Covid-19 miscellany

[Worldtraveller]

Yeah, that's the problem with freedom. People who are free might not do what you think they should be doing with their freedom. Tough titties.

Your argument is so hollow. This "liberty" or "freedom" is imposing on other people's liberty. I can't blast the speakers in my house in my neighborhood and make a public nuisance. And that isn't leading to anyone's death!

Another person's freedom and liberty stops well short of a second party's coffin.

We've discussed this before. I think you're a fucking fascist. Sorry to be blunt. But there it is. Your idea of liberalism isn't liberalism at all IMHO.

Bullshit. Living in a society comes with responsibilities. That's why we have these things called laws.

Or do you run red lights, drive on the wrong side of the road, and just drive as fast as you want? You're idea of liberalism is akin to a toddler's. Freedom is not a catchall caveat to do whatever the fuck you want, especially when it impacts other people's lives.

I think i should be free to just come in your house and take whatever I want. You cool with that right, because fuck anyone that wants to restrict MY freedom!

 

[DrZoidberg]

We've discussed this before. I think you're a fucking fascist. Sorry to be blunt. But there it is. Your idea of liberalism isn't liberalism at all IMHO.

That's fine, name calling and all is perfectly acceptable derail maneuver. However, that doesn't actually address the subject at all. IE, where does one draw the line of liberty and freedom? Is it legitimate to allow one person to commit actions that needlessly harm others? Does a person's right extend beyond the coffin of another?

You can call me a fascist if you want again, but that won't address the viable limits of freedom in a civil society, especially where the viable limits are respective to those that trespass on the liberties (or even lives) of others.

Yes, it does. We're all better off if the government isn't allowed to force normal people to do anything. If the government limits anyone's freedom it should only be to prevent outliers from doing extreme things. The moment we get a situation where we need to force a significant proportion of the population to do something, they really don't want to do, "for their own good" we're heading into dangerous territory.

I don't like that 20-30% of the population are anti-vaxxers. But they have basic human rights just like anyone. There's enough of them that I think we need to take their beliefs seriously.

How about trying to take their perspective? They think you're gambling with their health and risking their death, for questionable reasons. They accuse people like you (and me) for taking unnecessary risks.

Just calling them idiots and deciding that their opinions don't matter, so we can go ahead and treat them like children, is being a fascist.

If you're unable to convince them that you're right, perhaps work on your arguments instead of bullying them into submission.

Right now in Denmark you need to have been vaccinated to live a normal life. If you want to go to a restaurant you need to show a Corona pass. If you want to travel. If you want to go to a gym. If you want to go dancing. Corona pass. You can go and get tested each time. But that is a pain in the ass. We're bullying people into obedience. I have a problem with that.

Germany is going one step further. Next month, they will have the same rules, only that people will have to pay for each Corona test themselves. I really dislike it. I think it's fascism.

 

[DrZoidberg]

We've discussed this before. I think you're a fucking fascist. Sorry to be blunt. But there it is. Your idea of liberalism isn't liberalism at all IMHO.

Bullshit. Living in a society comes with responsibilities. That's why we have these things called laws.

Or do you run red lights, drive on the wrong side of the road, and just drive as fast as you want? You're idea of liberalism is akin to a toddler's. Freedom is not a catchall caveat to do whatever the fuck you want, especially when it impacts other people's lives.

I think i should be free to just come in your house and take whatever I want. You cool with that right, because fuck anyone that wants to restrict MY freedom!

Funny that you called me childish. Lol.

Great argument. That sure showed me. Going to someone's house stealing their stuff is EXACTLY THE SAME

 

[Harry Bosch]

We've discussed this before. I think you're a fucking fascist. Sorry to be blunt. But there it is. Your idea of liberalism isn't liberalism at all IMHO.

That's fine, name calling and all is perfectly acceptable derail maneuver. However, that doesn't actually address the subject at all. IE, where does one draw the line of liberty and freedom? Is it legitimate to allow one person to commit actions that needlessly harm others? Does a person's right extend beyond the coffin of another?

