>So many people just dismiss they opposing view , no matter whether the person put a lot of thought into it. You’re a lefty , do gooder from the right , and your a racist bogan from the left . Both wanting the other side silenced . I know it’s not really relevant to this , but I personally worry when I see this stuff .
This polarising binary of speech now removes all nuance from discussions. IMO it is a consequence of the politicisation of everything (particulary in the US), red team v blue team.
COVID vaccines are the perfect example. Its either the VACCINE IS PROVEN TO BE SAFE or the only other response is YOU SHOULD NOT TAKE THE VACCINE ANTIVAX view. Neither side of this binary is correct or tells the whole story. The vaccines are not proven to be safe, there has been no longitudinal studies done on the safety of them, but they have been proven (within acceptable parameters) to be safe in the short term. The choices people make are for their individual and community benefit, but it seems the media and social media narrative regarding it is that the community is incapable of discussing or making decisions as adults.
Im not an antivaxer, if/when my time comes I'll stick my arm out for the Oxford/Astra Zenaca vaccine(only).
Yep . Me too . So will my kids . But the conversation around how safe the vaccines are needs to be had . Especially if some unforeseen side effect rears it’s ugly head in the future .
I am a drug development project manager and I've been in the industry for 17 years. My company does contract work and we managed the Pfizer COVID vaccine study in the US, as well as the Novavax study (I did not work on it personally).
I don't really understand the comments about having a public "conversation" over the safety of vaccines. Your average person is not qualified to assess drug safety, nor does your average person understand the biostatistical analysis of trial data. The people who approve drugs for general consumption ARE the people who have expertise in the matter. So if a regulatory body deems that a drug is proven sufficiently safe, then that's about as good as you are going to get. Involving lay people in the discussion isn't really helpful.
By all means, do your own research on vaccines. The information is freely available. Do your research on everything, not just health. But also, you have to trust that the people who approve vaccines for general consumption are experts at doing so. Same as they approve other types of drugs for the general public, which aren't under scrutiny like vaccines are.
Or - don't trust the process, if you prefer, but understand that the process applies to ALL drugs, not just vaccines. So anti-vaxxers should also be wary of headache tablets, muscle relaxants, laxatives, cancer medications etc.
That's not to accuse anyone here of being an anti-vaxxer, just to give context about the process of developing and approving drugs - all drugs. I'm never quite clear why vaccines specifically have so much public focus. Or more correctly, I know that one guy published an article linking vaccines with autism many years ago, but that has been entirely hosed-down and I'm not sure why folks continue to worry more about vaccines than other medications. We've been giving shots to kids for a long time and the primary outcome has been near total eradication of a wide variety of illnesses that used to cause significant childhood mortality and morbidity.
People have to understand that the COVID vaccines are not being rushed or pushed through irresponsibly, despite political and social pressure to get the work done. In fact, these trials are getting much more medical and safety attention than any average trial would. Part of the reason the trials appear to be occurring quickly is because many of the red-tape hurdles have been removed. It's also proving much easier to get people to sign up for COVID trials than your average trial.
Furthermore, most, if not all, of the vaccines being applied to COVID are based on existing research/technologies. So pharma companies didn't have to wait to ramp up their trial abilities: they had the technology available once COVID was profiled/mapped.
For example the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine, they've been fooling around with the technology for years. Once they isolated COVID they were ready to go, and my company has a pre-existing partnership for managing Pfizer clinical trials, so they rolled out a protocol for my company to start work on. The protocol designs are usually very similar; you basically drop the study into the existing framework and get going.
Secondary to the trial design, part of taking any medication is being reliably informed of the risk-benefit profile by a medical professional. But that's not a public debate, that's a discussion you have with your doctor. That's also the reason they stick the little paper pamphlets in every single prescription medication, with warnings all over the box. That IS the safety discussion.
