The vaccine

[WiredIncorrectly]

I'm not having a vaccine, but i'm sure most will .

High five! Me neither.

[Gary A]

I think it’s important to question, and I agree that making it illegal to voice an opinion, no matter how misinformed the opinion is, merely confirms the idea of suppression. I’ve always thought that the best way to change an opinion is to engage in debate.

There are, however, some people who believe literally the first thing they read and the stick to it like glue. No amount of counter information will change their minds.

For me, I will make a decision on taking this vaccine when I feel I’ve been given enough information about it. I will always intend on taking a vaccine but there’s nothing at all wrong with waiting until you know enough to make an informed choice.

However, I feel there are far too many people who have simply decided they’re not taking this vaccine when the required information hasn’t even been made available. We know that initial results are showing 90% efficacy, we know there have been no serious. adverse events traced in any trial sans we know it’s a technology that’s never been approved in vaccination before.

Isn’t it far more sensible to make your decision when all the data becomes available?

[WiredIncorrectly]

Isn’t it far more sensible to make your decision when all the data becomes available?

I'd have more hopes of getting blood from a stone. I believe there will never be full transparency with COVID. We're just plebs. All we can go on is the information given which is: the numbers, the media, and one everybody should use ... Google Scholar. I only trust the later. The media is covered with liter. The Daily Mail comment section is disturbing.

believe literally the first thing they read and the stick to it like glue. No amount of counter information will change their minds.

A great many. They're idiots. I don't think we should be protecting the idiots from unsafe data. Instead, educate them on how to make decisions. My argument has always been to teach Philosophy in schools for this reason. It promotes logical thinking.

[Pamplemousse]

I've always been of the mindset that the Internet has always been an open communication platform where you can say and do as you please (if that lands you in legal troubles because of what you say that's your own fault ... i.e slander)

Just to be pedantic for a moment, WI; defamation in the spoken word is slander, but defamation in the published word - be it written or spoken in broadcast - is libel.

[WiredIncorrectly]

Just to be pedantic for a moment, WI; defamation in the spoken word is slander, but defamation in the published word - be it written or spoken in broadcast - is libel.

Thank you Please be pedantic, I enjoy learning the differences. My vocabulary range (you're going to be pedantic here. I feel there's another word I should have used.) is limited. I'm reading Necronomicon at the moment. I've noticed in chats with friends it's causing me to write in peculiar ways.

[Gary A]

I'd have more hopes of getting blood from a stone. I believe there will never be full transparency with COVID. We're just plebs. All we can go on is the information given which is: the numbers, the media, and one everybody should use ... Google Scholar. I only trust the later. The media is covered with liter. The Daily Mail comment section is disturbing.



A great many. They're idiots. I don't think we should be protecting the idiots from unsafe data. Instead, educate them on how to make decisions. My argument has always been to teach Philosophy in schools for this reason. It promotes logical thinking.

This is where I’m confused by the idea of not being given the data or only being fed a certain narrative. Information has never been so readily available and yet we seem to live in an age where people believe more than ever that we’re just “plebs” who are kept in the dark.

There are literally laws in place that mean we can have the ability to research whatever we damn well please. Perhaps it’s not so much about the lack of available information than it is more a lack of good sources. Personally, the only people I listen to when it comes to vaccination are the people who live and breathe in that world.

Virologists, epidemiologists, infectious disease experts, immunologists. I have no interest in taking my information from anywhere else. Sometimes it’s hard reading, sometimes it gives you a headache but it’s certainly worth looking to those people rather than obscure websites and tabloid newspapers.

[WiredIncorrectly]

This is where I’m confused by the idea of not being given the data or only being fed a certain narrative.

A lot of it fake. A lot of it misinformed. A lot of it ill informed. A lot of it munged together for clickbait.

[Gary A]

A lot of it fake. A lot of it misinformed. A lot of it ill informed. A lot of it munged together for clickbait.

So how do you define fake? You’ve already said you won’t be taking this vaccine but I’m curious to know why. I’m not trying to force your hand either way, as I said I haven’t reached a decision myself, but what is the reason for you refusing it?

Again, not saying you’re wrong, not saying you’re misinformed or whatever, I’m just wondering what info it is that’s swung your decision toward refusal?

[WiredIncorrectly]

So how do you define fake?

Something that is made to be true, but lacks evidence.

You’ve already said you won’t be taking this vaccine but I’m curious to know why. I’m not trying to force your hand either way, as I said I haven’t reached a decision myself, but what is the reason for you refusing it? Again, not saying you’re wrong, not saying you’re misinformed or whatever, I’m just wondering what info it is that’s swung your decision toward refusal?

Come on Gary, you've read my stuff on RNA?

[AntsyVee]

What would it take to get you to get a Covid vaccine? Do you get your other vaccines, James?