Jump to content

Compulsory Vaccination?

Compulsory Vaccination?  

62 members have voted

  1. 1. Is it morally acceptable for a country to make covid vaccination compulsory for the general population?

    • Yes, in some countries the situation in sufficiently bad that this can reasonably be considered.
      29
    • No, while compulsory mass vaccination is not morally wrong under all circumstances, it is wrong for covid at this time.
      4
    • No, compulsory mass vaccination is always wrong.
      29


Recommended Posts

https://jme.bmj.com/content/47/2/78

 

I've put this link on the Forum  for the ethicists who have the patience 

to read through it.

For those people against "Compulsory Cov 19 Vaccination", the moral imperatives-in the article- supporting compulsion  are  what you will have  to engage with. The philosophy driving the proposition is the most repugnant 

brand of Utilitarianism.  Utilitarianism is the last resort of scoundrels.

 

I'm against compulsion.

 

I attribute a greater degree of altruism  to people than the article credits people with.

 

And good luck to everybody on the Forum, as you engage with the State :in the struggle to  have control over what medical interventions you may be compelled to undertake.

 

Note: bodily autonomy trumps any obligations  to support the imperatives expressed  by government.

 

Next ,it will be everybody has to give a kidney-or else!

Or mandated vasectomy-aaarrrrg !

 

Edited by petemcewan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Carbuncle said:

A comparison of rates of covid hospitalisation and death at a fixed point in time for England, Scotland and Wales is a very weak means of establishing or refuting the effectiveness of mask wearing and vaccine passes.

 

1. As has been pointed out correlation does not imply causation. For example, it may be that higher case rates are actually the cause of more restrictive measures rather than the reverse.

 

2. If one is confident of causation and therefore uses this data then one should note that the wrong thing is being compared across these locations. If you change your non-pharmaceuticals interventions (NPIs) they do not instantly change the levels of infection but rather the way that this level of infection will evolve going forward. Perhaps an example would help. Suppose a location magically chose sufficient NPIs to keep levels of infection constant. The comparison proposed ends up scoring that location at it's level of infection prior to the imposition of the NPIs and the performance of NPIs themselves are not measured. [Technically, if you really want to do this (I think) the comparison should be on the basis of the derivative of the log of the rate of hospitalisation (or death) with respect to time, ie the gradient of the relevant curve.]

 

3. Once one begins to use this correct measure one can bring in data from all over the World because this gradient is not dependant on minor variations on for example what constitutes a 'death with covid'. It is then far more principled to use the whole data set than a cherry picked subset.

 

4. There remains a huge problem, however. Mask wearing and the presence of vaccine passes are not the only things that impact the data. One has to account for varying levels of prior immunity, how much time is being spent indoors, how good compliance is, when school holidays fall, population density, ... and so on and so forth. These other relevant variables vary across the UK or indeed the World.

So when your presented with pro vaccine/covid/vax passport facts you believe them but when your presented with any facts against they have to be nitpicked within an inch of their lives to try and prove them wrong in some, whats the point of presenting any data at all if you have to have hundreds of parameters, makes it totally meaningless.

 

As I've said before on this thread these people will never be convinced, ever no  matter how many obvious lies the MSM/government tell and how much evidence is put in front of them that contravenes what they've been brainwashed to believe.

 

If anyone's on Twitter check analyst and statistician Jamie Jenkins, he makes mincemeat of the garbage the media and mainstream news outlets pollute the airwaves with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, top4718 said:

So when your presented with pro vaccine/covid/vax passport facts you believe them but when your presented with any facts against they have to be nitpicked within an inch of their lives to try and prove them wrong in some, whats the point of presenting any data at all if you have to have hundreds of parameters, makes it totally meaningless.

I don't think you understood what I wrote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Carbuncle said:

I don't think you understood what I wrote.

It obviously wasn't very clear then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, top4718 said:

So when your presented with pro vaccine/covid/vax passport facts you believe them but when your presented with any facts against they have to be nitpicked within an inch of their lives to try and prove them wrong in some, whats the point of presenting any data at all if you have to have hundreds of parameters, makes it totally meaningless.

 

As I've said before on this thread these people will never be convinced, ever no  matter how many obvious lies the MSM/government tell and how much evidence is put in front of them that contravenes what they've been brainwashed to believe.

 

If anyone's on Twitter check analyst and statistician Jamie Jenkins, he makes mincemeat of the garbage the media and mainstream news outlets pollute the airwaves with.

So presumably you are going to present links to the source of your facts in line with the mods instructions?

 

https://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/topic/477887-coronavirus-part-three/?tab=comments#comment-8477556

 

Edited by Longcol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Longcol said:

So presumably you are going to present links to the source of your facts in line with the mods instructions?

 

https://www.sheffieldforum.co.uk/topic/477887-coronavirus-part-three/?tab=comments#comment-8477556

 

I gave it up as it's a waste of time, you'll never be convinced by anything, if an irrefutable fact is posted it gets ignored, the indoctrination is too complete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, top4718 said:

I gave it up as it's a waste of time, you'll never be convinced by anything, if an irrefutable fact is posted it gets ignored, the indoctrination is too complete.

Don't think you ever tried  backing up your "facts" with a source.

 

"Do your own research" was your normal response .

 

Your sig says it all - opinions not "irrefutable facts".

Edited by Longcol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, top4718 said:

Conwy, Lladudno and Rhos on Sea, nice enough places particularly Conwy.

Tourist areas where the locals would wear masks.

 

Not exactly the cities and valleys.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, fools said:

There isn't even a correlation, you have no data on masks, nothing. nada

You are posting arbitrary facts, and concluding masks masks masks

And neither do you. I'm talking use of masks in the real world.

 

And how can you possibly describe them as "arbitrary facts" !  That' s absolutely ludicrous.

There are non so blind......

Edited by Chekhov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MOD: closing this thread as it is also now just discussing Coronavirus, please continue to discuss this in one place:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.