What should society do
#31
I've had severe reactions to vaccines, one nearly killed me, I reacted badly to the first covid jab, I'll still take my 2nd.

I presume people worried about rare reactions don't take any medication at all? All medication can cause bad reactions, Ibuprofen can kill me for example.
Reply
#32
(05-24-2021, 10:53 AM)backsidebaggie Wrote: “Idiot scumbag”, kind of proves my point. Given many people have lost family to influenza, I wonder where this hatred has been for years and years for those who didn’t take the flu jab?

It is your right to think that yes, but it’s not pretty.

The flu is orders of magnitude less virulent and less deadly, ergo it is perfectly acceptable that only those at serious risk should take a yearly flu jab. Covid affects every person in the world and for anyone to reject a one-time vaccine to help save lives, based on no evidence whatsoever, is inexcusable. The covid vaccine and the flu jab are not remotely comparable.

You haven't proven any point. You are perfectly within your rights to think my scorn and the scorn of many others "isn't pretty" but your idiocy isn't winning any beauty contests either.
Reply
#33
I've never hidden my contempt and hatred for anti-vaxxers, or in fact any science denying idiots. I hate them, I'm honest about it, I tell them.
Reply
#34
(05-24-2021, 10:32 AM)ChamonixBaggie Wrote: Good to see hyperbole isn't dead

FWIW I don't think anyone should be forced to have a vaccine nor should anyone be excluded from society for choosing not to have it, that's completely totalitarian. I do however, reserve my right to think anyone refusing the vaccine is an idiot scumbag who is endangering the lives of others through their own self-important stupidity.

If some wackjob who'd watched too many videos on facebook refused the vaccine and gave my old man covid, I would not be particularly forgiving of that person. Fortunately he's fully vaccinated now so it probably wouldn't kill him.

The flu is orders of magnitude less virulent and less deadly, ergo it is perfectly acceptable that only those at serious risk should take a yearly flu jab. Covid affects every person in the world and for anyone to reject a one-time vaccine to help save lives, based on no evidence whatsoever, is inexcusable. The covid vaccine and the flu jab are not remotely comparable.

You haven't proven any point. You are perfectly within your rights to think my scorn and the scorn of many others "isn't pretty" but your idiocy isn't winning any beauty contests either.

It is less virulant and less deadly. So where do you draw the line between being totally fine with people not taking that, but those who don't have the covid vaccine are scumbags?

Its also not a one time vaccine - there will be more boosters.

No evidence? What about people like one on this thread who have had relatives affected by it? What about pharma's record in developing countries which is one big reason why many ethnic minorities don't want the vaccine? You can say no evidence, but some people want evidence of longer term safety before taking it. That's perfectly reasonable, whether you agree or not.

And thanks for calling me an idiot, again proves my point.

We can disagree, but abuse and hate is only coming from one of us. Thankfully that's not me.

Myself and Baggy1 have disagreed on this subject many times, but we've not resorted to abuse, and I could have a drink with him tomorrow and chat and still disagree. He strongly believes people should have the vaccine, but does not hate those who disagree with him, or want to exclude them from society. Nor does he abuse them. His own daughter disagrees with him at present I believe. It is possible to disagree and not abuse or hate.

(05-24-2021, 11:19 AM)Birdman1811 Wrote: I've never hidden my contempt and hatred for anti-vaxxers, or in fact any science denying idiots. I hate them, I'm honest about it, I tell them.

When you say anti vaxxers, you are aware that most who don't want the covid vaccine are not anti-vax in general? They just have reasons for waiting on this one?

And they're not all science denying idiots. Another silly label. Many ethnic minorities have concerns about pharma's record in developing countries... you know, science. That thing that's not absolute and there's different stances, opinions on. But lets not let nuance get in the way of a good hateful generalisation eh?

(05-24-2021, 11:16 AM)Birdman1811 Wrote: I've had severe reactions to vaccines, one nearly killed me, I reacted badly to the first covid jab, I'll still take my 2nd.

I presume people worried about rare reactions don't take any medication at all? All medication can cause bad reactions, Ibuprofen can kill me for example.

Of course, and some people want more data on the medium to long term effects. We have that with ibuprofen, its been around ages.
Reply
#35
Just to say.

Those with genuine concern on this ONE vaccine, are not anti-vaxxers, and as long as they listen when science is explained, and accept when people who know more than them correct them, I have no issue.

