[bavent]

They aren’t trying to start a productive discussion. Anti-vaxxers don’t approach debates in good faith. They tend to drop long-winded comments that vaguely link together different conspiracies and anecdotal bits of “evidence” but then never cite sources and never back up their claims when pushed.

[mpfundstein]

because all anti vaxxers are the same, right?

[bavent]

No, they are all individual beautiful little snowflakes, except they converge on agreeing on one thing. Thinking vaccines cause $X and also are vaguely linked to other things that aren’t proven. I’m criticizing them for that one thing, that they all have in common, which does allow me to categorize them as a group, when it relates to that one thing.

[AndrewUnmuted]

> Anti-vaxxers don’t approach debates in good faith.

Neither do people who make blanket pronouncements about an entire broad demographic of people, after labeling them with loaded & vindictive terminology.

[bavent]

Neither do people who make blanket statements about people making blanket statements.

[loceng]

I'm not an antivaxxer but lazy people like you won't differentiate and don't differentiate well which is why research studies published are poorly understood and bad conclusions are perpetuated and in part why we're in this mess.

But yes, terrible way to start productive conversation but even when linking and putting the effort in the HN intellectual mob has already ideologically and shallowly investigated and come to shallow/poor conclusions and downvote and don't bother engaging further: how is someone downvoting a good beginning to a productive conversation?

[bavent]

Lazy people like me? I’ve tried engaging with anti-vaxxers. It’s completely unproductive. Every single time. When I’ve tried something a hundred times and get the same result, why bother continuing to try?

I’m also not trying to have a productive conversation with you - you started this thread with a post that basically said “woe is me, I’m going to get downvoted” and then you got downvoted. You didn’t cite any sources and I don’t really care enough to dig through your comment history to find where else you did cite them, because I am not invested in this enough.

[loceng]

Someone who enters a conversation blindly calling a person an anti-vaxxer isn't worth engaging with - completely unproductive. You're aware mRNA vaccines are new technology for vaccines or no, and that vaccines usually take 7 years to go through approval process - and this one was fast tracked to 1 year? There are perfectly healthy teenagers dying after this vaccine; true statement that you may dismiss whether you believe it or not. Are you aware too that the inventor of the mRNA technology is trying to sound alarm bells for the problems with the spike protein with this vaccine?

And, digging through my comment history, it was 3 or so comments below the comment I made saying to reference it - but you assumed and instead put more effort writing this reply than to actually quickly look to see if your assumption was correct or not. But since you're relatively lazy - making assumptions - here, I've gone into my history and pasted the links for you:

Related links on Ivermectin:

https://covid19criticalcare.com

https://bird-group.org/

https://vimeo.com/562724784

https://vimeo.com/557811163

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNyAovuUxro