Maggie's FarmWe are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for. |
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Categories
QuicksearchLinks
Blog Administration |
Friday, May 14. 2021Merriam-Webster, the Ministry of TruthI am now a proud "anti-vaxxer." Actually, I'm not. But Merriam-Webster does define me as one. The funny thing is, I've gotten vaccinated. For polio, smallpox, MMR, tetanus, and even recently I received my second shingles vaccine. I got the shingles vaccine on the day I turned down the coronavirus vaccine. I have my own personal reasons for turning down the new vaccine. After all, I've had covid, and it was a bit tough, but nothing I couldn't handle. I have other reasons, too, which I won't share since the information on all of this is convoluted and tends to spark arguments (not discussions). It is not hard science by any stretch. Even my doctor, when I gave my reasons for rejecting it, tried to convince me to get it by saying "we know so little about it, the vaccine is a good idea." I replied that if you know so little, it seems odd that you're convinced that the vaccine will help me. I hardly see that as a reassuring argument. She agreed (which surprised me) and said "just realize you may get it again." I told her I've gotten the flu many times, too. Even after I was vaccinated. My reasons are mine alone and I'll get the answers and make my determinations as I go along. I have that right (in the old United States I did...). I'm not opposed to the coronavirus vaccine, either. I suggested my father (85, with heart issues) get it when he asked me if he should. He is a retired doctor, I laughed when he asked me, but I was honest. He agrees with my reasons for not getting it. It could be he's not seeking to have a discussion, but I know he has his own questions. Mrs. Bulldog got it (and, as I suspected, had no side effects, as she has been exposed to covid several times and never gotten it. Long exposures, both from me and friends. She really is a Viking.) and I supported her decision to get it. My mother (85 and frail) got it. Other members of my family have gotten it. I just have my own questions about this particular vaccine. I have a right to question it, and be skeptical. Even today, it's not uncommon to see or hear about fully-vaccinated people testing positive. I doubt this means they have covid. In fact, I'm willing to bet heavily the tests are incorrect (as so many are). I'm also not afraid of getting covid again. I dealt with it once, and it wasn't bad. I'm in better shape now than I was then (lost about 5 lbs, lifting more, using the elliptical for longer stretches - I made it a goal to get in better shape), and know how to deal with it (low sugar, lots of water, Vitamin D and lots of sun and fresh air). There are also improved treatments if I'm wrong. All that said, I'm not an anti-vaxxer. Not even a little. Not even a tiny bit. I'll get the vaccine IF my questions are resolved by my doctor AND if I reach a point that I feel it is useful and necessary. In the meantime, I'm not a threat. At least not health-wise. That said, I do oppose mandates and forcing people to do things they don't necessarily want to do. And if opposing mandatory vaccine programs makes me an anti-vaxxer, then I am a political problem to some people. What annoys me is that I'm defined by Biden and Merriam-Webster as an anti-vaxxer. That's wrong. The dictionary has extended its definition far too broadly. It's also wrong to have a President tell me that I have to choose between a mask and a vaccine. He, of all people, is unqualified to make this determination. He's just a power-mad elderly man with dementia (at least I think he's got dementia, he certainly behaves that way). I've gone without a mask pretty much everywhere (mostly outdoors, though I keep one in my pocket). Yellowstone, Grand Tetons, Block Island, New Orleans, North Carolina - I've done quite a bit of traveling. I wear the mask if I'm asked to, but not otherwise. As time goes by, people will see I'm not a risk. But for now, politically, I am. I am a massive risk politically. And I'm loving it. I won't make people do things they oppose. I appreciate others who realize this is the essential reason for the creation of our great nation. Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
Comments
Display comments as
(Linear | Threaded)
I appreciate your post. I received the J&J (single-shot) vaccine this week, but really only did it to appease my wife and, to a lesser extent, my employer (a small liberal arts college). I want students to be able to go back to living a more normal college life when school starts back in the fall and vaccination seems to be the way forward. I did not want to receive an mRNA vaccine, but my wife (a physician) received it.
While I think this virus can cause serious disease, it has been overblown a bit and politicized in a reprehensible fashion. Mrs. Bulldog has been asking me if I'll get it. If I do, J&J would be the one I'd get as it is a more standard vaccine (not mRNA). Not that I don't trust "scientists", but I don't trust mRNA. I am not convinced it has been tested widely enough.
