaccines can turn you into an alligator. The only plausible excuse to lie for a government figure is national security, as misinformation can play a role that benefits society there.
The bleach story has been fact checked as false multiple times but I think you make an interesting point about accountability in govt. I don't think is realistic though.
What should you do about things that are fluid? Should the current administration be held accountable for the "lies" they told about the vaccines and how they would prevent you from getting COVID? They represented them as facts.
> I always suggest we should make lying or misrepresenting facts while representing a government (from school councils to president), should be considered a very serious criminal offence.
You mean like claiming that Trump advocated drinking bleach? That kind of lying or misrepresentation?
Immigration is beneficial for wealthier citizens. Depending on the demographic they do depress wages because expectations are simply lower. They also compete especially with people in low-income brackets. A rising GDP from immigration is trivial, it does not mean that it is beneficial for everyone in society. On the contrary, I think some economic predictions just fall very short here and that they might be correct about their reservations because they can see that they need to compete with more people.
If your local conditions are better than 95% of the globe, why would not promoting local condition be ever irrational?
A local nonprofit healthcare organization (IHC, also started a nonprofit pharmaceuticals manufacturer with partners, to deal with shortages) has won my trust, in general. My wife and I know some medical people who have dealt with patients, and others who have lost loved ones to covid-19. The state hospital association concurs w/ the above: vaccines save lives. I also have high trust in two particular doctors (cardiologists, one a global pioneer and trainer in the field, now retired from it) that have responsible positions in the church I belong to, and others who have confirmed basically what the CDC says about vaccines and masks. Another one of those leaders pointed out that no one has a right to infect others (ie, vacc. and masks show we care about others who are more vulnerable). Edit: So basically I know enough about their honesty and competence to trust their professional/medical judgement.
I also dislike the idea of vaccine mandates. But I think the wise will usually get vaccinated.
I also know a very smart mechnical engineer who opposes masks, vaccines, and suffered a harsh recovery period from covid-19. I really like the guy and his family, and he has been good to us on multiple occasions when I was sick etc. I think misinfo is spread by those who want to weaken society and trust, but that has been discussed more elsewhere.
Unfortunately doctors who voice doubts about anything governments say on vaccines tend to lose their license to practice, so actually, doctors are much less reliable on this than engineers would be. The latter don't have to worry about professional blacklisting.
The CDC has proven completely unreliable on both vaccines and masks unfortunately. The mask studies they published are laughable and CDC vaccine stats conflate "unknown vaccine status" with "unvaccinated", which is obviously not valid.
You can believe people at your local church if you wish, but, that does not change the facts on the ground.
I think the CDC is made up largely of humans who have been doing their best with limited information that has increased over time.
But importantly, those I cited originally (not including the CDC) are people we know well or personally, not just at our local church, who have earned our trust and that of others by their continued competence and behavior over time. They include medical people (at least 3-4 doctors and at least one nurse, now that I think more about it). They include local news reporting organizations made of people I have come to trust, who report what the hospitals and hospital association has been saying, based on their experiences, overcrowding, who gets sickest, etc, and their professional knowledge. Not just one source for this information, but multiple, trusted, known, and mutually-corroborating. Some who lost loved ones. All of this vastly more so than any typical flu season. Also my wife's father remembers well, what life was like before the polio vaccine and how everyone ("every mother's son" as he put it) wanted a vaccine to avoid that grief, once it became available.
The engineer I mentioned, that I know fairly well, also said after his difficult illness, that it would have been worth it to get vaccinated, in retrospect. So maybe earlier I should have said "opposed" the vaccine instead of "opposes".
I don't personally know of cases where doctors lost their licenses because of voicing doubts. For those that you mentioned as losing licenses, do you know them or the reporters personally, with a chain of trust starting from the original, clearly identified, observer?
I see government as made of many humans, with varying degrees of trustworthiness and competence, and therefore there is the importance of careful vetting of sources, and corroboration across such trusted sources.
I am curious as to your views on the 1) purpose of government. Also its 2) present nature. And 3) about the principles underlying the US Constitution, and 4) how to determine what sources to trust.
Thanks for the discussion, and all best wishes to you. :)
Who denies covid exists? Cant see anyone in that group.
Who denies the claimed severity of covid19 being equivalent to the spanish flu? Hopefully everyone stands up... because that's completely deniable now. However, that's the claim that justified the unprecedented actions of locking down civilization. As opposed to the established standard of locking down just the sick.
Who has lost faith and trust in the medical professionals turn politician because of the endless lies as proven?
How about the misrepresentation of health measures taken throughout the process? How about the endless human rights violations.
How many people lost their job because they were pregnant and couldn't get vaccinated? The list of medicines allowed during pregnancy is VERY low. A pamphlet would be too big. Business card would suffice. Oh but you want to say the vaccine is safe for preggos? LOL. No... you just wanted to fire all those pregnant nurses. But wait... werent nurses in huge demand before covid... now you fired a bunch? Now you have such a shortage that you are obligating nurses to work insane hours?
>There are certainly people who think that Covid is a hoax. There aren't many, but they do exist.
Sure, but there's no point writing an article about such a non-existent position. Unless the point is to strawman. Which we have seen far too much of lately.
Readit News
People have predicted that vaccinated people will die in droves. They did not. One the other hand it was also predicted that the unvaccinated do the same. They did not either. Countries without access to vaccination did relatively fine. We will have this discussion again in next autumn.
