[B0ycey]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-55185119

This may well turn into a vaccination debate, but I found this article interesting and not on the specifics of vaccines but on free speech, or more importantly 'asking questions' which I think everyone should be doing anyway. So why is the lady being critised for asking questions? This vaccine has been pushed, created, tested and examined in ten months. The likelyhood is that it is safe. But didn't (not for you in the US) Thalidomide have the green light also? How did that work out? Professor Van Tan yesterday said the UK will not be giving this vaccine to pregnant women or children yet due to... wait for it... lack of data. He did explain that was because no pregnant women were trialled and this was precautionary but it is a signal that where other vaccines have had significant time to see the aftermath after testing and trials, this vaccine does not have that luxury.

This isn't advice to anyone not to take the vaccine nor was it's Wrights intention to do that also. I want to clarify that. But given the time frame and risk to reward, I am on the belief this vaccine should not be mandatory. If you are in a risk factor you should take this vaccine as soon as you get the opportunity. And if not, you should ask questions and decide the risk to reward. I know 'I am Legend' is just a movie, but if this turns out to be a global clusterfuck, who are we to blame? We are relying on ten months data here.

[AFAIK]

Couldn't you find a better example than an actress who doesn't know what she's talking about promoting a video in which the presenter openly admits they have no idea what they're talking about?

I'm going to practice my freedom of speech by calling these people's behaviour moronic.

[B0ycey]

I'm going to practice my freedom of speech by calling these people's behaviour moronic.

So do so. Isn't that the point?

The example is highlighted here. You conform because you accept the narrative despite not knowing what you are talking about. I wonder if ten months anyone truly knows what they are taking about. And in the UK we are taking precautionary measures because we don't know what we are taking about it seems.

I guess what their point is, which I think is obvious, they know their limitations. But being that something is being injected into them and they have reservations when we have officials say we do not have the data in vaccinate pregnant women and children because (of no fault of the vaccine btw) it has been rushed forward they question that. Is that wrong when they risk to reward is low to them in particular? Even a moron can see that it seems.

We are so fixated on 70% herd immunity that we will take any silver bullet and drive the narrative to the point of obsession. Perhaps the data is there to have confidence of the safety to a 70 year old man. It isn't there for a woman of child baring age. So if that's the case and someone wants to wait a few years just to be sure or whatever there reservations are now, I don't see why that is a bad thing.

[AFAIK]

I thought you didn't want this to be a vaccine debate.

In any case I'm not going to base my decision to trust a new vaccine on a youtube video by someone who doesn't know how vaccines work. I'm sure there are better sources out there. Remember when people blamed the MMR jab for increasing the rate of autism without evidence? How did that turn out?

[B0ycey]

I thought you didn't want this to be a vaccine debate.

Vaccination debate. I didn't want it to be about vaccination. That is to say we shouldn't be saying vaccination is bad or that people shouldn't be doing it. Questioning whether this specific vaccine has had time to be declared safe is a question everyone should be asking anyway. And another is whether the risk to reward is worth you taking it today. Which was Wrights point. She didn't say that people should not take the vaccine but they should be given the choice.

[AFAIK]

So this thread is about a specific vaccine? I thought you wanted to discuss the phenomena whereby people assert that my ignorance is just as valid as your expertise because we both have the same access to ballots and social media.

I don't have an issue with people questioning whether a fast tracked drug is safe to administer or not.

[B0ycey]

I don't have an issue with people questioning whether a fast tracked drug is safe to administer or not.

Indeed. I only brought this forward because of the hate she got for doing what we all should be doing anyway. I just didn't want Sivad to come alone with his antivax BS.

[AFAIK]

Looks like we're on the same page then.

[snapdragon]

All this woman had to do was find out about the subject first. Her claims are based on the fallacy that steps have been deliberately missed out in order to get the vaccine out quickly, when this isn’t the case. There’s no excuse for not knowing that. Not wishing to have the vaccine for whatever daft reason she might have is one thing, but pushing the idea the vaccine isn’t safe is quite another. She should shut the fuck up