Quote:
Originally Posted by Becca9800
"O, the irony" is clear to me. Because simply doing what you're told is best for you, wo questioning, is the very definition of "reasonable", correct? The mere fact that you believe it's a "few skeptical entertainers" and call it "theories and suspicions" tells me you are unaware of the breadth and depth of skepticism surrounding the C19 vaccine. I'm going to leave this article here for you, you'll be surprised by the who & why. The reasonable person wants to know both sides of an issue, will you read the article?
The Top Four Reasons Why Some People, Doctors; Scientists Refuse To Take The COVID Vaccine – Rights and Freedoms |
So, should I interpret your comment to say that ANYONE that disagrees with you simply accepted what they were told and did no research.
I can't speak for anyone else but I disagree with you and I subscribed to 6 leading medical and research journals (Nature, NEJM, Harvard, PennNews, et al) when the virus was first reported in the US. I subscribe to podcasts by leading Doctors in the field and the hospitals they work at and to podcasts by educators in the same field.
I have been posting here and Nextdoor since then and have simply been reporting what the experts around the world have said. And yet, I have been characterized as a fear-monger for explaining the concept of exponential growth, a liar for saying COVID was worse than the FLU, and now you are saying I am lazy and simply do what I am told by strangers rather than questioning and researching.
I disagree with you. I disagree with your conclusions, I will frequently disagree with your sources (when you provide them). But, I will never insult you, I will never call you lazy, will never call you sheep. I respect you, I can do that and still disagree with you.
EDIT: I read your link, it is written by a 20ish "reporter" with no background in medicine. he starts by saying:
"Reflect On:
Why does the mainstream fail to have appropriate conversations about concerns that are being raised about the COVID vaccine? Why do they remain unacknowledged and unaddressed?"
Which is demonstrably false. I am sure you can find some "media" that are ignoring the debate, but I could provide dozens (hundreds) of links to articles discussing and debating it - but the last time I did that I got banned.
Moving on down the article, the first "expert" he references is an associate editor that works at a prestigious journal. Not a scientist in this field.
The second was also NOT a specialist in this field. In fact, i found ONE specialist quoted.
The article is an opinion piece. He even states in his Bio that he got into writing for this outlet because he "disagrees" with other outlets. Not what I would call a credible source, more of a biased or prejudiced source.