No, I’m not referring to the ability of pathogens to become resistant to vaccines. Rather, I’m referring to those people who are resistant or hesitant about being vaccinated – particularly regarding covid. Many who understand the wisdom/necessity of taking precautions to limit the spread and harmful outcomes of the current pandemic, take a dim view of those who hold a different view. In fact some comments by otherwise intelligent people indicates that they have little to no sympathy for the unvaxxed, even wishing the unvaxxed succumb to covid as such fools don’t deserve a place in society.
While I have at times felt frustration towards those who fail to understand the benefits of health measures such as vaccinations, masks and social distancing, I do understand that how people think about various aspects of their lives are not usually based on willful ignorance. There’s usually many aspects of one’s background and experience that goes into how we develop the perspectives and attitudes we hold. An obvious example is how I, and most autistics, perceive and think of autism compared to those who are not autistic.
When it comes to resistance and hesitance towards vaccinations, there does appear to be more at play than stupidity. The University of Otago’s Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health & Development Study – an ongoing longitudinal study of children born in the city of Dunedin in 1971-1972 indicates that adverse childhood experiences (ACE) are the most solid indicator of whether or not one is likely to be resistant or hesitant to vaccination.
At the extreme end they may have been sexually abused, been exposed to extreme violence, or psychological abuse. Others have been neglected, grown up in chaotic environments, left on their own or isolated in school. The study, now 50 years in the making, has shown that victims of ACE end up being slow learners at school, and by their early teens have concluded that their health outcomes are not under their own control.
By their late teens, it is apparent that they dropped out of education early, and have a below average reading ability. They are also suspicious of the motive of others, and tend to misunderstand information when under stress. By the age of 45 they are likely to have a lower socioeconomic status, be less verbally adept, be slow information processors, and have less practical health knowledge.
What perhaps is significant is that victims of ACE see themselves as nonconformists who value personal freedoms over social norms, whose distrust of authority figures runs high. And herein lies a problem. Measures to counter the pandemic, be they mandates or advisories are viewed with suspicion. The time for reasonable dialogue is long gone – by 30 or more years. When study participants were 15 years old, they were asked to complete a checklist of “things you want to know more about if you are going to be a parent”. 73% checked immunisation. That was when the discussion should have taken place.
Let me quote from the findings of the longitudinal study regarding vaccine resistance and hesitancy:
Today‘s Vaccine Hesitant and Resistant individuals are stuck in an uncertain situation where fast-incoming and complex information about vaccines generates extreme negative emotional reactions (and where pro-vaccination messaging must vie against anti-vaccination messaging that amplifies extreme emotions). Unfortunately, these individuals appear to have diminished capacity to process the information on their own. The results here suggest that, to prepare for future pandemics, education about viruses and vaccines before or during secondary schooling could reduce citizens‘ level of uncertainty in a future pandemic, prevent ensuing extreme emotional distress reactions, and provide people with a pre-existing knowledge framework and positive attitudes that enhance receptivity to future health messaging. Moreover, many of the factors in the backgrounds of Vaccine-Hesitant and -Resistant Dunedin participants are factors that could be tackled to improve population health in general, such as childhood adversity, low reading levels, mental health, and health knowledge.Deep-seated psychological histories of COVID-19 vaccine hesitance and resistance (unedited version) – Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Research Unit, University of Otago, Dunedin, NZ
As always, the Dunedin longitudinal study provides a unique insight into significant aspects of a cohort of individuals born in 1971 & 1972, and the findings pose as many, if not more questions than they answer. With regards to handling future pandemics (and there will be future pandemics), this particular survey points to what needs to be done. What it can’t do is provide leads into how it might be done. Any suggestions?
Sources for this blog post:
Deep-seated psychological histories of COVID-19 vaccine hesitance and resistance (.pdf file)
Covid-19: Vaccine resistance’s roots in negative childhood experiences (RNZ)
Dunedin Study sheds light on New Zealand’s successful vaccination rates (Otago University news)
13 Apr, 2022 at 4:10 am
I think it was clever to apply an inquest into vaccine hesitancy into this longitudinal study. I wonder if more of this is going on around with world with other studies. It would be smart to explore and understand the decision process before the next global health crisis hits.
13 Apr, 2022 at 5:48 am
I think the Dunedin longitudinal study is unique in that after 50 years, 96% of the subjects still participate and that the study covers multiple disciplines including health, welfare, socioeconomics, social attitudes, criminality, relationships and much more.
It does give insight into why people can come to believe in false narratives, and while that can be helpful in the way authorities deliver information, it can also be used by those who wish to spread disinformation. A double edged sword.
You are correct by referring to then next global health crisis, because as sure as night follows day, there will be a next global health crisis. We have been fortunate that covid has been relatively benign and for most people short term. Next time we may not be so lucky.
7 May, 2022 at 10:22 am
I am not anti-vaccine to the extreme. We should just let people make their own choices.
