5 ms·

The steelman version of antivaxxism isn't "vaccines shouldn't exist", it's "on an individual basis, the risk-reward ratio of certain vaccines is not worth it. I

The steelman version of antivaxxism isn't "vaccines shouldn't exist", it's "on an individual basis, the risk-reward ratio of certain vaccines is not worth it. I should personally not vaccinate myself or anyone I care about, and be a free rider on societal herd immunity" That particular version of antivaxxism is the one I would have the most trouble refuting. It's especially troubling since if it were true then the powers that be would have every incentive to try to keep it quiet and attack anyone who suggests it. I mean, I make the same judgement call every year for flu shots. Is it at least plausible that I would be better off overall making the same call for some other disease?

rualca 6y ago
> (...) I should personally not vaccinate myself or anyone I care about, and be a free rider on societal herd immunity" > That particular version of antivaxxism is the one I would have the most trouble refuting. What's hard to refute? I mean, the exceptionalism argument only sticks with sociopaths who believe society exists only to serve their personal interests without having to contribute anything in return.
bart_spoon 6y ago
> it's "on an individual basis, the risk-reward ratio of certain vaccines is not worth it." That's not really true though. The risks involved in getting a vaccine are much, much smaller than the risks involved in not getting the vaccine, especially with diseases like Covid.