This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.
NOTICE: Some online security services are reporting that information for a limited number of users from this site is for sale on the "dark web." As of right now, there is no direct evidence of this, but change your password just to be safe.
The RPGPundit's Own Forum Rules
This part of the site is controlled by the RPGPundit. This is where he discusses topics that he finds interesting. You may post here, but understand that there are limits. The RPGPundit can shut down any thread, topic of discussion, or user in a thread at his pleasure. This part of the site is essentially his house, so keep that in mind. Note that this is the only part of the site where political discussion is permitted, but is regulated by the RPGPundit.

Author Topic: Please post your selfies with proof of vaccination!  (Read 6327 times)

Ratman_tf

  • Alt-Reich Shitlord
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6356
Re: Please post your selfies with proof of vaccination!
« Reply #135 on: May 11, 2021, 07:06:45 PM »
How do we differ on specifics? Do you think listening to one's doctor is a good idea for whether to get a given vaccine? Is the answer different for covid compared to other vaccines?

Yes and yes.

The science and data for known vaccines for known diseases have been around for decades if not hundreds of years. If a family doctor, general practicioner type says to get a known vaccine, that's probably good, informed advice.

The Covid-19 mRNA vaccine was literally created last year, and only has emergency FDA approval in the face of the pandemic. You can't seek legal recourse for any unintended side effects of the mRNA vaccines.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/12/16/covid-vaccine-side-effects-compensation-lawsuit.html

That in itself might give someone pause. But governments are pushing these vaccinations on everyone, worldwide. I don't expect a general practicioner, family doctor type to have an informed opinion on experimental vaccines and their unforseen consequences. Just the government line that everybody need to get vaccinated.

It's true that general practitioners are less informed about the newly-released vaccines than established vaccines. But the general public are even less well-informed than doctors are, and have much less background knowledge to understand news items and properly evaluate risks.

It sounds like you're saying that in the case of new and/or experimental treatments, that's when a patient should *not* listen to their doctor - because a general practitioner won't have experience with those. Is that fair?

No. I'm saying it's a factor in people's decisions, not an absolute.

Quote
From my view, those are the cases when I would *most* rely on a doctor's advice. The doctor has less information to go on in those case - but then so do I. I think it's always a bad idea for patients to do their own research and decide against their doctor's advice - and that is still true for new and/or experimental treatments. My doctor has a base of much more knowledge and experience than me. For a new treatment, she may well say "I don't know" and refer me to a specialist, but it's still deciding from a grounding she has of much greater knowledge of health.

But you choose your doctor and then choose to follow their reccomendations. I could pick a doctor that agrees with the critics of the vaccine and then say I'm choosing not to get vaccinated on the reccomendation of my family doctor. What would make my decision any better or worse than yours? I'm doing what my doctor said was right!

You can't offload the responsibility of making decisions about your body and health on another person. At best you can rely on their expertise to make your decision, but in the end, it's your decison, and your doctor doesn't have to live with your decisions. That's the time when you should do some research and make as informed a decision as possible.
The notion of an exclusionary and hostile RPG community is a fever dream of zealots who view all social dynamics through a narrow keyhole of structural oppression.
-Haffrung

Ratman_tf

  • Alt-Reich Shitlord
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6356
Re: Please post your selfies with proof of vaccination!
« Reply #136 on: May 11, 2021, 07:14:09 PM »
I've watched medication fuck up my mom, my sister, and my dad.  And that is just mental stuff not even opioids.  Luckily my family has been able to avoid that particular curse that doctors lay on people.

My brother was diagnosed with spastic colitis and prescribed a heavy fiber diet, which utterly fucked with the actual condition he had, Chron's Disease. It took him years and multiple doctors to get a correct diagnosis and a treatment plan.
Sometimes, doctors make mistakes. Sometimes, they make their patients worse. Sometimes they overprescribe opiods or antibiotics. A person can't just blindly do what their doctor says.
The notion of an exclusionary and hostile RPG community is a fever dream of zealots who view all social dynamics through a narrow keyhole of structural oppression.
-Haffrung

jhkim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9046
Re: Please post your selfies with proof of vaccination!
« Reply #137 on: May 11, 2021, 09:01:24 PM »
From my view, those are the cases when I would *most* rely on a doctor's advice. The doctor has less information to go on in those case - but then so do I. I think it's always a bad idea for patients to do their own research and decide against their doctor's advice - and that is still true for new and/or experimental treatments. My doctor has a base of much more knowledge and experience than me. For a new treatment, she may well say "I don't know" and refer me to a specialist, but it's still deciding from a grounding she has of much greater knowledge of health.

But you choose your doctor and then choose to follow their reccomendations. I could pick a doctor that agrees with the critics of the vaccine and then say I'm choosing not to get vaccinated on the reccomendation of my family doctor. What would make my decision any better or worse than yours? I'm doing what my doctor said was right!

