Hi, Guest

Author Topic: Coronavirus (Covid-19) Discussion  (Read 70616 times)

Offline cwcaswell

  • Haraki-san Student
  • **
  • Join Date: Jun 2021
    • View Profile
Re: Coronavirus (Covid-19) Discussion
« Reply #1125 on: Today at 09:48:06 pm »
Could the media be off in their numbers? Sure, but we know the disease is deadly and has lasting effects. It is worth trying to mitigate this disease in the wild at least until we better understand it.

Not sure what agenda you think the media is pursuing here but all signs point to getting stuck.

I definitely agree with most of your points here, but I do have to say that the media does enjoy maximizing our reactions to this and always has a tendency of hyper inflating data to serve their purpose. The media isn’t ran for the sake of public education anymore, it’s ran as a business. How do you keep a customer? I don’t think they’re ashamed of using fear

Offline mclaincausey

  • 見習いボス
  • *******
  • Join Date: Apr 2013
  • Swerve de Nîmes
    • View Profile
Re: Coronavirus (Covid-19) Discussion
« Reply #1126 on: Today at 09:58:30 pm »
Once again, these statements don't withstand the most trivial scrutiny.

I know you have insisted that comparing yourself to other, vaccinated people is valid, but as explained above, it is not. The important question is, will you, your loved ones, and your community, all else aside, be safer if you vaccinate or if you don't? From a logical perspective the answer is clearly that vaccination is the safer choice.

The preponderance of peer reviewed and hospital data do not support your position either. Again, upwards of 98% of hospitalizations in every geography I've seen figures for have been unvaccinated patients. And the vaccines have generally been very safe. You really have to look hard for the few edge case exceptions to that. And when you look at charts comparing vaccination rates to hospitalizations, a very strong (inverse) linear correlation is always there. From a data perspective, the answer is clear.

Sure, you have a personal view that animal testing is unnecessary. You're letting this personal belief take a part in guiding a public act (not getting vaccinated is very much a public decision, because it impacts the entire community). I consider this a non sequitur, as at the end of the day at least the animals would not have had their lives taken in vain if the vaccines are allowed to serve their purpose of protecting people's health, which is compromised every time people who are able to vaccinate fail to do so. Then your personal decision and public action are likely to add up to a (public) problem for other people (as well as a personal problem for you). And the animals are still dead, only their lives mean a little bit less. Meanwhile, human life is jeapordized by your decision. From a moral perspective, the answer is clear, as ultimately, you're not helping the animals, and you're potentially harming yourself and your community.

So the math doesn't add up. Which is fine, but it would be a lot easier to say "I don't want to take the vaccine" without attaching reasons to that decision that don't make sense.

But I guess you are helping yourself and maybe that's all that matters. Perhaps in your moral universe feeling morally superior is more important than utilitarianism, and however misguided that may be in my eyes, it is your right to be wrong.

I hope you think more deeply about the decision and its broader impact, and that's all else I'll say on the topic.
« Last Edit: Today at 10:02:20 pm by mclaincausey »
Think it, be it.

Offline mclaincausey

  • 見習いボス
  • *******
  • Join Date: Apr 2013
  • Swerve de Nîmes
    • View Profile
Re: Coronavirus (Covid-19) Discussion
« Reply #1127 on: Today at 10:01:20 pm »
I would agree @cwcaswell that the media is a sensationalism machine, which is why you have to think things through without panicking based on what they say. And that includes not reflexively taking a contrarian position to their narratives, but rather thinking through the best course of action.
Think it, be it.