> Read up on mass psychosis and mass psychology in general.
The entire anti-vaxxer movement makes perfect sense if you look at it like a mass psychosis of denial and a trauma response.
Questioning the mainstream media is a bit of a meme these days and unfortunately most people that bring up this point have a bit of an agenda to say the least, but: One thing that’s bothered me about the MSM from the start of the pandemic is the market fueled necessity to keep pumping out “news” when nothing important has happened.
Our desire to keep ourselves more informed has perhaps created this MSM monster that now through overexposure of fear and all other negative emotions that “sell” themselves are responsible for the trauma response that is conspiracy theories, flat out denial and a lack of consideration of expertise, not only for the pandemic but for climate change and much more.
I’d argue that the mandatory vaccine crowd are exactly the same.
Edpecially when natural immunity is completely overlooked.
Also I beleive that everytime officcials and MSM and threads like these completely undermine and ignore the millions of people who are traumatized by the pretty rough vaccine side effects ( Moderna is no joke ). these people wonder what else os being hidden.
And the gap becomes wider and more fantatic.
There is no anti vaxx movement.
As so many people are being infected anyway, odd are they are not showing up for boosters once infected.
And sinve the vaccine cards expire in 9 months (EU), you are never getting the entire EU population to show up for yearly inoculation.
Especially those who got infected anyway and those who suffered pretty badly by the vaccines but are ruthelessly dismissed.
Anti vaxx movement is dead.
The vaccines are incredibly leaky, and cause pretty severe side effects especially in young men.
They do not allow society to resume normality even if 100% are vaccinated ( do the math, the effect wears off so fast that its impossible to keep 100% even if every single himan on the planet had access and diligently showed up ).
The anti vaxx sentiment is dead. It died with omicron.
In a year all but older people i the rich west and possibly health care workers will techincally be considered unvaccinated.
Also, masks still made no difference in the spread.
Not even a dent in Omicron.
Only countries with high natural immunity has had relatively lower omicron curves.
Try the antivaxxer/antimasker /smooth brain/trumpis propaganda all you want in the virtual world.
In the real one, parents want their children back to school.
Elderly want to enjoy the few uears they have left outside of covid prison.
Young people want to meet and fuck other young people.
And evrr single officcial MSM praised health expert has turned out to be not only wrong, but laid a platform for intruse sureveillance and degrading humans to nothing more than viral plague hosts that most be muffled, injected and locked up.
Tldr; antivaxxer as a basis for the hatred of common hunan desire to find someone to hate is dead. Vaccines and masks are nowhere near what was promised and omicron proved it
I find your conflation of support for vaccines with support for lockdowns rather odd, because vaccines are the main thing that lessens the need for social restrictions!
> Anti vaxx movement is dead. The vaccines are incredibly leaky, and cause pretty severe side effects especially in young men. They do not allow society to resume normality even if 100% are vaccinated ( do the math, the effect wears off so fast that its impossible to keep 100% even if every single himan on the planet had access and diligently showed up ).
They are leaky, but not incredibly so. They show around 70-80% protection (with 3 doses for Omicron, 2 for earlier variants). That's a massive difference, especially when you consider that for a second-order transmission that reduces the chance by 80% of the 20% remaining, making it 95% effective and so on.
As a young person who has had ongoing side effects from the vaccine, I have to say that I'm the only person I know who has had this problem. It's very rare. Similar side effects from covid itself are much more common in all demographic categories (except for moderna in young men - they should get a different vaccine).
80% isn't protection. 80% still gets you pregnant.
Honestly, it's probably healthier for everyone to turn off the news for a half year, and did not worry about it. If you get sick, take care of it. If you don't, take care of those who do.
Lose weight. Exercise. Eat healthy. Live your life. Build and nurture friendships. Find and improve hobbies. Grow your family. You'll be fine until you die. But you can die any and every day for any arbitrary reason, so forget COVID and start taking care of life.
> If you get sick, take care of it. If you don't, take care of those who do.
Hospitals were getting overwhelmed. So "taking care of it" for many was not as trivial as the usual flu. Consider that 40% of adults in the US are obese which is a complicating factor for unvaxed infection.
While I agree there is an element of personal responsibility to obesity, the industrialized food system is rigged to make everyone fat if they live long enough.
It requires winning the genetic lottery or having a significant amount of self control to maintain a healthy weight as one ages. In some places healthier food is also more expensive, such as in major cities and food deserts.
Until the food industries are regulated more responsibility it's unrealistic and cruel for those of us born to be thinner to demand people 'just' exercise more and eat less.
People with 2 dose vaccinations are well protected from serious disease, taking up small fraction of hospital capacity (less intensive, shorter stays). Boosted folks are taking up less than that. It probably doesn't matter a lot for healthy people under 30, but that leaves an awful lot of people over 30 or with health problems where the available vaccines are hugely protective.
