What I don't understand about anti-vaxxers is...

[CanadianJohn]

What I don't understand about anti-vaxxers is how malevolent some of them are. If I decided I didn't want a covid jab, I certainly wouldn't picket hospitals and health centres. Recently an elected legislator in Manitoba faced a demonstration of about 30 people at her home, and someone left a noose on her lawn. www.winnipegfreepress.com/arts-and-life/life/health/alberta-politician-angry-after-covid-19-protesters-leave-gallows-noose-at-her-house-575661242.html

A recent news story on booster jabs provoked dozens of responses poking fun at "sheeple" and referencing Big Phama and similar themes.

Why are so many people so vitriolic about the vaccine?

[quote MrsCardone]@FakingMemories but those other people you mentioned (smokers, addicts, etc) are not putting anyone else at risk.

Anti-vaxxers (or biohazards, as I prefer to call them) very much are putting other people's health at risk.[/quote]
Normal fucking human beings are biohazards now? Might as well call most of the third world biohazards now too.

This sort of language towards other people should not be tolerated. It’s hateful and frankly you should be ashamed of yourself.

I think people forget or don’t even realise that the anti vaccine propaganda is being spread by a very small proportion of people who are making a huge amount of money from doing so.

Hi, anti-vaxxer here according to many of you.

The reality is that, like many, I've got a complicated medical history that means the risks of the vaccine outweigh it's benefits for me. I also have a letter from my consultant to this effect, but even that is not enough for me to quality as exempt - based on guidance an exemption is almost impossible to obtain, you pretty much need to have died from the first shot to be exempt from the second.

Because my health issues were caused by damage from a medication, I'm passionate about informed consent and believe that people should only take a medical intervention if the benefits likely outweigh the risks, and that they should also have the right to refuse a medication in any circumstances. Our bodily integrity really should be sacrosanct and that should be non-negotiable.

I find a lot of the arguments made - that it's your choice not to take the vaccine, and therefore you're choosing whatever exclusions are then applied to you - to be disingenious. Coercion is utterly inappropriate in a setting where a medical choice is being made.

These are, to me, important principles, and as bad as covid is, I don't agree that it's worth throwing them away for.

The vaccines are also not without side effects, sometimes grave ones. I'm particularly horrified at seeing the worlds "mild" in conjunction with myocarditis. As this risk seems to lie primarily with younger people, who have less risk from covid itself, I have found the pressure on them to have it particularly ethically dodgy.

Also if there's any cash going for being supposedly anti-vaxx I'm sorely disappointed that I've not received mine yet.

Hi, anti-vaxxer here according to many of you. The reality is that, like many, I've got a complicated medical history that means the risks of the vaccine outweigh it's benefits for me. I also have a letter from my consultant to this effect

That's not being an anti-vaxer. It's not really being discussed on here at all (except to the extent that the unvaccinated increase the risk to people like you).

Also if there's any cash going for being supposedly anti-vaxx I'm sorely disappointed that I've not received mine yet.

Try calling the vaccinated 'sheeple' and insisting the vaccine contains microchips, then you should qualify :-)

This is simply an example of the tone of 'debate' now on absolutely everything and from all sides.
The language used about 'anti vaxxers' is part of the problem. I am not an 'anti vaxxer'. I simply don't agree with mandates, especially for a vaccine that does not stop infection or transmission, making mandates utterly illogical and pointless as well as unethical.
Aggressive anti vaxxers are no worse than aggressive 'vaxxers'. Cut from the same cloth as people on the extremes of arguments always are.
There should be nuance.

What I don't understand about anti-vaxxers is where do they think we'd be without them? It wouldn't be back to normal that's for sure,

If they don't want to take them that's up to them, but they don't want anyone to take them.

exemption is almost impossible to obtain, you pretty much need to have died from the first shot to be exempt from the second

Yes, this is what I’m finding. No doctor is willing to put it down officially.

So what am I supposed to do? Have the second vaccine and risk making my neurological symptoms worse? Ask for a different vaccine and play roulette with that one too? After 4 months of hell, I’m not willing to do either of those things.

I agree that no-one should be forced to have a vaccine, I also think no-one should be forced or coerced NOT to have a vaccine (or prevented from having one) if that's their choice. I don't agree with 'passports' or anything like that.

There was a 15 year old girl who sadly died on the day she was due her vaccine, from covid. She didn't have the choice to have it over the summer - the JCVI took that choice away from ALL children and their parents.

One of the things we can do if we really care about those in developing countries is mask up and reduce levels of covid because we ARE producing more and more mutations with the higher levels of infection, we now have Delta+ and we gave the world Alpha previously. The biggest risk we pose to developing countries is us exporting a vaccine resistant variant, which is highly likely in the current scenario.

And yet, there are no mitigations at all. It just defies logic.

