Jump to content

Are anti-vaxers the new flat earthers?


gdevoy

Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, gdevoy said:

The traction ideas with no basis in measurable evidence seem to get these says is quite frightening to me.

This has always been the case throughout history. 

Facebook seems to be the worst perpetrator when it comes to spreading 'fake news' these days, but how much it actually influences people’s views is probably harder to gauge. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Shropshire_killie said:

The only problem tho is that suppression of information can be dodgy..i.e total state control and manipulation......oh hang on, wheres me Daily Express....and on that note,  come oan take f**k Scoatlin!!!!

I am slightly disturbed by the idea of the Government telling social meeja corporations what people can or can't say. I can't say I care for this approach to dealing with people, who are so stupid they could not be trusted to tie their own shoe laces.

The genuine truth is that there will be a risk associated with this covid vaccine as there is with any vaccine. And there is also a risk associated with not taking it. There is no risk free course of action here. My problem is with the people who think the elected bodies of government are less trusted to make that risk evaluation than Big Tam on Facebook.

Unfortunately bringing in laws against Big Tam talking pish simply gives him more credibility with the the hard of understanding.

Look what happened with the MMR fiasco. The outcome of that was that the UK lost it's "measles free" rating with the WHO and there was absolutely no impact on the incidence of autism. A sad manifestation of the real life impact of the Dunning -- Kruger effect.

   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, gdevoy said:

The genuine truth is that....

Look what happened with the MMR fiasco. The outcome of that was that the UK lost it's "measles free" rating with the WHO and there was absolutely no impact on the incidence of autism. A sad manifestation of the real life impact of the Dunning -- Kruger effect.

   

‘The genuine truth is that, like the flat earthers you called out in the OP, a lot of ‘faith’; has been put in an as yet untested in the wild vaccine.  We all hope there’s no probs, but that is not always the case with medicines out for trial after promising intial results.

MMR wasn’t an example of the Dunning-Kruger effect.  it was ‘fake news’, A Dr with a crappy conclusion, from a  false piece of research, who eneded up getting struck off as a result , for spreading that false information from flawed research, as the gospel.

Bit different (and more serious), than scared folk on their facebook feeds..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, RAG said:

‘The genuine truth is that, like the flat earthers you called out in the OP, a lot of ‘faith’; has been put in an as yet untested in the wild vaccine.  We all hope there’s no probs, but that is not always the case with medicines out for trial after promising intial results.

 

I am, like many others, concerned that the need for "good news" will cause govrnment officials to pressurise testers to say it us safer that they can possibly know it can be.

There are many risk factors with any new medication, and the behaviour of the Westminster government in grossly under stating the risks in leaving the EU does not fill one with confidence that they can be trusted. And I would not place any trust in the publicity department if a drug company. But there are other bodies who have not jad an integrity bypass involved. On top of that the anti-vaxers seem to be relying on Big Tam on Facebook to comfort them that they are in a low risk group. The truth is the disease is too bew fir anybody to be certain of what the low risk groups are and everybody can be a spreader whether they gave symptoms.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gdevoy said:

I am, like many others, concerned that the need for "good news" will cause govrnment officials to pressurise testers to say it us safer that they can possibly know it can be.

There are many risk factors with any new medication, and the behaviour of the Westminster government in grossly under stating the risks in leaving the EU does not fill one with confidence that they can be trusted. And I would not place any trust in the publicity department if a drug company. But there are other bodies who have not jad an integrity bypass involved. On top of that the anti-vaxers seem to be relying on Big Tam on Facebook to comfort them that they are in a low risk group. The truth is the disease is too bew fir anybody to be certain of what the low risk groups are and everybody can be a spreader whether they gave symptoms.

 

As I posted earlier, the WHO have said that in their opinion it requires months more testing before they would comsider okaying it.

The UK government are desperate to get this thing passed by their own regulatory bodies in an attempt to get the public onside.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see ther’s now a US vaccine, that’s claimed to be 95% effective and can be stored for up to 6 months in a standard freezer. or a fridge for a month. 

The preliminary data we have seen so far is very similar - around 90% protection for the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine and around 95% for Moderna's.

