The New Normal

[MC2]

To be fair, nobody said there was a high chance of dying from it. It was apparently alarming enough to somebody to pause distribution for a week or so.

The worst kind of argument is: “This [statistically nearly impossible] thing is dangerous, and [some dumb schmuck/some overintrusive government body/etc.] was concerned enough about it to do [overreactionary bullshit] so it’s a valid thing to bring up”

We don’t have to talk about lightning strikes or shark attacks or people drowning in bathtubs just because some dumb shmuck did some stupid shit, so we can pretty easily dismiss the “but someone might have died from a vaccine (unless the blood clot was from something completely unrelated to the vaccine)” talk.

 

[Campgottagopee]

So 3 deaths out of 9 million shots
So approx .00000027 % chance of dying
?

Right
I've learned to never say never

 

[Campgottagopee]

To be fair, nobody said there was a high chance of dying from it. It was apparently alarming enough to somebody to pause distribution for a week or so.

Exactly
And as Marz said apparently it's common practice for them to be paused, it's that the worlds eyes are on this now so it's "a big deal".
I wanted to get the J&J shot simply because it's 1 and done.

 

[Brownski]

We don’t have to talk about lightning strikes or shark attacks or people drowning in bathtubs just because some dumb shmuck did some stupid shit,

Agreed but To be fair, every time I take my surf kayak out in the actual ocean, all I can think about is sharks so I try to be understanding when people get obsessed with low probability/ high consequence events. It’s not how I live my life but I’m all about building bridges here, know what I mean? I’m into listening and understanding, not arguing. We’re all the same on this Earth. Amiright?

 

[MC2]

Agreed but To be fair, every time I take my surf kayak out in the actual ocean, all I can think about is sharks so I try to be understanding when people get obsessed with low probability/ high consequence events. It’s not how I live my life but I’m all about building bridges here, know what I mean? I’m into listening and understanding, not arguing. We’re all the same on this Earth. Amiright?

Sounds like you agreed with me, then spent the rest of the post starting an argument, so no, I don’t know what you mean.

 

[Brownski]

I’m just trying to listen and understand

 

[MC2]

I’m just trying to listen and understand

Here’s an example:

This [Skiing] thing is dangerous, and [ski area management] was concerned enough about it to [put up orange fencing in various places] so my idea to [put orange fencing down the sides of every trail and around every obstacle] is perfectly valid

We could spend all day arguing about it, or we could not waste our time and do literally anything else with our lives. By engaging with the argument (“well, skiing *really is* dangerous, and I *do* see orange fencing occasionally), you’re just getting involved in something that should have been dismissed in its entirety from the beginning because of the shitty conclusion that it leads to.

Putting orange fencing down every trail or not getting vaccinated because of [whatever bullshit] are shitty destinations and I usually don’t start in on journeys to shitty destinations (especially when they are based on shitty premises).

 

[Brownski]

Yeah, alright

 

[Campgottagopee]

Yeah, alright

Exactly

 

[Campgottagopee]

It’s not how I live my life but I’m all about building bridges here, know what I mean

I do
My uncle got hit by lightning while playing golf -- true story
I still play golf
So does he