You can call me a fascist if you want again, but that won't address the viable limits of freedom in a civil society, especially where the viable limits are respective to those that trespass on the liberties (or even lives) of others.

Yes, it does. We're all better off if the government isn't allowed to force normal people to do anything. If the government limits anyone's freedom it should only be to prevent outliers from doing extreme things. The moment we get a situation where we need to force a significant proportion of the population to do something, they really don't want to do, "for their own good" we're heading into dangerous territory.

I don't like that 20-30% of the population are anti-vaxxers. But they have basic human rights just like anyone. There's enough of them that I think we need to take their beliefs seriously.

How about trying to take their perspective? They think you're gambling with their health and risking their death, for questionable reasons. They accuse people like you (and me) for taking unnecessary risks.

Just calling them idiots and deciding that their opinions don't matter, so we can go ahead and treat them like children, is being a fascist.

If you're unable to convince them that you're right, perhaps work on your arguments instead of bullying them into submission.

Right now in Denmark you need to have been vaccinated to live a normal life. If you want to go to a restaurant you need to show a Corona pass. If you want to travel. If you want to go to a gym. If you want to go dancing. Corona pass. You can go and get tested each time. But that is a pain in the ass. We're bullying people into obedience. I have a problem with that.

Germany is going one step further. Next month, they will have the same rules, only that people will have to pay for each Corona test themselves. I really dislike it. I think it's fascism.

I think that it's closer to 20%. Regardless. I think that option is simple. 1) Follow the science; the unvaccinated isolate and/or wear your mask; economy goes back to normal; fewer people die; we go back to normal; Oregon Ducks win the NCAA football championship; or 2) Don't follow the science; allow the 20% to dictate; many thousands of more people die; survivors develop life long heart and lung problems; we all go back to isolation; the economy is ruined; but the 20% won't have their feelings hurt. I prefer option 1.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Yes, it does. We're all better off if the government isn't allowed to force normal people to do anything. If the government limits anyone's freedom it should only be to prevent outliers from doing extreme things. The moment we get a situation where we need to force a significant proportion of the population to do something, they really don't want to do, "for their own good" we're heading into dangerous territory.

I don't like that 20-30% of the population are anti-vaxxers. But they have basic human rights just like anyone. There's enough of them that I think we need to take their beliefs seriously.

How about trying to take their perspective? They think you're gambling with their health and risking their death, for questionable reasons. They accuse people like you (and me) for taking unnecessary risks.

Just calling them idiots and deciding that their opinions don't matter, so we can go ahead and treat them like children, is being a fascist.

If you're unable to convince them that you're right, perhaps work on your arguments instead of bullying them into submission.

Right now in Denmark you need to have been vaccinated to live a normal life. If you want to go to a restaurant you need to show a Corona pass. If you want to travel. If you want to go to a gym. If you want to go dancing. Corona pass. You can go and get tested each time. But that is a pain in the ass. We're bullying people into obedience. I have a problem with that.

Germany is going one step further. Next month, they will have the same rules, only that people will have to pay for each Corona test themselves. I really dislike it. I think it's fascism.

I think that it's closer to 20%. Regardless. I think that option is simple. 1) Follow the science; the unvaccinated isolate and/or wear your mask; economy goes back to normal; fewer people die; we go back to normal; Oregon Ducks win the NCAA football championship; or 2) Don't follow the science; allow the 20% to dictate; many thousands of more people die; survivors develop life long heart and lung problems; we all go back to isolation; the economy is ruined; but the 20% won't have their feelings hurt. I prefer option 1.

So if the majority would be religious you'd be cool with you being forced following the Bible? Or if they'd be straight up Nazis? Or if some bizarre version of science would be in vogue, you'd be cool being forced to follow that?

It's not a hypothetical example. In Sweden an urban left wing minority managed to seize control of all state run media in the 1970'ies forcing their cooky post modernist feminist ideas upon a population. That went great until the Internet was invented. The reaction against this is at this very moment putting extreme right wing politicians into power in Sweden. These are actual Nazis. Not just as a form of slander. These are the genuine thing. Because normal people are sick of being force fed a dodgy extreme interpretation of a liberal philosophy.

