[jasonlaramburu]

>There's a third option of actually engaging in the discussion. You know, actually investing the efforts of silencing anti-vaxers into explaining the truth instead

A good faith discussion between opposing parties requires establishment of some common ground and a set of rules of engagement (eg 'claims must be supported with facts/data'). Cult leaders foster a sense of paranoia among their followers which makes a good faith debate virtually impossible.

[mythrwy]

Yes but who are the cult followers and bad faith arguers?

In this case you may think you know. Maybe you are even correct. But maybe you won't be next time.

[jasonlaramburu]

>who are the cult followers

Anyone who won’t accept that vaccines save lives

[mythrwy]

It's not a great idea to suggest everyone who has come to a different conclusion then you is a cult follower and a bad faith arguer.

That is itself both cult like and in bad faith.

There are probably better ways to structure your arguments for whatever it's worth.

[jasonlaramburu]

Ok, it's not possible to have a good faith discussion about covid with someone who does not accept that vaccines save lives.

[mythrwy]

You aren't after a good faith discussion and the vast majority of people with reasonable knowledge, myself included, accept that in general, vaccines save lives.

Please stop with the cult like behavior.

[jasonlaramburu]

>the vast majority of people with reasonable knowledge, myself included, accept that in general, vaccines save lives

That really depends where you are located. There are US states where <50% of the eligible population is vaccinated.

Why the qualifier, 'in general?' In what cases does one of the major US COVID vaccines reduce a healthy adult's life expectancy?