You can't offload the responsibility of making decisions about your body and health on another person. At best you can rely on their expertise to make your decision, but in the end, it's your decison, and your doctor doesn't have to live with your decisions. That's the time when you should do some research and make as informed a decision as possible.

There's a huge difference between:

1) Choosing a doctor based on qualifications, and agreeing after talking to them.

2) Having concerns about your doctor and getting a second or third opinion - then using one's judgement to decide between the differing suggestions.

3) Pre-deciding what one want to hear, and then searching the Internet to find any doctor among tens of thousands because they say that.


I'm fine with #1 and #2, but I think #3 is a bad idea. If the doctor that you happened to choose is against the covid vaccine, I agree there is no difference. But if you're talking about #3, I think there is a difference.

Ratman_tf

  • Alt-Reich Shitlord
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6356
Re: Please post your selfies with proof of vaccination!
« Reply #138 on: May 11, 2021, 09:53:30 PM »
From my view, those are the cases when I would *most* rely on a doctor's advice. The doctor has less information to go on in those case - but then so do I. I think it's always a bad idea for patients to do their own research and decide against their doctor's advice - and that is still true for new and/or experimental treatments. My doctor has a base of much more knowledge and experience than me. For a new treatment, she may well say "I don't know" and refer me to a specialist, but it's still deciding from a grounding she has of much greater knowledge of health.

But you choose your doctor and then choose to follow their reccomendations. I could pick a doctor that agrees with the critics of the vaccine and then say I'm choosing not to get vaccinated on the reccomendation of my family doctor. What would make my decision any better or worse than yours? I'm doing what my doctor said was right!

You can't offload the responsibility of making decisions about your body and health on another person. At best you can rely on their expertise to make your decision, but in the end, it's your decison, and your doctor doesn't have to live with your decisions. That's the time when you should do some research and make as informed a decision as possible.

There's a huge difference between:

1) Choosing a doctor based on qualifications, and agreeing after talking to them.

2) Having concerns about your doctor and getting a second or third opinion - then using one's judgement to decide between the differing suggestions.

3) Pre-deciding what one want to hear, and then searching the Internet to find any doctor among tens of thousands because they say that.


I'm fine with #1 and #2, but I think #3 is a bad idea. If the doctor that you happened to choose is against the covid vaccine, I agree there is no difference. But if you're talking about #3, I think there is a difference.

Yeah. I didn't mean to word that as if I were seeking out a doctor specifically for an outcome. I meant, the doctor you picked turned out to be, etc....

Your option 2 is interesting. What would cause someone to have those concerns about their doctor? Especially for a contentious topic like experimental vaccines.
« Last Edit: May 11, 2021, 09:58:04 PM by Ratman_tf »
The notion of an exclusionary and hostile RPG community is a fever dream of zealots who view all social dynamics through a narrow keyhole of structural oppression.
-Haffrung

Zelen

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 112
Re: Please post your selfies with proof of vaccination!
« Reply #139 on: May 11, 2021, 11:00:07 PM »
I'm not against either informed consent or patients doing their own research. I can see how you might read that with the snippet you quoted, but please try to read the rest of that.

It's cool, I'm not trying to blow up what you're saying into a straw man. Your perspective seems reasonable, despite some of the hyperbole others might raise. Where we disagree seems mostly about broader issues of power dynamics, trustworthiness of people in power, etc. No one is going to agree on all of that anyway.

While I don't think your position is advocating for this, I do think it's worthwhile to speak out against uncritically trusting "authority" figures. Way too many people are now trapped in this mindset that you can never make a decision without consulting an "expert." It's particularly pernicious because almost all of the questions people want answers to are OUGHT questions, not IS questions. The former almost always is outside the scope of objective knowledge and depends deeply on values & perspective.

jhkim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9046
Re: Please post your selfies with proof of vaccination!
« Reply #140 on: May 12, 2021, 04:23:59 AM »
I'm not against either informed consent or patients doing their own research. I can see how you might read that with the snippet you quoted, but please try to read the rest of that.

It's cool, I'm not trying to blow up what you're saying into a straw man. Your perspective seems reasonable, despite some of the hyperbole others might raise. Where we disagree seems mostly about broader issues of power dynamics, trustworthiness of people in power, etc. No one is going to agree on all of that anyway.

While I don't think your position is advocating for this, I do think it's worthwhile to speak out against uncritically trusting "authority" figures. Way too many people are now trapped in this mindset that you can never make a decision without consulting an "expert." It's particularly pernicious because almost all of the questions people want answers to are OUGHT questions, not IS questions. The former almost always is outside the scope of objective knowledge and depends deeply on values & perspective.