7 May, 2022 at 11:36 am
Like choosing which side of the road to drive on or whether or not to shout “Fire!” in a theatre?
7 May, 2022 at 11:41 am
That’s different though.
7 May, 2022 at 11:43 am
How? Not following covid directives can have harmful consequences for others
7 May, 2022 at 11:51 am
Well, not closing down travel to and from China led to this pandemic escalating to the USA.
7 May, 2022 at 12:40 pm
Really? I seem to remember that most of the infected travellers came from Europe. Closing the border to one country is ineffective. I don’t know about the USA but here the authorities cannot prohibit travel to any other country, only the arrival of non-resident to this country
7 May, 2022 at 12:54 pm
Well, if the USA had closed off travel abroad for 3 months, we could have defeated the pandemic a long time ago.
7 May, 2022 at 4:12 pm
Once again: Really? This country closed its borders for two years and during that time we lived with no mask or social distancing mandates for all but a few weeks while an imported outbreak was eliminated, and only 50 deaths over those two years. Then omicron arrived, earlier this year. Now, we’re seeing 20 to 30 deaths every day, health services stretched to breaking point, and non-emergency surgery being delayed. If it wasn’t for the fact that 98% of the population is vaccinated, we would probably be seeing hundreds of deaths per day and the health system collapsing under the load.
You’re fooling yourself if you think that a 3 month closure of the border would prevented the pandemic in the USA. It might have worked if every country locked down as NZ did, but now covid is heading towards being endemic world wide, and the only way of minimising its effects on the population as a whole is to to take measures that slow down its rate of spread and to minimise the severity of its symptoms, both of which, with currently available resources, are best achieved by a combination of social distancing, mask wearing and immunisation. As someone who wishes to minimise my health risks (I’m 72) I refuse to give someone the “freedom” that allows them to put me in harm’s way. They can ignore every covid precaution they wish, but they’re not going to do it around me. I have freedoms too – the freedom not to have my health jeopardised unnecessarily by those who have little understanding of shared responsibility.
8 May, 2022 at 1:42 am
Barry, the people who took these “safe and effective” MRNA so-called “vaccines” should have checked multiple stories before getting on the vaccine bandwagon.
8 May, 2022 at 4:02 am
You are beginning to sound much like the individuals I refer to in the article.
I trust science, and that clearly shows the effectiveness and safety of the vaccine compared to not getting it.
Stories are just that – stories. Often misunderstanding the evidence, or anecdotal stories that have not been verified. Or nonsense spouted by conspiracy theorists.
If you can point me to reliable scientific documentation that has been peer reviewed by those in the field of immunisation, that provides evidence that it is safer not to have a covid jab than to have one, then I will reconsider my position.
8 May, 2022 at 4:04 am
Barry, what about people’s stories in their own words?
8 May, 2022 at 4:50 am
My previous comment applies. They are anecdotal.
Aditionally no one is claiming that the vaccine is will no have negative effects with some people. The is no medicine that is 100% safe. But they are orders of magnitude safer than not taking them.
I’ve taken medication in the past where known side effects included cardiac arrest, kidney failure and stroke. However the risk was worth taking in order to improve my quality of life.
As I’ve already stated if you wish not to be vaccinated and not to wear a mask, that’s your business. Just don’t expect to be welcomed in the community where I live.
8 May, 2022 at 4:56 am
Barry, if you know of anybody with a history of health issues, Epilepsy to name one example, while it may very possibly be true that the vaccines would not affect them too badly, can you honestly blame them for being skeptical?
8 May, 2022 at 5:31 am
Of course there are individuals for whom some medicines are contra indicated, and that also applies to vaccines, although compared to other medicines they pose far fewer risks. But for the majority of people the risks posed by vaccinations are negligible compared to the risks of not taking them.
You are confusing the weighing up of risk factors that apply to any one individual with the risk factors of an entire community. I’m a chronic migraine sufferer and because of how it presents in me, I can not take many migraine medications because they pose a very high health risk to me. However that doesn’t mean I have to be sceptical about their safety for most people. They work and don’t present the risk of serious side effects in 99.999% of those who take them.
So far you have provided no support for why anyone should be sceptical about the benefits of being vaccinated against covid. If it’s considered unsafe for someone to be vaccinated then they shouldn’t be vaccinated. And for this very reason it behoves all who can be vaccinated to do so in order to protect those who can’t. We’ve come back to collective responsibility.
8 May, 2022 at 5:33 am
Barry, I could provide you all the evidence out there and you would probably still be skeptical.
8 May, 2022 at 5:54 am
Sceptical of what exactly? Unverified stories of widespread harm claimed to be a direct result of having had a covid jab? Too right I’d be sceptical. Provide me with peer reviewed research and I’ll reconsider.