I think it's the same deal with Brexit. The British rurals were sick about being treated like children by London elites. So they reacted... like children... and voted for Brexit.

Forcing normal people to do things against their will, has a cost. No matter if you think you're doing it for a greater good.

I think we're always better off treating adults with respect, no matter how much we might think they're dumb. Not doing so, will backfire at some point.

If you think your scientifically minded education is so damn superior, then how the fuck can you fail to convince these anti-vaxxers they are wrong? How about some humility here? I think it's better for everybody in the long run.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

We've discussed this before. I think you're a fucking fascist. Sorry to be blunt. But there it is. Your idea of liberalism isn't liberalism at all IMHO.

That's fine, name calling and all is perfectly acceptable derail maneuver. However, that doesn't actually address the subject at all. IE, where does one draw the line of liberty and freedom? Is it legitimate to allow one person to commit actions that needlessly harm others? Does a person's right extend beyond the coffin of another?

You can call me a fascist if you want again, but that won't address the viable limits of freedom in a civil society, especially where the viable limits are respective to those that trespass on the liberties (or even lives) of others.

Yes, it does. We're all better off if the government isn't allowed to force normal people to do anything. If the government limits anyone's freedom it should only be to prevent outliers from doing extreme things. The moment we get a situation where we need to force a significant proportion of the population to do something, they really don't want to do, "for their own good" we're heading into dangerous territory.

I don't like that 20-30% of the population are anti-vaxxers. But they have basic human rights just like anyone.

The Government shouldn't have to enforce anything. People should be free to commit to actions they want everyday. We have incredibly thick law books that tell us, that isn't how things work, and have never worked. Your utopian laissez faire model is nothing but a dream. And to be clear, you aren't saying that anti-vaxxers have human rights, you are saying the rights of anti-vaxxers can trump the rights liberty of others, including the lives of others. Just say it, own it.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

We've discussed this before. I think you're a fucking fascist. Sorry to be blunt. But there it is. Your idea of liberalism isn't liberalism at all IMHO.

Bullshit. Living in a society comes with responsibilities. That's why we have these things called laws.

Or do you run red lights, drive on the wrong side of the road, and just drive as fast as you want? You're idea of liberalism is akin to a toddler's. Freedom is not a catchall caveat to do whatever the fuck you want, especially when it impacts other people's lives.

I think i should be free to just come in your house and take whatever I want. You cool with that right, because fuck anyone that wants to restrict MY freedom!

Funny that you called me childish. Lol.

Great argument. That sure showed me. Going to someone's house stealing their stuff is EXACTLY THE SAME

Yes, it is FUCKING CHILDISH. There's a fucking pandemic! People need to grow the fuck up and be adults. Stop being ideological idiots and deal with a massive issue of death like rational people. This is no different than the Holocaust of WW2. You can't sit back and say, oh people should have their freedom to hurt other people and DO NOTHING! It isn't "liberal" to allow irrational individuals to kill millions of other people directly or indirectly. It's cowardly and moronic.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Funny that you called me childish. Lol.

Great argument. That sure showed me. Going to someone's house stealing their stuff is EXACTLY THE SAME

Yes, it is FUCKING CHILDISH. There's a fucking pandemic! People need to grow the fuck up and be adults. Stop being ideological idiots and deal with a massive issue of death like rational people. This is no different than the Holocaust of WW2. You can't sit back and say, oh people should have their freedom to hurt other people and DO NOTHING! It isn't "liberal" to allow irrational individuals to kill millions of other people directly or indirectly. It's cowardly and moronic.

Aha... so the people who aren't fascists are guilty of the holocaust of WW2. Got it

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Yes, it does. We're all better off if the government isn't allowed to force normal people to do anything. If the government limits anyone's freedom it should only be to prevent outliers from doing extreme things. The moment we get a situation where we need to force a significant proportion of the population to do something, they really don't want to do, "for their own good" we're heading into dangerous territory.