If not, then yeah, I have a lot of contempt for them.
Reply
#36
(05-24-2021, 10:11 AM)backsidebaggie Wrote:
(05-24-2021, 09:35 AM)Derek Hardballs Wrote:
(05-24-2021, 09:06 AM)backsidebaggie Wrote:
(05-24-2021, 08:28 AM)Derek Hardballs Wrote: All I hear from ‘liberals’ is perfectly healthy people’s ‘right’ not to have the vaccine. Happy to shout ‘civil liberties’ whenever they are challenged. Meanwhile the most vulnerable who cannot currently have the vaccine are ignored, marginalised and their civil liberties are tossed aside with abandon by many in society.  There is no emphasis on responsibilities to others, just the belief that liberty of choice is theirs and theirs alone. It’s now been proven as far as I’m aware that those vaccinated reduce the spread of the disease but why worry about those at risk still if you place your ‘freedoms’ above everyone else’s.

A lack of vaccination increases the risk of more serious mutations of the virus, puts the most vulnerable at risk and die what? Some self important idea that an individual’s liberty is more important than other people’s right to live in a society that does not put them at risk.

I would personally ban any healthcare worker who wasn’t exempt due to health reasons from working in healthcare settings. Similarly I would do the same long term with any public facing worker. Also I’d try and make people understand that their rights are no more important than their responsibilities to others. Unfashionable as that opinion is with ‘liberals’ who would essentially throw the most vulnerable under the bus for the sake of other people’s ‘rights’!

Given the flu vaccine presumably reduces transmission, have you had these views in the past in relation to people haven’t had that jab? The emphasis has always been on the vulnerable person to be vaccinated for flu, I’ve never ever heard of anyone being abused or called an anti vaxxer for not having that? Or is this a new thing? My guess if it’s barely ever crossed your mind in the past. I could be wrong. 

Banning people from public facing jobs? How about just round them up and put them on an island? Have you any idea what an absolute fascist nut job you sound? You may not agree but it is a fundamental human right to have bodily autonomy. You may disagree with their view, but ban from jobs? Jesus. I’ve also read on this board vile abuse towards people who don’t want the vaccine. Do you want to ban them from shopping too? I mean, how can those who can’t be vaccinated ever go to a shop? Check everyone is vaccinated in the milk aisle?

I think you and others (the anti vax thread on the main board) will be embarrassed in years to come about these generalisations about people who don’t want a vaccine, the abuse of them, and the far right sounding fascist insanity where some seem to be basically suggesting a type of “medical apartheid”. Some have good reasons, whether you agree or not. You and others seem to love to hate this group of people, and label them with the lazy phrase anti vaxxer. The hate does not make pretty reading.

(05-24-2021, 08:49 AM)Derek Hardballs Wrote:
(05-24-2021, 08:36 AM)baggiebuckster Wrote: Good job nobody on here has friends or relatives badly impacted by the vaccine. Just collateral damage I assume.

Likewise I know thousands of families who would jump at the chance of having members of their family vaccinated. Imagine how they feel seeing others turning down the opportunity.

The same as they’ve always felt about millions not having the flu jab? Not given it a thought? Actually no, that was before people used covid as a reason to hate a group of people just because you disagree with their choice, which is a fundamental human right.

The safety of those who are vulnerable within a medical / health / educational / social care setting etc is also a human right. The Flu jab is available for almost all of those who need it. Equating the flu with Covid? You sound like Billy Basset!

No I’m not equating the flu with covid. I’m making one comparison in respect of a vaccine. The principle of vaccines is the same. Have you always shown such hatred towards those who haven’t had the flu jab? After all, they’re putting others at more risk, are they not? So why not hate for them in the past? Why not insist people in an educational setting be vaccinated against flu? I’m not comparing the actual diseases so don’t try that lazy argument on me. I’m comparing the principle of vaccination for both diseases.

The right to medical autonomy is not a “self important idea”. It is part of the Nuremberg code.

And you sound like a far right hate riddled fascist maniac by the way, who believes in a form of medical apartheid in which individuals are excluded from certain parts of society through their choice not to have a vaccine (coerced medical intervention is against the Nuremberg code). Trump would be proud of your divisive hatred, but there’s even worse than your comments on the anti vaxxer thread on the main board. You’re not even the biggest fascist on here!

