Clearly illustrating that people are in fact not smarter than the virus.
People should compare the rate of myocarditis from MRNA vaccines with the rate of myocarditis in those infected with covid…which we are able to do now, and which is one of the reasons why CDC says “even if this (myocarditis in <=30 year olds post-MRNA vaccine) does turn out to be an extremely rare side effect of the vaccine, “most patients who received care responded well to medicine and rest and quickly felt better.” And the serious risks of COVID-19 — even for young healthy people — outweigh the risks of any possible side effects from the vaccine.”
We will never have perfect or complete data when making critically important healthcare decisions…and ones that are being made at the individual level impact the rest of the population as well. Somehow these facts continue to get overlooked, or even purposely ignored by some.
The vaccine reluctant don’t think beyond themselves. And they won’t, because they are cutting their noses off to spite their faces—they don’t like being told what to do, or they are skeptical, or they are antivax. (I am not talking about anyone with legitimate medical concerns.) I guess Darwinism will win the day.
Meanwhile, if we behave responsibly, we apparently have a name: “vaccine enthusiastic.” I prefer the name “responsible human.” I guess I’m enthusiastic about the result of being vaccinated though. Relief, meeting friends and family without worrying, and knowing that I’ve done my duty to myself, my family and my fellow humans are definitely things worth celebrating.
The rationale is also deeply flawed and not rational. They or their loved one might end up in the hospital anyway with something much worse than a heart issue. (Again, I’ll mention my friend’s husband who recently had a liver transplant due to covid.). It’s pretty firmly established that just having covid doesn’t provide as much protection as getting vaccinated. And for every person who says “I know someone who had ____ after the vaccine” you’ll hear many others who say “I know someone who got covid twice and was much sicker the second time.” In fact, I know two people from the latter group and none from the former.
It might be an over-generalization to attribute motive to a vaccine decision. If “thinking beyond ourselves” is the standard, it’s going to be hard to figure that out unless someone volunteers that information and then consistently acts on it. For instance, are those who “just want things to get back to normal” thinking of themselves, or others? Hard to know but that did motivate a whole lot to get vaccinated!
There are four basic groups: those who are vaccinated and continuing to follow Covid protocols, those who are vaccinated and no longer following Covid protocols, those who are NOT vaccinated and following Covid protocols, and those who are NOT vaccinated and NOT following Covid protocols. The first and last group are definitely “most” vs “least” risk averse - and one can more easily glean how each feels about others vs themselves (usually they volunteer that information and their actions clearly indicate it as well). But the two middle groups . . . who is more self-centered? Hard to know - it’ll depend on the person. For instance, someone who cheated on Covid protocols throughout the pandemic but got vaccinated and now wants others to do so too might be demonstrating more evidence of not thinking beyond themself than the person who followed the rules and is continuing to use common sense Covid measures but has declined vaccination. The former may be motivated by their own thoughts, whims, wishes, and feelings. The latter may not perceive it as necessary based on the 12 months of available data on stacked prevention measures, may have difficulty getting the time off from work in case of reaction, may wish to have more data on the effect of the vaccine, and a whole host of other reasons that really can’t be characterized as motivated by “self” over “others.” One isn’t being self-centered just because they don’t do exactly what we would like them to!
Yes, I believe that “vaccine-enthusiastic” correctly describes those who want others to take the vaccine. They may want this for a whole lot of reasons. But one possibility would be that they are putting themselves and their loved ones ahead of others. To me that would be an example of self-centeredness (expanded a bit to include the family circle, of course).
This comment demonstrates well that many (most?) think about Covid and vaccination based on their personal experience or knowledge of it. Someone wants to avoid heart problems because they know a friend who had that experience following vaccination. Someone else wants you to be vaccinated because their friend’s husband had a bad outcome with Covid. One side doesn’t know anyone personally who had a bad outcome with Covid, the other side doesn’t know anyone with a bad reaction to the vaccine. I suspect this characterizes a good number of Americans! But even if not, it’s probably pretty common. In both cases, people are forming their judgements by weighing the theoretical against their actual. It’s not the best way to reason, but many do it this way.
