Friend has fallen into COVID-conspiracies

[PenaH]

Early this morning my friend me sent this on Messenger

Now, my friend has always been into conspiracies, but they always have been reletavly harmless, but this is something new. Just out of the blue on anti-vaxx mode

And just couple minutes ago he sent me another message regarding that mask mandates would be returning on our local area, even though just couple weeks ago they where removed

What do you think of his "arguments" and how can I help him? He used to be rational and skeptic guy, but now he is full on anti-vaxx and believes it is either NWO plan or genocide plan. What to do?

 

[deirdre]

i would say "i dont know why you sound so surprised about the demonization and the mask mandates. You know how the liberals are. But that has nothing to do with Trump's vaccine. The vaccine is as safe as other vaccines, so you should chillout about that bit. Trump wasn't trying to depopulate the planet, or take away your liberties. That is just typical left wing propaganda. It's not the vaccine's fault"

 

[Mendel]

Where is he getting his information from?
Are there still quality sources left that he trusts?

I don't know the guy, but if he used to be rational and skeptic, what would asking him for evidence do?

 

[PenaH]

Where is he getting his information from?
Are there still quality sources left that he trusts?

I don't know the guy, but if he used to be rational and skeptic, what would asking him for evidence do?

I asked him for his sources and evidence and as evidence he sent me several Mike Yeadon interviews, graphs from countries how covid deaths rising, even though most people would be vaxxed, InfoWars articles, unverified claims of vaccine deaths, McAfee's takes on vaccine few months before his death, etc.

There are many more, but those are main ones that pop up.

 

[Mendel]

I would like to find out how your friend has come to trust the sources he trusts, and then why he keeps trusting them even when they have obviously been fundamentally wrong in the past.

For example, Reuters did a background piece on Yeadon:

Article:

In October, Yeadon wrote a column for the United Kingdom's Daily Mail newspaper that also appeared on MailOnline, one of the world's most-visited news websites. It declared that deaths caused by COVID-19, which then totaled about 45,000 in Britain, will soon "fizzle out" and Britons "should immediately be allowed to resume normal life." Since then, the disease has killed about another 80,000 people in the UK.

Source: https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/health-coronavirus-vaccines-skeptic/

By his own sources, your friend knows this was terribly wrong.
So if I was to trust Yeadon e.g. on claims of vaccine infertility, I'd want to see evidence before I believed it.

What are your friend's sources for the death data graphs? They might be the most realistic bit of data he has access to, so a way forward might be to discuss his concerns with the aid of similar data sources.

I have no reason to trust Infowars/Alex Jones either. Jones just lost a big court case about his Sandy Hook school shooting coverage. Metabunk has an old thread on him (two, actually) in
the "people debunked" forum. https://www.metabunk.org/forums/people-debunked.18/

You got your friend to respond to your request for evidence, that is a good sign.

What you want to do is to give him reasons to look for more solid evidence. It's a good sleptic practice to look for hard evidence supporting claims, and to check evidence on how trustworthy sources are. If you know your friend is capable of critical thinking, a friendly inquiry/conversation could motivate him to apply it to some of these CT claims and peddlers of such, as long as he sees a chance to convince you.

Caveat: Try to concentrate and go in-depth on a few selected important claims, instead of following a huge amount of poorly supported assertions ("gish gallop").

Remember, metabunk is here to back you up when it comes to evaluating evidence.

 

[deirdre]

Jones just lost a big court case about his Sandy Hook school shooting coverage.

actually he lost (for now) by default, because he would not turn over his marketing documentation. Which is more applicable to this convo thread, as the only reason he wouldn't turn over the documentation...if you ask me.. is because they were trying to prove that he was purposefully lying as a marketing gimmick, and he was.


but we all kinda knew that from his divorce case:

Article:

Jones' attorney Randall Wilhite likened the conspiracy theorist to Jack Nicholson playing the Joker in "Batman," implying that Jones' parental abilities should not be evaluated on the person he plays on his website Infowars.com.

"He's playing a character. He is a performance artist," Wilhite said at the pretrial hearing this week.

Source: https://www.courthousenews.com/right-wing-pundit-fights-keep-custody-kids/

 

[Rory]

What to do?

I would avoid them (or at least the subject).

 

[Mendel]

What do you think of his "arguments" and how can I help him?

I would avoid them (or at least the subject).

Could you explain why you believe this is helpful?
(I have some ideas, but you're probably going to say it better.)

 

[Rory]

Nah, I bet I will say it worse (am tired).

Just, for me, people like that sound like headaches and I don't like headaches.

Then again, what people send on messenger may not represent what they're actually like. I know a guy in real life (who I see often) and he regularly sends me conspiracy stuff on messenger, but has not once mentioned any of it in person. Mostly I just ignore the messages or post a link to a fact check.

At first I thought he was getting into some really weird stuff and I interpreted his messages as a bid to 'convert' me to something he believed in. But when I asked him about it he said he just found it "interesting."

I have doubts that he was being honest about that but it helped me take them more lightly: all he's doing is sending a link/message/forward, it's me that made up the story that he: a) believes it; and b) wants me to believe it too.

Anyway, like I say, I either ignore them or send something very quick back, and in real life we talk about normal things and it's nice and fun.

