Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

NACI not recommending the use of AstraZeneca for seniors over 65 on Canada.


Recommended Posts

13 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

It should not be a political decision, but made on science and medicine. Sorry but the official advisory is agin it.

Most of the new recommendations will come from public health professionals because they are the ones getting the real world experience. There is nothing in it for manufacturers to change anything from their trial data.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my professional experience I can count very few cases where a competent professional would refuse to explain the rationale for their decisions, especially the ones with potentially important consequences. There can be some exceptions, like legal or ethical, or some very big and scary truth that cannot be broken to the public, but none seem to apply in this case. And so, seeing it repeating again and again, sparked my curiosity, why this aberration that seems to be persistent? What is causing it?

As there isn't any indication of a very scary truth or other constraints, one has to discount natural causes and the next possibility, by the principle of elimination, would be a systematic one. In a system what aims to produce best solutions, they are achieved via a competition of good ones. The best of the good solutions wins, and competition means: critical questioning; meaningful answers; defending strong solutions and eliminating flawed ones.

In a mediocre system (see "better than some, worse than others") the priorities are quite different. It knows that the results would not stand to a critical questioning. So the objective is not to create good solutions and select the best one(s); but to avoid questioning and answering from the start. But if the decisions are still made somehow, how are they made? So there must be a process by which something comes from somewhere, and without critical review and selection makes it to the public; and then the system must pretend and insist that it isn't just the best one, but the only one possible as otherwise it would have to present other options and they may turn out to be better as no critical filter was applied.

Now that makes sense, no? This is how these decisions, and (apparent) absolute consensus around them emerge. The system just removes everything else but its chosen truth of the day. This can explain travel from Wuhan and expert" calls to extend quarantines forever. That I can make sense of, so the exercise wasn't entirely wasted. But are there any other possibilities? I would be curious to know.

Edited by myata
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, myata said:

Now that makes sense, no? This is how these decisions, and (apparent) absolute consensus around them emerge. The system just removes everything else but its chosen truth of the day. This can explain travel from Wuhan and expert" calls to extend quarantines forever. That I can make sense of, so the exercise wasn't entirely wasted. But are there any other possibilities? I would be curious to know.

Yes, I think so. In general. Another possibility is they want to methodically and systematically kill us, only very slowly and softly. Like people just won't make babies anymore. They'll be all weird socially, generation of ignorant closet dwellers too freaked to touch another human being.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, OftenWrong said:

Yes, I think so. In general. Another possibility is they want to methodically and systematically kill us, only very slowly and softly. Like people just won't make babies anymore. They'll be all weird socially, generation of ignorant closet dwellers too freaked to touch another human being.

That second option would be too far off at least to me, but it could very well be an unintended consequence of the system run off the rails throwing all resources into propaganda of fear and helplessness. Not much about this virus has changed since last spring when masks in the stores were only recommended with next to zero, as far as I looked, cases. And now half of the folks in the street wear them. That's not rational, there isn't either proof or reasonable argument that it's doing anything, only the constant drumming of fear on all channels. And I know younger people who'd rather order delivery than go to a store, out of fear of being infected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone is free to make voluntary choices but still I insist that we, the public, have the right to know which vaccines are going where and when. In the current opaque system with information coming after a long delay in tiny bits and sometimes, there's simply no way to be sure that there aren't two or more different classes of citizens entitled to different shares of the critical public resource.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...