Show newer

@freemo if death counts as permanently injured then several thousand at least seem to have been permanently injured.

using the phrase "common" was lax of me - I just had a (brief) look at openVAERS and pericarditis and heart attacks seem to be ~20 in a million.

the question is relative though, what is my chance of dying from covid compared to my chance of having a negative reaction to the vaccine?

If you're at risk then it probably makes sense.

If you're young and healthy without co-morbidities then you can make a decent numerical case that the vaccine still makes sense - but in this case it appears to be very much in the noise.

if you then add that the potential for long term risks are completely unknown, the decision not to get vaccinated is perfectly reasonable.

My failure to answer your quiz has no bearing upon any of the reasoning I have used here.

I appreciate there are many people making wild claims on many sides - this doesn't justify sophistry.

@freemo I can't speak to what other people are saying but swelling of the heart seems to be a very common symptom and historically has extremely bad clinical outcomes in the long term.

my point is that being unable to answer the questions on your test (hands up, I had no fucking clue) doesn't mean I can't look at the numbers of clinical outcomes and decide against.

@freemo it's false to suggest that you need to understand the technical details of the human immune system to understand that a heart attack induced by vaccination is not a good outcome

skells boosted

“When we build, let us think that we build forever. Let it not be for present delight nor for present use alone.”
— John Ruskin, Seven Lamps of Architecture, 1849

skells boosted
skells boosted
Only half done, I had no clue
hardly any of this. Wish they would mention this stuff in schools.
Gulags and stuff with Jocko and JP.
https://youtu.be/FU8IwII8hhc
skells boosted
Here's one of the problems with righting the national ship as I see it.

The recent movement on the right around establishment Republicans has been populist, even when improbably led by billionaire populist Trump. Populist movements, almost by definition, require outside candidates.

But if the real problem happens to be a nonpartisan administrative state, an external populist movement becomes little more than a fashion show.

What one then needs instead is a reform movement, one specifically dedicated to digging out the pathological ticks.

But an outside populist ends up invariably being naive about the ecology of the tick infestation, which was one of the poignant hallmarks of the Trump administration.

What one ends up needing, then, is a Washington insider, reform candidate who knows the players and their deeds and thus which ones to most effectively fire and replace while bending his populist support to the specific material effort of governmental reform.

Unreformed government will simply shake off populism the way a Lab shakes off water.

Mr. Smith can't go to Washington; Mr. Smith must come from Washington, but I can't for the life of me tell you who that hypothetical Diogenes' honest man might be.

@iskandrian the rabid opposition from the standard hacks ticks the right boxes too

skells boosted
skells boosted

@ringo @11112011 that is the longest fucking maiden name I've seen in my life, bet there's a story there

Show older
CleverLibre Social

CleverLibre Social is an inclusive social instance for open discussion, learning, and community.
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.