If you are in doubt, like with anything, do your own research and discuss with a professional. There's plenty of easily-accessible and transparent information available online regarding COVID vaccines and their clinical trials:
Lastly in terms of long-term safety studies, I don't know how realistic that is. I don't mean from the POV of time elapsed, I simply mean due to the nature of vaccine delivery. Most drugs with long-term safety profiles are subscription products - i.e. you take them continuously for long periods. With vaccines, you treatment is normally over after a few weeks max, and typically side-effects present within a few days (e.g. injection-site reactions, allergies etc.). Vaccines have been well-studied over a very long period of time, so pharma companies have become pretty good at anticipating and managing side-effects, most of which tend to be quite benign.
Vaccines work to elicit an immune response, so they are typically quite weak products and it's your body that does the heavy lifting. Seriously, do the research on known and predicted adverse reactions to any/all vaccines and you will see the same fairly modest stuff over and over - headache, joint ache, injection-site swelling, chills, tiredness etc.
Consider it like drinking alcohol - the difference between the safety of drinking a lot of alcohol in a short period vs over a very long-period. The outcomes here are very different and there's no specific reason to expect that having 20 beers in one week will set you up for life-long outcomes.
Statistically, I think its very very unlikely we are going to see serious unexpected long-term adverse reactions from COVID vaccines. That's not to say we don't continue to do the safety analysis work (for example, the Pfizer study is collecting safety events for 2 years post dose, so it is ongoing), but just to realise it's a precaution and there is not any specific rationale to wait for more data before folks start getting their shots.
And all this is part of the conversation . No matter what anyone says, people are wary of it , because perception equals reality . If you perceive something to be true then that’s your truth . It’s just most of us can rationally , pivot , the moment better information presents itself .
I understand what your saying . I’m not an anti Vaxer at all . But we should have healthy conversations about it . Why not ? Even if the conversation is simply be to explain why it’s safe and the reasons for it .
I’m constantly having to have conversations about things I do at work , to people who arnt as informed and think of ways to explain things to them , so they can walk away more educated . Especially in the most ELI5 way I can think . Otherwise , people go off half cocked , and for me , and the company I work for . Especially in the role I have , they get extremely angry about things because of the lack of information, and it affects them .
Who’s got the time to do that research mate ? I mean seriously ? I find it interesting and will later , but most will just look at dr Facebook , posted by Mother of 3 amber from Byron bay , and take that as gospel .
Many people are concerned about the eagerness of most to give away all thier power to the government . I don’t know what to think. But I’ve had many conversations with all kinds of people about it , and the ethics , morals and to more extremes the conspiracy theories .
The vaccination is just , really, an overt example of the controls we are giving to others. And a lot of people , unless they’ve had the tragedy of a family member passing , secretly arnt sure of covid isn’t a hoax . The rational part of the brain corrects them , but they have lingering doubt .
Some super intelligent people I’ve met feel this way. Not enough to not get vaccinated , or get out the signs and March on Parliament House, or even voice it to most people . But it’s an itch that sits in the back of thier head . One of my close mates thought this way , until a couple of family members were fighting for thier life in the last few weeks .
These conversations have to be had . Not in the , “I know more than you , cause your dumb and don’t believe” belittling way. Especially if the only reason you believe is you lost a close family member .
There’s nothing wrong with discussing it . And people who think there is . Are the problem I’ve been posting about the last few days . If you know more , don’t be a douche to people who have reservations . Try and ease thier worry . Because thier concerns are fair enough IMO. I mean it’s not like a government had never tried to control the population through nefarious means before is it ............
Perception is not reality. Perception is the lens through which we view reality. 'Perception is reality' is a statement that is often used to justify a perception that is objectively unjustifiable.
Perception is the mental gymnastics or a mental impression of something. Reality is how things actually exist. Perception is the lens through which we process, remember, interpret, decide and act on reality. If we perceive things that are way out of touch with reality then we have a problem with our perception lens, and that can shift from illusion to delusion.
By all means let us have a discussion, I’m all for that, but at least let’s have a discussion that has some basis in reality.
We are not islands, everything in modern society requires the cooperation and trust in others, I don’t see this as giving away power, and in fact I find this empowering. As an example there is no way I could develop any one of the many vaccines that have saved my life, and I am happy that others have, so I can benefit. Are vaccines perfect? No, I have never heard anyone involved in the medical profession ever saying they were. As with any medical intervention it is a balancing act between risk vs benefit. I am I qualified enough to make that assessment? No I am not. I’ll leave that to the medical experts in that field. I won’t be leaving it to the “Mother of 3 amber from Byron bay”.