That's not being an anti-vaxer

I've been called an anti-vaxxer on here quite a bit. I also really don't want anyone to be taking a vaccine or anything else for my sake. On a pratical level I'm at no particular risk from covid, but more important to me is the principle. Other people are not my human shields.

I can remember reading earlier in the vaccination programme (maybe February) that in the US, a pharmacist deliberately turned the fridge off where the vaccines were being held in hopes to ruin people’s faith in the vaccine!
I thought to myself, just because you don’t want it doesn’t mean others think the same. So malicious as at the point, it was only for the most vulnerable in society.

@HitchhikersGuide

This is simply an example of the tone of 'debate' now on absolutely everything and from all sides. The language used about 'anti vaxxers' is part of the problem. I am not an 'anti vaxxer'. I simply don't agree with mandates, especially for a vaccine that does not stop infection or transmission, making mandates utterly illogical and pointless as well as unethical. Aggressive anti vaxxers are no worse than aggressive 'vaxxers'. Cut from the same cloth as people on the extremes of arguments always are. There should be nuance.

Agree, but nuance and rationality left the building back in 2020!

"Isn’t it about choice? Get it if you want, stop pushing it on those who don’t. It’s a great product for those who need it, which is not every last fucking person on earth.

Besides, concerning COVID, aren’t rich countries doing this anyway by jabbing teens and young healthy people with it while vulnerable people abroad are dying?

It’s really, really weird, people who normally care about equity suddenly don’t want to know.

(I got jabbed for my job with lots of travel, I don’t want any more boosters and really want off this treadmill)"

Me too. I don't really like the thought of a 3rd jab in the space of 9 months, when actually there are millions of older/more vulnerable people in developing countries who haven't even had one dose yet! Plus, where does this end? Are we expected to get one every six months now??

@UsedUpUsername

I also remember the threads discussing the the value of elderly people vs. children, and what children have given up for the elderly. These would then go into "my grandma is 75 - she would give up her last years to see my child this Christmas!" Bollocks. Grandma could have another 15 years left to live. These threads all smelled of eugenics

That’s Grandma’s decision to make, not the government. Why do you think random public health authorities should get to determine whether Grandma gets to see her grandkids?

You missed the point. Even if 'Grandma' was real in most of those posts, and I doubt that, the implication that the young should take priority over the old - even if it causes their death - was heavy. This sacrifice was expected even of relative younger old people - like the 75-year-old I mentioned. And sometimes, if families cannot be trusted to protect their most vulnerable family members themselves, perhaps public health authorities are better placed to make those decisions. Better that than have whole care homes wiped out.

[quote MrsCardone]@FakingMemories but those other people you mentioned (smokers, addicts, etc) are not putting anyone else at risk.

Anti-vaxxers (or biohazards, as I prefer to call them) very much are putting other people's health at risk.[/quote]
Disgusting and dehumanising way to talk about other people - we don't have to go too far back in 20th century history to see where dehumanising certain groups of people leads to.

They're having to justify their own stupidity and cowardice to themselves, so I guess pretending they are 'defending helpless children' makes them feel better.

As for leaving nooses, whoever did that clearly doesn't have much grip on reality and needs psychological help.

@Dishhh

*@UsedUpUsername*

I also remember the threads discussing the the value of elderly people vs. children, and what children have given up for the elderly. These would then go into "my grandma is 75 - she would give up her last years to see my child this Christmas!" Bollocks. Grandma could have another 15 years left to live. These threads all smelled of eugenics

That’s Grandma’s decision to make, not the government. Why do you think random public health authorities should get to determine whether Grandma gets to see her grandkids?

You missed the point. Even if 'Grandma' was real in most of those posts, and I doubt that, the implication that the young should take priority over the old - even if it causes their death - was heavy. This sacrifice was expected even of relative younger old people - like the 75-year-old I mentioned. And sometimes, if families cannot be trusted to protect their most vulnerable family members themselves, perhaps public health authorities are better placed to make those decisions. Better that than have whole care homes wiped out.

Well it was government policy that actually caused vast swathes of death in nursing homes back in 2020 when they compelled those nursing homes to take untested (and some infected) elderly patients from hospital to the homes to make way for the expected surge in the hospitals. Thousands died as a result of that so I would not look to our public health authorities for example in respect of our elderly population.

That aside, it's astounding that you talk about families having to "protect" their elderly relatives as if those elderly people have no autonomy and are incapable of making decisions for themselves on their own risk analysis. Most people I know in their 70s and beyond are well capable of deciding on their own risk and want to do so, my own mother included. She says she will never obey another lockdown again and will never be dictated to again as to when or how she sees her grandkids and she will hug who when wants when she wants. She's 83.

Should say she will hug who she wants when she wants.

