Then why isn't it mandatory? What are there no laws stating that people must accept the covid vaccine, or else face dire legal and penal consequences?
— baker
Mandatory where? Mandated by whom? — Fooloso4
Then why isn't it mandatory? What are there no laws stating that people must accept the covid vaccine, or else face dire legal and penal consequences? — baker
Wrong. Infectuous diseases (esp. those with potentially fatal outcomes) are a matter of public health, and therefore, cannot be left to the individual to decide about. They should be regulated at least by laws, but preferrably, by the constitution.My body, my choice. Their body, their choice.
Much like death, everyone handles it in their own way. — ArguingWAristotleTiff
In medicine, a person can give no informed consent if they don't have a medical degree. It all comes down to trusting one's doctors. — baker
It wasn't for those who had to be hospitalized afterwards or even died.
What do you have to say to that?
— baker
I have nothing to say to that without specific details and statistics. — Fooloso4
Exactly. Still, medical lays are being fooled by the medical system there is such a thing as "informed consent".It is not clear whether you are denying the practice of informed consent or questioning the concept. The former is well documented. The latter is more problematic. Even people with medical degrees may not have the specialized expertise needed to be fully informed about a particular procedure. An internist does not have the knowledge or experience of a neurosurgeon. — Fooloso4
No, that's evasion.The answer to that has more to do with politics than vaccine safety and efficacy. — Fooloso4
You should have something to say for those for whom the vaccine wasn't safe and effective. And there is a number of those for whom it wasn't. — baker
If it would be in the nature of the vaccine to be "safe and effective", it would be so for everyone. — baker
A person is not a statistic.I cannot evaluate this without specifics. Were there underlying medical conditions? What was the cause of death? "a number" is statistically meaningless. — Fooloso4
Then why talk about it this way, as if it does work that way?If it would be in the nature of the vaccine to be "safe and effective", it would be so for everyone.
— baker
That is not the way medicine works.
Likewise. There is a real pro-vaccination hysteria going on. Which just goes to show how much importance faith has in applied medicine.I notice that I use the same rational approach to come to my position as others do theirs, albeit different positions, and I seem to catch hell for having a different stance. Seems weird; I am not bitching at anyone for getting the shot. — Book273
How so?? Vaccination doesn't stop you from being a spreader.I took the vaccine, not for me, but for others — James Riley
Still, medical lays are being fooled by the medical system there is such a thing as "informed consent". — baker
then why not have them decide about medications, including experimental ones? — baker
A person is not a statistic. — baker
For the person who ends up with bad side effects, it does not matter if they are in the statistical minority. — baker
If it would be in the nature of the vaccine to be "safe and effective", it would be so for everyone.
— baker
That is not the way medicine works.
Then why talk about it this way, as if it does work that way? — baker
How so?? Vaccination doesn't stop you from being a spreader. — baker
It's very simple: If the vaccine is indeed so safe and effective (that accepting it should be a no-brainer), then why isn't it mandatory by law? — baker
Pretty bummed. I got the stupid shot and have not noticed any increase in my 5G signal. — Count Timothy von Icarus
So, if you are at the risk of dying, refuse the vaccine, and become a strain on medical personal, then maybe we can see it as putting yourself at an unneeded risk, and as a consequence, you take the place of someone who actually needed that care. — Christoffer
Like the smokers that need respiratory therapy, or the cardiac patients that are obese and smoke, or the alcoholics that need to be stabilized from GI bleeds or rampant high sugar levels...Oh wait, 95% of those are also based on a personal decision, so I guess they are also taking the place of someone who needed the care. — Book273
But behavior that affects other people, hurts them, kills them, regardless of causal proximity, should never be accepted and should be considered a crime. — Christoffer
Like driving a car? What about having children? — Tzeentch
To be clear, there is no necessity for driving a car or having children; those are merely products of our desires. — Tzeentch
Getting the vaccine and following restrictions are the same as mitigating risks with the other examples.Mitigating the risks does not change that. — Tzeentch
Not in the same manner as denying a vaccine and recklessly expose themselves to other people. It's the same as someone deciding to put on a blindfold and driving on a sidewalk that was assumed to be free of people. It's knowing about the risks of hurting others and still doing it. Driving normally and having children is not even in the same ballpark in terms of causality.Those behaviors affect other people, with a risk of hurting or even killing them. — Tzeentch
What do you mean by this? I have clearly stated that denying the vaccine but still going out into the public and taking part in society is an active choice of ignoring the dangers of hurting or killing others. There's no rational argument to be made that someone who doesn't take the vaccine then tries to mitigate the following dangers as existing unvaccinated in public is a risk. That would mean locking themselves in their apartment and never seeing anyone. They are a risk if they live in a place where interactions are unavoidable. And I also said that it's fine if people who won't get the vaccine live by themselves far away from other people as the risk of hurting or killing others is so low that it ends up being in the same statistical number as the ones who the vaccine doesn't have an effect on. As long as the people who don't take the vaccine don't use hazard suits while they are out they aren't mitigating anything.One could also claim to have attempted to mitigate the risks of them not being vaccinated. — Tzeentch
If people stopped driving we would have a hard time functioning as a society — Christoffer
and if people stopped having children humanity would die out. — Christoffer
Not in the same manner as denying a vaccine and recklessly expose themselves to other people. — Christoffer
Societies have functioned without cars for millenia. They are not necessary at all. — Tzeentch
Yes, and?
People don't have children in some sort of sacrifice to the human endeavor. They have children because they desire to have them. — Tzeentch
All these things can be said for driving and having children. You're simply labeling one as reckless and the other as somehow acceptable because of a form of cosmic necessity, which I will argue is nothing other than a guise for desire; not much different from a desire not to be vaccinated. — Tzeentch
I'll propose something radical: if one is afraid that being sneezed on will kill them, they're the one who should be isolating themselves. — Tzeentch
Seeing one's own fear as a legitimate basis to dictate how others should exercise their right to bodily autonomy; now that is immoral; no less immoral than pressuring a woman into how she should or should not have an abortion.
Your fear is not my fear. — Tzeentch
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.