Let me ask you a question: how is it that you know more about the so called harm of the covid vaccine than all those scientists, doctors and statisticians involved in ensuring the effectiveness and safety of it? They are all involved in a cover up perhaps?
8 May, 2022 at 6:27 am
Barry, here are a few videos for you: 1: https://www.bitchute.com/video/a7UU88ey7lNM/, 2: https://www.bitchute.com/video/sbp5hZvC6sCA/, 3: https://www.bitchute.com/video/9gFElDAF1FRk/, 4: https://www.bitchute.com/video/0TuIQcDpK4jH/ I am skeptical of the claims by news anchors who have no medical degrees that legitimate licensed medical professionals are lying about what medical experts say. If polygraphed, I would not be surprised if it was news anchors who were caught in the lies and the medical experts were vindicated.
29 May, 2022 at 3:53 am
Lockdowns don’t prevent anything health wise as such although there are pros and cons as some people stop to reconsider their lives and the fact one doesn’t need to rush around everywhere polluting the environment as one goes and stressing oneself and others at the same time.
Best way to protect oneself among other things is to boost vitamin D if you don’t get enough via the sun (free!) if you do the right things.
29 May, 2022 at 6:50 pm
Nonsense! Aotearoa eliminated Covid in a matter of weeks by going into strict lockdown. After that we had almost two years with no community transmission. Over that time there were 25 reported covid deaths, 24 of them being during the lockdown. Now that the country is 95% vaccinated, and our borders are open we’re seeing 10 – 20 people dying each day from covid. Personally I would have preferred keeping the borders closed a while longer, but as almost 20% of this nation’s income is derived from tourism related industries, and given the fact that people do get lockdown fatigue, at some time we would have to accept that covid will become endemic. However, if it hadn’t been for short, sharp lockdowns this county would have had death rates similar to other developed nations – far too many. The lockdowns to eliminate covid and closing the border until a high rate of vaccination was achieved is why this country has had and still has a very low death rate for covid.
8 May, 2022 at 9:36 am
There’s not even corroborated evidence that the claimed injuries are real let alone any evidence that there’s a link between the claimed injuries and the vaccine. There’s no corroborated evidence that these people have even been vaccinated.
I then had a look around Bitchute. Admittedly I only viewed a random sample of articles, but every one of those spouted one conspiracy theory after another, one hate concept after another. For example did you know:
1. The New Zealand Prime Minister is a man in drag
2. The UN is cooperating in a Zionist Communist takeover of the world by 2030
3. The Ukraine really is controlled by Nazis
4. The Biden administration is deliberately causing a food shortage in the US by sabotaging food processing plants and making them look look accidents.
I viewed a total if 12 videos all just as crazy as those described above, and the comments attached to them are some of the most hate filled extreme right views I have seen anywhere. Why would any rational person think anything published there have even a grain of truth.
If wish to be so misinformed by watching the hatred and disinformation of Bitchute go ahead, but don’t repeat it hear. It’s not welcomed.
17 May, 2022 at 2:33 am
Barry, it is not just Bitchute. The evidence is all over the place.
6 Jun, 2022 at 12:49 am
I have looked at the science and found that vaccines add to the risk from covid and don’t protect from that risk.
6 Jun, 2022 at 12:59 am
You’re looking in the wrong places then. The evidence clearly shows that vaccines reduce the the likelihood of getting covid, transmitting covid, and having severe symptoms of covid. If you believe health professionals and the authorities are deliberately providing the vaccine in the knowledge that it is harmful, I suggest you read my article again.
6 Jun, 2022 at 2:06 am
“Wrong places” = confusion about evidence
There are no “wrong places”. There is high quality evidence and low quality evidence.
You are unaware of a lot of the science. This happens if you only listen to official sources.
Clare Craig, a UK pathologist, has shown that vaccines add to risk of myocarditis in veterans on top of the risk from covid.
unvaccinated: 370 cases per million
vaccinated: 580 cases per million
6 Jun, 2022 at 1:10 pm
Did you actually read the article you linked to? Let me quote the last paragraph:
Nature has published this paper which presents data in an obtuse way that should never have passed peer review. The results were presented as showing how dangerous the Covid virus was for cardiovascular complications without suitable controls to enable that conclusion to be drawn. The evidence on vaccination risks was hidden and not presented in a meaningful way for different age groups. Even then, they demonstrated a significant risk of myocarditis after vaccination, particularly after then encountering the virus but this key finding was hidden in the supplementary appendix. Why?”
The article referred to seems to be Xie, Y., Xu, E., Bowe, B. et al. Long-term cardiovascular outcomes of COVID-19. Nat Med 28, 583–590 (2022)
The study itself compared the Long-term cardiovascular outcomes of COVID-19 compared to a non-infected control group and the conclusion is that covid significantly affects long term outcomes. Myocarditis is a small risk with any vaccine, but it is statistically insignificant compared to the benefits of vaccinations. With regards to the myocarditis risk with the covid vaccination, the method used appears to be flawed, as is stated in the article you link to. Another article also has similar criticisms. You, like ragnarsbhut in above comments, choose to selectively mine data without looking at the big picture.
