Coronavirus thread

[Mandryka]

Too many assumptions and ifs with these vaccines. Honestly, the whole thing looks more and more like a large-scale vaccinological experiment rather than something thoroughly researched and relatively safe. I have no intention to get the shot(s) anytime soon.

And lest I be accused of being an anti-vaxxer, I hasten to add that over the years I got my 7yo son vaccinated with all the mandatory vaccines plus several of the recommended, non-mandatory ones.

Try maximin - look at your options from a self interested point of view and maximise your minimum payoff. If you don't get the vaccine the probability of you getting sick with Covid is increased, and even if it's mild it's a lot worse than any side effects of the vaccine itself. If you do get it, the worst consequence for you is a painful arm and a bit of the shivers the day after. So I'd say, logically and prudentially, take it if offered, even if you're in your 20s or 30s.

[Florestan]

Try maximin - look at your options from a self interested point of view and maximise your minimum payoff. If you don't get the vaccine the probability of you getting sick with Covid is increased, and even if it's mild it's a lot worse than any side effects of the vaccine itself. If you do get it, the worst consequence for you is a painful arm and a bit of the shivers the day after. So I'd say, logically and prudentially, take it if offered, even if you're in your 20s or 30s.

I'm 48, actually. I couldn't get the shot right now anyway because I don't fall into any category which is scheduled for this spring. But I can't say I can hardly wait my turn either. I'll just wait and see.

[Mandryka]

I'm 48, actually. I couldn't get the shot right now anyway because I don't fall into any category which is scheduled for this spring. But I can't say I can hardly wait my turn either. I'll just wait and see.

I felt a bit like you I have to say, though in the end I took it, with the maximin reasoning above my motivator.

[DavidW]

There seems to be this pervasive misinformed opinion that the vaccines were rushed.  They were not rushed.  It is possible to run the different phases of the clinical trials simultaneously since they are independent of each other.  It made testing faster but no less rigorous than moving through in a sequential fashion.

And at this point so MANY people have been vaccinated with such a very, very small percentage suffering from unintended significant side effects that fear of these vaccines just doesn't seem rational.

Since medical experts are claiming a very high percentage need to be vaccinated to reach herd immunity, for the good of the community everyone that can be vaccinated should be regardless of whether they think that they personally need it.

[Mandryka]

Since medical experts are claiming a very high percentage need to be vaccinated to reach herd immunity, for the good of the community everyone that can be vaccinated should be regardless of whether they think that they personally need it.

That argument will work only if they prevent transmission.

[Florestan]

everyone that can be vaccinated should be regardless of whether they think that they personally need it.

Iow, vaccination should be mandatory, right?

[Karl Henning]

     As of today I qualify for the vaccine, as phase 2 begins in Massachusetts. I have an appointment for the first shot March 12 at my health care provider.

Good to know - hope it goes well. Getting my Shot No.1 this afternoon.

Very good, friends.

[Karl Henning]

I hope all goes well for you. There is a report on Microsoft News saying a new 'Finnish' variant has been detected. It probably originated outside Finland but was first detected there. One of your top virologists has said that, as yet, it is 'not yet a major concern'. Let us hope it stays that way.

Hear, hear!

[Florestan]

There is a report on Microsoft News saying a new 'Finnish' variant has been detected. It probably originated outside Finland but was first detected there.

That's actually a very sensitive topic. If a mutation was first detected in country X, then it's okay to call it the British, Brazilian, Finnish or South African mutation. But try to talk about the Chinese virus (because it's China where the first cases of SARS-Cov-2 were detected and reported, right?) ---and  no sooner than that you'll be accused of racism. 

[MusicTurner]

Iow, vaccination should be mandatory, right?

I don't think that's what he's saying.

Saying for example that everyone should eat healthy food, does not mean that one wants it to become mandatory, and the alternatives forbidden. It's a recommendation, based on sound advise.

[Mandryka]

I don't think that's what he's saying.

Saying for example that everyone should eat healthy food, does not mean that one wants it to become mandatory, and the alternatives forbidden. It's a recommendation, based on sound advise.

If the vaccines prevent transmission then not being vaccinated is like smoking. By refusing the vaccine you will not only put yourself at risk, you would, in the event, put others at risk who are near you. If there's a case for banning smoking in public places on the grounds of the dangerousness of passive smoking, there would be case for forbidding people who haven't been vaccinated to enter any public place, they would have to remain in solitary house arrest.

[Karl Henning]

I don't think that's what he's saying.

Saying for example that everyone should eat healthy food, does not mean that one wants it to become mandatory, and the alternatives forbidden. It's a recommendation, based on sound advise.

Indeed.

[Florestan]

there would be case for forbidding people who haven't been vaccinated to enter any public place, they would have to remain in solitary house arrest.