Funny thing about science is that it is challenged, re-examined, and sometimes even changes. Most scientists would say that “accepting the science” is probably not the best way to describe how we should view science.
ETA: I’m not sure ALL are happy - especially those who want others to be vaccinated to, and who spend a lot of time on that very topic.
Agree with most of the above. The difficulty is, again, those disparate probabilities. For an older person, myocarditis from Covid is indeed a risk. For a younger person, not so much. And “don’t worry most responded to treatment and felt better” isn’t generally communicated with most other vaccines! Hence the hesitancy. Also, again “EUA” means that in aggregate the vaccine does more good than harm. That means that 1) yes, people are making decisions without the full set of data and 2) individuals might have a different outcome than the aggregate. On the one hand, the message to those individuals is that their decisions impact others. But that’s also true for our actions and words in trying to convince others to get the jab. We might be a bit too careless about waiving aside those possible adverse outcomes.
I’m very sorry you even have to make that statement on here- or anywhere else, for that matter. I’m sure those who go around coughing on people are not the norm, but the (unfortunate) exception, so having to explain the obvious just goes to show where we find ourselves nowadays.
Wouldn’t you have to be pretty isolated to not know anyone personally who had a bad outcome with Covid? Maybe you don’t know someone personally who actually died, but you’re pretty much guaranteed to know someone who ended up hospitalized or nearly so.
I don’t know anyone who had a bad outcome or was hospitalized. I live in central MA which by the numbers was hit pretty hard, but I don’t know anyone in either category. I do know people who had it but all cases were mild.
Perhaps they are in a bubble with other like-people. But that’s true for many across SES, ethnic, education levels, etc. It does encourage group-think. It’s possible that if one doesn’t know anyone who’s had a bad reaction to the vaccine that’s bubble-think as well (for the record, I know for a fact that I live in a bubble across many attributes; however, when it comes to Covid and the vaccine - and this might just be a function of the state I live in or people I know - there’s at least one person of my acquaintance in pretty much every scenario described on this thread!).
Those folks didn’t “lose” anything. They made a conscious (rational choice – for them) to attend/host indoor gatherings and play covid roulette. Many others chose not to.
You asked about knowing someone personally. I don’t. Now you ask if I’ve heard about it on the news. Well of course I watch the news and hear about people that I don’t know who have had it, but personally - no. No one I know personally who had it had anything more than mild symptoms that lasted a short time.
Well, it looks like you edited your post while I was responding so now this doesn’t make sense.
I heard of a spouse of a neighbor’s adult child who was hospitalized with covid and recovered. My nephew who got covid in college also recovered. All of my extended family members & friends got covid VAX as soon as they were eligible and could get them—no bad side effects.
What do these anecdotes prove? Not much to me. I still believe the data that getting the vaccines ASAP is the safest route, plus continuing to mask when unavoidably in crowds.
Nope, don’t know anyone personally who has died of covid. H believes he may had had covid in 2/2020 and is still trying to recover his once exceptional sense of smell.
I realize I have personal contact with tons and tons of people through work and I was privy to a lot of health information. I guess other people don’t get that much information from that many people.
Maybe I pay a lot of attention or maybe people like to talk to me in general, because even though nobody in my immediate circle had any bad effects, I’ve been told about bad effects experienced by neighbors and acquaintances. I swear, I never ask.
I know I hear a lot too. For me, the grapevine from school, extended family, neighbors, and church share a lot of info about many people. Then there are my kids’ contacts too and medical boy’s experiences.
Don’t ask me a thing about Hollywood, famous singers, what’s hot on Twitter, or the Royal Family, but if it’s about people I know or people in my circle know, I probably know it too.
