An interesting question about belief -- God and Vaccines

[Thief]

I'm here because my parents got it on

yep....you got sucked into the chemistry

it will dry out and break

and apparently your spirit will do so as well?

 

[Thief]

Not one.

only one

the body introduces this reality into your mind

it can do nothing else

 

[Heyo]

But wait a minute, don't those same believers go to the doctor when they really are sick? Scripture makes no pronouncements about cardiac by-pass surgery, so why believe it to be effective, and vaccines -- which have almost eradicted things like, polio, tetanus, rubella, hib, measles, whooping cough, pneumococcal disease, rotavirus, mumps, chickenpox, diphtheria. All of those things were common when I was young, and we were all vaccinated against them. Now, they are quite rare, thank goodness.

So there is as much (actually much more) evidence for the efficacy and safety of vaccines than there is for a cardiac by-pass. But the anti-vaxers will not take those, but will happily submit to the bypass.

The Covid vaccine has not yet been approved by an authoritative body, i.e. their pastor, pope, preacher, guru, shaman, gode. In fact the safety has been questioned. The only ones who are saying that it is save are scientists and they have used evidence - things and people who are not seen as authoritative.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

only one

the body introduces this reality into your mind

it can do nothing else

This is the purpose of the "copies?" Is that what you mean?

A single copy perhaps is as you described - tasked with creating an interpretation of (and informing on) the world around it via stimulus. The body's "purpose" in other words. But you were specifically citing "billions and billions." So I figured you were referring to a purpose for that. The purpose of the billions and billions is most certainly not to "introduce this reality into your mind." That doesn't make much sense.

Also, I'd word it differently, because in my opinion, the mind (not the brain) is a very small part of the overall being - not any more important than any other vital part. The way I'd word the idea you presented is this:

An interpretation of reality as it exists is produced for your mind by the body.​

Your use of the words "this reality" makes it seem as if reality is malleable or that we definitively get a shot at "other realities." It's an unnecessary leap of faith with zero evidence. Also, I feel your statement of "it can do nothing else" puts undue emphasis on the mind's importance. Because, as I see, it, the "mind" can't really do anything without a body either. If there is nothing to control, what do you even have at your disposal to "do" anything? Anything besides "think" that is. And even then, just imagine a brain born "in a vat." What thoughts do you think it could possibly develop with absolutely zero sensory input?

 

[Katzpur]

I don't see the connection. Unless maybe some religious are more skeptical than non-religious. I notice living here age is a factor in who trusts the vaccine and who doesn't. No doctor would say take a vaccine, drug, or treatment without talking to one's doctor first. I'd have to see a source, though.

I don't see the connection either.

 

[Thief]

That doesn't make much sense.

creating one copy.....to produce one soul
is a bit.....lacking

Man was created to form unique spirit

and one copy is enough?

apparently not

 

[dybmh]

we have heard many adverse reactions - speaking of Covid

"we have heard..." That's a rumor. People believe rumors because they hear it repeatedly. When misleading information is shared vigorously on social media, people believe what they hear instead of researching it themselves.

There haven't been "many" adverse reactions. That's an exaggeration, but people believe it because they see the claim repeated online.

Researcher’s speech used to mislead about Covid-19 vaccine safety

A speech by a biomedical researcher stating that 21 percent of patients from the Moderna Covid-19 vaccine trial have experienced “serious adverse events” has been shared thousands of times on social media. But he is referencing data from phase 1 of the vaccine trial, in which researchers did not identify “trial-limiting safety concerns,” and only 0.5 percent of vaccine recipients reported serious reactions in the phase 3 trial, which involved thousands of people.
​

A claim comparing adverse events for COVID-19, flu vaccines exaggerates raw data

Facebook posts: Say "coronavirus vaccinations seem to be causing 50 times the adverse events of flu vaccinations after just the first of two shots."

PolitiFact's ruling: Mostly False

Here's why: An article widely shared on Facebook from the website of Ron Paul, a Texas doctor and former GOP congressman, carried this ominous headline:

"Coronavirus vaccinations seem to be causing 50 times the adverse events of flu vaccinations after just the first of two shots."

The Claim relies on tweets and unverified repoting of adverse effects:

The article reported on what it called "disturbing numbers" from a series of tweets a day earlier from Berenson.

Berenson’s tweets said he obtained his figures from the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.

VAERS is not designed to indicate whether a vaccine caused a health problem, but is good for detecting patterns of events that might indicate a problem, which in turn might trigger further investigation of a possible safety concern.

The site notes that it contains "unverified reports" of adverse events that occur after vaccination. Anyone can make a report.