That said, Mrs. Bulldog feels that we won't be able to travel if I don't get it. I pointed out to her that there are nations (I have not visited) which do have certain vaccine requirements. In many cases, friends of mine who have traveled to these nations said their vaccine papers were never checked and nobody really cared. I doubt covid will see such lax attitudes in the near term, but give it time and people will begin to realize, as you said, that it's been overblown and politicized. It certainly can be dangerous, and it certainly can be deadly. Having had it, it was no picnic. It also was not the horrendous experience you see touted on the news and talk shows. That kind of experience is limited to a very, very small percentage of people. Which is why I think comparisons to driving deaths is completely legitimate. I didn't stop driving because it's dangerous and potentially deadly at a similar rate. I am, however, careful and watch out for others - which is an entirely different scenario than what the politicized version of this is professing. In addition, laws and mandates have not stopped danger and death on the roads. What has made a difference is good training and increased awareness on the part of drivers. I believe the same situation can, and should, have been applied here. I am not someone who will walk into a store, flout their request for me to wear shirt, shoes or (in this case) a mask. They can require what they want. It's their store. But I do not appreciate a politician telling me what I must do, and I am likely to flout those rules if they are foolish and ill-considered. I have, in fact, and will continue to do so. Mrs. Bulldog has been asking me if I'll get it. If I do, J&J would be the one I'd get as it is a more standard vaccine (not mRNA). Not that I don't trust "scientists", but I don't trust mRNA. I am not convinced it has been tested widely enough.
That said, Mrs. Bulldog feels that we won't be able to travel if I don't get it. I pointed out to her that there are nations (I have not visited) which do have certain vaccine requirements. In many cases, friends of mine who have traveled to these nations said their vaccine papers were never checked and nobody really cared. I doubt covid will see such lax attitudes in the near term, but give it time and people will begin to realize, as you said, that it's been overblown and politicized. It certainly can be dangerous, and it certainly can be deadly. Having had it, it was no picnic. It also was not the horrendous experience you see touted on the news and talk shows. That kind of experience is limited to a very, very small percentage of people. Which is why I think comparisons to driving deaths is completely legitimate. I didn't stop driving because it's dangerous and potentially deadly at a similar rate. I am, however, careful and watch out for others - which is an entirely different scenario than what the politicized version of this is professing. In addition, laws and mandates have not stopped danger and death on the roads. What has made a difference is good training and increased awareness on the part of drivers. I believe the same situation can, and should, have been applied here. I am not someone who will walk into a store, flout their request for me to wear shirt, shoes or (in this case) a mask. They can require what they want. It's their store. But I do not appreciate a politician telling me what I must do, and I am likely to flout those rules if they are foolish and ill-considered. I have, in fact, and will continue to do so. I’m going to avoid it, I think those at risk will want to vaccinate, but the vaccine hasn’t been through the standard trial timeline so I don’t believe we should rush children or those at low risk into getting a questionable shot
We got the Moderna shots as soon as they were offered in Florida. Mr. H has scarred lungs from a bad bout with pneumonia, and he has had a mild stroke in the past, so we thought JIC. I got it because he did, and I have my own problems with weakened kidneys. But it doesn't bother us that other people are refusing the vaccines, that's their choice. Our kids have gotten the shots, but their (adult) kids are deciding not to, and why should they? They're young and healthy, and one thinks he had COVID anyway. As for the mRNA process, I have a feeling that it's going to be the future for all vaccines eventually anyway, because it seems to be a more efficient way to deploy immunity. Just remember, in the beginning, ALL vaccines were experimental and scary.
It's not scary. I'm just unsure of their efficacy (which is why I'd opt for J&J). I reject the notion that these new forms of prevention are frightening or dangerous. But I do have a series of other concerns which no doctor has, as yet, answered. When I get those answers, I may be more disposed to get an mRNA vaccine. For now, I'll work with the traditional vaccine methods. Tried and true until new is proven. It's better to be a fast follower than a risk-taker.
That said, I do have a big problem with the government protecting the pharma companies from lawsuits - which should not be happening. IF there are problems associated with vaccines, regardless of "Warp Speed" or not, the reality is they should be held accountable. I have to disagree with you there. I support eliminating the manufacturers' risk as a reasonable means of giving them an incentive to manufacture something quickly in an emergency--as long as no one is required to take it. We can then all make up our minds whether to risk it, with no second-guessing.