I don't like that 20-30% of the population are anti-vaxxers. But they have basic human rights just like anyone. There's enough of them that I think we need to take their beliefs seriously.

How about trying to take their perspective? They think you're gambling with their health and risking their death, for questionable reasons. They accuse people like you (and me) for taking unnecessary risks.

Just calling them idiots and deciding that their opinions don't matter, so we can go ahead and treat them like children, is being a fascist.

If you're unable to convince them that you're right, perhaps work on your arguments instead of bullying them into submission.

Right now in Denmark you need to have been vaccinated to live a normal life. If you want to go to a restaurant you need to show a Corona pass. If you want to travel. If you want to go to a gym. If you want to go dancing. Corona pass. You can go and get tested each time. But that is a pain in the ass. We're bullying people into obedience. I have a problem with that.

Germany is going one step further. Next month, they will have the same rules, only that people will have to pay for each Corona test themselves. I really dislike it. I think it's fascism.

I think that it's closer to 20%. Regardless. I think that option is simple. 1) Follow the science; the unvaccinated isolate and/or wear your mask; economy goes back to normal; fewer people die; we go back to normal; Oregon Ducks win the NCAA football championship; or 2) Don't follow the science; allow the 20% to dictate; many thousands of more people die; survivors develop life long heart and lung problems; we all go back to isolation; the economy is ruined; but the 20% won't have their feelings hurt. I prefer option 1.

So if the majority would be religious you'd be cool with you being forced following the Bible? Or if they'd be straight up Nazis? Or if some bizarre version of science would be in vogue, you'd be cool being forced to follow that?

This isn't about majority opinion. This is about medical consensus as it exists today... globally... that was peer reviewed. Extrapolating an emergency response into a grotesque hypothetical is ridiculous. Simply put, get vaccinated or deal with the PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY of not getting vaccinated. The anti-vaxxers want the cake and want to eat it. Their worldview on this has been so poisoned by the right-wing media circus, they think they are entitled to whatever they want. If they don't want to be vaccinated, there are steps they need to take, because the virus is real, the virus is killing people, the virus will mutate and possibly get worse.

But they think not only is vaccination unnecessary, they think masks are unnecessary, they think spacing is unnecessary, they think any mitigation is a vile incursion of their liberty, and they won't change their minds until they or someone very close is dying from it.

 

[repoman]

Pretty cool if more of the parts of the virus could be included. That may come with the real risk of having a few people make antibodies that will react with some part of their own body. Fingers crossed.



https://theconversation.com/covid-vaccines-focus-on-the-spike-protein-but-heres-another-target-150315

But, maybe it is that the antibodies to the N-protein are just made coincidentally and have low impact on fighting covid. Anyone have good data?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Funny that you called me childish. Lol.

Great argument. That sure showed me. Going to someone's house stealing their stuff is EXACTLY THE SAME

Yes, it is FUCKING CHILDISH. There's a fucking pandemic! People need to grow the fuck up and be adults. Stop being ideological idiots and deal with a massive issue of death like rational people. This is no different than the Holocaust of WW2. You can't sit back and say, oh people should have their freedom to hurt other people and DO NOTHING! It isn't "liberal" to allow irrational individuals to kill millions of other people directly or indirectly. It's cowardly and moronic.

Aha... so the people who aren't fascists are guilty of the holocaust of WW2. Got it

You can't sit back and allow people to kill millions of other people because of libertarianism. That isn't what libertarianism is supposed to be about. My freedom to wave my arms around ends when my arms are in your face affecting your movement or worse hitting you. My freedom to be a Nazi ends well before I am running around killing Jews. The same with wearing masks or vaccinating. My freedom to not wear a mask or be vaccinated ends when I am spreading infections to the populace, killing people. If you see some idiot waving their arms in someone else's face to hit them, tell them to stop. If you see a Nazi about to kill a Jew, defend the Jew. You might have to kill some Nazis to do it. If you have a population of idiots not vaccinating or wearing masks such that there are covid surges with people dying excessively, you make some policies or allow businesses to make rules requiring masks and vaccinations. This isn't rocket science.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Funny that you called me childish. Lol.