I guess in this particular case it depends on what the real life interactions are like. Maybe it's similar to the example I mention here? Or maybe not.

But either way, perhaps "avoid them/the subject" is the right way to go. When they're sending things like "Do. Not. Be. A. Sheep." it feels like constructive conversation would be extremely difficult (at best).

 

[Rory]

Holy! Our old friend Rob Skiba's on that list:

Not dead though.

 

[PenaH]

Now, he also send me text from article about known Finnish far-right conspiracy tabloid, MV-lehti about death of woman that died 5 weeks after second Pfizer shot. Quoting it like this:

"Satu, a 36-year-old nurse mother, died completely healthy five weeks after the second Pfizer vaccine, "writes Sanna Tilanto on her FB page. The dead woman's sister visited Level podcast to tell a tragic story about the consequences of experimental corona vaccination.


"For several days she had difficulty breathing, arrhythmia and facial paralysis. She said she kept feeling unwell while packing for a cabin trip. Next night she had died at her home and his son had found her.

Several blood clots were found at autopsy. Several starting blood clots in the brain and lungs. The heart had expanded 75% larger.

Her sister asks to share this information that vaccines are by no means safe. She doesn't want her sister to die in vain. She asks people to share this in order to avoid even one vaccine death. A healthy person cannot die suddenly without a reason! ", Writes Sanna Tilanto on her FB page"

Now, I can not verify this news at any way, but I replied to him that even if this is true, only a handful from millions-billions of vaccinated people have died and most of them are alive and fine, but he replied that even one death is too much for him to "gamble on health".

 

[CarolynD]

Have you read Mick West's book? It has great advice about this situation. Maybe my age is making me a bit more callous, but how much time and energy do you want to invest in this person, given they seem to have little motivation to change their thinking? Would it be better for you to focus more on your like-minded friends? (Personally, this has helped me.) Whatever you decide, I wish you luck!

 

[Mendel]

he replied that even one death is too much for him to "gamble on health".

He's gambling on his health either way.

Article:

Dangerous blood clots can occur in moderate COVID-19

A European study has found an elevated risk of a life-threatening blood clot called venous thromboembolism (VTE) in COVID-19 patients who were not critically ill. The blood clot risk had previously been associated with severe COVID-19. The researchers tracked 2,292 patients who came to hospital emergency rooms with mild or moderate COVID-19 but without VTE. Four weeks later, VTE had developed in roughly 1 of every 200 mildly ill patients who had not been hospitalized and nearly 5 of every 200 moderately ill patients overall, the researchers reported on Friday in Thrombosis Research.

Source: https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/risk-dangerous-blood-clots-linked-moderate-covid-19-high-dose-blood-thinner-can-2021-10-11/

So it's blood clots either way, plus Covid's normal effects.

And that woman seems to have been a health gambler as well:

For several days she had difficulty breathing, arrhythmia and facial paralysis. She said she kept feeling unwell while packing for a cabin trip

Facial paralysis would have me seeking a doctor immediately (hopefully within hours), maybe even call an ambulance. Strokes can happen to anyone. (5 weeks later? Seriously?)

 

[Agent K]

Now, I can not verify this news at any way, but I replied to him that even if this is true, only a handful from millions-billions of vaccinated people have died and most of them are alive and fine,

Well, the ones who died are not alive and fine, but I know what you meant.

Article:

Oct. 7, 2021 -- A Washington state woman died from a rare blood clotting syndrome after receiving the Johnson & Johnson COVID-19 vaccine, state health officials said.
The CDC has reported three other deaths nationwide from the vaccine-related syndrome.
The vaccine complication is rare, occurring in about 7 per 1 million vaccinated women ages 18-49, according to the CDC. For women over age 50 and men of all ages, the complication is even rarer.
Among the 15 million people who have received the Johnson & Johnson vaccine, the CDC has identified 47 cases of the syndrome. The majority have recovered.

Source: https://www.webmd.com/vaccines/covid-19-vaccine/news/20211007/washington-woman-died-rare-vaccine-related-blood-clot

This sad news comes from King County, where people who are not fully vaccinated are now 78 times more likely to die of COVID-19 related illness than fully vaccinated people.

https://kingcounty.gov/depts/health/covid-19/data/vaccination-outcomes.aspx

but he replied that even one death is too much for him to "gamble on health".

Again, I'd refer him to the long and growing list of anti-vaxxers who gambled with their health and lost, like our flat-earther friend Rob Skiba. I count being placed on a ventilator as a lost bet.
https://www.sorryantivaxxer.com

 

[FatPhil]

Now, he also send me text from article about known Finnish far-right conspiracy tabloid, MV-lehti about death of woman that died 5 weeks after second Pfizer shot.

I don't know MV-lehti, I left Finland before that sprang into existence. The name basically mean "WTF??!! News" - which will be important. (That punctuation is in their logo, so I have included it.)

The (finnish) wikipedia page on it is fairly critical, calling it a fake news site:

MV-mediaa on arvosteltu muualta kopioitujen, tarkistamattomien ja keksittyjen uutisten levittämisestä, salaliittoteorioita tukevien juttujen julkaisemisesta sekä ihmisten yksityisyyden loukkaamisesta. Sivustoa pidetään myös rasistisena ja vihaa lietsovana, ja se on näiden takia myös poliisitutkinnan kohteena.

