Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

The stupidity of the anti-vaxx nutcases

It’s also important not to pretend that brand new vaccinations are definitely harmless and nobody should be concerned about them. No actual immunologist would ever claim that. But I see a lot of slapping down of fear as if it shouldn’t even be mentioned and people are idiots even for raising it. All that does is feed the idea that people are hiding things g from them.
 
I agree, that was a direct quote from Icke's site, he included the link & page number, not me, but these fools don't bother to follow the link & read it, or don't understand what they are reading, and just spread the bollocks instead.
Yes - I thought the page number and link were in the original you were quoting. TBH I only checked it cos I’m having a break from laminating my bedroom floor 😁

Other times I would most likely read the quote without checking the link, and just assume the ‘humanicide’ claims were unsubstantiated bollocks not supported by the document - because it’s from Icke the lizard-botherer.

Similarly, someone else coming across it might well not read the document but go away thinking “interesting, David Icke has been proved right in the past so I’ll take his word for it” or “Icke must be doing something right to arouse the ire of the establishment so maybe he has a point”
 
It’s also important not to pretend that brand new vaccinations are definitely harmless and nobody should be concerned about them. No actual immunologist would ever claim that. But I see a lot of slapping down of fear as if it shouldn’t even be mentioned and people are idiots even for raising it. All that does is feed the idea that people are hiding things g from them.
I’ve tried to counter this with one person by saying that all medicines have their own potential dangers, just look at the list of side effects on the leaflets.

I suppose one argument could be that the benefits (for oneself and for society) of being vaccinated outweigh the risks. But I realise not everyone will be swayed by that.
 
I’ve tried to counter this with one person by saying that all medicines have their own potential dangers, just look at the list of side effects on the leaflets.

I suppose one argument could be that the benefits (for oneself and for society) of being vaccinated outweigh the risks. But I realise not everyone will be swayed by that.
Nothing wrong with this approach. But you might find it even more effective not to be in a mode of trying to persuade and just explain that you recognise there are risks yourself but want the vaccine anyway (with a reason if you feel so inclined). That way they aren’t on defensive mode but are just seeing an alternative modelled behaviour from someone they presumably have some personal regard for. It’s then not about them being wrong, it’s about your own “journey” (hate that phrase) through the process.
 
Last edited:
It’s also important not to pretend that brand new vaccinations are definitely harmless and nobody should be concerned about them. No actual immunologist would ever claim that. But I see a lot of slapping down of fear as if it shouldn’t even be mentioned and people are idiots even for raising it. All that does is feed the idea that people are hiding things g from them.

I remember how I felt, as a parent 20 years ago when there was fear about the MMR triple jab.

Our fears at the time were genuine, if unfounded, and the government response was more or less 'just trust us' which doesn't do much if you have no reason to trust them.

So I have sympathy for hesitancy based on that, though none for the people preying in those fears.
 
This is what they do from primary school age in Finland, & it’s effective.

The answer, I think, is not for society to wring its hands at the newer phenomena and try to wish them away, but to evolve ways of countering and addressing them. Number one on my list would be teaching more people, earlier, about using their own critical thinking skills - the "meme" equivalent of vaccination. But that's not going to happen, not least because it means changing the way we educate people today in order to achieve a potential benefit a minimum of 10 years down the road.
 
Without wanting to sound too much like a loon, I think another good reason why that won't happen is that the last thing the government wants is a population schooled in critical thinking. Labour or Tory.
I don't think there's anything loony about that view. I think that there has long been a tug-of-war between the idea of education as enlightenment on one hand, and that of it as a means of training compliant drones on the other. The compliant-drone version has largely been in the ascendancy for the majority of my lifetime.
 
I tend to agree with this.
I did once ponder whether ridiculing the ‘truthers’ might be a useful tactic, but overall I feel - like others - that this just pushes them further into the cult.

Can’t speak for anyone else, but for me - on this thread and elsewhere - my ridicule and mockery of ‘freethinkers’ isn’t done in the hope of changing their opinions, but is instead a way of letting off steam in a supportive environment! The idea that other Urbanz also feel exasperated, angry & despairing has been helpful to me in a world that seems to have gone bananas.
Yes
 
Concerned about the pregnant staff member's safety, but obviously not quite so concerned for her safety that they'll just pay her to stay home.
Absolutely love it, its my favorite, when these folk use intellectual giants like twain and Einstein and camus in their meme warfare, whilst not seeing what people like that stood for. It really makes me feel that all their genius and intellectual blood sweat and tears was worth it in the end. Rolling in their graves.
Yeah, Camus especially - I remember a point early on in lockdown when it seemed like a fair few people were recommending re/reading The Plague. I'd obviously forgotten about the secret twist ending of that where it turns out that there's no such thing as plagues and they're just made up to trick people into taking evil vaccines.
I'd wager that most loons couldn't even name those events. I've certainly never heard any of them mention any of these.
TBF, I'd be willing to bet that very few of those harbouring - or promulgating - these views will have ever heard of either of those events.
On this point, I think it's very contextual - we're mostly familiar with anti-vax stuff as it exists in (mostly white) British settings. And I suppose it's fair enough for British people to not talk about the Tuskegee experiment that much, like the Tories can be blamed for a lot of vile shit but I think it'd be a stretch to try and claim Johnson had something to do with Tuskegee. But black Americans, especially those with some interest in history or politics, definitely will be aware of it, and I guarantee you that those versions of anti-vax discourse that circulate within black American communities will be full of references to it.
A few relevant links:


Obv, I'm not saying that black Americans are right to refuse the vaccine, I think everyone should get vaccinated. But I think making the argument as to why people should get vaccinated in that particular context is... well, it's certainly not as simple as just saying "trust the science" or whatever.
 
