Addressing Some Anti-Vax Arguments

Below is a response I read on a thread about the vax.  I don't address the cranks but this gentleman put out there some of the concerns of the more moderate anti-vax folks which I think has sway among folks who are not following this really closely.  Afterward, I put my response.  I post this as a general refutation, but also so I can come back and cut and paste this so I don't have to retype it later.

"I am honestly baffled by people who have so much hate and scorn for others who are simply making a choice, or even a gamble with their own bodies and health. Why are we condemning those who wish to wait until more test have been done on the vaccine or those who have had COVID and are relying on their natural immunity? It takes longer to gestate a baby, build a house, and grow a garden, than the vaccine has been available (not FDA approved). So, let them wait and see. If you have the vax then you are all good. Test continue to show that the vaccine is not as full proof as once claimed and that natural immunity is still outlasting it. Why can't people be patient and not be called "anti-vaxers"? Why is there such a need to ostracize people who want to chose for themselves. Does the irony of pointing a finger and saying, "they are all just wrongly falling for group think" from those who are also in a group of opposite thinkers, strike anyone else as interesting? If you choose to get the jab, great. If not, that is your personal choice. If the concern is that they might spread it to others, we know that those who are vaxed are doing that as well. We also know, there will never be a fully eradicated situation. The fear mongering and scorn is what gets me. Don't forget, Yoda also said, “fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate to suffering!.”"

Let's address some of this -

"I am honestly baffled by people who have so much hate and scorn for others who are simply making a choice, or even a gamble with their own bodies and health."

Unfortunately, we do not live in a bubble. I would agree with you IF the consequences fell merely on those making that choice. But their choices are giving the virus new breeding ground to mutate and spread. So, in that sense, it is not a personal choice.

"Why are we condemning those who wish to wait until more test have been done on the vaccine or those who have had COVID and are relying on their natural immunity? It takes longer to gestate a baby, build a house, and grow a garden, than the vaccine has been available (not FDA approved)."

Simply not true. Vaccine development has been going on for a hundred years. The Covid/Sars has been being addressed for the last decade. These vaccines are just the extension of everything that has come before. In the same way Ford is fairly certain its latest model of the Explorer will not explode when you turn the key, science is not unaware of what is happening with these vaccines.

I believe the whole -"the vax is experimental/it is not FDA approved yet" is a distractor. Emergency authorization has been given, and for the FDA it is merely a matter of paperwork that should be complete in the next month or two. In my experience, folks who bemoan the FDA approval will not change their tune once it is given, they just move on to another objection. In that sense, they are not making an honest argument.

"If you have the vax then you are all good. Test continue to show that the vaccine is not as full proof as once claimed and that natural immunity is still outlasting it. Why can't people be patient and not be called "anti-vaxers"? Why is there such a need to ostracize people who want to chose for themselves."

No, not all good. As stated, giving the virus open fields endangers all of us. Every study indicates natural immunity is not enough. We call people anti-vaxxers because they are against the vaccine. As was stated, they are not choosing just for themselves. IF that were true, I would feel bad for them, but it would be no skin off my nose.

"Does the irony of pointing a finger and saying, "they are all just wrongly falling for group think" from those who are also in a group of opposite thinkers, strike anyone else as interesting?"

Nope, do not find it ironic or interesting. Groupthink is not the problem. Wrong thinking is.

"If you choose to get the jab, great. If not, that is your personal choice. "

As stated, not a personal choice. Some things affect the community and there is no getting around it. Denying it is simply self-deception.

"If the concern is that they might spread it to others, we know that those who are vaxxed are doing that as well."

Any mapping of the spread of a virus demonstrates the mathematical decrease a vax has on a virus... you simply reduce its growth potential. Everything is not either/or.

"We also know, there will never be a fully eradicated situation."

Never been the goal... but we can make it so almost no one ever experiences it. Stating arguments in their extreme or as either/or scenarios is a form of gaslighting.

"The fear mongering and scorn is what gets me. Don't forget, Yoda also said, “fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate to suffering!.”

Fear of the known can be a reasonable response. Creating fear over falsehoods is what, I believe, the anti-vaxxers are doing.