🎓 Dr. Freemo 🇳🇱 @freemo@social.cleverlibre.org

@Meachamus_Prime No leftist politics in tech! pssshhh, go back to nazi germany, we dont do that in America, land of the free.

@realcaseyrollins agreed and same

Merry Christmas!

@realcaseyrollins

The bigger concern along those lines, and the one scientists have been very vocal about is an ADE reaction. Which would cause vaccinated people to have deadly reactions to future exposures to the virus (1 year or so out)

@realcaseyrollins Oh its not, it skipped a ton of safety trials and its reckless and negligent to be releasing this vaccine at the current stage, agreed.

But my point is that the risks from it are not at all similar to the risks from the virus itself.. it may kill or hurt him sure, but it wont be in the same way as simply getting the virus might.

@realcaseyrollins the fact that he probably wouldnt survive the virus, isn't that the reason he got the vaccine? Sounds like its his best chance for survival, assuming the vaccine itself doesnt have its own issues.

Two sides to every story...

@benk

What country isnt stuck in politicial dysfunction. The USA feels like a mental hospital right now and they are more anti-muslim than they are pro by the looks of it.

@mur2501 @trinsec

@benk

I personally dont see the adherence to arabic a bad thing so long as a person is allowed to use their native language as a stepping stone, particularly if adopting the religion later in life.

My impression has been that while the Arabic language is strongly prefered and generally seen as the only way to really understand or be part of the religion at all, translations are acceptable as a stepping stone. Most muslims seem to think even a partial effort is better than no effort.

@mur2501 @trinsec

@benk

Agreed it may not have been the best word choice, but you get the idea.

@mur2501 @trinsec

@benk

Quote from wikipedia with source:

Because Muslims revere the Qurʻan as miraculous and inimitable (iʻjaz al-Qurʻan), they argue that the Qurʻanic text should not be isolated from its true form to another language or written form, at least not without keeping the Arabic text with it. Furthermore, an Arabic word, like a Hebrew or Aramaic word, may have a range of meanings depending on the context – a feature present in all Semitic languages, when compared to English, Latin, and Romance languages – making an accurate translation even more difficult.[1]

Fatani, Afnan (2006). "Translation and the Qurʻan". In Leaman, Oliver (ed.). The Qurʻan: an encyclopaedia. Great Britain: Routledge. pp. 657–669.

@mur2501 @trinsec

@benk

Wel that part that was true is that it is considered "unholy" or rather less holy, to translate the quran.

@mur2501 @trinsec

@mur2501

Thats not entirely true, every muslim I know can read the quran in the native language and are taught the language at a young age. Those who can not understand it read a translation along side the original.

@trinsec

Interesting fact of the day:

Islamic medicine was well ahead of its time when it came to the treatment of the mentally ill. the Quran demanded the those with mental illness be taken care of and treated kindly, this was reflected in how doctors of the time cared for the mentally ill and very much a departure from the attitudes of other cultures at the time where the mentally ill were demonized or quite literally treated as possessed.

Here is the specific quote from the quran translated to english:

"Do not give your property which God assigned you to manage to the insane: but feed and clothe the insane with this property and tell splendid words to them." -- Sura 4:5

#History #Islam #Musslim #Quran #Religion #Psychology #medicin #history #science @Science

@hansw@mastodon.social sure id be happy to.

It is the same reason I am pro state rights int he USA over federal rights. In short, as you concentrate power into fewer people who have power over a greater number of people then you enable tyranny and corruption to flourish, both as intentional tyranny from those seeking to take advantage as well as things that may be perceived as being for the greater good, but in fact just oppress the minority, an effect thatis refered to as "a tyranny of the majority".

for example arguments that reflect a "Tyranny of the majority" thinking are the very sorts of logic that was used to justify continuing slavery towards the end of its life as an ideology. People argued that to end slavery would cause economic and social chaos to the point that we could even run farms and people would starve and die, that it was justified to continue slavery since black slves were a minority of the population dn thus the greater good was invoked. Obviously rubbish.

this is ultimately the problem when you try to apply democratic systems across large swaths of area and across varied cultures and societies that each have their own internal sense of morality and law. It tends towards laws that of the best interest of 51% of those with a vote and is willing to let the other 49% suffer "for the greater good"

The other side is that more power in fewer hands means its easier for a single corrupt person to do alot more damage.

I believe in distributed governance, local-first governance. Coalitions are fine whereby trade or even military assets might be handled at a collective level, but any such arrangements should be limited in scope and power and ultimately allow for its members to withdraw at their leisure. It certainly should never take the form of a law making body whose laws will supercede those of the local governments.

@robryk the risk of dying from covid over time we can kinda estimate with some level of reason.. thats not the issue.

the issue is that the risks fromt he vaccine in terms of long term effects are a complete and utter unknown.

So while we can access the fallout from letting COVID continue without a vaccine (to some extent) we are completely blind to whether a vaccine will have lower risk or if in fact may make things far worse and result in more people dieing, not less.

What im suggesting is we have have two alternatives.. 1) a disease we know a little about and have some sense of its risks, but not much.. and 2) a random drug someone cooked up that we have virtually no idea what the risks are.

Also keep in mind that more often than not logn-term trials of vaccines cause them to fail the trials far more often than it causes them to pass. So the likelihood the vaccine will cause mroe harm than good is probably higher than the inverse.

What im arguing is we shouldnt be injected untested chemicals with no history of safety into our veins in the off chance it might help and be safe, that is reckless and not something we have ever found acceptable in modern science really.

You have to remember the IFR of covid right now is estimated around 0.23%, which is high and worthy of concern, but hardly so high as to warrent taking untested drugs that could prove to be fatal or make the risks worse. COVID is a serious disease and anyone who says otherwise is a fool, but serious enough to start cooking up vaccines and mass administering them eithout any of the usual long-term safety studies, particularly on a new class of virus using a totally new and untested technique... hell no thats just wreckless in the extreme.