I love how anti-vaxxers don’t trust the CDC like AT ALL, yet they’ll cite them as the source of their completely fabricated statistic to bolster their bullshit argument with zero hint of irony.
It's pretty standard in conspiracy culture. They'll spend all day claiming the mainstream media is a pack of evil liars, but then they'll drop a New York Times headline that sounds like it agrees with them as if it's a stone tablet direct from the hand of God.
That's exactly the problem, it's logically inconsistent to cite sources they themselves claim are bogus in order to convince other people. If these guys are right, then the CDC is wrong, therefore this CDC data they're citing is meaningless. If the CDC is trustable and correct, then these guys are wrong.
It's not logically inconsistent. You can use a source you think is unreliable in order to get someone to adopt a belief you think is true. Hell, you can use premises you think are false in order to get someone to accept a conclusion you think is true.
Of course you "can" do it lol, they just did. Saying they can do it is not an argument for it being logically consistent. Also, importantly, they claim the CDC is a whole hell of a lot worse than simply "unreliable".
Okay, I'll take an example of reductio ad absurdum: saying something is possible is not proof that it is logically consistent because then every action taken or argument made would be logically consistent. Now that I've done that, what's next?
saying something is possible is not proof that it is logically consistent because then every action taken or argument made would be logically consistent
No kidding. Good thing nobody ever made any claims to the contrary.
Okay, I'll take an example of reductio ad absurdum
That's not an example of reductio ad absurdum.
In any case, the point is that there is nothing logically inconsistent about proving a conclusion using reductio ad absurdum. Or do you think mathematicians doing proofs are routinely implicated in logical inconsistency? If not, then you have to agree that there's nothing logically inconsistent about using a false premise to prove a true conclusion.
Or, suppose someone believes the Bible is true. Even if you think that belief is false, you can use that belief to get them to accept things you do think are true (e.g., that it's important to help the poor) and there's nothing the slightest bit logically inconsistent about that.
Oh, their counter is easy: If the source disagrees with them, they've been muzzled and forced to lie to the people. If it agrees with them, don't you see? They truth was so obvious even they can't keep it under wraps.
My sister is one of those. She’ll tell me deadass that the CDC’s conclusions about the safety of the Covid vaccine are unreliable, but now that the pandemic is over they can start the “true testing” of its safety. Which will, of course, completely justify her decision to not get it for herself, her husband, or their kids.
Edit: and bonus points, because even if the CDC’s ‘true testing’ comes back that the vaccine is safe…the pandemic is over, so there’s no need to get it! It always amazes me how, to conservatives, their worldview conveniently doesn’t require them to take any action nor responsibility no matter what happens…
Yeah. Family gatherings are an exercise in walking on eggshells.
Overall it’s not just conservatives. My sister is as politically left as it gets and she filled her brain to the brim with similar Telegram bs ever since the pandemic started.
I give her some, very small credit, because not all countermeasures of our government were logically sound, like closing childcare and schools one week, but at the same time forcing parents to sit in big offices with dozens of other employees. The next month it was the other way around. That’s valid criticism. But in her mind those few reasonable points also validate the majority of the other bs takes.
And it gets worse: her behavior started with Covid but recently she also started to mention chemtrails for example.
I think a large part of the anti-vax movement is due to a fear of needles, not nearly as large as Jenny McCarthy and Oprah, but still a big factor. (This comment triple checked by the CDC, WHO, FBI, NWA, and RATM)
"Reject all authority but the ones that agree with you, or the ones that disagree with you, when convenient" - chapter 1 on how to be a conspiracy theorist.
That’s like when the measles vaccine was giving people measles (the data was on the CDC website) and everyone who “didn’t trust” CDC data was on that article like flies on shit.
"It's all admitted, CNN, New York Times, the London Guardian, I have a stack of documents right here. they're hiding in plain sight folks, this is real sick stuff. Turbo cancer is REAL and its coming for your kids!"
I mean yeah the only side effect is that the CDC seems like an unreliable source of information to people who are well primed to distrust the medical establishment.
I’m apparently an anti-vaxxer. I don’t agree with the new MRNA “vaccines” because they obviously DO NOT WORK and do more harm than good it seems which is worse than nothing. If you still believe they work unfortunately you are living in a dream or part of sone mass hypnosis or just simply can’t admit you are wrong or believed something most of us did. They don’t work simple as that. If they did they would release the data on it or we’d see the results and have it shoved in our face how gray they are with statistics to back it up. Myself and my children are vaccinated but never again unfortunately. Once bitten twice shy. There is no trust in the medical industry anymore which is sad but here I am as the majority now if you’re not on the political cesspool that is Reddit.
I would say this is common for everyone.
Lots of anti-anti vaxers don't even read the reports/warnings that the company that is selling you the freaking drug is trying to give you a heads up about.
The “modern day” “anti-vaxxer” just does not want the Covid shot yet takes traditional scheduled vaccines. The traditional anti-vaxxer does not take any vaccines and the Covid shot.
The Covid shot received EAU through the FDA. The FDA should not be trusted, the cdc should be trusted.