Do I? For what? Expecting those who look after the most vulnerable (those who cannot currently be vaccinated) to accept that the role comes with the responsibility for those they are treating to minimise the risk of harm to them by getting vaccinated? A lot of jobs require certain restrictions to their rights, including DBS checks, vaccinations, drug tests, fitness tests etc. Even in my career I’ve been required to have a Hepatitis B jab if I wanted to work in a particular area. 

If you don’t want lazy arguments about the flu jab stop making them. You are the only one muddying the water with this line of argument. 

The hyperbole in your reply doesn’t make me think, oh yes those who refuse the jabs rights are far more important than those who can’t and are vulnerable but can’t have the jab, no matter how many times you shout fascist.
Reply
#37
(05-24-2021, 11:29 AM)Birdman1811 Wrote: Just to say.

Those with genuine concern on this ONE vaccine, are not anti-vaxxers, and as long as they listen when science is explained, and accept when people who know more than them correct them, I have no issue.

If not, then yeah, I have a lot of contempt for them.

Birdie most who don't want the covid vaccine are not anti-vaxxers. Its an easy label that's been put out there and is being jumped on as an label (more divide and rule from the media/government?). I know a lot of people who have declined the covid jab at present. Literally all of them have had loads of vaccines.
Reply
#38
(05-24-2021, 11:16 AM)Birdman1811 Wrote: I've had severe reactions to vaccines, one nearly killed me, I reacted badly to the first covid jab, I'll still take my 2nd.

I presume people worried about rare reactions don't take any medication at all? All medication can cause bad reactions, Ibuprofen can kill me for example.

So will you now not take Ibuprofen? I have the same issue with Penicillin.
Reply
#39
(05-24-2021, 11:32 AM)Derek Hardballs Wrote:
(05-24-2021, 10:11 AM)backsidebaggie Wrote:
(05-24-2021, 09:35 AM)Derek Hardballs Wrote:
(05-24-2021, 09:06 AM)backsidebaggie Wrote:
(05-24-2021, 08:28 AM)Derek Hardballs Wrote: All I hear from ‘liberals’ is perfectly healthy people’s ‘right’ not to have the vaccine. Happy to shout ‘civil liberties’ whenever they are challenged. Meanwhile the most vulnerable who cannot currently have the vaccine are ignored, marginalised and their civil liberties are tossed aside with abandon by many in society.  There is no emphasis on responsibilities to others, just the belief that liberty of choice is theirs and theirs alone. It’s now been proven as far as I’m aware that those vaccinated reduce the spread of the disease but why worry about those at risk still if you place your ‘freedoms’ above everyone else’s.

A lack of vaccination increases the risk of more serious mutations of the virus, puts the most vulnerable at risk and die what? Some self important idea that an individual’s liberty is more important than other people’s right to live in a society that does not put them at risk.

I would personally ban any healthcare worker who wasn’t exempt due to health reasons from working in healthcare settings. Similarly I would do the same long term with any public facing worker. Also I’d try and make people understand that their rights are no more important than their responsibilities to others. Unfashionable as that opinion is with ‘liberals’ who would essentially throw the most vulnerable under the bus for the sake of other people’s ‘rights’!

Given the flu vaccine presumably reduces transmission, have you had these views in the past in relation to people haven’t had that jab? The emphasis has always been on the vulnerable person to be vaccinated for flu, I’ve never ever heard of anyone being abused or called an anti vaxxer for not having that? Or is this a new thing? My guess if it’s barely ever crossed your mind in the past. I could be wrong. 

Banning people from public facing jobs? How about just round them up and put them on an island? Have you any idea what an absolute fascist nut job you sound? You may not agree but it is a fundamental human right to have bodily autonomy. You may disagree with their view, but ban from jobs? Jesus. I’ve also read on this board vile abuse towards people who don’t want the vaccine. Do you want to ban them from shopping too? I mean, how can those who can’t be vaccinated ever go to a shop? Check everyone is vaccinated in the milk aisle?

I think you and others (the anti vax thread on the main board) will be embarrassed in years to come about these generalisations about people who don’t want a vaccine, the abuse of them, and the far right sounding fascist insanity where some seem to be basically suggesting a type of “medical apartheid”. Some have good reasons, whether you agree or not. You and others seem to love to hate this group of people, and label them with the lazy phrase anti vaxxer. The hate does not make pretty reading.