This is, imo, a really great article that could go in a number of threads, but might as well go here:
In prison, today’s pandemic and shades of yesterday’s: What the fight against COVID can learn from the one against AIDS
(link to outline.com version cos the original doesn't like EU browsers)
From David Gilbert, who was involved in setting up the first peer education project about AIDS inside US prisons:

A few months back I was part of a cluster of six people called to the prison infirmary to be offered the seasonal flu shot; four of the other five men refused it. Today, as I listen to the loud conversations “on the gate” (people talking back and forth while locked in their cells), I hear considerable sentiment against taking the COVID-19 vaccine when it is offered. (As a result of a court order, it will now be available for New York State prisoners.)

People in more comfortable sectors of society may not understand why such distrust of the medical authorities is so widespread in here, but it’s reality-based. The infamous Tuskegee syphilis study on Black men is but the best known of the plethora of medical experiments on Black and Brown people in and out of prisons, and other vulnerable populations. On top of that, in here we all know some grim examples of the problems with prison medical care.

COVID-19 is the second pandemic that has swept through our prisons since I was incarcerated in 1981. AIDS, starting in the 1980s, was a grim reaper which in 1995 alone took 258 lives of mainly young New York State prisoners. The two diseases are very different in terms of means of transmission and of the ways they attack the human body. At the same time, some of the lessons we learned fighting the last pandemic are useful today.

The coronavirus is airborne, which makes our crowded prisons and jails, often with poor ventilation and limited access to hygiene supplies, torrid hot zones. There have been COVID-19 outbreaks at 850 jails and prisons across the U.S.; the infection rate is three times higher in the prison population than the outside population, and the mortality rate is twice as high.

The threat is not just to prisoners’ lives. Because staff are coming in and out every day, they can bring infections in and also take them out to their communities. Even if adequate immunity is eventually achieved, COVID-19 will not be the last contagious disease that can fester in prison. Public health is yet another powerful reason to reverse mass incarceration.

When AIDS hit us, the anxiety among prisoners was palpable, the misinformation was rife, the distrust of CDC guidelines was high. I was co-founder of the first comprehensive peer education project on AIDS in a prison, which helped spark a proliferation of such programs throughout New York State and nationwide. We bridged the trust and information chasm with extensive peer education — well-respected and thoroughly trained prisoners counseling our fellow prisoners. We were able to make a big difference in acceptance and support for people living with AIDS, with intensive one-on-one work around drug and sex practices, in offering accurate assessments of the effective medications that became available in 1996.

With COVID-19, the primary need is to dramatically reduce the prison population and to make the vaccines available to everyone in a congregate setting. But there is also a role for peer education. We need to counter the sense of futility about social distancing by explaining that, even though the standards we see on TV are impossible for us, whatever one can do in terms of masking and maintaining some distance can make a difference. We need respected peers well-versed in all aspects of the vaccine who can talk with fellow prisoners about the current levels of efficacy and safety.

The most effective public health results are achieved when the affected communities are educated and mobilized. Prisons are no exception.
 
kabbes said:
The point is that if you actually want to reduce the harmful conspiratorial guff, you need to look at what are the contextual factors that bring it about and tackle those, not just call people idiots and hope that fixes it.

It's all very well getting drunk on Urban and calling conspiraloons idiots, and plenty of people ;) on here very much do go down that path -- especially at weekends ;) :beer:

But (bolded bit in your post above), not a single Urban that I've seen posting, has actively advocated that abuse of conspiraloons is any kind of strategy to persuade them into other ways of thinking.
 
20210505_074727.jpg

Really? Maybe not the 99.9% of it we're worried about, though?

(This ad is in yesterday's Evening Standard)

Seems irresponsible wording to me - I can imagine if you're vaccine hesitant, you might think "I'll just use the nasal spread instead, if it works 99.9%"

This is up there with pushing bleach
 
Oh yeah, that nasal spray is really going to reach into the cell walls of your bronchi where the virus is reproducing.
 
Really? Maybe not the 99.9% of it we're worried about, though?

(This ad is in yesterday's Evening Standard)

Seems irresponsible wording to me - I can imagine if you're vaccine hesitant, you might think "I'll just use the nasal spread instead, if it works 99.9%"

This is up there with pushing bleach

I am not sure it's up there with pushing bleach, as it has been approved for use in the UK & Europe, so there must be something in it. I remember reading about it last year, and that it's designed to be used as a complement to face masks and vaccination, rather than an alterative.

It probably would have been of more use before the vaccines gained approval, I am not convinced there will be much demand for it now.

SPL7013 has been proven to be virucidal, inactivating a broad spectrum of respiratory viruses, influenza viruses, respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), and other cold-causing coronaviruses in laboratory studies. In their research Starpharma have found Viraleze inactivates COVID-19 in under 60 seconds.

The virucidal element of the spray works by spike proteins, found on the surface of some respiratory viruses, becoming trapped by SPL7013 and then irreversibly blocked so the virus can no longer infect mucosal cells. These blocked viruses are then naturally eliminated through the nasal mucus.

The nasal cavity has been found to be the primary site where COVID-19 becomes established before it spreads to the lungs.

 
hmmm - so not quite as bad as I thought.

Still think they could have spelt this bit out better & bolder:

it's designed to be used as a complement to face masks and vaccination, rather than an alternative
 
I guess it's more for offices where no-one wears a mask, and maybe travelling on the tube / bus when masks are no longer compulsory but people still feel nervous.
 
Back
Top Bottom