How about we compare covid death rates for unvaccinated subjects and those fully vaccinated plus booster? Here’s the weekly death rate per 100,000 for unvaccinated/fully vaccinated:
96% of the New Zealand population is fully vaccinated. If there was any statistical significance to the rate of myocarditis or other side effects in the population, don’t you think that it would show up in our health statistics? What the statistics do show is that hospitalisations and deaths amongst the unvaccinated are approximately an order of magnitude greater that amongst those who have been fully vaccinated and have received a booster shot.
According to the claimed increased rate of myocarditis, this country should have somewhere around 1250 cases of covid vaccination induced myocarditis. Don’t you think that would show up in the health statistics? Of course the lizard overlords might have demanded that health professionals deliberately hide this information, just like they did with the MMR vaccine causes autism. If you believe that, you’ll believe anything.
Taking all things into account, the risks involved in contracting covid without being fully vaccinated is approximately 10 times higher than contracting covid when fully vaccinated. It’s a no brainer as far as I’m concerned.
Unless you can provide evidence of fully peer reviewed studies showing that the side effects of the covid vaccination outweigh the benefits, this conversation is at an end.
6 Jun, 2022 at 1:56 pm
“With regards to the myocarditis risk with the covid vaccination, the method used appears to be flawed, as is stated in the article you link to. ”
The article didn’t state that the data was flawed. Worrying about a flawed method is a distraction.
“Taking all things into account, the risks involved in contracting covid without being fully vaccinated is approximately 10 times higher than contracting covid when fully vaccinated.”
Nope. The risk of the injected is many fold higher than the uninjected. It’s like a foxhole and bunker situation. The foxhole is safer than being out in the open, but the bunker is safer until the safety wanes. To get from the foxhole to the bunker you have to go out in the open where the biggest risk is. Most of the injected deaths happen within 21 days of injection. There is also some long term risk, of course.
6 Jun, 2022 at 6:35 pm
I had a look at your blog. The three articles tell me all I need to know about you. Your sources include a White nationalist/supremacist website, that even claims the the russia/Ukraine war is really about Russia protecting the “white race” and Christianity; that the AMA and CDC conspired to rewrite history to hide that “fact” that vaccines are unnecessary and are dangerous; that the 2020 US election was “stolen”; That “big pharma” consistently falsifies the results of their testing; that the JFK assassination and 9/11 were the result of “behind the scenes” government plots masterminded by some shadowy “alternate authority”. And that’s just for starters. In other words, your sources are from conspiracy theorists – the very ones my article is about. That more or less puts you in the same basket
If as you claim that the covid vaccination causes more harm than good, it would mean that there would be thousands of such cases in New Zealand. All of which, it would seem have been deliberately hidden from the public. It is a nonsense.
The simple facts are that the unvaccinated in NZ are disproportionally represented in the covid hospitalisations and deaths (about 10 times higher). You refute that with a “Nope”. Where’s your evidence? There has been no statistically significant increase in non-covid related hospitalisations, deaths or complications. Of course, you can provide documented evidence that proves otherwise?
7 Jun, 2022 at 1:00 am
Wow! You are really…out in the pasture.
8 Jun, 2022 at 1:58 am
“Indiana life insurance CEO says deaths are up 40% among people ages 18-64”
““What the data is showing to us is that the deaths that are being reported as COVID deaths greatly understate the actual death losses among working-age people from the pandemic. It may not all be COVID on their death certificate, but deaths are up just huge, huge numbers.”
Covid deaths were up 12% in 2021 over 2020, but working age mortality was up 17%. Only about a third of the working age excess mortality was due to covid. Mortality was up huge in the 35-44 y.o. group, who rarely die from covid. I’ve got a whole post about working age excess mortality in 2021.
“He said at the same time, the company is seeing an “uptick” in disability claims, saying at first it was short-term disability claims, and now the increase is in long-term disability claims.”
Likely injuries both from covid and from covid vaccines.
8 Jun, 2022 at 2:51 am
I can’t speak for the CEO of one life insurance company in the USA, but are you aware that in this country mortality is down since the start of the pandemic? Do you not think that when we have a 96% vaccination rate, that if the covid vaccination was harmful, that it would show up in our health statistics? The simple fact is that the only change in hospital admissions has been an increase due to corona and a decrease in other communicable diseases such as the flu. This is because measures to limit the spread of covid has reduced the spread of all communicable diseases.
Regardless of what you might want to believe, the hospitalisation rate.and death rate for covid is 10 times higher in the non vaccinated compared to the vaccinated, and there is no evidence of an increase of any other condition that might indicate people are experiencing adverse conditions attributable to the vaccination.
