(06-11-2021, 02:48 AM)Thryleon date Wrote:That argument is one that can be followed until the appropriate data is gathered and measurable. We have much better information about COVID, the prophylactic cost, the ongoing mental health cost, and the ongoing risk profile to warrant a review of our approach to dealing with this risk. Thats what I want done.Firstly, vaccines save lives they do not cost them, as mentioned earlier if the data is followed on deaths after vaccination is shows that the broad trend is that deaths from clots are reduced. The problem is social media and media bend the category, they ignore the general trend and want to discuss a very specific subset cherrypicked for the purpose which they want portrayed as the norm.
No, my argument is built on the premise and factual data that shows we are ruining many lives trying to save few lives.
Thats the same argument being mounted for vaccinating against Covid too by the way. You know the one you are advocating based on the data that we might potentially ruin few lives trying to save the many (so to speak) which means we should vaccinate.
Dont worry about wars. This isnt about war.
I dont need to be right, I want to challenge my own thinking here, which is why I am asking such questions on a footy forum, devoid of the emotive arguments you get from people who take this all very personally and dont add enough balance to their arguments.
I'm not sure what ruining a life means in the pandemic lockdown perspective, much of the pain and suffering is a consequence of civil disobedience against the lockdown rather than the mechanics of the pandemic lockdown itself. While I concede the lockdown civil disobedience doesn't exist without the lockdown, I can't say that low case numbers would persist in the absence of lockdown.
"Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck ....... Ruck, ruck, ruck, ruck"