(05-24-2021, 08:49 AM)Derek Hardballs Wrote: Likewise I know thousands of families who would jump at the chance of having members of their family vaccinated. Imagine how they feel seeing others turning down the opportunity.

The same as they’ve always felt about millions not having the flu jab? Not given it a thought? Actually no, that was before people used covid as a reason to hate a group of people just because you disagree with their choice, which is a fundamental human right.

The safety of those who are vulnerable within a medical / health / educational / social care setting etc is also a human right. The Flu jab is available for almost all of those who need it. Equating the flu with Covid? You sound like Billy Basset!

No I’m not equating the flu with covid. I’m making one comparison in respect of a vaccine. The principle of vaccines is the same. Have you always shown such hatred towards those who haven’t had the flu jab? After all, they’re putting others at more risk, are they not? So why not hate for them in the past? Why not insist people in an educational setting be vaccinated against flu? I’m not comparing the actual diseases so don’t try that lazy argument on me. I’m comparing the principle of vaccination for both diseases.

The right to medical autonomy is not a “self important idea”. It is part of the Nuremberg code.

And you sound like a far right hate riddled fascist maniac by the way, who believes in a form of medical apartheid in which individuals are excluded from certain parts of society through their choice not to have a vaccine (coerced medical intervention is against the Nuremberg code). Trump would be proud of your divisive hatred, but there’s even worse than your comments on the anti vaxxer thread on the main board. You’re not even the biggest fascist on here!

Do I? For what? Expecting those who look after the most vulnerable (those who cannot currently be vaccinated) to accept that the role comes with the responsibility for those they are treating to minimise the risk of harm to them by getting vaccinated? A lot of jobs require certain restrictions to their rights, including DBS checks, vaccinations, drug tests, fitness tests etc. Even in my career I’ve been required to have a Hepatitis B jab if I wanted to work in a particular area. 

If you don’t want lazy arguments about the flu jab stop making them. You are the only one muddying the water with this line of argument. 

The hyperbole in your reply doesn’t make me think, oh yes those who refuse the jabs rights are far more important than those who can’t and are vulnerable but can’t have the jab, no matter how many times you shout fascist.

Yes you do sound like that if you want jobs taken off people for their choice. The examples you give are for new employees too, not getting rid of those who don't want this vaccine. In addition, we discussed this weeks ago and I asked for a workable solution on what to do with a healthcare system where 10-20% may decline the jab. It literally could not cope, but you couldn't come up with a workable solution.

I've not muddied the water with the flu vaccine argument, its a reasonable comparison and I've explained why. You made the lazy argument that i was comparing covid to flu. I was not. I was comparing the vaccination principle and you know it.

I'm not asking you to think that those who refuse it are more important. I've never said that. Both views are perfectly reasonable, the difference being that you want people to lose fundamental rights and ban people from public facing jobs (pointless given the same people who are vulnerable will still need to go into shops etc), which yes is fascist. Read some of the comments on the anti-vaxxers thread and its simply not hyperbole. There is vicious divisive hatred on there. Which you are entitled to have of course.

Some reasons people won't have the vaccine, despite having had many other vaccines:
Family members had bad reaction.
Ethnic minorities aware of big pharma's less than perfect record in developing countries.
Preference to wait for long term data.

There's three reasons which are common. Yet the people who take these views are getting called anti-vaxxers, conspiracy theorists, and some think they should lose fundamental rights (eg banned from some public services) thrown in with a bunch of name calling. Thinking like this is similar to the actions of the far right. Group people, abuse people, ignore nuance and the fact most people are decent human beings even if they disagree.
Reply
#40
They aren't anti-vaxxers.

However if they won't listen when the questions are answered,and most can be already,then yes, I an angry with them.

I can't take another lockdown,my family can't. My son, 9 last week spent spent 8th birthday crying saying it was the worst birthday ever and asking if it's OK to kill himself, my wife has had several mental breakdowns. I've had severe thoughts to suicide.

If we go back into lockdown because of people WHO ARENT QUALIFIED TO DENY SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS then yes, I will be very, very angry with them and hope they all get covid and suffer. Because I will be suffering from their ignorance and selfishness.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
{myadvertisements[zone_2]}