The context: I had first asked SirD whether he could be persuaded to get vaccinated and, if so, what might persuade him. He responded by saying that he was choosing to stand by. I wondered how long he would wait to make a determination as it might be years before adverse side effects of the vaccine might surface. He responded by wondering why I was not concerned about that. As reflected in my response that you have bolded, SirD’s responses indicate to me that he has made up his mind and believes the passage of time will validate his choice. In sum, I do not think there is anything that would persuade him to get vaccinated, given his current circumstances and beliefs. So, I believe I have the answers to the questions I posed.

I also acknowledged that his circumstances were rather unique in terms of the degree of isolation he and his wife can and do exercise. He did say that he does make infrequent visits to grocery stores and other such stops. I guess I wonder why he seemingly is trying to convince others that eschewing vaccination is the better choice  when he has to know that the circumstances of the lives of the vast majority differ from his. As you say, above, most do not have that option, at least not to that degree. And, as noenz has said, the vast majority do not want to live that way.

What's wrong with that, in Sird's case? He has the luxury of self isolating, without impacting his economic or personal life, or risking the health of others.
It seems the more prudent step, for him.
The rest of us have to, or want to be out in the world...so the more prudent thing is take the shot. 

What's wrong with that, in Sird's case? He has the luxury of self isolating, without impacting his economic or personal life, or risking the health of others.
It seems the more prudent step, for him.
The rest of us have to, or want to be out in the world...so the more prudent thing is take the shot. 

What's wrong with that, in Sird's case? He has the luxury of self isolating, without impacting his economic or personal life, or risking the health of others.
It seems the more prudent step, for him.
The rest of us have to, or want to be out in the world...so the more prudent thing is take the shot. 

It seems you are waiting to be proven right about your choice not to get vaccinated —  not to be proven wrong about that choice. 

I am concerned about the virus. I am not concerned about the safety of the vaccine. While acknowledging that nothing is guaranteed or foolproof, I trust those epidemiologists and others in the field who have determined it to be sufficiently safe. I consider placing trust in these people and institutions to be logical.  I readily acknowledge that I have no basis or requisite background knowledge upon which to study the issue myself and reach my own conclusion. So, yes, it is a matter of trust in those experts, those institutions, and, writ large, science itself.

It seems you are waiting to be proven right about your choice not to get vaccinated —  not to be proven wrong about that choice. 

I am concerned about the virus. I am not concerned about the safety of the vaccine. While acknowledging that nothing is guaranteed or foolproof, I trust those epidemiologists and others in the field who have determined it to be sufficiently safe. I consider placing trust in these people and institutions to be logical.  I readily acknowledge that I have no basis or requisite background knowledge upon which to study the issue myself and reach my own conclusion. So, yes, it is a matter of trust in those experts, those institutions, and, writ large, science itself.

And this does not concern you?  Seems to me the virus itself and its journey is the more deciding factor and that will reveal itself much sooner.

 sirdroseph wrote:
So then why do you continue to question everyone else, who don't have the luxury of hiding from the world and need to interact to survive?  Your "math" on risk and reward has almost no relevance in the normal lives of the vast majority of the world.  The virus has provided confirmation bias that your concerns about society "were right all along", and apparently loneliness gives you the time to share videos with the dozen people on these boards to reinforce your point of view.  I for one commend your choice to isolate, and thank you on behalf of those where you used to live. Having the luxury to "wait and see" doesn't apply to most, so are they better off risking their lives to the virus or taking what appears to be an incredibly safe, incredibly useful vaccine to protect themselves and the others they interact with? The title of the thread is meant as an indictment to institutions, but selfish misinformation is infinitely more dangerous than any institutional plan.

 sirdroseph wrote:
I have heard others say this. How long would you wait to determine whether the vaccine is sufficiently safe and effective? I ask because it seems that adverse side effects — should they occur — could take years to surface. What are you monitoring while you are waiting? Yes, it does appear you are in a rather unique position in terms of very limited contact with others.

In addition to that, both my wife and I rarely leave our property even before this all happened because this is our homesteading lifestyle and the outside world offers us very little that we desire so why go anywhere? Basically, we were already built for this and have not had to alter our lives at all sans wearing a mask when going on grocery store and feed supply runs of which only I do. My wife has been blessed to never have the need to leave the property and has no plans to do so. So there is no persuading me either way, I am on standby.