We don’t have a broken fragmented health system. Health statistics are gathered across the entire nation using uniform reporting protocols across primary and secondary care. Any harmful effects from vaccinations would become apparent, but absolutely nothing has shown up. Nothing. Zilch. Zero.
Provide reliable, verifiable evidence, not anecdotal comments, that prove more people are harmed by covid vaccination than are harmed by covid itself.
8 Jun, 2022 at 3:00 am
“but are you aware that in this country mortality is down since the start of the pandemic?”
Urban legend. Working age mortality was up 17.5% in the US in 2021 over 2020. I have a post about that. It’s a 5 sigma deviation.
8 Jun, 2022 at 3:01 am
“Regardless of what you might want to believe, the hospitalisation rate.and death rate for covid is 10 times higher in the non vaccinated compared to the vaccinated,”
I have a post about that, too.
8 Jun, 2022 at 8:23 pm
The simple picture, and here I’m referring to my own country and not the US or Sweden. This nation (with the exception of one city) had no community spread of covid for two years while the pandemic raged across the rest of the world. We had no mask or social distancing mandates, with rock concerts and sporting events with 60,000 in attendance. But if you look at hospitalisation data you’ll see a drop in some health classifications. For example no annual flu epidemic. Hospitalisations for flu dropped to near zero. Some forms of accidents reduced markedly. Why? Because people changed their lifestyle in order to reduce the chances of covid spreading should it have got into the community.
Vaccinations started here a year before our borders reopened to ensure we had a high vaccination rate before the inevitable arrival of covid with travellers from overseas We started vaccinations later than most developed nations because (a) we were covid free, and (b) we are a small nation at the very end of a long and broken supply chain.
Apart from the reductions I mentioned above, there was no discernable increase in any of the symptoms that anti-vaxxers claim the vaccination causes. With the increasing rate of vaccinations, we saw people relaxing their precautions and accident rates started to return to pre-covid days. Flu rates remained low however as the mandatory 2 week isolation of arrivals into the country prevented the arrival of new strains. I will repeat that no discernable increase of any of the symptoms that anti-vaxxers claim occur with the vaccination over the 12 months before the border opened. Why do you think that was? Because there were no such cases or because there was a massive coverup by health professionals, politicians and public servants, or because our professionals and statisticians do not understand the data?
So with 12 months in which to find evidence of harmful effects of the vaccination, what did we find? Evidence of localised pain for a few days, mild flu-like symptoms and/or tiredness for a few days. No different from what can be expected of any vaccine. There was one reported case where the vaccine may have contributed to the death of one person who was already severely health compromised. That’s it. There is absolutely no evidence to suggest that the Pfizer vaccine is in any way harmful.
In April/May 2020 when covid arrived here, we had 25 covid related deaths in 2 months. We then eliminated the virus and over the next 2 years there were another 25 deaths – all of people who had been infected while overseas. How was it known it was eliminated? Because of the high rate of testing but zero cases being found, and that testing of wastewater could reveal one person in 10,000 as having the virus or even shedding dead virus after recovering from an infection.
When the border reopened we had a 90% vaccination rate, which has since risen to 96%, and as would be expected, covid arrived and we’re now experiencing 10 – 20 deaths per day and up to 10,000 reported infections. And for the first time since the winter of 2019, we’re seeing hospitalisations for flu and similar infections. Proportionally we’re seeing hospitalisation and deaths for the non-vaxxed at around 10 times the rate for vaxxed, and this is true across all age groups, but still no increase in those symptoms you claim should be demonstrably evident. They are not.
Unlike the US where one might be justified to claim profit is a motive for hiding the facts and lying about the dangers of vaccination, that does not hold true in a publicly funded health system where funding is provided through taxation. Spending in one health sector can increase only if spending in another sector is decreased. That is a simple fact of life here. Being the least corrupt nation in the world, and one of the most transparent (unlike the USA), there is no rhyme or reason for data to be fabricated.
Up until the relaxing of border controls, this nation traced every covid incident and that included genome tracing. It was possible to trace each and every case back to where it crossed the border. No state in America was able to achieve such results. Now, with so many infected travellers arriving in the country universal genome testing is no longer feasible.
The health system is currently stretched almost to breaking point with covid cases. As we have been flu free for the winters of 2020 and 2021, this year’s epidemic will probably be more harmful than we’ve seen in a while. And once more I will point out that there is no evidence of any of the harmful side effects that anti-vaxxers claim the covid vaccine causes.