From which I can extract keywords like tarkistamattomien~unverified, keksittyjen~fabricated, salaliittoteorioita~conspiracy-theories.

I followed one of its references supporting such claims and reached a finnish state media article on fake news generally, wherein MV-Lehti was given many paragraphs of criticism, all strongly calling its reputation into question, but none of which were particularly forthcoming in specific evidence. However, this quote from the founder does sum up the direction he's coming from:
yle.fi: Hän mainitsi myös, että MV sai alkunsa "täydestä huumorista, nimihän sen jo kertoo".
my translation ~ He also mentioned that MV started as "entirely humour, the name already says that".
Here, "he" is the founder, and looking at (a googoo translate of) his wiki page linked to from the MV-lehti one, he seemed like a *very* questionable character, but apparently he's dead now, so irrelevant to these particular claims.

YLE also mention:

MV-sivusto on jo niin näkyvä suomalaisessa Facebookissa, että Perussuomalainen puolue joutui virallisella Facebook-tilillään ottamaan siihen kantaa. Ylläpitäjä ilmoitti viime viikolla, että MV-sivustolle vievät linkit poistetaan puolueen Facebook-sivulta.

Which I think implies that even the "True Finns" (OK, they changed their name since coining that one, but I think the original name is more revealing), a "right-wing populist political party" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finns_Party) ~"is removing links to MV-Lehti from the party's Facebook page". If even they are distancing themselves from him, it must have a pretty toxic reputation.

So, yeah, I wouldn't take anything on MV-lehti at face value. As you imply, it's entirely possible that the case mentioned is a real one, but if their counter-argument against vaxxing is an isolated anecdote rather than statistics, it really oughtn't be persuasive at all.

Beware, my Finnish ain't that good. Do. Your. Own. Research. (and correct me where I err, please)

Linkies missing from the above text:
the wiki page on them: https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/MV-lehti
the YLE article: https://yle.fi/aihe/artikkeli/2015/03/23/valheenpaljastaja-uutista-helppo-matkia

 

[PenaH]

I don't know MV-lehti, I left Finland before that sprang into existence. The name basically mean "WTF??!! News" - which will be important. (That punctuation is in their logo, so I have included it.)

The (finnish) wikipedia page on it is fairly critical, calling it a fake news site:

MV-mediaa on arvosteltu muualta kopioitujen, tarkistamattomien ja keksittyjen uutisten levittämisestä, salaliittoteorioita tukevien juttujen julkaisemisesta sekä ihmisten yksityisyyden loukkaamisesta. Sivustoa pidetään myös rasistisena ja vihaa lietsovana, ja se on näiden takia myös poliisitutkinnan kohteena.

From which I can extract keywords like tarkistamattomien~unverified, keksittyjen~fabricated, salaliittoteorioita~conspiracy-theories.

I followed one of its references supporting such claims and reached a finnish state media article on fake news generally, wherein MV-Lehti was given many paragraphs of criticism, all strongly calling its reputation into question, but none of which were particularly forthcoming in specific evidence. However, this quote from the founder does sum up the direction he's coming from:
yle.fi: Hän mainitsi myös, että MV sai alkunsa "täydestä huumorista, nimihän sen jo kertoo".
my translation ~ He also mentioned that MV started as "entirely humour, the name already says that".
Here, "he" is the founder, and looking at (a googoo translate of) his wiki page linked to from the MV-lehti one, he seemed like a *very* questionable character, but apparently he's dead now, so irrelevant to these particular claims.

YLE also mention:

MV-sivusto on jo niin näkyvä suomalaisessa Facebookissa, että Perussuomalainen puolue joutui virallisella Facebook-tilillään ottamaan siihen kantaa. Ylläpitäjä ilmoitti viime viikolla, että MV-sivustolle vievät linkit poistetaan puolueen Facebook-sivulta.

Which I think implies that even the "True Finns" (OK, they changed their name since coining that one, but I think the original name is more revealing), a "right-wing populist political party" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finns_Party) ~"is removing links to MV-Lehti from the party's Facebook page". If even they are distancing themselves from him, it must have a pretty toxic reputation.

So, yeah, I wouldn't take anything on MV-lehti at face value. As you imply, it's entirely possible that the case mentioned is a real one, but if their counter-argument against vaxxing is an isolated anecdote rather than statistics, it really oughtn't be persuasive at all.

Beware, my Finnish ain't that good. Do. Your. Own. Research. (and correct me where I err, please)

Linkies missing from the above text:
the wiki page on them: https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/MV-lehti
the YLE article: https://yle.fi/aihe/artikkeli/2015/03/23/valheenpaljastaja-uutista-helppo-matkia

You got it pretty much spot on. MV has been notorious spreading anti-immigration and islamophobia ever since 2014 or 2015, when refugee crisis was at it's strongest and populist parties started to become more and more mainstream. Even then they talked about NWO, Agenda 21 and White Replacement theories. They still talk about immigration alot, but ever since 2020, most of them are COVID or COVID-vaccine skeptic news and sharing people like Robert Kennedy, Mike Yeadon, Peter McCollough, etc. and some of our own variations like Olli Posti and microbiologist Tamara Tuuminen and parliament member Ano Turtiainen (who has said he believes vaccinations to be depopulation plot of elite).