However, both trials are still taking place and the final numbers could change.

Moderna's vaccine appears to be easier to store as it remains stable at minus 20C for up to six months and can be kept in a standard fridge for up to a month.

Pfizer's vaccine needs ultra-cold storage at around minus 75C, but it can be kept in the fridge for five days. 

The Sputnik V vaccine, developed in Russia, has also released very early data which suggests it is 92% effective. (BBC)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, gdevoy said:

I am, like many others, concerned that the need for "good news" will cause govrnment officials to pressurise testers to say it us safer that they can possibly know it can be.

There are many risk factors with any new medication, and the behaviour of the Westminster government in grossly under stating the risks in leaving the EU does not fill one with confidence that they can be trusted. And I would not place any trust in the publicity department if a drug company. But there are other bodies who have not jad an integrity bypass involved. On top of that the anti-vaxers seem to be relying on Big Tam on Facebook to comfort them that they are in a low risk group. The truth is the disease is too bew fir anybody to be certain of what the low risk groups are and everybody can be a spreader whether they gave symptoms.

 

The difference between brexit and getting a vaccine Ok’d is that there is an independent body  , the MHRA , that verifies the veracity of the claims by any drug company . They are used to pressure being applied by the big Pharma companies . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Bonbon19 said:

The difference between brexit and getting a vaccine Ok’d is that there is an independent body  , the MHRA , that verifies the veracity of the claims by any drug company . They are used to pressure being applied by the big Pharma companies . 

Correct!!!

Unlike the meeja who blow in the breeze the the MHRA are used to large corporate bodies and institutions with vested interests trying to influence them. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/15/2020 at 7:34 PM, Beaker71 said:

The top guy at Pfizer cashed all his shares in just before the announcement of the vaccine.

make of that what you will but Pfizer doesn’t have a great record in this game.

Is it possible, that maybe, just maybe, they knew the other vaccines didn't need to be stored up Jack Frost's arse?

Could that be why they released their findings earlier, to get billions of dollars in orders in by panicked Governments all over the World?

We really do have incompetent idiots in charge of this country.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Scooby_Doo said:

Is it possible, that maybe, just maybe, they knew the other vaccines didn't need to be stored up Jack Frost's arse?

Could that be why they released their findings earlier, to get billions of dollars in orders in by panicked Governments all over the World?

We really do have incompetent idiots in charge of this country.

Probably.  The ‘Jack Frost’ vaccine, is a totally new class of vaccine, that works in a different way to all previous vaccines - so I read anyway.  Might not be last we hear of -80C medicines as a result. UK has something like 300m+ doses of various vaccines ordered - supposedly - so they are employing a scattergun approach.  Were only about 30m doses of ice cold ordered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I pity people who believe s**te they read on Facebook, but most of Facebook’s toxicity comes from the idiots that pass it on whether they actually believe it or not. People have always been stupid and unable to think for themselves but it’s only recently that it’s become compulsory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, KenVaagen1984 said:

I pity people who believe s**te they read on Facebook, but most of Facebook’s toxicity comes from the idiots that pass it on whether they actually believe it or not. People have always been stupid and unable to think for themselves but it’s only recently that it’s become compulsory.

Agreed.  But people used to be as herded by traditional forms of media, which was as controlled and planned by corporations for rich oligarchs, just as they are now influenced by algorithms.  Usually the complaints about social media, come from traditional media sources, who no longer have as much clout in forming option, as when there were 4 TV channels and most people read a paper.

Is there any difference between the 80s, when 10m punters read the Sun with stories about the EU banning bendy bananas and whats on social media these days?  Probably not.  Are newspapers any less of a groupthink ‘bubble’, devoid of dissenting voices to the main group narrative than facebook?  Probably not.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, RAG said:

Are newspapers any less of a groupthink ‘bubble’, devoid of dissenting voices to the main group narrative than facebook?  Probably not.  

A very valid point but while large meeja corporations manipulate the masses to advantage a small cartel of wealthy people, their evil contempt fur the masses only goes so far as without the masses there would be no corporate profits. The thing about Facebook is it is totally toxic and self destructive in a way that us much worse that the MSM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Guff92 said:

“The social dilemma” on Netflix is an interesting watch. Facebook have a lot to answer for. But so do we for spending so much time on our phones.

