The Vaccine

trisher

Claude Levi Strauss
Le savoir scientifique avance à pas trébuchants, sous le fouet de la contention et du doute.
Scientific knowledge advances haltingly and is stimulated by contention and doubt.

Oui c'est vrai trisher. Et qu'est-ce que ça veut dire?

It means that every scientific advance starts with a question which the scientists try to find an answer to, and that they realise that the only way forward is by questioning every hypothesis and trying to prove it wrong before making their findings known.

Levi-Strauss also said this: The man in the street will, therefore, twist the statement that the scientist has come to the end of meaning into the statement that the scientist has penetrated as far as he can with the tools at his command, and that there is something beyond the ken of the scientist. This imagined beyond, which the scientist has proved he cannot penetrate, will become the playground of the imagination of every mystic and dreamer.

trisher

I wonder why those who choose to believe in the vaccine feel the need to denigrate anyone who asks questions and to assert their superior and unchallengable knowledge? Could it be that they are neither as certain nor as clever as they pretend? Whistling in the dark perhaps?

I really don't feel you understand what "believe" means in the context of science.

Scientists don't "believe". They do research and come up with results. No decent scientist would claim to "know" anything apart from the results of any experiments they've done. That's why things are called "theories".

I don't believe in a vaccine, but I read the results. I know the human race has benefited from vaccines in the past.

They haven't been peer-reviewed yet (AFAIK), but it would appear that the efficacy is high, so they do work. Whether they work for everybody and whether they can be delivered in practice are different issues. Nobody can know what the overall effect on public health will be for many months or years.

So I ask myself some questions:

1 Will it harm me? Almost certainly not.
2 Will it harm me more than the alternative? No.
3 Will it benefit me? Probably.
4 Will it benefit others? Probably.

Once risks are balanced, to me, it's a no-brainer.

This imagined beyond, which the scientist has proved he cannot penetrate, will become the playground of the imagination of every mystic and dreamer. Thank goodness for that. I was thinking of Hugh Everett 111 who was scorned by so many scientists for so long.

There are some notable scientific contrarians who questioned the status quo and their theories have stood the test of time. Galileo and Darwin are classic examples.

Nevertheless, it doesn't mean that every contrarian viewpoint is valid. I sometimes feel that there are some people who make a lucrative living out of being contrarian, which isn't that difficult to do in an era when authority is being constantly questioned.

People who start threads are often accused of never getting back, so here I am.
I didn’t realise when I asked the question, just how contentious a subject it would become.

Thank you for all your thoughts.
I have read each and every one.
I am still undecided but veering towards accepting the offer when it is made.

I think it would be cowardly of me to wait and see.
Why should I let other people take the any risk if I am not prepared to.

I was never against it, just undecided to have it early or wait.

I have always trusted my Dr to be honest with me, I will now trust the scientists to do the same.

Okay....I have a new 'theory'. Now, I have no training or expertise in science or medicine - but surely the fact that I am NOT an expert means my theory has every reason to be good.
So....could it be that Corona Virus was actually designed to control us all - put out in the air (maybe by those airplane trails) by every government in the world for that purpose, but then got a bit out of hand. So, now the vaccines are to take away those control bugs they had released into the air and put us back to where we had been pre-Covid.
So, that would mean that all those who do not have the Vaccine, are keeping themselves under that control.

SIGH - I know, absolutely stupid - but no more stupid that any of the other 'theories'. Might even find some legs amongst those anti-vaccers, and get them to pushing to the front of the queue.

Playing Devil's Advocate is useful, but doesn't necessarily overturn consensus.

I get a general impression that many posters are saying the vaccines are very welcome, though they are not quite a done deal yet. That gets interpreted by some, of course, as saying that everyone OUGHT to have them the moment they are available.

I like that theory, Franbern. Tailor-made for those who want magic wands to cure everything. One ring to rule them all.

For a minute there Franbern I thought "here we go again"...

annsixty I hope you got some useful information from this long thread .

Alegrias2, if you only reassured one other person on here it's progress so I thank you.
I didn't need convincing but was grateful for your reassurance.

growstuff

There are some notable scientific contrarians who questioned the status quo and their theories have stood the test of time. Galileo and Darwin are classic examples.