The current vaccines are leaky enough that any reductions in social restrictions below strict lockdown mean pretty much everyone is going to get Covid, generally over a very short time period. There doesn't seem to be any way around this. Also, the feasibility of putting lesser restrictions in place to try and spread the hospital load out is damaged by the fact that protection from vaccination fades relatively quickly - and that doesn't just seem to affect protection against infection, but also hospitalization and death. They're effective at reducing the number of deaths but just aren't the way out people like to claim they are.
“Pretty much everyone is going to get COVID” is how I feel as well, just like pretty much everyone is going to get the flu across any given 50 year span. Some will die from it, most will not. (C19 is obviously worse than a typical flu, but by less than a decimal order of magnitude.)
Then the interesting question is what to do about it. You can give up a lot of life’s freedoms and enjoyment to maybe cut that 50-year risk in half. Is that worth it? To my reckoning: Not to me, not to my elderly parents, and not to my kids. I’m thankful that my kids are at least pre-teen and not (yet) teen or college age where our choices are hitting much harder.
I guess if people are making their decisions based on a belief that significant reductions in hospitalization aren't beneficial, that explains something.
That graph is from the UK, where most of the people spending time in hospital due to Covid are vaccinated. The thing is that as you can see from the graph, there's a huge difference in hospitalisation rates between age groups, and in the UK there's not that many unvaccinated people amongst the high-risk age groups. (Actually, I'd be interested what the error bars on that are because they're subtracting vaccinations from the population estimate to get the denominator of total unvaccinated people and it seems like that'd be very sensitive to errors in their population estimate.)
So there is a signficant reduction in the risk of hospitalisation from vaccination right now, but we're seeing close to all the benefit that we're likely to at least from a society-wide perspective. There's no way to stop the hospital system from collapsing just by rounding up the remaining unvaccinated and getting them vaccinated. (Individual unvaccinated people might of course get a lot of personal benefit from getting jabbed, depending on age and health.)
> They show around 70-80% protection (with 3 doses for Omicron, 2 for earlier variants)
That protection level lasts for about two months and then nosedives to uselessness[0].
If we keep pumping people with boosters, the manufacturers and the media aren't going to be able to keep suppressing reporting about the resulting heart issues the mRNA vaccines cause in many people[1].
Again, the vaccines are astoundingly leaky and were designed for a variant of the virus that hasn't existed in any meaningful way for a while.
People with only natural immunity from any variant are shown to have much better protection than mRNA vaccinated and boosted people[2].
> They show around 70-80% protection (with 3 doses for Omicron, 2 for earlier variants).
What is the absolute risk reduction you get from the shots? “95% effective” is a relative risk reduction and only refers to severe illness or death, not infection or transmission (neither of which were studied).
> E[s]pecially when natural immunity is completely overlooked.
The one thing about natural immunity is that it does not prevent the transmission or spread of the virus on a population level. For example, prior to the ’90s, there were yearly outbreaks of varicella among school aged children despite the fact that at least 99% of the adult population has natural immunity to the disease.
After widespread vaccination, outbreaks of that disease are practically unheard of.
For the same virus, the CDC recommends that healthy adults over 50 years of age who have prior immunity get 2 additional doses of another formulation of that vaccine to prevent a resurgence of the same disease in older adults.
On another note, if the percentage of the population immune to a certain viral illness drops below a certain threshold because a subset of the population is refusing vaccination, then outbreaks will occur. It happened a few years ago with measles.
> The vaccines are incredibly leaky, and cause pretty severe side effects especially in young men
Do you have sources backing up this statement?
As for the concept of "leaky" vaccines, you need to realize that vaccines have never had 100% effectiveness and that their effectiveness is through achieving the goal of getting a high percentage of the population immune to a particular disease, something that's never really achieved by relying on natural immunity on its own.
Unfortunately, the parts of your comment pertaining to spread, immunity, and vaccinations are not accurate and rely on assumptions that are known to be false. Many people keep trying to counter bad information, but it seems like a battle that's not winnable[1].
The entire anti-vaxxer movement makes perfect sense if you look at it like a mass psychosis of denial and a trauma response.
Questioning the mainstream media is a bit of a meme these days and unfortunately most people that bring up this point have a bit of an agenda to say the least, but: One thing that’s bothered me about the MSM from the start of the pandemic is the market fueled necessity to keep pumping out “news” when nothing important has happened.
Our desire to keep ourselves more informed has perhaps created this MSM monster that now through overexposure of fear and all other negative emotions that “sell” themselves are responsible for the trauma response that is conspiracy theories, flat out denial and a lack of consideration of expertise, not only for the pandemic but for climate change and much more.