To date, I have tolerated your many links to sites that are inaccurate, spread half truths, misinformation and disinformation, and are full of racist, far right, pro Trump, anti-diversity, pro-conservative, anti-liberal, conspiracy infested ideology. But this is my blog, and I have no intention of it being used to spread such ideology. In your case my tolerance has dried up. Use you own blog for such links. I will however use this comment to point to some sites that you really should read carefully:
Killer COVID Vaccines? What VAERS Really Tells Us About Coronavirus Shots And Blood Clots
The vaccinated proportion of people with COVID-19 needs context
Ecological fallacy: When a scientist (inadvertently, I hope) uses a favorite antivax form of study
Don’t fall for the Nirvana fallacy – COVID vaccines are safe and effective
Commentary: Anti-Vaccine Movements: Thriving on Fallacies and As Old as Vaccines Themselves
The scientific evidence shows that COVID-19 vaccination reduces the risk of infection and mortality; analysis of cases and deaths from 145 countries is methodologically flawed
Series on Logical Fallacies – The False Dichotomy
I appreciate that none of the above links are likely to cause you to change your mind. You’re too far down the conspiracy rabbit hole for that. But at least it will provide balance to anyone who comes across this conversation thread.
And with that, this conversation is ended as I have more fruitful avenues to explore
8 Jun, 2022 at 10:03 pm
Typical vax cultist. You rant and shut off conversation.
8 Jun, 2022 at 11:09 pm
No. You are welcome to continue the conversation. What you can’t do is link solely to racist, far right, pro Trump, anti-diversity, pro-conservative, anti-liberal, and conspiracy theorist sites. It’s my blog, my rules. The only person ranting here is yourself and ragnarsbhut. I have described the situation in my country of residence, and it would seem that you are not interested in what I have to say about it.
You read antivax sites that that rely on hearsay and anecdotal stories that are not able to be verified by independent sources, that lack credible scientific information backed up by peer reviews and take the as truth. You ignore evidence that are contrary to your beliefs.
Here’s a question for you: If the vaccine is as dangerous as you claim, why is there no evidence in the health statistics for this country? Surely a year should be sufficient to show a trend, and in the case of this nation the data hasn’t been muddied covid cases, because there weren’t any.
8 Jun, 2022 at 11:51 pm
“What you can’t do is link solely to racist, far right, pro Trump, anti-diversity, pro-conservative, anti-liberal, and conspiracy theorist sites.”
Umm, you probably don’t realize that this pegs you as a left wing wacko. And you are notoriously ill-informed about the anti-vaxxers. Steve Kirsch, Robert Malone, and Jessica Rose are all on the left and are prominent in the antivax movement. But they think critically, which you would do well to emulate.
Until you are willing to consider other possibilities and look at data, you will stay blind. That’s just how it works.
“You read antivax sites that that rely on hearsay and anecdotal stories that are not able to be verified by independent sources, that lack credible scientific information backed up by peer reviews and take the as truth.”
This pegs you as silly. It is impossible to avoid the arguments of vax proponents. And the BMJ has taken an antivax position. (I reference a post by Jessica Rose, who is quite the leftist, but not a loon.) I guess the BMJ is now somehow anti-science???
“If the vaccine is as dangerous as you claim, why is there no evidence in the health statistics for this country?”
Provincials think that their perspective somehow represents the rest of the world. It’s a kind of myopia. Your tiny island nation is very different from the US. Islands can escape pandemics which continental nations cannot. Large cities have different pandemic results from rural areas. Because large cities have mass transportation, where people spend an hour in a crowded vehicle with dozens of strangers.
Tiny populations tend to not get looked at very carefully and they lack the resources to do much looking themselves.
8 Jun, 2022 at 11:04 pm
“This nation (with the exception of one city)”
Covid spread in large cities because of public transportation. And yours is a tiny island nation (New Zealand, right?) which has a very different situation than populous, continental nations. Very few blacks or hispanics in New Zealand–those groups tend to have high rates of vitamin D deficiency which correlates to high covid mortality.
“Contrary to what you would think, countries with the longest and most stringent lockdowns were likely to have higher rather than lower excess mortality. Governments that used them did so because they failed to act in time. They implemented delayed lockdowns across their entire countries, underestimating the virus and prioritising economic order.” The first sentence is data and is high quality. The second is opinion and is low quality.
Unfortunately, the same article has bathwater: “Several Asian countries tended to have strong test-and-trace capacity, and this frequently resulted in lower excess mortality (China and Japan being examples, alongside Taiwan).”
SARS hit Taiwan and Japan hard, which resulted in a great deal of cross immunity to covid since both are caused by similar coronaviruses.
“And once more I will point out that there is no evidence of any of the harmful side effects that anti-vaxxers claim the covid vaccine causes.”
Vaccination in one population when vitamin D levels are high says nothing about vaccination in another population in winter when vitamin D levels are low. Vaccinating in winter when vitamin D levels are low is going to get different results than vaccinating in a moderate-climate environment when vitamin D levels are high. Maybe vitamin D levels are high in New Zealand year round? Found this: “However, most of the country lies close to the coast, which means mild temperatures year-round. ”
Hawaii has that situation. Tennessee and New York, not so much. Do you get the point, even? Different locations in the US have very different results. Mostly because of seasonally-divergent levels of vitamin D.