. . . I am on standby.

 sirdroseph wrote:
Fair enough. What are your reasons for not getting the vaccine? Are you persuadable on the issue? If so, what would persuade you?

A bit more advice for those who wish to actually make a difference in persuading others is to quit using the term antivaxxer.  I know there are a lot of antivaxxer's out there, but the majority of those who have trepidation for taking these particular vaccines for this particular virus at this particular time do not fall into this category.  Lumping all those you do not agree with into these false terms is another guarantee you will either be met with anger or completely ignored.  As lazy pointed out, condescension and bullying do not produce results quite the contrary they will only harden Pharoah's heart and back people more into a corner. You have to take into account the overwhelming human desire to spite someone who is being an asshole.

  I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take this anymore!

 NoEnzLefttoSplit wrote:
None of which makes him wrong.

Pause for a moment and consider how much is cause and how much is effect. I don't know this guy. He may be a complete dick, charming accent aside, but people being pushed around (and people, regardless of whether they advocate for pushing around or not are being pushed around) are going to push back. Lash out. Come up with irrational justifications for resisting being pushed around. We can disagree with that backlash and those irrational justifications, the intellectual straw-grasping that goes on here—and I think we both do—but that isn't going to get this guy or anybody who thinks like him to go get a jab. And the more of him there are the less safe we all are. He needs to be convinced. That isn't going to happen via condescension or belittling, as guilty as I am of it. We need to engage with him and change his mind, and a lot more minds like his. Bellowing orders isn't working. What else you got?

  I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take this anymore!

people are hurting. I get it. but let's look at this guy's narrative.. he's an antivaxer, anti-Scottish-independence activist, British nationalist (probably a Brexiteer though I haven't checked).. if anyone is "exploiting the emergency to gain control over more aspects of our lives" this bloke is one of them, stoking fear and mistrust of government and authority to push his political agenda. 

Then when you factor in his oh-so-nostaligic life-used-to-be-better bullshit, flowers in a glass vase and all, the kind of nostalgic hankering for days of glory past, or at least intimations of it, then I'm riled.

Don't worry, you are not the least like this guy. You have a sharp brain for one thing and more than an ounce of self-reflection. You are also eminently fair. I don't think this guy is. He has an agenda to push and he's using any tool at his disposal, including transparent attempts to exploit people's suffering, hurt and confusion.

Well that's a bad idea. The internet is full of crazies.

There is more than one way to suffer.

I hear this guy and he sounds like sooo many people I know. On a bad day he sounds like me.

People who are seriously online might, like you, hear a whining child. Get over it, go get your social interactions thru a glowing screen like a modern person and buck up. People who need real human contact hear the prisoner in the next cell.

I straddle those worlds, those points of view. I started working from home 15 years ago, and I've been using the internet as a social tool—my workplace watercooler—since 1989. I've even met some of those who may, against their better judgement, be reading this.

I'm also deeply embedded in my local community—in its arts, humanitarian, and political realms—and the endless lockdowns have been enormously frustrating. Not just on a personal level—my dog do I miss dancing!—but on professional levels (couldn't travel for a year) and political levels.

The latter has been maybe the most frustrating of all. We couldn't even hold a campaign rally, and my party gets zero interest from the press. The only way to get anyone's attention is word of mouth or an in-person event, where people can meet someone whose politics they've only been exposed to in caricature and find out how inaccurate the picture they've been shown is.

It has also empowered conspiracist factions who have a ready explanation for the isolation and frustration: it's intentional. It's not control for the sake of safety, it's control for the sake of control.

And they have a point. There are people exploiting the emergency to gain control over more aspects of our lives. What many of them miss is that doesn't mean the emergency is fake. Those voices are, more and more, getting silenced and suppressed on social media; that means they retreat into their bubbles and the rest of us have fewer and fewer ways to change their minds.

I wish people of both camps—the seriously online and the face-to-face—would have a lot more compassion for each other. Make an effort to create that human contact for those who can't get it thru a screen; find ways for businesses that need human interaction to stay afloat. Meaningful ways, not a check in the mail. Don't be so goddamned smug that you have what you need, reach out to those who don't. Don't delegate that task to a faceless government ill-suited to the task, go help your neighbor.

And don't use the pandemic as an excuse to shield yourself from your duty to those around you. You may need them someday.