Anti-Vaxxer Rally…Creepy?

[sp1814]

When anti-vaxxer rallies begin to look like
The Nuremberg Rally, should we be concerned:
https://twitter.com/marclister3k/status/1418907451190038533?s=21

If not, why not?

[pixie374]

Jim, if I know I have (or come into contact with) covid, I have had to isolate for 10 days. Having it, without knowing, masks and distance are enough.

[tomus42]

We should not be concerned. I've never had an issue with people that don't want to take the vaccine, unless they try to prevent me from taking it too. If they all want to gather together in the same place, again, that's up to them.

[jim360]

Nothing in what I've said was bullying. The comment about risks I accept to an extent, except that it's describing a common fallacy. The chances of catching Covid are far from negligible -- especially if the disease is spreading so widely. So I'm not sure that "likely never to get" is an accurate summation.

This doesn't invalidate the idea of personal choice. The freedom to make choices about personal health does include the freedom to make bad choices. I'll do my best to persuade people to get the vaccination, but I will do nothing to *force* them to. I might point Nailit to the recent stories of vaccine sceptics catching Covid and begging to be vaccinated, by which point it is too late to stop them catching it, or dying from it. I might point him to the data I've provided, which to the best of my knowledge are correct (or at least correct enough to make the point). And, finally, I will certainly challenge him on the idea that other people's health is nothing to do with him, which appears at the very least to be lacking any community spirit. But it stops at the point of frogmarching him to the vaccination centre.

[pixie374]

Why persuade, though? It's his choice. Surely, accurate info from both sides is the only way he can decide.

[jim360]

Providing accurate information is -- or, rather, ought to be -- persuasive in and of itself. There's no sense at all in which the risks of having the shot outweigh, or even come close to balancing, the benefits of having it.

[pixie374]

They have done for some. Then, why not just give both sides, instead of trying to persuade one way or another? It's a personal decision.

[jim360]

With a disease that's now endemic, personal decisions in isolation are impossible. So, the reason to persuade is because anybody choosing not to take the vaccine is keeping us one step further from attaining herd immunity.

Fortunately, despite his insistence otherwise, it's clear that Nailit is in a minority. Unfortunately, minorities refusing to get vaccinated have to be very small indeed to have no knock-on effects for the rest.

[pixie374]

I thought we had given up on herd immunity some time ago, and there are too many variants now?
But in any case, I would hate someone else to make the decision for my benefit, steamrollering people often has the opposite effect anyway. Information and choice... otherwise it isn't informed consent.

[Spicerack]

I know that knowledge is like Kryptonite to you lefties, SP, but there were many Nuremberg Rallies.
Was a time Lefty defended people's right to peaceful protest.
When/if they start with the arson/looting that other protestors indulge in you may become concerned. (or not, as is your want)

[nailit]

Try again...
Tried so many times to reply but couldnt when I c&p someone elses response.....strange!

Jim, Im not a covid denier.
But I am a (covid)vaccine sceptic, merely because I am worried about long term affects.
We know about any long term affects (if any) of other vaccines.
We know sod all about this.

//it's clear that Nailit is in a minority//
But that doesnt always make the majority true.
And doesnt answer my question or satisfy my concerns.
The 'majority' of people once believed that the Earth was flat and that leeches helped health.

The argument that the majority agree doesnt make it right.

[pixie374]

Out of interest, nailit, how long is "long-term"? And is there anything specific?
Tbh, I was only worried about short-term with the second one. Once the allergy effects went, I can't think of any further effects it might have?

[jim360]

// The 'majority' of people once believed that the Earth was flat ... //

This has (almost certainly) never actually been true, but that's more a point of pedantry. It's true that the majority is not always right, although I'm not sure that you can use that to deduce anything about the correctness of a given majority opinion. In this case, the opinion on vaccines is based on the evidence, of which there is now a lot -- more than just the initial studies, but also the roughly two billion jabs administered world-wide.

The long-term effects are by definition unknown at this point, although honestly I am not sure what you're even envisaging. The risks of most vaccines, when they exist, are overwhelmingly in the short-term -- people will occasionally suffer severe instant reactions, or something milder, but it is as far as I'm aware unheard-of that a vaccine has a detrimental effect to one's health after, say, five to ten years. The only long-term effect is immunity to a given disease, which may itself wear off over time.

[Mamyalynne]

The prospect of long Covid and how that has changed many people's lives worried me more than the possibility of a reaction to the vaccine.

That was part of my decision making process.

[jourdain2]

On the whole I am supporting Pixie and Nailit. I am not anti-vacc. (have had 2 jabs)but I am most strongly against the idea of vaccine passports and will refuse to get one. That way lies discrimination against a minority and I will not go along with it. Just substitute the word 'black' for 'unvaccinated' and you will see what I mean.

I'm even reading that 'the unvaccinated' should not be allowed to be teachers, doctors, lawyers - professional people generally. Surely that reminds some people of something that happened in the 1930s?

These demonstrations are not full of anti-vaxxers. They are full of anti-vax passport opinions and anti lockdowns and pro freedom of choice - which is what I thought we had in this country. Anger is growing. Youngsters are bitter and angry against older people who have had the jab and they feel forced into it when they won't be that poorly. It's horrible for society.

I even hear that the C of E is talking about 'vax-passports' to go to a service.... well that'll smash our church choir to bits, just as we are struggling back after lockdown. I won't do it and nor will a lot of (vaccinated) people.

[jim360]

Yes, indeed. If we are going on long-term risks, then Covid again wins. Maybe "only" about 0.5% of those who catch Covid die from it, but something in the region of a million people in the UK have suffered from long-term effects of it including, but not limited to, lung and brain damage. The true scale and definition of Long Covid isn't settled, again for obvious reasons, but this would probably raise the "risk factor" of catching Covid around tenfold. It's a nasty disease.

[pixie374]

I thought i responded, but it's not there. Jim, it's more about the vaccine, than covid. You are posting as if people will definitely get one or the other- and should just work out the risks.
Those aren't the only options though, many people won't get vaccinated and won't get covid either- it isn't a 50/50 gamble and I don't think it should be presented that way.

[pixie374]

Maybe I put it elsewhere lol. I also said to jourdain, thanks- carers are now being forced to have it. Even though they have prevented the spread by testing for many months. There's already a shortage of carers, without this too.

[Mamyalynne]

I responded too, a long reply and the thread closed on me.

I'm not typing it all again.

[nailit]

//I thought i responded, but it's not there.//
I responded as well but got deleted/shut down.
Posted so many replies to this thread but never made it. Weird.
I give up

[pixie374]

Ah ok, thanks.