Social media sites are designed to keep folk addicted to their phones, the 'constant scroll', the colours, the notification pings, the 'like' button, it's all there by design.

Most folk get their news from social media now, but it's not the same messaging as you'd get from a newspaper. There's a billion different news feeds giving each user an individualised reality.

The algorithm re-enactments in The Social Dilemma are pretty interesting, showing how it all works

It's designed for convenience, confusion, polarisation and time wasting, basically downgrading our attention spans and critical thinking, a race to dumb down populations, making folk too stupid to be governed.

People, or machines, can post virtually anything they want for clicks and likes, and there's no accountability. And the more extreme the content, the more 'likes' it gets, so the more extreme the content gets... etc, etc.

Facebook is the most profitable data harvesting machine in human history, and it is WE who are the crops to be harvested. We are worth more when we're addicted, distracted, outraged, narcissistic, polarised and dis-informed, than if we're an informed citizen in a democracy.

We're only 10 years into this mindf**k and it's only gonna get worse ...if we let it!

Edited by Scooter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, gdevoy said:

A very valid point but while large meeja corporations manipulate the masses to advantage a small cartel of wealthy people, their evil contempt fur the masses only goes so far as without the masses there would be no corporate profits. The thing about Facebook is it is totally toxic and self destructive in a way that us much worse that the MSM.

It’s only one website on the internet.   Is a classic example of ‘moral panic’, much like Elvis was corrupting the kids, there were satanic messages if you played Beetles albums backwards, then going raving and unnecessarily hugging too many people was corrupting the kids, or Gangster Rap and now Grime.  

The algorithm thing is the difference.   Although even back in the day, The Sun knew what ticked their readerships boxes, so gave them what they thought they wanted in an ‘algorithm’ of sorts.  You think NewsCorp were more interested in corporate profits or moral good, when they were hacking phones at The News of The World?

Facebook’s fine as long as you use it sparingly, give them as little detail as possible, as long as you have a good enough reason to use it.  It makes it easy for me to stay in touch with my friends who live abroad, so I tolerate it for that reason.

I set up a new computer over the weekend which informed me it had blocked over 150 tracking attempts without even going on facebook, so facebooks kinda the McDonalds of the internet.  Gets a lot of stick cos they’re a biggie, but almost every internet product that doesn’t charge a fee for use does the same.  Although even the McDonalds thing is a bit of a myth in the UK, as the US ingredients have significantly more crap in them.

Edited by RAG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, RAG said:

Facebook’s fine as long as you use it sparingly, give them as little detail as possible, as long as you have a good enough reason to use it.  It makes it easy for me to stay in touch with my friends who live abroad, so I tolerate it for that reason.

And that right there is why we're f**ked. Everyone will find a good excuse and how many people will use it "sparingly"? Really? 

People who use it are quite prepared to give away their time and their privacy for convenience and free stuff!

They said television was the drug of the nation, breeding ignorance, now it's unsocial media.

Whatever you post, however you interact, will eventually be used against you, and you won't even know it's happened.

Edited by Scooter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Scooter said:

And that right there is why we're f**ked. Everyone will find a good excuse and how many people will use it "sparingly"? Really? 

It just depends on the individual doesn’t it?  I still phone people and text folk, so I’m not a particularly good example, I was also on facebook well before it was populated by folks moms and it was ‘different’ as a result - more typed content, less pictures of cats.

I’ve probably made 500 posts on here since the last facebook one I did - although I did get a wee bit of banter with my Belgian mate in Chicago (who’s a Dr in AI algorithms funnily enough) on US election night, which I couldn’t have done otherwise.  So it’s not just connivence and free stuff, it’s communication, which is a basic human thing.

I’d probably class a 500 to 1 ratio of posts on facebook to here as ‘sparing’ use of fb.

For communicating in a fragmented world, if your pals are all over shop, it’s still probably the best tool for that specific use case.

As for people using what you say against you, well that’s life isn’t it?   Can also work ‘for you’ depending on what you say.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...