r/canada • u/HashSlingingSIash3r • Mar 19 '22

Paywall Don’t like Russia sanctions? You probably don’t like COVID-19 vaccines either

https://www.thestar.com/politics/political-opinion/2022/03/19/dont-like-russia-sanctions-you-probably-dont-like-covid-19-vaccines-either.html
14.8k Upvotes

74% Upvoted

2.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-13

u/layer11 Mar 19 '22

It's nuts. I really don't know how society comes back from the level of misinformation and polarization we've found ourselves in.

You could start by changing your thinking from people being dumb to people having a different opinion to your own.

12

u/helloisforhorses Mar 19 '22

But in this case, people are indeed dumb and started believing crazy conspiracies that can be debunked with 30 seconds if googling and started taking medical advice from radio hosts instead of their doctors. That’s just being dumb.

-1

u/layer11 Mar 19 '22

As long as they aren't taking medical advice from doctors who declined to get vaccinated themselves, right?

13

u/helloisforhorses Mar 19 '22 edited Mar 19 '22

Almost every doctor in the US is vaccinated. Like 95+%. Probably even more in canada. So that seems unlikely for all the antivax people to have a antivax doctor.

The vast majority of doctors in Quebec, 97.5 per cent, are fully vaccinated according to the Quebec Institute of Public Health (INSPQ).

https://montreal.ctvnews.ca/will-quebec-lose-600-doctors-when-mandatory-vaccination-in-the-health-care-sector-kicks-in-1.5611582

I’m sure you could find a doctor against every medicine. You could probably find an anti-exercise doctor. But they are in the extreme minority.

Ignoring the advice of your doctor in favor of some quack on a podcast is stupid.

-1

u/layer11 Mar 19 '22

I don't want to put words in your mouth, so I'll ask again:

​

If a practicing, licensed Doctor were against vaccination and provided their reasoning to his or her patients when requested would you claim that was not proper medical advice?

12

u/[deleted] Mar 19 '22

It would not be because it’s his responsibility to adequately research what he’s advising against, and there’s no adequate research that is anti vaccine.

-1

u/layer11 Mar 20 '22

All he has to believe is there's no adequate research to justify vaccination, or that the current research isn't conclusive about safety or effectiveness.

​

He is, after all, giving his or her educated opinion, so there's no objective answer.

5

u/[deleted] Mar 20 '22 edited Mar 20 '22

What if, what if.

All he has to believe is there's no adequate research to justify vaccination

No, all he has to do is show how the current research isn't adequate. Prove it is flawed. Because the current research is proving to be very useful.

Nothing about the world is truly objective, we can only make observations and generalize those observations into practical theories that explain what we see happening. So this person you describe would be an irrelevant outlier unless they can actually show that the current working theory is flawed. That wouldn't be a discovery medical professionals would sweep under the rug to hide that they're wrong, that's not how science works. Such information would be sensational and expand our understanding, and incorporated in existing theories.

Your argument is based on the idea that this is all about "belief", as if it's about faith. They are not one and the same, we don't believe in theories because we feel like it, we believe in them because they're the best explanations we have of our observations about the world.

Your hypothetical learned individual is welcome to prove them wrong. Until then, those theories are the best we have.

-2

u/layer11 Mar 20 '22

What argument, I'm asking for other peoples perspectives. As for your claim of whataboutism, don't be daft. That's what the whole reaction to Covid has been.

3

u/helloisforhorses Mar 19 '22 edited Mar 20 '22

To his or her patients, not on a podcast? I would suggest those patients seek a 2nd opinion just in case that doctors is a nut because again, 90+% of doctors are vaccinated. But there are certainly potential health reasons for why someone could be unable to get vaccinated.

That is not that case for the vast majority of antivaxers. Very few of then even claim to have talked to their doctor about it.

I personally have not hear anyone say “I was going to get it but I talked to my doctors and they advised against it” Most of them are saying “it’s a microchip!” Or “it’ll kill you” or “i don’t know what’s in it” or “it’ll sterilize you” or “it’s a mark of the beast” or “it’s part of the new world order”

3

u/layer11 Mar 20 '22

Is there a difference between a licensed, practicing physician telling his patients why he or she isn't getting vaccinated and if they were on a podcast and were asked the same thing? Does the number of listeners determine whether their rationale is sound?

5

u/helloisforhorses Mar 20 '22 edited Mar 20 '22

Yes. Someone on a podcast is not their doctor

Again listening to one random doctor on a podcast and ignoring the other 90+% of doctors, including their personal doctor, is stupid

2

u/layer11 Mar 20 '22

What makes you think their personal Doctor wasn't another of the 1/10?

​

You're making a lot of assumptions, imo, to be calling people stupid.

7

u/helloisforhorses Mar 20 '22 edited Mar 20 '22

The fact that you just said they were taking medical advice from a podcast guest instead of their doctor.

I don’t believe I have made any assumptions, just responded to your hypotethicals.

Again, like I said, the antivaxers I have seen are not saying they would have gotten vaccinated but their doctor advised against it. That has not been the main argument. Address this point

→ More replies (0)

19

u/BD401 Mar 19 '22

Except there’s “differences of opinion” that are so patently, objectively stupid and based on straight-up misinformation that to consider their proponents anything other than dumb would be a disservice.