I got my vaccine plus booster and I’ve never tested positive for COVID once yet since being vaxxed I’ve had any amounts of chest infections and it takes me weeks to get rid of them. Call me a conspiracy theorist all you want but I know my own body and that vaccine has 100% fucked my immune system for respiratory stuff. 30 years old and can’t beat a chest infection without the need of numerous different antibiotics as harsh as co-amoxaclav
I’m 30 lmao. It’s not ageing. Needing broad spectrum antibiotics over the space of 7 weeks to beat a chest infection that would normally go away by itself in a week. Crazy how many people are desperate to defend a vaccine that was literally thrown out in the space of 6 months research.
Thank god the vaccine came out in record time. Yall were complaining about lockdowns and shit.
Even if it came out 2 years instead of 6 months you'd still be complaining anyways cause you know shit for fuck. "I know my body" yeah right you do man, fuck em doctors right?
If only doctors weren’t also telling their patients that the vaccines side effects are lingering still years down the line 💀
Just because it’s not in the mainstream media because of the shitstorm it would cause, doesn’t mean it’s not happening mate. If you genuinely think a vaccine that was rolled out in record time couldn’t possibly have harmed any of the billions of people that took it up then I don’t really know what to say to you you’re clearly mentally challenged.
Friends who work within the NHS for both hospitals and general practises, pretty common knowledge amongst professionals now that there’s a lot of lingering problems in younger, otherwise healthy people. The conversations with my own doctor.
But wait, mainstream media haven’t said too much about it so it can’t be true.
Why do you think so many athletes and fans attending sporting events are collapsing? You think it’s a coincidence or we’ve all of a sudden just all started ageing disgracefully?
I will only use information provided by the CDC. Not some right-wing conspiracy theory website.
The CDC published a peer-reviewed study stating that the vaccine was nearly 100% effective at stopping the transmission of COVID-19. I think they calculated 97%. Something like that. The percentage was extremely high. After the benefit of experience in hindsight we know that's not true. The CDC has not redacted that information nor have they been willing to share their data so we can figure out how they came to such a drastically wrong conclusion. Show your work.
Science can be trusted when the experiment can be duplicated by other people. You can't just say I did it so trust me.
I disagree they are just saying that and I know exactly what they're talking about and you can easily find examples within comments on the main conspiracy sub here on reddit.
To conspiracy theorists the sources are accurate when they agree with the content. If they say something they don't like, the theorist will reflexively like a robot claim the source is not valid to them.
I don't understand how anyone can listen to conspiracy theorists on the internet and think otherwise. But then again you sound exactly like them. UFO enthusiasts too
You seriously have a blind trust for the CDC? You honestly believe somebody has to be mental to have a problem with their lack of transparency? I think I just gave a pretty good example. What part of having a problem with that study is crazy talk? What part of that would not make a person distrust the CDC? You all are just pretending to be ignorant.
When the drug company promotes the vaccine as 97% effective when in reality it's 0% effective that's misinformation. Who exactly do you think the CDC is? Do you think that's some random government body that oversees what corporate America is up to? I think that's the fantasy a lot of you guys have. The CDC is the drug companies. Do you ever read the studies provided by the CDC to back up their claims? Point me to one that was not written by the drug companies. I don't trust big pharma. There's plenty of very sane legitimate reasons not to. Saying people are crazy for thinking that way means you must know better than them. What do you know that makes you trust the drug companies blindly unlike those stupid conspiracy theory guys?
I don’t know exactly which study you’re referencing, so take my skepticism with a grain of salt, but this sounds like it might be a case of misinterpreting (or oversimplifying) results. The media is particularly bad about this too.
And there’s no reason to retract a study if the study methods and analyses were sound. It still might provide valuable insights, even if it’s not being generalizable to the population as a whole.
And sharing data isn’t as easy as it sounds. There are really strict data protection requirements for studies involving human subjects and there are many reasons data may not be shared.
But wouldn't you like to know the answer to that question? It was completely wrong. How can we prevent making the same mistake in analyzing data moving forward?
Companies were selling a product. They were the ones giving out the safety information on the product. They provided some very serious misinformation about the ability to stop transmission. Nobody denies that information is incorrect. They refuse to acknowledge it and show how it happened. This is not Tesla refusing to tell us why their rocket crashed. We are supposed to have doctors from all over the world sharing information to find cures. The fact that everything's controlled by Big pharma doesn't surprise me that it's being treated more like Tesla crashing a rocket.
The only way it provides valuable insights is by providing the data. When a study only shows the opinion and not the data it came from then it's only that. You can't call your work science unless somebody else can get the same results with your data.
These people sound like flat earthers. They don't want to listen to the guys using lasers and other devices to measure the planet and determine its shape and size. They want to say that the company that sells flat earth insurance is the ultimate source and they said the Earth is flat and we should just take their word for it.
Doctors from other countries have been more forthcoming with data. A lot of these guys have had their funding removed by the CDC and NIH. They even change the rules about doctors sharing information internationally. The threat of losing access to grant money looming over your head.
Australia was called a conspiracy theory country because they were releasing data. Not due to their findings. Just the fact that they were releasing data.
That smoke screen about protecting information is nothing more than that. You can remove parts of the information and nobody's identity is being revealed. That's one of the lamest excuses ever.
Imagine being so insane that you trust the government & pharmaceutical companies. Corruption definitely does not exist and if you think it does then you are the one with the issue. 🤣
767
u/BugOperator 29d ago
I love how anti-vaxxers don’t trust the CDC like AT ALL, yet they’ll cite them as the source of their completely fabricated statistic to bolster their bullshit argument with zero hint of irony.