Yeah - I'm seeing more talk of the threat of Japanese encephalitis here along with it's vax.
The JE vax is available but not 'free' yet. I've not looked at the production method, but it's really not going to impact my decision making either way.
I'm keeping an eye out for outbreaks that would justify another coercive 'preventation' drive.
So, shouldn’t vaccines be reserved for pathogenic treatment that results in debilitating disease? The question here is whether organisms unfit for survival should be granted a potentially dangerous accommodation so they can go on to breed and propagate their genetic liabilities. Nature says no, and has for thousands of years. What do you say?
I've always been against the shotgun approach to vaccines for relatively benign viruses. Chicken pox & measles come to mind. I would prefer my kids got exposed to the real virus. I've always been concerned about the incentives involved in the
medical industry.
I've also always leant towards freedom of choice & bearing the consequences of your decisions.
At the end of the day, I trust 200,000 years of evolution more than a white coat that's apparently acting in my best interests. I currently seek medical assistance for acute injuries though.
Yeah shotgun approach is rarely a good thing. Im supposed to take a bunch of boosters now but I won't, knowing how bad the system is.
A major concern for me is the medium-term effect of 'leaky' vaccines (which we know the COVID one is). Compare with what's happened in Marek's disease: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.1002198
This is absolutely the case. A vaccine must protect against the three vectors, transmission, infection, and disease. If they don’t, they’re actually helping the virus or bacteria. I think it’s likely the COVID vaccine purveyors knew this. I’m just a simpleton peasant and thanks to the internet, I knew this…
Your approach sounds reasonable to me, and is similar to my own approach. I think modern medicine is relatively good at triage, but not much beyond that. It’s seems like it’s important that any person realize that they may not be fit for a reasonable model of survival and accept that fate, if not their own survival, than certainly the survival of potential offspring. It should be more socially acceptable to recuse yourself from the gene pool for conscientious reasons in my opinion. Let’s just face it, not all people are fit to survive, and even fewer are fit to procreate. This process shouldn’t be the current free for all that it currently is. Fully 50% of pregnancies are accidental. Why not separate sex from procreation?
I've accepted my own mortality on a deep level. It took a while & resulted in large scale changes to my beliefs & perspective on things.
I think this is very much a spectrum but that most humans live in almost complete denial of their mortality even into the latter half of their life. Most people go through a personal crisis as it becomes apparent their meat sacks are impermanent.
My biggest objection is around the centralised decision making of appropriate treatments & the socialising of these costs. This should all be left to the free markets.
Yours might be a sack, mine is a suit! 🤣