Nevertheless, it doesn't mean that every contrarian viewpoint is valid. I sometimes feel that there are some people who make a lucrative living out of being contrarian, which isn't that difficult to do in an era when authority is being constantly questioned.

But it has been alleged on this thread that scientists don't "believe" anything but deal in facts, whereas actually they understand and believe according to what is the current agreed scientific theory Hugh Everett 111 and quantam theory being a classic example of something rejected as nonsense by scientists for a long time.

Sorry folks, can't help myself.

Its "quantum" trisher. If you want to have a chat about Hugh Everett and his theories of quantum superposition and non-collapsing wavefunctions, I suggest you start another thread and I'll join you there.

When cornered pick out the typo! Goes to prove that scientists are by no means as expert as they pretend, just egocentric.

I wonder are you still insisting that belief has no place in science?

Happy to talk about the many-worlds interpretation, trisher, not feeling cornered at all.

But still no answer to a direct question. I shall take that as an admission that sometimes belief is involved. That's the trouble with scientists they pretend they are all-knowing when in fact they are like all of us fallible, they just find it difficult to acknowledge that.

Casdon

"GrannyRose15 you are demonstrating that you haven’t done your research if you don’t consider yourself vulnerable at the age of 64, because you are, that’s why you’re in one of the vulnerability categories, and you will be offered the vaccine early next year (about February probably)."

Do you know how many people under the age of 65 have actually died from this illness? Not as many as you think. Most of the casualties are over 85 and not in good health.

I do know -6,438 under 65s so far, the vast majority aged over 45. As the evidence shows, risk increases as you age so at the age of 64 you’re tipping fast into the 65-74 age range. It’s not an insignificant risk.

A friend's daughter died of Covid last week. She was in her late 40s.

The increase in deaths begins to be very noticeable from 60 up.
From Deaths of patients in hospitals in England up to September 30th, split by age and gender

- - - - - - - - Female - - - Male - unknown - -total
0 - 19 yrs - - - - 10 - - - - - 11 - - - - 0 - - - - -21
20 - 39 - - - - -93 - - - - - -124 - - - -0 - - - - -217
40 - 59 - - - - -781 - - - - -1,543 - - - -0 - - -2,324
60 - 79 - - - - 3,957 - - - --7,467 - - - 0 - - -11,424
80+ - - - - - - 6,959 - - - -9,103 - - - -1 - - -16,063

I am very unsure about the vaccine. I used to have the flu jab every year, but realised that I was ill with sore throats, coughs, runny nose etc. every couple of months. I decided not to have the vaccine quite a few years ago, and I did not get ill every few weeks. Last time I had flu was 1957.
I may sit on the fence at first as i am not too sure about the safety of the vaccine, I don't think enough time has been given to the testing, and I'm afraid there might be hidden dangers of side effects

Forgot to mention that I am 83.

trisher

But still no answer to a direct question. I shall take that as an admission that sometimes belief is involved. That's the trouble with scientists they pretend they are all-knowing when in fact they are like all of us fallible, they just find it difficult to acknowledge that.

They hypothesise (possibly because they believe something is true), but any claims they make are based on empirical evidence (facts). There's a vast difference between that and a belief in, for example, a religion.

Elegran

The increase in deaths begins to be very noticeable from 60 up.
From Deaths of patients in hospitals in England up to September 30th, split by age and gender

- - - - - - - - Female - - - Male - unknown - -total
0 - 19 yrs - - - - 10 - - - - - 11 - - - - 0 - - - - -21
20 - 39 - - - - -93 - - - - - -124 - - - -0 - - - - -217
40 - 59 - - - - -781 - - - - -1,543 - - - -0 - - -2,324
60 - 79 - - - - 3,957 - - - --7,467 - - - 0 - - -11,424
80+ - - - - - - 6,959 - - - -9,103 - - - -1 - - -16,063

Not only do people have reduced immunity as they age, but most people over 60 have at least one co-morbidity.

starlily there are lots of opinions and facts earlier on in this thread that might give you more information to think about. Watch out for the conspiracy theories! I'm sure your doctor will be able to give you some advise as well, about what's best for you at your age. All the best!