Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Gina's avatar

When Mortenson and Dahl become epidemiologists, I will consider their opinions. Until then, I believe they are dangerous.

Expand full comment
Roberto Castro's avatar

IMO this is a reckless and uninformed move, that is motivated by fear and a distrust for government. Ironically, the proponents of this measure are government and are not either medical professionals or versed in virology. They are free to refrain from getting any preventive medicine shot and if they are with like-minded people, free to spread virus amongst their clique. Have at it. In this world, however, there are places where common sense and decency comes into play and they should honor the wishes of those locations that require a mask (if that time comes again). I presume that most of us--who believe in science and have read the positions of peer-reviewed articles and journals on various health risks-- would prefer not having to take the shots ... but that is not the reality. I take shots to protect myself and others. I do not want to expose others to a virus that could be deadly to them or make them sick. See .... it's not about me, it's about the community. Again, I rather not wear a mask, but do so to protect others. It is a small sacrifice.

As for the proponents of this measure, it is troubling to see them taking positions with regard to ill-advised treatments and seeking to impose restrictions because they believe they either know better or think they liberty is being threatened. The latter argument is emotional and not scientifically backed up. I am sure they will cite a study or two that comes from a non-peered review study to back up their claims and effort. Alternatively, they will argue that the "deep state" is manipulating us and argue that we are effectively "sheep" or something to that effect. Again, there is an emotional appeal to their argument, but it is not based on scientific fact and feeds on fear to advance their position. That is tragic. That is criminal. That is cowardly.

The public deserves a robust debate based on facts. The use of the "fear" tactic to advance their agenda is cowardly and a disservice to the public they elected to serve. While the public includes their clique, they represent many others. If that does not dawn on them, IMO, they need to retire.

Expand full comment
7 more comments...

No posts