During the pandemic have we given away power to the government? Yes absolutely. Sometimes I think it is a bit over the top but the numbers don’t lie. Compared to most of the rest of the world Australia is the place to be. Can we refine the liberties we give away or is there better ways of coping with the Pandemic, probably and 20-20 hindsight is wonderful. My personal opinion is the Federal Government has relegated its responsibilities to the states and that is not acceptable to me. Is Hotel quarantine the best solution for return travellers? I am in the camp that would like to see quarantine facilities outside of the capital cities, greatly reducing the risk to the majority of the population. None of the objections to this, that I have seen, could not be overcome with some innovation, planning and management.
Australians are known for the rebellious nature. After all we started as a convict settlement. I have my fair share healthy contempt for authority, but I am also a pragmatist.
So your reality is the same as my reality ? That’s not philosophically possible . Our experiences , and environment , people around us etc shape the lens to which we see the reality . It’s like being colour blind . What if you didn’t know you were colour blind ? Would it just be a lens at that point ? The way you state that , is like most people can differentiate between the perception and the reality . Most people can’t .
That’s so obtuse , and close minded to imply that it’s mental gymnastics that people are doing
Everyone has a lifetime of experiences that shape this lens , twist it and distort it . The function of questioning everything is evolutionary, as it serves a function for self preservation, it’s hardly isolated to Australia because some white people got off a boat 200 years ago.
I don’t understand what your trying to say ? That because you believe something , or even I believe that everyone else is wrong for being sceptical ? Thats arrogant IMO.
There’s so much information out there that’s bogus , and so many echo chambers of bad ideas , that are completely siloed from each other, let alone the rest of us , that you have to break through those barriers . It’s the reason the uptake for the jab in many countries is really slow.
People are listening to thier sceptical voice . Rightly or wrongly .
So the conversation has to be had. Just because you feel what you feel , and are self Riteous about it , doesn’t mean everyone else is .
The simple lockdown that a lot of people have done , even though the laws have relaxed hasnt helped either . People are scared . You don’t calm people by telling them they’re idiots because you know what’s right . That has not , and never will work .
Reality is what exists, there is no mine vs yours, it's not a philosophy. If you are colour blind, that does not mean colour does not exist. Your perception is that you can't distinguish well between red and green. That's your perception. If something is reflecting all red light then it is red, that's the reality. If something is reflecting all green light then it is green, that's the reality. Perception is a different matter for each individual.
Experience certainly varies from individual to individual and certainly your experiences will be different to mine.
I agree that everyone has a lifetime of experience to shape their perspective lens. The problem arises when that lens is so far shifted from reality it poses real problems, for the individual and for society as well.
I will go wherever the evidence goes. If someone can show me valid evidence of why my view is not as good as theirs, then I'll change my view. Remember though that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
I agree, you don't calm people down by calling them idiots.
It’s ? philosophy. There’s millions of debates , about what is reality , and what is perception . Your opinion is just one . The matrix theory being the most funny , open one . I once had an arguement with my uncle who believed it could be possible , and I took your stance on it . That it’s absolute garbage . Until I realised , that in itself is a perception. What defines this reality though ? Things you touch , smell feel , see etc . What happens if you take away some of those . Thier perception changes ? But how much of a perception change . Does that form a new reality . What are the states that make up that reality .
It’s a trip once you head down that rabbit hole. My point is still the same . If you perceive it to be true . Your whole life will be built around that perception of truth , that you will then eventually have your perception match your reality . So your perception will be your reality .
I understand what your saying . That how can reality change . It just is , and we live it . But is it ?
By the way , not a tree hugging hippy . Just listened to a lot of podcasts , and read books about , consciousness and reality and perception . I found myself trying to figure out myself and identity.
I guess to sum up my point , if you believe it to be true , it is true . It doesn’t matter what’s happening around you . That’s your truth. So if some people thier truth is , that coronavirus is something to fear , and it’s all a government control tool , then the conversation needs to be had to change thier perception , and by association thier reality .