In current partisan debates, I think both sides claim to be critically thinking - but they are highly biased in how they direct criticism. That's why I appreciate it here, and try to seek out speaking to people with opposing points of view.

I am generally very pro-science, meaning true peer-reviewed research in mainstream journals. Earlier, you brought up the case of smoking and tobacco companies earlier -- but I think you're drawing different conclusions from that example.

The tobacco companies had hundreds of millions of dollars, but they were completely unable to buy any mainstream peer-reviewed research that refuted the link with cancer. All the traditional institutions continued to publish results showing a clear link between cigarettes and cancer. Instead, the companies mainly tried to use PR and obfuscation to tell people "don't believe the scientists". They created their own research institute (TIRC) and put in place the handful of scientists who disputed the link, but TIRC didn't actually produce any peer-reviewed paper disputing the link. Instead, they mostly just created PR, and opinions from a few selected individual scientists like Clarence Little. The papers they actually published were mostly unrelated to the tobacco-cancer link. I thought the book "The Emperor of All Maladies" had a good account of it, and was a good read in general.

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/7170627-the-emperor-of-all-maladies

I think it's a great example of how opinion pieces and PR are easily bought, but mainstream science is not. Money could buy a handful of corrupt or simply incorrect scientists, but it didn't change the mass of research.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2021, 04:26:36 AM by jhkim »

HappyDaze

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • H
  • Posts: 3534
Re: Please post your selfies with proof of vaccination!
« Reply #141 on: May 12, 2021, 05:44:36 AM »
On the contrary I think you will find that most doctors would appreciate being able to discuss the various pros and cons of potential treatments with their patients which is necessary if you want to have informed consent.
I think that what you think does not match my professional experiences of working with doctors, with the biggest limiter being the doctors' available time per patient.

Shasarak

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2904
Re: Please post your selfies with proof of vaccination!
« Reply #142 on: May 12, 2021, 06:36:32 AM »
From my view, those are the cases when I would *most* rely on a doctor's advice. The doctor has less information to go on in those case - but then so do I. I think it's always a bad idea for patients to do their own research and decide against their doctor's advice - and that is still true for new and/or experimental treatments. My doctor has a base of much more knowledge and experience than me. For a new treatment, she may well say "I don't know" and refer me to a specialist, but it's still deciding from a grounding she has of much greater knowledge of health.

As if most patients bother to do their own research.

Most of them dont even know what the tablets are that they swallow every day.

On the contrary I think you will find that most doctors would appreciate being able to discuss the various pros and cons of potential treatments with their patients which is necessary if you want to have informed consent.

As with Zelen, I apologize if my bad phrasing implied otherwise. I completely agree that reading and discussing with doctors is a good idea. My disagreement comes if the patient decides against the first, second, and third opinion to handle their own treatment.

That is exactly informed consent.  The patient has to take responsiblitiy for their own treatment.

Why would you disagree with that?
There will be poor always,
pathetically struggling,
look at the good things you've got! -  Jesus

Shasarak

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2904
Re: Please post your selfies with proof of vaccination!
« Reply #143 on: May 12, 2021, 06:39:13 AM »
On the contrary I think you will find that most doctors would appreciate being able to discuss the various pros and cons of potential treatments with their patients which is necessary if you want to have informed consent.
I think that what you think does not match my professional experiences of working with doctors, with the biggest limiter being the doctors' available time per patient.

So Doctors dont want to spend the time to discuss a patients treatment with the patient because that would waste their time that they could spend in not discussing a different patients treatment?

It has a certain logic.
There will be poor always,
pathetically struggling,
look at the good things you've got! -  Jesus

HappyDaze

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • H
  • Posts: 3534
Re: Please post your selfies with proof of vaccination!
« Reply #144 on: May 12, 2021, 06:54:10 AM »
On the contrary I think you will find that most doctors would appreciate being able to discuss the various pros and cons of potential treatments with their patients which is necessary if you want to have informed consent.
I think that what you think does not match my professional experiences of working with doctors, with the biggest limiter being the doctors' available time per patient.

So Doctors dont want to spend the time to discuss a patients treatment with the patient because that would waste their time that they could spend in not discussing a different patients treatment?

It has a certain logic.
There's a balance they have to make between quality of care and quantity of care. Devoting too much time to one patient's care can sometimes be a disservice to others (and invites claims of discrimination in some cases). This is why face to face time with the doctor is often limited to only 10 minutes for many appointments.

Shasarak

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2904
Re: Please post your selfies with proof of vaccination!
« Reply #145 on: May 12, 2021, 07:21:22 AM »
On the contrary I think you will find that most doctors would appreciate being able to discuss the various pros and cons of potential treatments with their patients which is necessary if you want to have informed consent.
I think that what you think does not match my professional experiences of working with doctors, with the biggest limiter being the doctors' available time per patient.

