[Becca9800]

Originally Posted by GrumpyOldMan

So, should I interpret your comment to say that ANYONE that disagrees with you simply accepted what they were told and did no research.

Your perceptions are your reality. If you choose to believe that’s what I meant… You get to own it though. The well-researched knows both sides.

Originally Posted by GrumpyOldMan

and now you are saying I am lazy and simply do what I am told by strangers rather than questioning and researching.

Is that what I said to you? You read that huh? I'm certain I did not. I never used that word anywhere, nor was I even addressing you.

Originally Posted by GrumpyOldMan

EDIT: I read your link, it is written by a 20ish "reporter" with no background in medicine.

This was clearly an article about why there is vaccine hesitancy. It is not a medical research paper. C’mon! You know the difference. So what if he's 20ish? Does that make him not credible in and of itself? I thought it was well researched, well written and hit the nail right on the head.

Originally Posted by GrumpyOldMan

Which is demonstrably false

If you believe medical doctors and scientists speaking unfavorably about the vaccine aren't being silenced, you'd be very wrong. And because they are being silenced, how can their findings and opinions be adequately discussed by any media? So whatever debates you're hearing are incomplete or one-sided.

Originally Posted by GrumpyOldMan

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 author's first source, a medical journal editor and publisher, was for a quote used re: politicization, corruption, and suppression of science. I’m not sure why you think he's not expert enough to quote.

Again, it was a piece on why there is vaccine hesitancy, not a medical research paper. The author cited his sources to demonstrate the reasons behind the hesitancy, which you reject solely because you don't find the sources expert enough. You don't address the info provided, instead you simply discount all of it.

Originally Posted by GrumpyOldMan

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.

It's meant as a look at the other side. So the author is not a credible source to write an article explaining why there is vaccine hesitancy? Ok then. This is why I try to avoid any discussion about the vaccine. No author, source, study or expert is ever acceptable. Have a good rest of your day.