So, basically they are your averege nationalist conspiracy site.

 

[FatPhil]

You got it pretty much spot on. MV has been notorious spreading anti-immigration and islamophobia ever since 2014 or 2015, when refugee crisis was at it's strongest and populist parties started to become more and more mainstream. Even then they talked about NWO, Agenda 21 and White Replacement theories. They still talk about immigration alot, but ever since 2020, most of them are COVID or COVID-vaccine skeptic news and sharing people like Robert Kennedy, Mike Yeadon, Peter McCollough, etc. and some of our own variations like Olli Posti and microbiologist Tamara Tuuminen and parliament member Ano Turtiainen (who has said he believes vaccinations to be depopulation plot of elite).

So, basically they are your averege nationalist conspiracy site.

Turtiainen, eh? Some overlap with this thread then: https://www.metabunk.org/threads/fi...ble-covid-vaccine-genocide.11865/#post-252977

Not heard of Tuuminen before, she sounds like she knows the CT script quite well:
"Most important, it has become practically impossible to hold a true exchange of views on this topic with the Department of Health and Welfare and the Finnish Institute of Occupational Health. [...] A critical questioning of this public policy is deemed heretical by insurance companies and their concealed allies, such as governmental agencies, which means that critics of this approach may be subjected to vilification, harassment, reprimands, demotion, attacks in the social media, denial of funding and grants and access to research material, and even outright offensive behavior and marginalization." -- https://www.researchgate.net/public..._Highly_Politicized_and_Downplayed_in_Finland

And the anti-covid-vax script too:
"Tuuminen käyttää sanaa preparaatti, koska hän ei halua puhua rokotteista. – Esimerkiksi Pfizerin ja Modernan rokotteet eivät ole rokotteita ollenkaan. Ne ovat kokeellisia preparaatteja ja kemikaalisia konstruktioita."
~"tuuminen uses the word 'preparations', because she does not want to say 'vaccines'. "For example, the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are not vaccines at all. The are experimental preparations and chemical constructions"."
-- https://www.mtvuutiset.fi/artikkeli...ija-rokote-pienempi-paha-kuin-sairaus/8218234

Likewise, Posti was new to me, he looks like a regular "suppliments loon" from the brief clicking around I did.

Do these people get onto the mainstream media much in Finland, or are they, erm, safely marginalised? (Where they can then claim that marginalisation as a badge of honour, alas, the reinforcement of the "them vs. us".)

Ooops, I've slightly derailed your thread, but I do like to keep up with the Finnish scene.

 

[FatPhil]

... even if this is true, only a handful from millions-billions of vaccinated people have died and most of them are alive and fine, but he replied that even one death is too much for him to "gamble on health".

Does he accept that avoiding the vaccine is also a gamble on health?
If not, then does he think that absolutely no good, no protection at all, can come from the vaccine?

Because either an initial Yes or a No followed by No means that you could now start discussing relative risk levels - you might have an "in", some common ground which could be expanded upon.

However, No followed by Yes puts his stance in direct opposition to all of the medical evidence *independently* collected worldwide. Even the medically literate who are taking minority positions, ones that he has probably quoted to support his argument, do not take this position. Is he happy taking that stance?

Beware - my way looks confrontational, and that's counterproductive. It needs to be softened in such a way that you don't keep pushing him further away.

 

[PenaH]

Likewise, Posti was new to me, he looks like a regular "suppliments loon" from the brief clicking around I did.

Do these people get onto the mainstream media much in Finland, or are they, erm, safely marginalised? (Where they can then claim that marginalisation as a badge of honour, alas, the reinforcement of the "them vs. us".)

Ooops, I've slightly derailed your thread, but I do like to keep up with the Finnish scene.

Yeah not to go too far from original topic, Posti is an blogger that has talked a lot about food nd how he believes Big Pharma to know certain foods and supplements can cure diseases better or faster than medicene, but it is kept away from people so they won't lose money. Now he is more popular with claiming vaccine is unsafe and daily publishes his stances on latest covid news and his followers claims of their close ones' vaccine injuries which can not be verified at all.

Only Tamara and Ano have gotten reactions from mainstream media, while Posti is more of an social media celeb. I feel this has spread it bit more since in one link you linked, there was debate between Tamara and Mika Rämet (who is kind of like Fauci of Finland) and Rämet stumbled a lot in his words and sounded nervous and make look "get vaccinated" side look even more bad in their eyes and have memed it a lot and claimed "he clearly knows the real dark truth".

There are few other people I would like to share, but I don't want to make this whole different thing, so if you want, I can tell them in private messeges.

 

[Agent K]

Holy! Our old friend Rob Skiba's on that list:View attachment 47104
Not dead though.

He is now.
https://www.sorryantivaxxer.com/pos...-earther-anti-vaxxer-on-ventilator-with-covid

"I absolutely HATE hospitals and their 'protocols'"

Apparently his family planned to change the protocol.

Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/COVIDAteMyFace/comments/pizfti/rob_skiba_the_king_of_evangelical_flat_earthers

 

[Mendel]

He is now.

