Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > Dallas
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 09-01-2021, 12:09 PM
 
8,181 posts, read 2,746,761 times
Reputation: 6015

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wittgenstein's Ghost View Post
I'm not sure if you're actually arguing that Covid presents such a small risk to unvaccinated people that the risk can be ignored or if you are just being argumentative for the sake of it.
I'm saying that's not your judgment call to make for anyone besides yourself.

 
Old 09-01-2021, 12:13 PM
 
115 posts, read 62,491 times
Reputation: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wittgenstein's Ghost View Post
600k people in a country of 300 million have died. That's a .2% chance of death, and a much higher chance of serious sickness or hospitalization -- and that's just in a year or so.
 
Old 09-01-2021, 12:14 PM
 
5,683 posts, read 4,088,526 times
Reputation: 7401
Quote:
Originally Posted by potatocoins View Post
What is the correct amount of risk I should be taking against COVID and what is the correct amount of skepticism should I have towards the leaders so that I am not labeled as misinformed or anti-vaxx?

Apparently there is only one correct answer to my question, because apparently me saying that people have varying degrees of risk and skepticism makes me anti-vaxx.
Discussions of risk threshold make no sense if they aren't coupled with a discussion of increased benefit that comes with increased risk. I have a relatively high risk threshold in general, but I would never choose to accept an elevated risk for no benefit. If I am ice climbing, for example, there is a much higher chance I die than if I am sitting at home reading a book. But I am doing something I enjoy, and I accept the elevated risk in exchange for getting to do an enjoyable activity.

That is not analogous to Covid vaccines. You don't get to enjoy your life more because you go without a vaccine and accept a much higher risk of death. And besides, I think you are fundamentally mischaracterizing the justification of most anti-vaxxers on this issue. It isn't that they simply enjoy risk and like taking on a higher chance of death. Instead, it's that they think avoiding the vaccine lowers their risk. To them, saying no to the vaccine is a risk-avoidance move. In this, they are badly misinformed. The risk of being unvaccinated is much, much higher.
 
Old 09-01-2021, 12:15 PM
 
5,683 posts, read 4,088,526 times
Reputation: 7401
Quote:
Originally Posted by potatocoins View Post
600,000 divided by 300,000,000 is .002. Maybe you should fix your eyebrow.
 
Old 09-01-2021, 12:17 PM
 
5,683 posts, read 4,088,526 times
Reputation: 7401
Quote:
Originally Posted by albert648 View Post
I'm saying that's not your judgment call to make for anyone besides yourself.
I'm simply arguing that it's irrational, so you can take your libertarian pleas elsewhere. It's irrelevant to the discussion we're having.
 
Old 09-01-2021, 12:21 PM
 
115 posts, read 62,491 times
Reputation: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wittgenstein's Ghost View Post
Discussions of risk threshold make no sense if they aren't coupled with a discussion of increased benefit that comes with increased risk. I have a relatively high risk threshold in general, but I would never choose to accept an elevated risk for no benefit. If I am ice climbing, for example, there is a much higher chance I die than if I am sitting at home reading a book. But I am doing something I enjoy, and I accept the elevated risk in exchange for getting to do an enjoyable activity.

That is not analogous to Covid vaccines. You don't get to enjoy your life more because you go without a vaccine and accept a much higher risk of death. And besides, I think you are fundamentally mischaracterizing the justification of most anti-vaxxers on this issue. It isn't that they simply enjoy risk and like taking on a higher chance of death. Instead, it's that they think avoiding the vaccine lowers their risk. To them, saying no to the vaccine is a risk-avoidance move. In this, they are badly misinformed. The risk of being unvaccinated is much, much higher.
I blame the leaders of our country for losing the trust of the people. People are rightfully skeptical of the government, the leaders, the media, etc..