@Dishhh

*@UsedUpUsername*

I also remember the threads discussing the the value of elderly people vs. children, and what children have given up for the elderly. These would then go into "my grandma is 75 - she would give up her last years to see my child this Christmas!" Bollocks. Grandma could have another 15 years left to live. These threads all smelled of eugenics

That’s Grandma’s decision to make, not the government. Why do you think random public health authorities should get to determine whether Grandma gets to see her grandkids?

You missed the point. Even if 'Grandma' was real in most of those posts, and I doubt that, the implication that the young should take priority over the old - even if it causes their death - was heavy. This sacrifice was expected even of relative younger old people - like the 75-year-old I mentioned. And sometimes, if families cannot be trusted to protect their most vulnerable family members themselves, perhaps public health authorities are better placed to make those decisions. Better that than have whole care homes wiped out.

Grandma in a care home probably does not have 15 years left, so I’m not sure what your point here is.

Care homes necessarily have stricter COVID protocol but Granny living independently on her own should decide whether she wants to be isolated from her family (elderly isolated and alone are at higher risk from depression and other maladies) or take unknown risks to see her loved ones.

Why shouldn’t it be a choice left to individuals?

I have declined the covid jabs. I made an informed decision not to have them, after weighing up the pros and cons based on my personal perceived risk, the infection fatality rate, the fact that there was no long-term data and (as we now know) the fact that having the jabs don't prevent you from getting or passing on covid.

Alarm bells started ringing for me when I realised how they were counting and classifying covid deaths.

I remain very 'under the radar' about not having the jabs. The reason why some unvaccinated people are getting so passionate about things is that they can see that there is literally no counter view being presented in mainstream media and want to make people aware.

There are no special reports on the 6pm news showing people who are vaccine damaged. There are no journalists on the news questioning the method in which covid deaths are reported and the definition of "unvaccinated" people in hospital (you are not considered vaccinated until 15 days after the 2nd dose is administered). There is no mention on the mainstream media about the covid IFR.

I don't condone people intimidating other people in the slightest, but can understand why some extreme people/groups are doing it.

As a person with family scattered in various red list countries , I am hoping all requirements requiring travellers and tourists to be vaxxed are removed. I would like to travel to see them without taking boosters and also have my unvaxxed relatives travel to see me. After all, our bodies, our choice.

That aside, it's astounding that you talk about families having to "protect" their elderly relatives as if those elderly people have no autonomy and are incapable of making decisions for themselves on their own risk analysis. Most people I know in their 70s and beyond are well capable of deciding on their own risk and want to do so, my own mother included. She says she will never obey another lockdown again and will never be dictated to again as to when or how she sees her grandkids and she will hug who when wants when she wants. She's 83

Also, this basically.

You want to take agency away from from elderly people and yet dare to cry about ‘eugenics’

I'm vaccinated . Had my booster and flu jab as well over the past month.
I don't condemn people who make their own personal decision no to have the vaccine. We are all adults and the majority of us have enough capacity to make that informed choice.
What I don't like and derailing a bit here sorry.
I'm nhs .
We have to be vaccinated
Our patients don't
Our visitors don't
This does not prevent them from care or visits.
People seem to think all the elderly are vaccinated, they are not.
But the care sector is willing to sack hundreds of thousands of staff across the care system.
This is wrong.
We can not force our patients or visitors to be vaccinated.
Where will this shit show end?
Our trust at the weekend was working on 84% staff
When this vaccine mandate come in trusts will be fucked
Care homes are already feeling it.
And it's not the well you should of had your vaccination. That's not the answer.

@Greenplums sorry, that doesn’t sound very informed to me and I definitely have seen things in the media about all of these topics. It’s not a conspiracy theory you know and by saying you can see why some people are leaving nooses on lawns to intimidate makes me think you are not a very nice person.

I want to know why they are happy to destroy their relationship with family etc for the ideology.
A relative has called those who accept vaccines etc etc brainless morons. This is on a Public Forum where all the brainless morons can read it.
I have also been told that my dds shouldn't have the vaccine if I want yo be a grandmother and that my kids will be orphaned because we are double jabbed.
Not sure if that us worse than using every sudden child death as ammunition against the vaccine. Even 11 year olds. The 16 year old who died early on from COVID with no pre existing conditions must have been SIDS from a vaccobe too.

You want to take agency away from from elderly people and yet dare to cry about ‘eugenics’

My dad is in his mid 80s. He refused to be infantilised last year as did a lot of his friends. The ones that were left - obviously a lot of them died over the past ten years or so. The ones that were left didn’t want to ease what could be their last year(s) hiding away in their homes alone.

They carried on meeting up, having their poker nights. Some of their children threw tantrums over it, saying they would report them to the police.

I’m glad they carried on. My dad said he’d made it this long into life, something had to kill him eventually, he couldn’t run and hide from death forever.

Even more glad now that he carried on having fun - my dad has had rapid cognitive decline over the past few months and is now a shell of the person he was.

At least he carried on living his life and didn’t hide away for the last “good” year of his life.