And as usual, no piety from some die-hards:

Article:

Source: https://old.reddit.com/r/flatearth/comments/q7vzou/shill_of_the_insane_globe_cult_posing_as_a/

 

[PenaH]

My friend send me news links to bunch of new suspicious articles and videos and also an new article about how 3rd shot has been shown to be benefital, but according to medical experts it wouldn't be enough to end pandemic and he thinks this is evidence how goverment will never give up the power and will keep people in endless limbo of "restrictions > shots > lowering restrictions > restrictions back > new shot and repeat". How can I explain he is wrong?

 

[Mendel]

according to medical experts it wouldn't be enough to end pandemi

It's difficult to discuss this without sources.

To eradicate Covid, we'd need effective global vaccination. As far as I can tell, experts disagree over whether this is possible. But the "Spanish flu" epidemic did not end with the eradication of the flu, so maybe we don't need to eradicate Covid.

Article:

The pandemic's end

This won't happen with a bang. What we can expect to see is a fading-away. Waves might well still continue, and even increase in magnitude. But fatalities will reduce and severe illness become less common as vaccination rates improve.
As medical historians Erica Charters and Kristin Heitman put it, epidemics end once the disease is

accepted into people's daily lives and routines, becoming endemic— domesticated—and accepted.

Whereas diseases become epidemics and pandemics through purely biostatistical means – a matter of how many people are infected and where those people are – they end once the biomedical harms they cause are sufficiently reduced. In other words, when relatively few people are getting seriously ill.
There are currently multiple vaccines that are extremely effective in reducing the effects of the virus from a life-threatening disease, to (for the vast majority of people) nothing more than a mild cold.
Even in the face of further waves of infection, were the entire population fully vaccinated, the biomedical harm the disease would cause would be (relative to many diseases we are already dealing with) sufficiently low to call an end to the epidemic.
This would mark the point at which governments could stop implementing many of the economically and socially devastating non-pharmaceutical interventions.

Source: https://theconversation.com/amp/we-cant-banish-covid-19-but-we-can-end-the-pandemic-with-vaccinations-168294

this is evidence how goverment will never give up the power and will keep people in endless limbo of "restrictions > shots > lowering restrictions > restrictions back > new shot and repeat".

Your friend needs to understand that restrictions are imposed to prevent the hospital systems from getting overloaded. Last year, restrictions ("non-pharmaceutical interventions" aka NPIs) were the only way to achieve that. (And it required the fewer restrictions, the more people did that on their own.) This year, we also have vaccines that are very effective at preventing people from getting hospitalized.

So if everyone in the population does their best to not get sick, there is no need for restrictions.

Unfortunately, data (e.g. from the USA) shows that Covid denial and anti-vaxxing drives hospitalisation rates up. This causes restrictions. The best way to avoid restrictions is to have as many people vaccinated as possible.

As for new shots being needed, it's hard to predict how good the long-term protection is. It basically depends on our immune systems, and how the virus mutates. For other diseases, sometimes a single vaccination is sufficient, sometimes you need refresher shots (e.g. Tetanus).

Basically, a goverment's job is to keep the health system working, and if it needs restrictions to achieve that, restrictions will happen. Ask your friend if he knows another way to do that.

 

[PenaH]

It's difficult to discuss this without sources.

To eradicate Covid, we'd need effective global vaccination. As far as I can tell, experts disagree over whether this is possible. But the "Spanish flu" epidemic did not end with the eradication of the flu, so maybe we don't need to eradicate Covid.

Article:

The pandemic's end

This won't happen with a bang. What we can expect to see is a fading-away. Waves might well still continue, and even increase in magnitude. But fatalities will reduce and severe illness become less common as vaccination rates improve.
As medical historians Erica Charters and Kristin Heitman put it, epidemics end once the disease is

Whereas diseases become epidemics and pandemics through purely biostatistical means – a matter of how many people are infected and where those people are – they end once the biomedical harms they cause are sufficiently reduced. In other words, when relatively few people are getting seriously ill.
There are currently multiple vaccines that are extremely effective in reducing the effects of the virus from a life-threatening disease, to (for the vast majority of people) nothing more than a mild cold.
Even in the face of further waves of infection, were the entire population fully vaccinated, the biomedical harm the disease would cause would be (relative to many diseases we are already dealing with) sufficiently low to call an end to the epidemic.
This would mark the point at which governments could stop implementing many of the economically and socially devastating non-pharmaceutical interventions.

Source: https://theconversation.com/amp/we-cant-banish-covid-19-but-we-can-end-the-pandemic-with-vaccinations-168294

The source is this news article: https://www.is.fi/kotimaa/art-2000008351623.html

Translation of title: The third vaccine in the study provided almost complete protection - experts say why it is not enough to end the pandemic

If I understood right, that is basicly what is also said in article and also that no matter what vaccine, covid is here to stay. If you want to, I can provide entire translation.

Your friend needs to understand that restrictions are imposed to prevent the hospital systems from getting overloaded. Last year, restrictions ("non-pharmaceutical interventions" aka NPIs) were the only way to achieve that. (And it required the fewer restrictions, the more people did that on their own.) This year, we also have vaccines that are very effective at preventing people from getting hospitalized.

So if everyone in the population does their best to not get sick, there is no need for restrictions.

Also, that is pretty much what I said to him, that this happens because people are not following restrictions and are not getting vaccine and he replied "that's what they want you to think to not make you think their true agenda"

 

[NoParty]

...3rd shot has been shown to be benefital, but according to medical experts it wouldn't be enough to end pandemic and he thinks this is evidence how goverment will never give up the power...