Great argument. That sure showed me. Going to someone's house stealing their stuff is EXACTLY THE SAME

Yes, it is FUCKING CHILDISH. There's a fucking pandemic! People need to grow the fuck up and be adults. Stop being ideological idiots and deal with a massive issue of death like rational people. This is no different than the Holocaust of WW2. You can't sit back and say, oh people should have their freedom to hurt other people and DO NOTHING! It isn't "liberal" to allow irrational individuals to kill millions of other people directly or indirectly. It's cowardly and moronic.

Aha... so the people who aren't fascists are guilty of the holocaust of WW2. Got it

Probably closer to the Rwandan genocide. Luckily it wasn't hatchets though. But both included people being lied to by those elected into power and their supporters to take a position that was ridiculously stupid and harmful. And everyday people were out there, without a care, spreading a disease that would kill hundreds of thousands in the US in the fall/winter. People doing it would deny the moral implications, even deny the numbers that were killed.

 

[rousseau]

It'd be interesting to see how different the anti-vax conversation would be if we were vaccinated with a pill and not a needle. I'm reasonably sure most of the reluctance to get vaccinated is because people are afraid of needles.

 

[Elixir]

maybe it is that the antibodies to the N-protein are just made coincidentally and have low impact on fighting covid. Anyone have good data?

From the link: "N protein antibodies that get inside cells are recognised by TRIM21, which then shreds the associated N protein. Tiny fragments of N protein are then displayed on the surface of infected cells. T cells recognise these fragments, identify cells as infected, then kill the cell and consequently any virus."

Sounds like a pretty hamfisted approach compared to targeting spike proteins with mRNA vaccines. Kinda like dealing with the Taliban taking control of Afghan villages by nuking the villages. Eventually, that is going to have an overall bad effect on the Country as a whole. mRNA vaccine would be more like having an effective wall around those villages, and simply not letting the Taliban in.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

It'd be interesting to see how different the anti-vax conversation would be if we were vaccinated with a pill and not a needle. I'm reasonably sure most of the reluctance to get vaccinated is because people are afraid of needles.

I don't think so. I think what we're witnessing is a combination of scientific illiteracy, complacency and political polarization.

 

[DrZoidberg]

So if the majority would be religious you'd be cool with you being forced following the Bible? Or if they'd be straight up Nazis? Or if some bizarre version of science would be in vogue, you'd be cool being forced to follow that?

This isn't about majority opinion. This is about medical consensus as it exists today... globally... that was peer reviewed. Extrapolating an emergency response into a grotesque hypothetical is ridiculous. Simply put, get vaccinated or deal with the PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY of not getting vaccinated. The anti-vaxxers want the cake and want to eat it. Their worldview on this has been so poisoned by the right-wing media circus, they think they are entitled to whatever they want. If they don't want to be vaccinated, there are steps they need to take, because the virus is real, the virus is killing people, the virus will mutate and possibly get worse.

But they think not only is vaccination unnecessary, they think masks are unnecessary, they think spacing is unnecessary, they think any mitigation is a vile incursion of their liberty, and they won't change their minds until they or someone very close is dying from it.

Medical consensus has historically been used for all kinds of nastiness. We have a history and a context we need to take into account. We also live in a world where plenty of the world's population live in dictatorships. This isn't the time and place to sacrifice liberal values for the greater good. Labelling it as laissez faire or libertarianism is just nuts. No. Its middle of the road fundamental liberal values.

If we want to bend those we need a stronger reason than Covid-19 IMHO.

 

[Toni]

So if the majority would be religious you'd be cool with you being forced following the Bible? Or if they'd be straight up Nazis? Or if some bizarre version of science would be in vogue, you'd be cool being forced to follow that?