I am just against vaccines mandates, good control groups (not optional in any scientific endeavour based on statistics) are necessary and I am for the freedom to choose. I am not responsible for the perceived safety of others. I am an anti-vaxxer now, I identify with this position and even support people that plainly deny the existence of the virus. Anti-vaxxer were not a problem, but some people made them one. Shame on them.
And to be clear, 100% of those who refuse the vaccine and get a bad case, immediately and ever so conveniently start trusting doctors again, tuck their tails between their legs and run to the nearest hospital.
See how in Germany the head of an insurance firm wrote an open letter saying his countries stats on vaccine injuries were wildly out of line with claims with vaccine injury billing codes. For pointing this out, his company fired him. Anyone making claims about hospital load change due to vaccines cannot be reliable, for this reason. The data just isn't there and sadly it's deliberate.
0. Covid deniers.
1. Anti-vaxxers.
2. Proponents of herd immunity
3. Fencers
First three categories are talked about, the fourth category is seldom discussed. These are people who will let the dust settle before taking a call. What I mean by "dust settle"? Well, people would first like to see that the vaccines are stabilised, enough data is there to get a vaccine if there is no requirement from medical standpoint(a UK doctor went viral during pandemic when he confronted the UK health secretary on forced vaccination).
The way the pandemic was handled seemed like a panic and blame-game by politicians, play-safe by scientists, and money-making by pharma.
There are really good videos by Dr. Jay Bhattacharya on this topic.
Not sure we need to do that for society as a whole. There's a difference between us, common people, and people with platforms, either private, or state-provided. These last two groups could be regulated, because misleading the public can have dire consequences to society.
I always suggest we should make lying or misrepresenting facts while representing a government (from school councils to president), should be considered a very serious criminal offence. Humanity cannot afford to have presidents who suggest drinking bleach may be a good idea or that COVID vaccines can turn you into an alligator. The only plausible excuse to lie for a government figure is national security, as misinformation can play a role that benefits society there.
You mean like claiming that Trump advocated drinking bleach? That kind of lying or misrepresentation?
If your local conditions are better than 95% of the globe, why would not promoting local condition be ever irrational?
Who is "we", and why do they get to decide?
I also dislike the idea of vaccine mandates. But I think the wise will usually get vaccinated.
I also know a very smart mechnical engineer who opposes masks, vaccines, and suffered a harsh recovery period from covid-19. I really like the guy and his family, and he has been good to us on multiple occasions when I was sick etc. I think misinfo is spread by those who want to weaken society and trust, but that has been discussed more elsewhere.
The CDC has proven completely unreliable on both vaccines and masks unfortunately. The mask studies they published are laughable and CDC vaccine stats conflate "unknown vaccine status" with "unvaccinated", which is obviously not valid.
You can believe people at your local church if you wish, but, that does not change the facts on the ground.
But importantly, those I cited originally (not including the CDC) are people we know well or personally, not just at our local church, who have earned our trust and that of others by their continued competence and behavior over time. They include medical people (at least 3-4 doctors and at least one nurse, now that I think more about it). They include local news reporting organizations made of people I have come to trust, who report what the hospitals and hospital association has been saying, based on their experiences, overcrowding, who gets sickest, etc, and their professional knowledge. Not just one source for this information, but multiple, trusted, known, and mutually-corroborating. Some who lost loved ones. All of this vastly more so than any typical flu season. Also my wife's father remembers well, what life was like before the polio vaccine and how everyone ("every mother's son" as he put it) wanted a vaccine to avoid that grief, once it became available.
The engineer I mentioned, that I know fairly well, also said after his difficult illness, that it would have been worth it to get vaccinated, in retrospect. So maybe earlier I should have said "opposed" the vaccine instead of "opposes".
I don't personally know of cases where doctors lost their licenses because of voicing doubts. For those that you mentioned as losing licenses, do you know them or the reporters personally, with a chain of trust starting from the original, clearly identified, observer?
I see government as made of many humans, with varying degrees of trustworthiness and competence, and therefore there is the importance of careful vetting of sources, and corroboration across such trusted sources.
I am curious as to your views on the 1) purpose of government. Also its 2) present nature. And 3) about the principles underlying the US Constitution, and 4) how to determine what sources to trust.
Thanks for the discussion, and all best wishes to you. :)
Who denies the claimed severity of covid19 being equivalent to the spanish flu? Hopefully everyone stands up... because that's completely deniable now. However, that's the claim that justified the unprecedented actions of locking down civilization. As opposed to the established standard of locking down just the sick.
Who has lost faith and trust in the medical professionals turn politician because of the endless lies as proven?
How about the misrepresentation of health measures taken throughout the process? How about the endless human rights violations.
How many people lost their job because they were pregnant and couldn't get vaccinated? The list of medicines allowed during pregnancy is VERY low. A pamphlet would be too big. Business card would suffice. Oh but you want to say the vaccine is safe for preggos? LOL. No... you just wanted to fire all those pregnant nurses. But wait... werent nurses in huge demand before covid... now you fired a bunch? Now you have such a shortage that you are obligating nurses to work insane hours?
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/nurses-union-submits...
Oh wow. Nobody saw that coming /sarcasm.
Sure, but there's no point writing an article about such a non-existent position. Unless the point is to strawman. Which we have seen far too much of lately.