Sorry to hear about your friend.
Every time I hear a sketchy conspiracy theory, my first question is:
"What's the motive?" Without a reasonable, plausible motive, I see little reason
to take a wild claim too seriously.
Like "flat earth." No one ever offers a motive--that isn't laughable--for
why there would be a gigantic plan to fool people about the shape of the planet.

Likewise, I find the
"government somehow wants some kind of vague, power associated with lockdowns"
to just be the very weakest of sauce. If that's the supposed motivation...me? I'm out.

And obviously eradicating COVID-19 would be great...
but our immediate task is to survive it.
And vaccines are simply the best way to do that.
Thus, the obvious option.

 

[Rory]

My friend send me news links to bunch of new suspicious articles and videos and also an new article about how 3rd shot has been shown to be benefital, but according to medical experts it wouldn't be enough to end pandemic and he thinks this is evidence how goverment will never give up the power and will keep people in endless limbo of "restrictions > shots > lowering restrictions > restrictions back > new shot and repeat". How can I explain he is wrong?

There's something in that, in that studies are showing that protection wanes after some months:

Just like the protection gained through natural infection, it looks like vaccine-induced immunity gradually wears off.

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20210916-covid-19-how-effective-is-a-third-vaccine-dose

That's from a BBC article talking about a "3rd shot". And:

We found that initial protection against infection a month after the second dose of the Pfizer vaccine was 88%, while after five to six months this fell to 74%.

For the AstraZeneca vaccine, there was around 77% protection a month after the second dose, falling to 67% after four to five months.

https://covid.joinzoe.com/post/covid-vaccine-protection-fading

So more rounds seems likely - but as for whether this is all part of a "government scheme", I doubt there's any argument or convincing either of you can do, since the proof either way relies on what happens in the unknown future.

Generally when the issue is like this - relying on time and events to unfold - I don't see any point in discussing it much. Though I do sometimes like to offer a bet on the outcome - and interestingly, when it comes to "putting their money where their mouth is", no one has yet to take me up on it. Which is completely fine - I just find it a really nice way to bring the discussion to an end, and to be a point I can always return to if it comes back up again.

 

[Mendel]

The source is this news article: https://www.is.fi/kotimaa/art-2000008351623.html

Translation of title: The third vaccine in the study provided almost complete protection - experts say why it is not enough to end the pandemic

If I understood right, that is basicly what is also said in article and also that no matter what vaccine, covid is here to stay. If you want to, I can provide entire translation.

Google translation (excerpts):

The third corona vaccine is an excellent enhancer of the protection previously obtained, but it is not yet known how long the protection will be.
More monitoring information is needed on the duration of the protective effect of the vaccine against viral infection and mild and severe disease.
- Time will tell, Hanna Nohynek, chief physician of the Department of Health and Welfare, says about the effectiveness of the vaccine.

According to Nohynek, whether a fourth corona vaccine may be needed depends on how long-lasting the effect of the third dose of the vaccine is and also on what happens to the virus.

- If the virus is strongly modified in such a way that it evades the protection of the vaccine, then in the same way as for influenza, booster doses are needed for at least some groups.

According to Nohynek, the effects may no longer be needed if the virus remains very similar and changes in its structure do not affect vaccine protection and if the third dose provides long-term protection.

The point is, we don't know enough about the third dose to be sure that we can eliminate Covid with it.

he replied "that's what they want you to think to not make you think their true agenda"

I don't know about Finland, but in Germany, current legislation matches restrictions to hospitalisation rates. I expect that Finland is also transparent about this data. Maybe you can show your friend where to look up the hospitalisation data for the region he lives in, so that he can understand how these are connected.

Basically, a goverment's job is to keep the health system working, and if it needs restrictions to achieve that, restrictions will happen. Ask your friend if he knows another way to do that

Have your friend assume that the epidemic is real, and then ask him what he would do if he was the government.

 

[Z.W. Wolf]

I would avoid them (or at least the subject).

I would just move on to cultivating a friendship with someone else. It may sound harsh, but I've learned to just move toxic people out of my life. There are 7 billion people on the planet.

 

[deirdre]

I would just move on to cultivating a friendship with someone else. It may sound harsh, but I've learned to just move toxic people out of my life. There are 7 billion people on the planet.

many people just can't handle rapid change easily. this pandemic has been a major shock to many people's systems, let alone that the health officials are just (understandably to me) changing the message every other day.

It's possible his friend just can't handle the "new normal". To be honest it's really starting to irritate me too. Not enough to go into full fledge denial mode (yet), but i can see how some people would freak out that way.

I believe though his friend knows deep down he is wrong. "Methinks thou protests too much" syndrome. It's one thing to not get a vaccine and gripe to friends, it's another to send rant messages on social media.

Maybe he can just say "Look, i get that you are trying hard to justify your fear of getting the vaccine, and that your psyche can't handle the incredibly annoying reality of this pandemic... but please stop sending me all this anti-vaccine bunk. Thanks".

And if his friend does not respect his wishes then he can put him on ignore for a while.