This isn't about majority opinion. This is about medical consensus as it exists today... globally... that was peer reviewed. Extrapolating an emergency response into a grotesque hypothetical is ridiculous. Simply put, get vaccinated or deal with the PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY of not getting vaccinated. The anti-vaxxers want the cake and want to eat it. Their worldview on this has been so poisoned by the right-wing media circus, they think they are entitled to whatever they want. If they don't want to be vaccinated, there are steps they need to take, because the virus is real, the virus is killing people, the virus will mutate and possibly get worse.

But they think not only is vaccination unnecessary, they think masks are unnecessary, they think spacing is unnecessary, they think any mitigation is a vile incursion of their liberty, and they won't change their minds until they or someone very close is dying from it.

Medical consensus has historically been used for all kinds of nastiness. We have a history and a context we need to take into account. We also live in a world where plenty of the world's population live in dictatorships. This isn't the time and place to sacrifice liberal values for the greater good. Labelling it as laissez faire or libertarianism is just nuts. No. Its middle of the road fundamental liberal values.

If we want to bend those we need a stronger reason than Covid-19 IMHO.

If it's not for the greater good, then I don't see how anyone can call it liberal values.

Medical consensus has sometimes been misinterpreted and misused and but medical consensus is based on the best information available at the time. When more is known, then better decisions are made--barring ideological interference.

So far, COVID19 has killed more than 4 million people. Since it hasn't killed you, I realize you see that as no big deal but for those of us who see the world beyond our noses, it's a very big deal.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

So if the majority would be religious you'd be cool with you being forced following the Bible? Or if they'd be straight up Nazis? Or if some bizarre version of science would be in vogue, you'd be cool being forced to follow that?

This isn't about majority opinion. This is about medical consensus as it exists today... globally... that was peer reviewed. Extrapolating an emergency response into a grotesque hypothetical is ridiculous. Simply put, get vaccinated or deal with the PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY of not getting vaccinated. The anti-vaxxers want the cake and want to eat it. Their worldview on this has been so poisoned by the right-wing media circus, they think they are entitled to whatever they want. If they don't want to be vaccinated, there are steps they need to take, because the virus is real, the virus is killing people, the virus will mutate and possibly get worse.

But they think not only is vaccination unnecessary, they think masks are unnecessary, they think spacing is unnecessary, they think any mitigation is a vile incursion of their liberty, and they won't change their minds until they or someone very close is dying from it.

Medical consensus has historically been used for all kinds of nastiness. We have a history and a context we need to take into account.

Which is why vaccinating minorities and Africa in general need to anticipate these historical problems and an issue with trust. Middle aged white people... not so much.

 

[TomC]

No idea what works with persuading him, but the CDC thinks that he should still be vaccinated, even if he was already COVID19 positive:

He's vaccinated now, Praise Jesus!

The carrot that worked was his employer announcing "Two weeks after your second shot you don't have to mask at work."

I'm a big believer in this sort of social pressure, rather than government intrusion into people's lives.

Tom

 

[Playball40]

We've discussed this before. I think you're a fucking fascist. Sorry to be blunt. But there it is. Your idea of liberalism isn't liberalism at all IMHO.

Your stance isn't very 'liberal' either.

But the point of liberalism is NOT that there should be no consequences to freely chosen actions.
If you're free to join NAMBLA, you're not necessarily free to have a job as a teacher in elementary school, where children are or might be threatened by your presence.
If you're free to reject a vaccine, you're not necessarily free to have a job in a school or meat packing facility, where people are or might be threatened by your presence.
If you're free to do intoxicants, you're not necessarily free to drive a city bus, where passengers, motorists, pedestrians, buildings are threatened by your impaired judgement.

The anti-vaxxers i have met are demanding that they can choose not to get a shot AND that they suffer no inconveniences for this self-inflicted vulnerability o being a plague rat. Shopping, dining, work, school, visiting the elderly, international travel, all while breathing with gay abandon. Why would the rest of us tolerate this threat to the herd?

AGREE AGREE AGREE