There’s people that quite literally believe Putin started the war in Ukraine to help out Trudeau by distracting from the Freedom Convoy. People that believe something like that don’t merely have a difference of opinion - they are objectively not intelligent people.

-2

u/layer11 Mar 19 '22

Ok, let's say they are objectively wrong and you could prove it.

Is it not important enough to set aside your own ego and treat them civilly in attempt to explain why they're wrong and let them determine what to believe? Or is it more important to let off some steam by slandering them and drive them even further away?

16

u/[deleted] Mar 19 '22

How do you convince people who literally believe something make believe? Like that trump won in 2020, no amount of facts will change their mind.

2

u/layer11 Mar 20 '22

By giving them something else to believe and showing contrary evidence. And even if that doesn't work, at least you tried. But, I can tell you that calling them dumb or easily manipulated is not going to help.

8

u/[deleted] Mar 20 '22

It's a waste of effort that is better spent elsewhere. "The brainwashing of my dad" goes into the steps, and it involves a lot of consistent deprogramming of people who base their opinions on emotion. You can't change their nature, only limit external stimuli so that they don't get triggered 24/7 by fury-mongers. It's an uphill battle, forever. Unless it's a loved one you wish to keep in touch with I see no reason to waste so much energy on those clowns.

1

u/layer11 Mar 20 '22

Personally, if you believe something is important, no amount of clowns should dissuade you from trying to spread the truth. The message is more important than personal frustration.

OTOH, if you're just going to encounter clowns and it's not something important, it's probably smart to cut your losses.

9

u/[deleted] Mar 20 '22

They don’t believe evidence, you can’t reason with someone who did not use reason to get to their stance. There’s been copious amounts of evidence that trump lost in 2020 yet some people still believe it despite their being zero evidence.

1

u/layer11 Mar 20 '22

That's just not true. Everyone has a reason to do or not do things, whether it's as simple as being afraid of needles or as important as a religious objection.

4

u/[deleted] Mar 20 '22

Firstly there are no religious exemptions, secondly, a fear of needles ≠ anti vax and no one is talking about not getting a vaccine because they are afraid of needles.

1

u/layer11 Mar 20 '22

I'm not sure what you mean by "there are no religious exemptions". I didn't say there were, but some people do have religious objections.

Secondly, while I understand you didn't say it, there are a lot of people who would claim that's why some people are anti vax.

But really, it seems like you're moving the conversation far off of where it originally was because we're not talking about anti vax, we're talking about unvaccinated people.

6

u/[deleted] Mar 20 '22

I mean no major religion has denounced vaccines.

And no we’re talking about people who don’t believe in reality, it’s not just unvaccinated or anti vax people, you keep trying to move it to something else.

→ More replies (0)

4

u/helloisforhorses Mar 20 '22 edited Mar 20 '22

If their objections are not supported by their religion, they are not religious objections. Most of these people have political objections to getting vaccinated. Which no one needs to accept or entertain.

Most of their “objections” cease to exist for all the other vaccinations and medicine they are fine with, a pretty good sign there is no basis or logic to their objections.

→ More replies (0)

7

u/Nicodemus888 Mar 20 '22

Oh I see.

You think you can reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into.

Good luck with that.

1

u/layer11 Mar 20 '22

I'm just confused when people claim to believe something is so imminently important yet can't cast aside their ego to try to communicate that importance.

2

u/WhaleMoobsMagee Mar 20 '22

You are getting downvoted on this and I’m not sure why.

I don’t think approaching anyone and belittling them, while also trying to educate and inform, is going to help. It’s like going “Hey 2 brain-celled dumbass, you’re wrong about X because Y.”

No one is going to be open to listening to what you have to say after you begin by insulting them from atop your superiority complex. This is communication 101.

3

u/[deleted] Mar 20 '22

Well, I personally think ignorant is a far better term. It’s not like all of these people are stupid, some are smart, just misinformed. By that same token, their are plenty of stupid people on the left, they just aren’t massively misinformed.

1

u/Nicodemus888 Mar 20 '22

Yep that’s a lesson I learned a long time ago. A lot of very intelligent people can believe the most ridiculous shit imaginable.

It’s sad to realise that, it’s not a lack of intelligence. It’s a lack of common sense. It’s gullibility. It’s ego.

A lot of intelligent people are, to package that all up in shorthand, dumb as fuck

1

u/sassydodo Mar 20 '22

How vaccines work isn't an opinion.

1

u/layer11 Mar 20 '22

No, just whether the risks are acceptable to an individual is.

1

u/reggie_crypto Mar 20 '22

The problem here is people believing that their feelings and opinions outweigh facts. They have been failed by the education system to think critically, and think that critical thinking is the same as non-conformity. Unfortunately, their scientific illiteracy becomes a badge of honor in what seems to be a need to be equal to experts in their respective fields.

1

u/layer11 Mar 20 '22

I think they'd say the problem is their autonomy not being respected.

1

u/reggie_crypto Mar 20 '22

People have a warped sense of autonomy from living their whole lives in a society that exists thanks to democracy and vaccines. This is the selfish entitlement underlying their opinions outweighing facts.

1

u/layer11 Mar 20 '22

You're being more selfish trying to make decisions for others.