So Doctors dont want to spend the time to discuss a patients treatment with the patient because that would waste their time that they could spend in not discussing a different patients treatment?

It has a certain logic.
There's a balance they have to make between quality of care and quantity of care. Devoting too much time to one patient's care can sometimes be a disservice to others (and invites claims of discrimination in some cases). This is why face to face time with the doctor is often limited to only 10 minutes for many appointments.

So in that case there is no way that one of your doctors is going to make any real kind of diagnosis and or recommendation in a single 10 minute consulation.  They will send the patient for various lab tests or scans or xrays or what have you and rack up at least two or three consulations so that they can really milk that patient for as much as they can.

Because they cant be accused of discrimination if they send you for many expensive tests, can they?
There will be poor always,
pathetically struggling,
look at the good things you've got! -  Jesus

oggsmash

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1578
Re: Please post your selfies with proof of vaccination!
« Reply #146 on: May 12, 2021, 09:12:13 AM »
On the contrary I think you will find that most doctors would appreciate being able to discuss the various pros and cons of potential treatments with their patients which is necessary if you want to have informed consent.
I think that what you think does not match my professional experiences of working with doctors, with the biggest limiter being the doctors' available time per patient.

So Doctors dont want to spend the time to discuss a patients treatment with the patient because that would waste their time that they could spend in not discussing a different patients treatment?

It has a certain logic.
There's a balance they have to make between quality of care and quantity of care. Devoting too much time to one patient's care can sometimes be a disservice to others (and invites claims of discrimination in some cases). This is why face to face time with the doctor is often limited to only 10 minutes for many appointments.

  Well...it is also up to the customer, the patient, to bring up to the doctor they may need a bit more time.  If the doctor can not do that, well IMO its the patient's fault for not telling the doctor he/she is fired.   I think we should in many of these interactions remember who is the client and who is the contractor/employee.   

DELETE THIS

  • No me gusta
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • D
  • Posts: 2766
  • DELETE
Re: Please post your selfies with proof of vaccination!
« Reply #147 on: May 12, 2021, 09:19:04 AM »
Imagine saying something so mind-blowingly stupid then backtracking and pretending it's a nuanced position...typical gaslighting communist rhetoric.

oggsmash

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1578
Re: Please post your selfies with proof of vaccination!
« Reply #148 on: May 12, 2021, 09:29:25 AM »
I've watched medication fuck up my mom, my sister, and my dad.  And that is just mental stuff not even opioids.  Luckily my family has been able to avoid that particular curse that doctors lay on people.

My brother was diagnosed with spastic colitis and prescribed a heavy fiber diet, which utterly fucked with the actual condition he had, Chron's Disease. It took him years and multiple doctors to get a correct diagnosis and a treatment plan.
Sometimes, doctors make mistakes. Sometimes, they make their patients worse. Sometimes they overprescribe opiods or antibiotics. A person can't just blindly do what their doctor says.

  Every profession has a range of performers in it, from high performers to lazy shitbags who show up to work to kill time.  Some people get into a professions being the top of their class, some get there from being nepotistic hires, diversity hires, etc and maybe last in their class.  I think people are quick to bow a little too quickly to authority in cases where their own personal best interests are in the discussion.

HappyDaze

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • H
  • Posts: 3534
Re: Please post your selfies with proof of vaccination!
« Reply #149 on: May 12, 2021, 09:38:19 AM »
On the contrary I think you will find that most doctors would appreciate being able to discuss the various pros and cons of potential treatments with their patients which is necessary if you want to have informed consent.
I think that what you think does not match my professional experiences of working with doctors, with the biggest limiter being the doctors' available time per patient.

So Doctors dont want to spend the time to discuss a patients treatment with the patient because that would waste their time that they could spend in not discussing a different patients treatment?

It has a certain logic.
There's a balance they have to make between quality of care and quantity of care. Devoting too much time to one patient's care can sometimes be a disservice to others (and invites claims of discrimination in some cases). This is why face to face time with the doctor is often limited to only 10 minutes for many appointments.

So in that case there is no way that one of your doctors is going to make any real kind of diagnosis and or recommendation in a single 10 minute consulation.  They will send the patient for various lab tests or scans or xrays or what have you and rack up at least two or three consulations so that they can really milk that patient for as much as they can.

Because they cant be accused of discrimination if they send you for many expensive tests, can they?
That's generally true, and it's also why most doctors will only see you after other medical professionals (typically nurses) have already collected,  filtered, and concentrated your subjective input into a format that allows the doctor to optimize their time with you. This will then go with labs, imaging, and other objective pieces (that may be precollected in some cases, particularly for existing patients or in integrated care networks). So, if you're a first time patient of a doctor, you most likely will not get a comprehensive diagnosis of a complex issue in a single visit.

As for ordering lots of expensive tests, that's not how they make money anymore.