Are there any stats which identify outcomes for vaccine refusers as distinct to unvaccinated.
Well, answering your question might quickly get into politics, so I’d prefer to send you a link to a study via private message, so as not to inflame passions. Sent you a PM.
cl-user
#98
There are plenty of them. Vaccines are statistical tools. At the population level (on average) they prevent deaths and bad outcomes even though there is be a small percentage of the population that will have a bad reaction to the vaccine and will be worse off.
Covid, 4 years on.
Excess Death Rates for Republican and Democratic Registered Voters in Florida and Ohio During the COVID-19 Pandemic
Pro-Trump counties continue to suffer far higher COVID death tolls
3 Likes
blsm
#99
I like to think the world (and possibly this site) still values ordinary, curious people like us who participate and share our n=1’s. I certainly enjoy the fact that you contribute here.
7 Likes
RobTuck
#100
I disagree with one of your positions @CronosTempi. While it is demonstrably true that both rational and irrational minds will subscribe to positions which turn out to be unsupported by empirics, or some combination of argument and evidence, it does not follow that the mental processes by which these two minds arrived at their propositions cannot or should not be distinguished and treated separately. Again, it is axiomatic in the philosophy of science that the meaning, merit, and validity of a proposition is determined not by its correctness (which is often a moving target over time, anyway since rational knowledge advances by rejection propositions) but by the methods employed to arrive at the proposition. To believe otherwise would commit us to contemplating a Nobel for an ape that hammered out E=MC^2 on a keyboard.
Whether or not any one of us engages the world rationally across the spectrum of our beingness – or whether such uniformity is even possible or desirable – is irrelevant to setting standards. Refereed journal readers do not care or even need to know if an author is a Druid who leads a Gaulish clan every Saturday but they do have every right to insist that his submission is based on adherence to the canons of scientific reasoning.
Does a decision to enforce standards create a grey area of borderline cases? Of course it does! Such is a life of intellect.
RobTuck
#101
Nicely demonstrated @cl-user.
1 Like
RobTuck
#102
By the way and my apologies @CronosTempi, it was my intention to add my voice to your call for conceptual analysis. I had some good friends who distilled a version of Jerry Coomb’s work organizing it into high school curriculum via various pedagogical strategies, ultimately settling on integrating it as meta-curriculum in social studies courses. Jerry and my friend and mentor Michael Scriven were consultants on the research project. I also consulted with them and was enriched by the perspectives and work. Perhaps not surprisingly, some parents objected to teaching their children how to make rational decisions and adjudicate value propositions.
It seems this is broadly true. Off hand, I can’t think of too many other instances where politics seem to suddenly overwhelm a given science topic; its usually just the Covid vaccine issue (and Covid more broadly such as when discussions invoke ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine, and bleach use).
Maybe we just have a “Covid Vax” thread where people who are really into that topic can dive in and debate, but my concern would be that most of us really don’t care and so its a self-selecting and biased group. For me, Vaccinations are generally a settled science and so I don’t read much here on the vaccine wars, unless its new info and likely related to longevity / cancer risks, etc. I have zero interest in rehashing old vaccine data.
Can anyone else identify other areas or topics here where political affiliations seem to automatically overwhelm science. Most topics here are really apolitical; there is no dominant political bias in SGLT2 inhibitors, or rapalogs, etc.
It does seem that certain topics get taken over by social media “influencers” where the data starts to get really distorted and edge cases or cherry picked data gets unreasonably emphasized; I’m thinking “statins”, “lipids” are topics that in some areas where discussions in some corners of the Interwebs has become almost religious in some sections; where “statins are bad or evil and destroying our brains” and “lipid levels are irrelevant” seem to have become a minor zeitgeist. But - I think we can handles these as we have in the past, with rational discussions and bringing data and relevant papers to the discussion.
7 Likes
Politics and science tend not to be that linked apart from
a) Funding decisions
b) When the public authorities wish to put pressure on people to do something.
When I was a Member of the UK Parliament (650 people). There were more MPs from my Oxford College (Magdalen - Oxford is divided into colleges) than MPs with Science Degrees from all Universities. (I was one) I would not be surprised if the USA or other countries were similar.
Longevity will be a spectacular political issue when it is thought more generally to be a realistic issue (which I personally think it is now).
4 Likes
LukeMV
#106
It’s pretty obvious who people voted for based on their stances on this topic. With maybe an exception or two, I could probably go down the line of everyone’s posts in this thread and guess who they voted for correctly.
Like it or not, everyone has a different set of beliefs that they believe to be factually accurate when it comes to politics and vaccines.
I say all that to say that it is that it’s a political topic in disguise.
2 Likes
Beth
#107
Hmmm, so all these points are very good, but I’ll just chime in that I would hate to see all mention of vaccines be banned because, for example, I learned here that getting the flu shot could be pro longevity. I got it this year based solely on all of you.
If, for example, the bird flu morphed into something dangerous, I’d want there to be an opportunity for discussion if a vax should become an option.
I only cared about the political aspect when there were fights over mandates early on when I was worried people were going to kill me with their choices. Once the vaccines showed it could still spread, I stopped caring what others did because it’s all about ME ME ME!
5 Likes
medaura
#108
Problem with that data is that there’s selection biases. Vaccine uptake likely overlaps with not only political leanings but socioeconomic class, race (which itself correlates with health outcomes), education level, etc. A ton of interdependent variables that correlate with health status. Benefits as well as risks also seem to vary by age as well as sex.
1 Like
shc
#111
Fyi, this is happening now and not related to opinions on the Rapanews forum.
But rather, at the national level.
I believe this would be concerning to people on both sides of the political divide.
4 Likes
KarlT
#112
For those of you interested in a good read, I recommend “Blind Spots” by Dr Makary. It covers several areas where the health/medical establishment was significantly wrong about something that resulted in poor outcomes for thousands, even millions of people. Maybe more importantly, it discusses how anyone opposed to these erroneous ideas was silenced, resulting in prolonged erroneous practice.
If you think you know the science, and anyone disagreeing should be silenced, you might get some insight from this book.
12 Likes
LukeMV
#113
I think everyone has made up their mind at this point and there is not a single thing that could ever change that. Ideology is tough to break.
Banning people for vaccine skepticism is total partisan nonsense. Some vaccines appear to confer benefits, some appear to confer harm. The covid experience brought to light some things and reduced public trust, and now RFK is a product of that. I think it’s all worth discussing, the people here are smart enough to source data themselves and draw conclusions. Banning dissenting voices because they make us feel insecure is not the appropriate scientific approach.
Put it all in it’s own thread and delete off-topic posts outside the threads.
6 Likes
KarlT
#115
This is not a one issue situation. What’s really ironic is that most mainstream people would consider most of the things we talk about on this forum to be out of the ordinary and think we should be silenced.
7 Likes
My personal view is that allowing anti-vax posting here will only bring the use of rapamycin for longevity into disrepute.
2 Likes
Nah they just think we are delusional, greedy and egocentrical people chasing a pipe dream at worst.
Ray1
#118
I might as well admit to being what some of you would consider a kook. I have never been vaccinated against COVID, have taken the horse paste, and had obtained a hydroxicloriquine prescription from Alan S Green. Even so, I don’t wish to read or comment about any of this stuff on this forum. There are numerous YouTubers and substacks dedicated to dubious alternative medicine. Some of that stuff might even work! I read this forum to learn about esoteric information related to Rapamycin and aging. If I never read anything about COVID on this forum that is fine by me. Just my 2 cents.
4 Likes