This is something that is not being discussed enough. We choose to vilify people who don't trust the vaccine, instead of analyze where we went wrong in losing the trust of so many people and how we can regain it back.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wittgenstein's Ghost View Post
600,000 divided by 300,000,000 is .002. Maybe you should fix your eyebrow.
You can't just assign the same level of risk across the entire population though. Your risk of dying depends on a number of factors with age being a big one. Your percentage is highly misleading.
 
Old 09-01-2021, 12:26 PM
 
5,683 posts, read 4,088,526 times
Reputation: 7401
Quote:
Originally Posted by potatocoins View Post
I blame the leaders of our country for losing the trust of the people. People are rightfully skeptical of the government, the leaders, the media, etc..

This is something that is not being discussed enough. We choose to vilify people who don't trust the vaccine, instead of analyze where we went wrong in losing the trust of so many people and how we can regain it back.
People are to blame. This is the information age. If you choose to use unreliable sources of information, it's on you. There is no reputable information source that is currently saying people shouldn't be vaccinated. Every single living president has been vaccinated. I think every member of Congress has been vaccinated. If not, it's very close. You know who hasn't been vaccinated? 99% of people currently dying from Covid.

"I'm going to stick my head in the sand, and when I do, it's the government's fault" is hogwash.

Quote:
Originally Posted by potatocoins View Post
You can't just assign the same level of risk across the entire population though. Your risk of dying depends on a number of factors with age being a big one. Your percentage is highly misleading.
So what you're saying is screw the high-risk people, huh? If 10% of the people actually have a 2% risk of death (that's 1 in 50!), the other 10% should just say "Tough noogies, my risk is low. I won't even get a simple shot that carries almost no risk so that you can live"?

What a caring person you are.
 
Old 09-01-2021, 12:31 PM
 
115 posts, read 62,491 times
Reputation: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wittgenstein's Ghost View Post
People are to blame. This is the information age. If you choose to use unreliable sources of information, it's on you. There is no reputable information source that is currently saying people shouldn't be vaccinated. Every single living president has been vaccinated. I think every member of Congress has been vaccinated. If not, it's very close. You know who hasn't been vaccinated? 99% of people currently dying from Covid.

"I'm going to stick my head in the sand, and when I do, it's the government's fault" is hogwash.
Even in the information age, sometimes people can get stuff wrong (ex. "You have a %.2 chance of dying from COVID).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wittgenstein's Ghost View Post
So what you're saying is screw the high-risk people, huh? If 10% of the people actually have a 2% risk of death (that's 1 in 50!), the other 10% should just say "Tough noogies, my risk is low"?

What a caring person you are.
I'm saying you're spreading misinformation by claiming you have a %.2 chance of dying from COVID.
 
Old 09-01-2021, 12:33 PM
 
5,683 posts, read 4,088,526 times
Reputation: 7401
Quote:
Originally Posted by potatocoins View Post
Even in the information age, sometimes people can get stuff wrong (ex. "You have a %.2 chance of dying from COVID).

I'm saying you're spreading misinformation by claiming you have a %.2 chance of dying from COVID.
You're dodging the meat of the argument because you're defending a bad position that is obviously either very irrational or very selfish.

And I never said everyone has a .2% chance of death. I said the average person does. You apparently don't realize the difference between "average" and "every."
 
Old 09-01-2021, 12:42 PM
 
115 posts, read 62,491 times
Reputation: 126
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wittgenstein's Ghost View Post
You're dodging the meat of the argument because you're defending a bad position that is obviously either very irrational or very selfish.
We simply disagree on the matter, that's all. I blame the leaders, while you blame the people. What are your thoughts on the fact that black people are the most vaccine hesitant racial group. Is that because they are also the most uninformed group?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wittgenstein's Ghost View Post
And I never said everyone has a .2% chance of death. I said the average person does. You apparently don't realize the difference between "average" and "every."
You didn't say 'every' or 'average', you simply didn't specify. Either way, your statistic is highly misleading.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Texas > Dallas
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top