🇳🇱
The thing about vaccines are, even if they dont work (and they probably dont at this point with delta) that the risk from them is so extraordinarily low that there is no reason not to get them.
You are at more risk of harm on your drive to the vaccine location than you actually are by getting the vaccine.
total worldwide death toll to date from the vaccine.... 5 people... 5 people out of over 400 million doses. I think the vaccine is useless but I still got vaccinated simply because there is no good argument not to.
@freemo you think the vaccine is useless?
@skells Based on most recent data, yes. If you had asked me a few weeks ago I would have said no.
@freemo with this logic it wouldn't take much uncertainty in risk to justify not taking the vaccine, via negativa
@skells Dont you need to also add in the uncertainty in my claim that the vaccine is useless then?
@freemo true, which leaves us at a wash.
interventions with high uncertainty add noise
@skells the claim here is not that ther eis high uncertainty but relatively low uncertainty.
The certainty that vaccines are safe is relatively high, and its safety is extraordinary high as well (5 deaths out of 400+ million doses)
The certainty that the vaccine is useless is moderate. the evidence is fairly suggestive that it is useless right now against delta, but its highly preliminary and stands a good chance of changing. so the certainty on this side is middling at best.
So from these two factors one would conclude the overwhelmingly obvious choice is to get the vaccine.
@freemo what evidence do you have for long term safety of the vaccine?
@skells The same evidence we have for all vaccines that over time have proven to be true. Over a year of data on 400+ million doses without the slightest hint of anything suspicious. As we know from vaccines in the past, and drug testing in general, this results in extremely high confidence in its safety into the future.
@freemo
1) There is plenty of evidence that vaccines are doing harm. We can disagree on the interpretation of that evidence but there is plenty to be concerned about.
2) The mechanisms which cause long term damage don't necessarily show up in the short term. It took decades for the results of radiation to play out in nuclear researchers.
@freemo it's very easy to hold your position when those who disagree with your are defined as stupid
I won't argue about this with you.
@skells incidentally it is also easy for me to hold my position when the people disagreeing with me are literally and actually stupid. Generally stupid people do a poor job at making a compelling case.
@skells
1) no there isnt, unless you define evidence as "stupid shit people make up". Chances are you call things evidence that doesnt remotely resemble evidence.
2) radiation is something completely new. vaccines are not new, and the RNA approach to vaccines are not your only option (there are classical vaccines). So no this is false, classical vaccines have been around for decades and we know well the risk. Yes there is some very small chance something novel could arrise. But we have done this so many times with so many vaccines and never had a problem the chance is vanishingly slim