I agree with RebeccaH that the mRNA technology probably is the future, because it's spectacularly more effective than a traditional vaccine. If vaccines are risky at all, then all the more reason to stick to the ones that are incredibly effective. We tolerate less risk if a treatment's benefit is murky. The risk of this vaccine is even more overblown than the risk of the disease, and that's saying something, because this was a very, very scary disease even if its real horrors were reserved for a small minority of sufferers, so to overblow the disease's quite serious risks took an unusual degree of dishonesty and hysteria. What it came down to for me was that the vaccine wasn't 100% foolproof, but the risks of the disease (small risk, horrible downside) easily outweighed the risks of the vaccine. You go with the information you have. I didn't have the luxury of remaining virus-free for 10 years or so while we studied the vaccine's effects at a leisurely pace. The disease is here now. My choice has to be now. OMG! What a stupid definition:
"a person who opposes vaccination or laws that mandate vaccination." I, who have had many vaccinations throughout my life, will be considered as an "anti-vaxxer" too! Although not opposed to vaccinations in general, I am very much opposed to government making laws requiring vaccinations. This has been a pack of lies from the beginning. I know enough to know that anything anyone in the openly and proudly corrupt federal government has to say about this non-pandemic is a goddam lie. This is a giant global experiment by the scum of the earth. I shall not comply.
Hey great! You mean those people aren't really dead? I can't wait to call my friend Jeanie and tell her she's actually not a widow, and Alan will be coming back any time.
I'm deeply sorry for your friend Jeanie's loss of her husband Alan. Every death is a tragedy.
Dictionaries are supposed to record the meanings that people actually use. It gets squirrely when some people use a word one way but others believe it is an inaccurate use. There has been a dishonest expansion of racist, for example, and it is now recorded in all dictionaries, because the word is used in that way.
This is one of the dangers of the elite media - they can make it a recognised meaning by constant use even if it's not true. In conversation, there is not much more that can be done than asking people to defining their terms and rejecting that version as colloquial or imprecise or otherwise jumping in to mention that it is a common usage but you believe it to be mistaken. That's what we do now with words like depression, liberal, and intellectual. This is the primary issue I am discussing. That the definition of this "anti-vaxxer" term is skewed (and the use of "racist" is, as well, I agree).
The other information I shared about my concerns is just to reinforce that forcing people to do things is problematic. The government is a problem when members there decide what the "public good" is and isn't. Am I not part of the public? Before you force me to do something, address my concerns. Not once through this pandemic has that happened. Not once. The answer has always been "we don't know enough" which isn't an answer. As for your friend, I am truly sorry for her loss, and the loss of anyone who caught Covid and died as a result of it. As I've written before, I know (at this point) well over 100 people who have had it. None went to the hospital. None died. I'm not "lucky" as someone once said. I'm standard. I did hear 3rd hand of a friend's friend who was on a respirator. I also have a friend who had to get an ablation to address a heart condition his doctor said was a result of Covid. Thing is, he had the condition BEFORE Covid, because we'd discussed it. Maybe it got worse, I am not sure. He was very clear his doctor said "it was a result of" and not "got worse because" and rather than point out he and I had discussed it...I let it go. My guess is he got some benefit of some nature by having that as the explanation. Covid is very real, and very dangerous. And I had it. So I'm no fool and I'm not saying anything like it's fake. But there was no cost/benefit analysis done and there was no common sense applied. Journalists report the news. Activists shape the news, by sharing common narrative points and repeating them under a variety of circumstances to artificially build their importance in the public conscientiousness. They push their stories. Just so, the dictionary is now another instrument of choice to pushthe narrative by re-defining vocabulary to suit.
That's not any different than they have done since the early 60's when they controversially first included the word "ain't." People think dictionaries should record what words should mean, but they don't. Not their job. Not intellectually defensible to take sides like that. they aren't pushing anything. They are recording how people actually do use words. No more, no less.
I too had COVID, and will not get the vaccine as long as I test positive for antibodies. I find it odd that no one in medicine is talking about us that have natural antibodies and that we don't need the vaccine. That is except for Rand Paul, and the media refers to him as a "quack". I donate blood every 2 months, and they test for antibodies. As long as I test positive, no reason for the vaccine.
Your clear concise employment of critical thinking skills is refreshing. I too have survived the WUHAN as upwards of 98% of other folks contracting it have so done. THE natural antibodies I have / you have & the other post WUHAN suffers now have coursing throughout their plumbing begs the question from our elites (theFauch.. CDC... NIH...WHO... ) running the COVID indoctrination effort ... Just when will the "pandemic" be over?
To Paraphrase: "If you want a vision of the future, imagine a mask strapped on a human face - forever."
Please look at the American thinker article 5/17/21 Why the media are ignoring massive covid -19DEATH SPIKE
It stated that there have been 3,544 DEATH'S and 12,619 serious injury's as of April 21 per the Vaccine Adverse Event reports System database per comparison of 20 to 30 from flu vaccine Please read the article its an eye opener |