 

[obiwanbenobi]

what are the odds of crashing when they go out for a drive?

how does that compare to the odds of having a life-threatening reaction to being vaccinated?

personally, i live with an anti-vaxer and my other parent is also not vaccinated. they both know i think they are idiots. that's where i've left it.

another friend lost her husband recently due to their anti-vax stance and then they got Covid and he died and she was sick and thinks it was God's will. *SMH* she said that she didn't know who or what to believe but it was a friend of hers who is also religious who got her going on the anti-vax stuff and influenced her more than she would have been otherwise. i'm sorry for the troubles she's going through and now going to move and such, but sincerely, nobody hid anything from her, the information was out there by reputable sources. i just wish there was something i could have said to her to get them both vaccinated and also to my parents, but in all cases they're entrenched in their beliefs. i might as well be spouting hot air in a desert.

 

[FatPhil]

they got Covid and he died and she was sick and thinks it was God's will.

I know it's easy to just conclude "anti-science", but I'm curious why there seems to be such a strong correlation between godsquaddiness and anti-covid-vax attitudes, at least in the countries whose media I am most surrounded by (the US) and most local to (Estonia). My view is that it hasn't always been this way. For example:

In fact, religious leaders have often been the pioneers of vaccinations. Famous 17th-century Massachusetts preacher Cotton Mather had himself and his congregation inoculated against smallpox when it was still very controversial. In the early 1800s, Iceland and Sweden made the clergy responsible for vaccinations.

[...]Instead of standing in the way of immunization, many faith-based organizations are helping to reach children who would otherwise miss out on vaccines. In the Democratic Republic of Congo, 35 percent of the 515 health zones in the nation are co-managed by faith-based organizations, especially Catholic and Protestant churches. These church-sponsored groups transport vaccines, train health workers, provide vaccinations, and serve as key players in national immunization campaigns.

The DR Congo is not unusual in this respect. In many rural areas of Africa, Christian missionaries began providing formal health care long before government or other private health-care systems, and Christian organizations remain important providers of care today. World Health Organization studies have shown that faith-based health facilities provide anywhere from 25 to 50 percent or more of health care in some African nations.

-- https://www.christiancentury.org/blogs/archive/2014-10/christians-long-support-vaccines
(First pre-covid hit from Startpage when given the search term ``christians vaccination -covid'', but selected as it corresponded to how I think things used to be.)

Perhaps it's culturally localised, maybe there are just islands of this new attitude in - hopefully - isolated parts of the world, and it isn't a universal phenomenon. It's causing all kinds of demographic weirdness here - there was a rally in town this weekend which seemed to be organised by a Christian organistion, but heavily supported by (e.g. speakers, banners, publicity, etc.) what's our most populist/racist party. ( Bible references and political affiliations were visible throughout the crowd: https://news.err.ee/1608379775/gallery-protesters-rally-against-coronavirus-restrictions-in-tallinn - we're a small place, that was a big event - I had to walk through that crowd to get my pizza, you can be sure I masked up and kept my head down!) Uniting Christians and almost-Nazis (honestly, at a recent cross-party debate just before the local elections there were several moments where the EKRE representative said things that caused *everyone* in the room to do a sharp intake of breath with an internal "did he really say that - yikes?!?") really does seem to be a bizarre property of this pandemic.

 

[Mendel]

Uniting Christians and almost-Nazis

There's always the danger of perceiving "the church" or faith as unified when they're not. During the Third Reich, German protestants split into Hitler-supporting "Deutsche Christen" and the opposing "Bekennende Kirche" in what is known as "Kirchenkampf".

Regarding vaccines, Pope Francis and his bishops have urged everyone to get vacvinated:

Article:

The Pope has joined his voice to those of Bishops across North and South America to urge people to get jabbed against Covid-19.

"Thanks to God's grace and to the work of many, we now have vaccines to protect us from Covid-19," he said in the video released on Wednesday. He added that vaccines "bring hope to end the pandemic, but only if they are available to all and if we collaborate with one another." [...]

The Pope noted that social and political love is built up through "small, individual gestures capable of transforming and improving societies." "Getting vaccinated is a simple yet profound way to care for one another, especially the most vulnerable," he said.

Source: https://www.vaticannews.va/en/pope/news/2021-08/pope-francis-appeal-covid-19-vaccines-act-of-love.html

But even the Catholic church is split:

Article:

Pope Francis said on Wednesday he was puzzled why so many people, including some cardinals in Roman Catholic Church hierarchy, have refused to get inoculated against COVID-19.

Source: https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/pope-urges-covid-inoculations-says-vaccines-are-humanitys-friends-2021-09-15/

Article:

Source: https://www.prri.org/research/religious-vaccines-covid-vaccination/

----------

there seems to be such a strong correlation between godsquaddiness and anti-covid-vax attitudes, at least in the countries whose media I am most surrounded by (the US) and most local to (Estonia). My view is that it hasn't always been this way.

Looking at the data, it's not "this way" even now.