Such a scenario would beat even the worst nightmares of Dostoevsky, Kafka and Huxley taken together --- and yet it is very much possible. What saddens me no end is that you and probably nine out of ten GMGers approve of it, nay, you are only too eager to welcome and applaud it.

[71 dB]

As of now, 5 % of Finns have got their vaccination. 95 % to go (+ second round)... 

[Karl Henning]

Such a scenario would beat even the worst nightmares of Dostoevsky, Kafka and Huxley taken together --- and yet it is very much possible. What saddens me no end is that you and probably nine out of ten GMGers approve of it, nay, you are only too eager to welcome and applaud it.

Well, that was a leap.

[Florestan]

Well, that was a leap.

Should God Almighty prove me wrong, I'd leap for joy.

[Mandryka]

God Almighty

He is unclean, and he shall dwell alone; his dwelling shall be outside the camp.

[MusicTurner]

If the vaccines prevent transmission then not being vaccinated is like smoking. By refusing the vaccine you will not only put yourself at risk, you would, in the event, put others at risk who are near you. If there's a case for banning smoking in public places on the grounds of the dangerousness of passive smoking, there would be case for forbidding people who haven't been vaccinated to enter any public place, they would have to remain in solitary house arrest.

Yes, there are some dilemmas in this. The policy in European countries is that it is hoped for, that enough people will show responsibility by getting the vaccine, and that the virus will then die out, or become more tolerable. So a certain number of free-riders will be accepted, and also benefit from it in the end. But there's the dilemma that logically, getting the vaccine could or will lead to some privileges when moving about in society, cf. the plans for a vaccine pass, even on an international level. This could facilitate more people getting the vaccine, but it could also collide with the individual rights for self-determination, collide with discrimination, and ultimately human rights, according to some people. There's a resolution from the European Council, January 21st, that seems to put the individual's own right to decide first, but I haven't seen much discussion of it, and apparently, the main content of the debate there, and the political answer about it, is that it's too early to decide on the matter.

https://epthinktank.eu/2021/01/25/outcome-of-the-european-council-video-conference-of-21-january-2021/
https://www.nyatider.nu/council-of-europe-no-compulsory-vaccinations-and-no-discrimination-against-the-unvaccinated/ (this is a right-wing source, likely biased)


I think that it is likely that gradually, a larger percentage of the population will be getting the vaccine, and that it will be the majority probably everywhere. We're still very early in that process.

Future research will show the extent one might still be able to infect others, and which vaccines this may apply to; the vaccines will be improved all the time too. But I'd suppose that there's hardly the same level of infection risk for others, as you'd have without the vaccine. We'll see. However: 1) if getting a vaccine, one will not strain the health care system like people who get really sick from the disease 2) one will contribute to work with improving vaccines 3) overall, it's still most likely that one will contribute to the disease dying out 4) continued testing might be an option to survey the situation, if there's a problem in an area 5) by still applying basic considerations, there shouldn't be a problem meeting those who hadn't had a vaccine. And when meeting others that have had the vaccine, such considerations can probably be loosened somewhat.

[Florestan]

Yes, there are some dilemmas in this. The policy in European countries is that it is hoped for, that enough people will show responsibility by getting the vaccine, and that the virus will then die out, or become more tolerable. So a certain number of free-riders will be accepted, and also benefit from it in the end. But there's the dilemma that logically, getting the vaccine could or will lead to some privileges when moving about in society, cf. the plans for a vaccine pass, even on an international level. This could facilitate more people getting the vaccine, but it could also collide with the individual rights for self-determination, collide with discrimination, and ultimately human rights, according to some people. There's a resolution from the European Council, January 21st, that seems to put the individual's own right to decide first, but I haven't seen much discussion of it, and apparently, the main content of the debate there, and the political answer about it, is that it's too early to decide on the matter.

I should have thought it was the default position of the Left, be it European or American, to fight each and every form of discrimination. Therefore I should have expected all left(ist) GMGers to strongly denounce and renounce any idea of people being allowed or not to move around depending on whether they were vaccinated or not --- as long as vaccination is voluntary, not mandatory.

[MusicTurner]

I should have thought it was the default position of the Left, be it European or American, to fight each and every form of discrimination. Therefore I should have expected all left(ist) GMGers to strongly denounce and renounce any idea of people being allowed or not to move around depending on whether they were vaccinated or not --- as long as vaccination is voluntary, not mandatory.

Yes, the basic discussion in this is that the very introduction of any sort of vaccine pass would be illegal, since holders of it shouldn't and couldn't be given any privileges, in any form. Only specific laws regarding mandatory vaccines in some circumstances should be allowed, though some oppose this too. But then, for one thing, a vaccine pass could also be incorporated into these laws.