We've seen a rash of countries in Europe loosening or removing their COVID restrictions over the past months. Yet here in the US we keep being told that "The Science" demands that we continue to mask, and adhere to other restrictions. Hell, Canada is using force against peaceful protesters because they demand that restrictions continue. Some folks are telling us that some of these restrictions might become permanent, because "The Science" tells them so. They tell us that we must listen to "The Experts" and that questioning "The Experts" is akin to heresy.
So, are we really suggesting that "The Experts" in the US are more "expert" then "The Experts" in Norway, or the UK, or Sweden? The same experts that Biden based his "winter of death" comments on?
I guess I'm still on the side of using information as a way to measure and accept the level of risk that is comfortable for each of us, while choosing to err on the side of not imposing my decision on others.
Simply following "The Experts", without questioning has never appealed to me. Nor has ignoring one set of "The Experts" for "The Experts" that someone else favors.
My family is currently making plans for gathering to celebrate my aunt's 95th birthday. There is quite a bit of difference in how best to accommodate this, ranging from don't do this, to 2 vax/booster/mask, to masks alone, to nothing. I plan to attend, and I will accede to what makes people the most comfortable in terms of restrictions. There are several people who have made it clear that they will not attend because they are afraid (either for themselves or for others), and I respect their decision and will not criticize them.
I do find it sad though. As we just found out that there is a strong likelihood that there will not be a 96th birthday to celebrate. I can't understand choosing not to avail oneself of one of the last opportunities to see a beloved family member alive. It's their choice, and they'll have to live with it, but I see no reason not to gather and celebrate a life well lived, with family and friends.
4 comments:
Wow. May she prevail over what might be putting a 96th birthday at risk!
Aside from that news, and maybe with that news in mind, I would be eager to make the party. With that news in mind, assuming it's a serious prognosis, it seems it would make no difference as to what demands were instituted by whomever is arranging the party. That is, why would I have to take the jab if my aunt's life is already teetering on the brink of eternity? Am I to assume the unlikely possibility that it is only me among the many vaxed attendees who is capable of infecting my aunt with something by my mere presence? And what if my aunt strongly desires to see me knowing her time is short and opportunities are thus lacking? I have heard from plenty of old people (and I qualify more and more each day for that title) who are fine risking death to see their grandchildren. I feel certain I would be, too.
As to "experts", well, there's no doubt that some only care about "experts" who validate their preconceived notions. And I'm willing to review what such "experts" have to say. But if they are contradicted by other experts, then such confusion demands I wade through it all to determine which side of the question makes the most sense, due to the provision of data and research, as well as to how it is presented in order to be understood. The point is "reviewing what any 'expert' has to say". This means going beyond the headline and actually reading and studying. It's sort of like having "journalistic standards" of investigation. It's quite useful in uncovering truth or what is most likely to be true.
Since it's a pretty aggressive cancer diagnosis and since she's likely to choose not to undergo radiation/chemo, it's unlikely that she'll see 96.
While I support your right not to take the jab, I don't think that I'd make the same choice. Since I've had the first round, I'll likely get the booster before I leave. I'll choose this because I've decided that it's the best course for me and my family. Again, I wouldn't be against someone who makes other choices, I'm simply making a different choice.
The term "expert" seems to mean "Anyone who buttresses my opinions or political views.". It's interesting to see people who venerate "experts" in one area, but ignore them in other areas.
Just wondering, were you a regular consumer of flu shots over the years?
Not a regular consumer.
Post a Comment