Originally posted by: Gibsons
Originally posted by: Zenmervolt
Originally posted by: Gibsons
No, you fall under selfish dumbass. Millions get the flu every year, leading to a few hundred thousand being hospitalized and ~30K deaths. Those numbers could be reduced dramatically by vaccination, see "herd immunity."
You might be the one who catches it and spreads it to someone who dies. Maybe you just don't care... you aren't required to either care or get the vaccine.
And when I drive, even if I drive correctly, I might be the guy who the reckless driver swerves around just before he loses control and runs over a group of pedestrians on the sidewalk. The only way to ensure that we cannot ever cause indirect harm to someone else is to live life inside of a bubble.
If I'm sick, I stay home. I wash my hands and I sneeze into my elbow rather than onto my hands. I accept the risks associated with failure to vaccinate myself. If someone else does not accept those risks, then they should vaccinate themselves. I am not responsible for ensuring that another adult is protected.
Sorry, but 30,000 deaths in a population of 280+ million is a statistical irrelevance. It's not worth getting worked up over.
ZV
I'm not berating you here, really, I understand where you're coming from, but I'm curious: At what point does it reach relevance to you? 100k, 1 million?
In terms of at what point something reaches a level of true concern from a population sustainability point of view, there are multiple variables in play such as the birth rate and other causes of death. If something is poised to cause a severe shift in the births to deaths ratio for a population then it's a threat, but, realistically-speaking, I haven't heard of anything that represents such an existential threat to society.
I mean, there are over 40,000 deaths each year from traffic accidents yet somehow the 30,000 deaths per year from influenza are a severe issue? The numbers just don't scan. I am not making light of the individual deaths, but clearly neither traffic accidents nor influenza represent valid existential threats to our society.
As far as at what point something would become relevant enough for me to take my own precautions, that would depend on the ease with which the precautions could be taken, the likelihood of the event occurring, and the probability of a devastating outcome. For example, I use a seat belt in my car because there is virtually no encumbrance resultant from its use, and I wear leathers and a helmet when on my motorcycle because even though injury is unlikely, the potential severity is very high in the rare case that injury does occur.
In the world of pathogens, I don't worry about getting vaccinated for the flu because I am personally extremely unlikely to suffer adverse effects beyond a few days of missed work (and, as I can work over VPN from home, I may not even miss work). I do use prophalactics if I engage in sexual behaviour due to the fact that the potential consequences, while unlikely, are severe.
ZV