We are seeing 137,500 excess deaths in the US working age population in 2021 over 2020. This was a 17.5% increase in working age mortality in 2021. Are you denying that this occurred???
Has anyone looked for myocarditis in New Zealand’s population? I would guess not.
We’ve seen increased incidence of myocarditis in the US for the vaccinated over the unvaccinated. Which I referenced.
“Proportionally we’re seeing hospitalisation and deaths for the non-vaxxed at around 10 times the rate for vaxxed”
This just shows that you haven’t bothered to read my article about Swedish data which explains this. Manipulation of statistical definitions to favor vaccination causes this sort of error.
“Being the least corrupt nation”
Lol. Jacinda Ardern. No question that Washington is very corrupt. Corruption is typically worst at the highest levels. Wellington.
“You’re too far down the conspiracy rabbit hole”…Ummm, Event 201 is online, right? No theory there. The conspiracy is out in the open. But that’s the genius of the plan–it’s incredible. Like a 007 movie. People won’t believe their own eyes.
Notice that I engaged your arguments, but you do not engage mine.
Why did you fail to respond to my referenced posts? Did you even bother to read them? I guess not. So you’re kind of like a child that sticks its fingers in its ears and says “Lalalalala, I can’t hear you.”
You reference low quality articles and think that they mean something. You think that your provincial island experience somehow applies to populous, continental nations. Simply absurd.
9 Jun, 2022 at 12:26 am
It’s quite clear that you are hold to vax conspiracy theories, which to be quite frank I’m not interested in arguing. Yes I did read the articles you linked to – all of them, and also several other articles from each of those sites to get a better understanding of their perspective. That is why I described them in the way I did. It was not from reading one article on each site. When websites have as much bias as those you presented to me, some of which make Fox News look positively liberal and left wing, one that carries a “white exceptionalism” theme, others that repeat the “stolen election” theme or conspiracies from JFK to 9/11 to covid, then I’m not interested. I have done my research and come to a different conclusion to you. It so happens that my conclusion is closer to the collective scientific and medical perspective than yours.
I am not required to refute your claims. I am satisfied that your arguments are built on logical fallacies that I have neither the patience nor time to argue with you. There is no peer reviewed article in any reputable medical or scientific journal that supports your claims. In fact they all clearly show evidence to support the widest possible uptake of vaccinations as one of the tools with which to combat covid. I am satisfied that not only is the vaccine safe, not having the jab will produce negative outcomes for our society..
You do realise that New Zealand is an urban society. In fact our urban population is proportionally slightly higher than in the US, and this country from north to south is approximately the same distance as from the Canadian border to the Mexican border. As for vitamin D, our levels are quite low. The reasons are complicated but it’s a choice of having low levels of vitamin D or skin cancer. Personally, I prefer the former.
Event 201 – another conspiracy theory. I’ve looked at the evidence and have come to a different conclusion to you. I believe my judgement is sound. You clearly have come to a different conclusion.
9 Jun, 2022 at 8:27 am
“It’s quite clear that you are hold to vax conspiracy theories,”
So now science is a conspiracy theory. Interesting….
“Yes I did read the articles you linked to – all of them, and also several other articles from each of those sites to get a better understanding of their perspective. That is why I described them in the way I did.”
So now the British Medical Journal is a conspiracy theory publication….Ohhhhh-kayyyyy
“I am not required to refute your claims. ”
Perhaps because you cannot, you dance.
” I am satisfied that your arguments are built on logical fallacies”
So now science is “logical fallacies.” Ummm….
“I am satisfied that not only is the vaccine safe, not having the jab will produce negative outcomes for our society..”
I’m reminded of a certain monkey with his hands plastered over his eyes.
“In fact they all clearly show evidence”
I have dismantled several on my site. You exhibit the fallacy of begging the question.
“You do realise that New Zealand is an urban society. In fact our urban population is proportionally slightly higher than in the US,”
This is known as a fallacy of distribution.
“Event 201 – another conspiracy theory.”
So the evidence being online somehow makes this only a theory….
“As for vitamin D, our levels are quite low.”
Again with the distribution fallacy. Various ethnic groups have high levels of vitamin D deficiency. Not something you can generalize. I guess vitamin D supplementation isn’t something that the public health authorities recommend, for some reason. Is the FDA really less incompetent than the New Zealand health authorities?
You know, we send to Australia to get the vitamin D analog calcifediol. Kind of funny, considering that you in Oceania don’t use it much, apparently.
11 Jun, 2022 at 2:44 pm
This comment of yours needs a reply.
“The reasons are complicated but it’s a choice of having low levels of vitamin D or skin cancer. Personally, I prefer the former.”
Fallacy of the false dilemma. You can get vitamin D exposure in about ten minutes as is recommended by the New Zealand public health authorities.
