What's regular (perhaps unsuspecting) fella' to do? — jorndoe
the guy I mentioned may have lost loved ones to covid, but he didn't see them die. — frank
Stick to reading reputable journals and expert opinion. — Isaac
It's on a scale. — jorndoe
People hear about it from news sources they already don't trust. — frank
The more of them the better, giving more weight, and history, context, ability to spot apparent anomalies/outliers, overview — jorndoe
I just don't think everyone has time (or knowledge/skills/inclination) to do that, not if we're talking technical papers anyway (many wouldn't know where to look). — jorndoe
Reuters and Associated Press, for example, seem good. Or just good enough perhaps? — jorndoe
Are you now saying that spreading unfounded doubts is problematic? — Olivier5
Either quote me ever saying that spreading unfounded doubts was not problematic, or argue like a grown up. — Isaac
The whole body of pro-vaccine responses on this thread (and the other) has been predicated entirely on that premise. You've said almost exactly that yourself only a few posts ago, about...
not spreading artificial doubt and confusion in the midst of a crisis.
— Olivier5 — Isaac
not all "mainstream media" reports are bullshit and pseudo-information.
Inflated or blanket distrust can be wacky just the same. Perhaps even paranoid? — jorndoe
You have in my view spread wholesale condamnations of governments, the medical establishment, the media and the likes — Olivier5
...that were totally unfounded. These doubts of yours in your own doctors, ministers and journalists are coming from somewhere alright, but this 'somewhere' is not reality — Olivier5
Sorry if I appear to trust doctors and my government(s) more than I trust you. — Olivier5
I have what I believe are good reasons to trust doctors. — Olivier5
I have no reason whatsoever to trust you. — Olivier5
Some of the things you write seem to come directly from Trump — Olivier5
It's only snide when others do it to you, right? — Olivier5
Quote them then. — Isaac
So were faced with an awful situation. There's this crisis where millions are dying and one crucial part of the solution is a vaccine. But the only people who can make vaccines are these awful, criminal profiteers (I'm exaggerating only a bit). What do we do? If we say we can't trust the awful, criminal profiteers and tell them where they can stick their vaccine, a lot of people will die whilst we all become immune naturally. But does rejecting that option mean we have to march it in on a litter to fanfare, ticker-tape parades and cheering crowds, one for everyone...have one for the baby... No, I don't think so. I think we can, as I said, begrudgingly accept that we have little choice for those who really need it, but that's as far as we'll go and as soon as this thing's over... — Isaac
this is the kind of heavily paranoid stuff I am talking about: — Olivier5
where does this reference to natural immunity supposed to ultimately grace us all come from? — Olivier5
that's saying that the pharmaceutical companies have behaved reprehensibly — Isaac
The way I read it, you painted a whole lot of people as criminals. — Olivier5
Nothing in this article says anything about "all of us becoming immune naturally", — Olivier5
The immune systems of more than 95% of people who recovered from COVID-19 had durable memories of the virus up to eight months after infection. — literally the first sentence in the actual fucking article
"Durable memories up to 8 month" <> everybody becoming immune.The immune systems of more than 95% of people who recovered from COVID-19 had durable memories of the virus up to eight months after infection. — literally the first sentence in the actual fucking article
They are criminals — Isaac
"Durable memories up to 8 month" <> everybody becoming immune. — Olivier5
Who is 'they' in that sentence? — Olivier5
In what way does a durable memory in the immune system not mean 'becoming immune'. — Isaac
The pharmaceutical corporations in question. — Isaac
In many ways, one of which is the constant emergence of new variants, another the finding is limited to period of 8 months after infection. Yet another the difficulty to extrapolate from in vitro findings to in vivo response. — Olivier5
So how many people are we talking about? — Olivier5
We're looking for the term 'becoming immune' being restricted to uses where immunity has been proven ex vitro to last beyond 8 months without chance of variants. — Isaac
What has the number of people got to do with the argument? — Isaac
your article makes a much weaker claim. — Olivier5
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.