Article:

Source: https://www.pewresearch.org/science/2021/09/15/covid19-restrictions-appendix/

Article:

Source: https://religionunplugged.com/news/2021/8/3/the-young-and-secular-are-least-vaccinated-not-evangelicals

Article:

Source: https://www.prri.org/research/religious-vaccines-covid-vaccination/

The highest risk of rejecting the vaccine doesn't stem from belief in any religion, but from belief in conspiracy theories:

Article:

Source: https://www.prri.org/research/religious-vaccines-covid-vaccination/

 

[Rocky]

I've lost a friend recently about this vaccine. She asked me a question about how I feel about it. I told her I was vaccinated because I believe in the science and that we need to get this virus under control. She started spouting off different conspiracies as well. I asked her where she was getting her information from but she wouldn't tell me. My guess is from conspiracy podcasts and websites. And FB. When I asked if that was the case she never spoke to me again. People are very gullible so I don't fault her for it. I even said I don't care if she or anyone else gets vaxxed. Their choice. I've learned that when someone asks me my opinion to be prepared for a heated and insulting debate. Now I just say I don't care. It's not worth losing friends over and it's an argument where you cannot convince them otherwise so what's the point?

 

[Landru]

Off topic posts moved to https://www.metabunk.org/threads/covid-vaccine-and-vaers-discussion.12088/

 

[PenaH]

I'm starting to lose hope I can help him anymore. We discussed about an hour yesterday about these things and after it I had glimmer of hope, but it faded in this morning when I saw his Twitter post. It was so long it needed to be shared in TwitLonger

 

[Mendel]

If he can't even consider the "what if everything is real" scenario, he's been brainwashed into losing his empathy.

This hasn't been "leaked", there are at least 3 studies published on it.
"Natural immunity" means you survive a Covid infection.
If "the government" promoted that, your friend would complain that it's 100 times more dangerous than the vaccine.

I'd like to see evidence for the "young people have died with the vaccine" claim, it feels like this is misleading or wrong.

And the rest of the tweet is suspicions without evidence.

I don't see that. It means what it meant, when it was said, in context.

Article:

WASHINGTON (AP) — This summer's coronavirus resurgence has been labeled a "pandemic of the unvaccinated" by government officials from President Joe Biden on down.

The sound bite captures the glaring reality that unvaccinated people overwhelmingly account for new cases and serious infections, with a recent study of government data showing that hospitalization rates among unvaccinated adults were 17 times higher than among those fully vaccinated.

But the term doesn't appear to be changing the hearts and minds of unvaccinated people. And it doesn't tell the whole story, with some breakthrough infections occurring among the fully vaccinated. That recent twist led health officials to recommend a return to masks and a round of booster shots.

"It is true that the unvaccinated are the biggest driver, but we mustn't forget that the vaccinated are part of it as well, in part because of the delta variant," said Dr. Eric Topol, professor of molecular medicine at Scripps Research in La Jolla, California. "The pandemic clearly involves all people, not just the unvaccinated."

Source: https://apnews.com/article/health-pandemics-coronavirus-pandemic-9845c7257300ff6546c20489e642a1ea

The unvaccinated have a responsibility for what's happening, and calling it a lie is not a mature way to deal with that.

 

[Rocky]

If he can't even consider the "whatcif everything is real" scenario, he's been brainwashed into losing his empathy.

View attachment 47302
This hasn't been "leaked", there are at least 3 studies published on it.
"Natural immunity" means you survive a Covid infection.
If "the government" promoted that, your friend would complain that it's 100 times more dangerous than the vaccine.

I'd like to see evidence for the "young people have died with the vaccine" claim, it feels like this is misleading or wrong.

And the rest of the tweet is suspicions without evidence.
View attachment 47303
I don't see that. It means what it meant, when it was said, in context.

Article:

WASHINGTON (AP) — This summer's coronavirus resurgence has been labeled a "pandemic of the unvaccinated" by government officials from President Joe Biden on down.

The sound bite captures the glaring reality that unvaccinated people overwhelmingly account for new cases and serious infections, with a recent study of government data showing that hospitalization rates among unvaccinated adults were 17 times higher than among those fully vaccinated.

But the term doesn't appear to be changing the hearts and minds of unvaccinated people. And it doesn't tell the whole story, with some breakthrough infections occurring among the fully vaccinated. That recent twist led health officials to recommend a return to masks and a round of booster shots.

"It is true that the unvaccinated are the biggest driver, but we mustn't forget that the vaccinated are part of it as well, in part because of the delta variant," said Dr. Eric Topol, professor of molecular medicine at Scripps Research in La Jolla, California. "The pandemic clearly involves all people, not just the unvaccinated."

Source: https://apnews.com/article/health-pandemics-coronavirus-pandemic-9845c7257300ff6546c20489e642a1ea

The unvaccinated have a responsibility for what's happening, and calling it a lie is not a mature way to deal with that.

What if he said liar liar pants on fire?

 

[deirdre]

I'm starting to lose hope I can help him anymore. We discussed about an hour yesterday about these things and after it I had glimmer of hope, but it faded in this morning when I saw his Twitter post

if you think entrenched people can change their minds over night, you should probably just give up now and save yourself the headache.

 

[Mendel]

What if he said liar liar pants on fire?

If he says it in Youtube video with dramatic music over stock photography and warnings of "share this before it gets censored", it's probably bunk. That stuff usually is. I don't trust it.

 

[PenaH]

Today he send me a message asking me "Btw, did you know most of members of Congress have Pfizer stocks? If that doesn't seem suspicious, I think nothing will".

I tried to find some info myself, but only thing I found was some data from 2018. What do you think? Is there data to show that claim is true and/or even if it is, it wouldn't mean there is devious stuff going on?