Vitamin D deficiency correlates with cancer risk. You really, really don’t understand science.
6 Jun, 2022 at 4:23 pm
I should add that being able to distinguish baby from bathwater is essential to critical thinking.
6 Jun, 2022 at 6:39 pm
You are wasting my time. If your sources are representative of your values, then you are everything I am not, and I’m proud of it.
7 Jun, 2022 at 1:01 am
I value non-woolly thinking. I wish you valued it, too.
8 Jun, 2022 at 8:25 pm
What you have provided is bathwater. There is no baby.
9 Sep, 2022 at 2:44 am
Barry, there is a difference between vaccine resistance and wanting to wait and see all of the pertinent data regarding the safety and risks associated with the vaccines. There is also a difference between wanting a vaccine and wanting a vaccine to be mandated.
9 Sep, 2022 at 6:08 am
Did you read that hesitancy was mentioned also? Kind of makes your comment redundant doesn’t it?
Do you understand that it’s the cohort with lower educational levels, social skills, cognitive ability, suffered childhood trauma and have a false belief that they are independent and sophisticated thinkers who are significantly more likely to be vaccine resistant or hesitant?
Do you understand that the article also calls for a sympathetic understanding of this cohort instead of vilifying them?
Finally, mandates were restricted to those who worked in sectors such as health care or at the border, and if you don’t understand the reasoning behind it after all this time then I can’t help you. The mandates were always going to be a temporary measure, perhaps apart from where there’s regular or close contact with the those who are most vulnerable to covid. I’m in my 70s and if I were in need of care I’d want to minimise covid risks to me by ensuring all those involved were vaccinated and if they get covid that they remain isolated from me. Please note the use of “minimise” and not “eliminate”.
9 Sep, 2022 at 9:16 am
Barry, I understand all of this. What Covid vaccine were you the least skeptical of?
9 Sep, 2022 at 2:17 pm
It’s not a matter of scepticism. It’s a matter of taking a critical look at the evidence presented and weighing up the benefits of whether or not having the jab was for the greater good of everyone concerned. My conclusion (as it has been for most people who aren’t in the cohort discussed in the longitudinal study) was that not only was it personally beneficial, it was also beneficial to the community and wider society.
All vaccinations carry some risks, and no one, including the most ardent supporter of vaccinations denies this, but the evidence is clear that any harm caused by vaccinations is negligible compare to the benefits. And that includes all the covid vaccinations approved for use in this country.
I will remind you again the cohort that exhibits the greatest vaccination resistance and hesitancy are stuck in an uncertain situation where fast-incoming and complex information about vaccines generates extreme negative emotional reactions (and where pro-vaccination messaging must vie against anti-vaccination messaging that amplifies extreme emotions). Unfortunately, these individuals appear to have diminished capacity to process the information on their own.
9 Sep, 2022 at 2:54 pm
Barry, I understand, however, of those vaccines presently known, what manufacturer had the best track record for vaccines and other medicines?
9 Sep, 2022 at 2:57 pm
How is that relevant to the content of my post?
9 Sep, 2022 at 3:00 pm
Barry, if someone is resistant to a vaccine provided by one manufacturer, Moderna for example but not that from Astrazeneca, could that be due to the reputation of the manufacturer? The judgement of an MD?
9 Sep, 2022 at 9:03 pm
Once again, how is that relevant to the findings of the Dunedin longitudinal study with regards to vaccine resistance and hesitancy? The study describes a subset of the study cohorts who are suspicious of vaccinations in general, often believing that they cause more harm than good and that the authorities and/or the medical profession are aware of that but prefer to keep the public ignorant. This subset believes they are independent minded but in reality lack the ability to process information on their own. the study was not specific to covid but was carried out in light of the current pandemic, but applies to vaccinations in general, and as the study describes, a suspicion of the motives of those in the health profession.
It has nothing to do with the perceived reputation of a manufacturer, nor the particular preferences of their doctor. Vaccination resistance or hesitation does not mean brand preference or regarding one vaccine manufacturer as being more trustworthy than another.. If that is what you think, then clearly you do not understand the nature of the post at all.
To put it bluntly, vaccine resisters and to a lesser extent the vaccine hesitant do not trust health professionals nor those in authority who must negotiate society’s path through difficult times. This distrust arises from childhood trauma resulting in a diminished ability to independently process information, especially when the data is complex. To make matters worse, they erroneously believe that they have an above average ability in this regard, which compounds the problem.
If you have a point, please come out and state it. So far you’ve wandered from border closures to videos claiming isolated adverse effects with absolutely no corroborating evidence, to brand preference.
10 Sep, 2022 at 1:40 am
Barry, if we had completely closed off travel to and from China at the early onset, as well as monitoring the NIH, maybe we could have avoided this pandemic in entirety. Anthony Fauci has as much blood on his hands as the Chinese Communist Party.