Results of searches on the VAERS database appear with this caveat, among others: "VAERS reports alone cannot be used to determine if a vaccine caused or contributed to an adverse event or illness."
​

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Extremely odd. A few comments:

a) "religious believers" are not a monolith, so I'd be curious if there are surveys demonstrating a trend or if this observation is anecdotal,

b) if there is a distinction in the trend, if it exists, between different varieties of "religious believers," and

I think the OP addresses that. He doesn't say that religious people tend to be anti-vaxxers; he's saying that anti-vaxxers tend to be religious. This still leaves room for most religious people to be pro-vax.

c) non-theists frequently assert that non-theism implies no positive beliefs, only a lack of one. A strong correlation between belief in vaccine efficacy/safety/etc. and non-theism would seem to contradict that idea, in a very specific way, possibly indicative of a larger web of interrelated beliefs that in fact are implied or likely given someone identifies as an atheist.

I'm not sure I see that.

Anyone who isn't a theist is going to be excluded from groups where theism is a requirement of membership. This make non-theists less likely than theists to hold the beliefs that those groups espouse.

It seems to me that most reasonably informed people in general - theist and atheist alike - believe that the COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective. It's just that some of the anti-vaxxer groups tend to either focus on attracting theists or actively exclude atheists.

 

[Kenny]

"we have heard..." That's a rumor. People believe rumors because they hear it repeatedly. When misleading information is shared vigorously on social media, people believe what they hear instead of researching it themselves.

I apologize in my wording...

Proper statement,

"Twice we OVERheard nurses talking to each other... one at a restaurant and one at Walmart -- and we HEARD them saying they wouldn't take the vaccine".

Now... whether they are forced sometime or another to take it to work as a nurse is a different story.

 

[dybmh]

I apologize in my wording...

Proper statement,

"Twice we OVERheard nurses talking to each other... one at a restaurant and one at Walmart -- and we HEARD them saying they wouldn't take the vaccine".

Now... whether they are forced sometime or another to take it to work as a nurse is a different story.

What was your source of information that there had been "many adverse reactions" to the Covid vaccine?

 

[BilliardsBall]

I am fascinated by something that the news is barraging us with these days:

• there are many people, most of whom are religious believers, who do not believe that vaccines are safe and effective, and
• there are many other people who typically don't believe in gods (I am one), who are quite ready to believe in the efficacy and safety of vaccines, based on what science tells us.

Is this not odd?

And . . . there are many agnostics and atheists who believe conspiracies about vaccines. And?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

"we have heard..." That's a rumor. People believe rumors because they hear it repeatedly. When misleading information is shared vigorously on social media, people believe what they hear instead of researching it themselves.

There haven't been "many" adverse reactions. That's an exaggeration, but people believe it because they see the claim repeated online.

Researcher’s speech used to mislead about Covid-19 vaccine safety

A speech by a biomedical researcher stating that 21 percent of patients from the Moderna Covid-19 vaccine trial have experienced “serious adverse events” has been shared thousands of times on social media. But he is referencing data from phase 1 of the vaccine trial, in which researchers did not identify “trial-limiting safety concerns,” and only 0.5 percent of vaccine recipients reported serious reactions in the phase 3 trial, which involved thousands of people.

A claim comparing adverse events for COVID-19, flu vaccines exaggerates raw data

Facebook posts: Say "coronavirus vaccinations seem to be causing 50 times the adverse events of flu vaccinations after just the first of two shots."

PolitiFact's ruling: Mostly False

Here's why: An article widely shared on Facebook from the website of Ron Paul, a Texas doctor and former GOP congressman, carried this ominous headline: "Coronavirus vaccinations seem to be causing 50 times the adverse events of flu vaccinations after just the first of two shots." The Claim relies on tweets and unverified repoting of adverse effects:
The article reported on what it called "disturbing numbers" from a series of tweets a day earlier from Berenson. Berenson’s tweets said he obtained his figures from the CDC’s Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System. VAERS is not designed to indicate whether a vaccine caused a health problem, but is good for detecting patterns of events that might indicate a problem, which in turn might trigger further investigation of a possible safety concern.

The site notes that it contains "unverified reports" of adverse events that occur after vaccination. Anyone can make a report. Results of searches on the VAERS database appear with this caveat, among others: "VAERS reports alone cannot be used to determine if a vaccine caused or contributed to an adverse event or illness."
​

It's the illusory truth effect. I read about it awhile back and media is great at projecting it.

https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/features/xge-0000098.pdf Recent work suggests that the ease with which people comprehend statements (i.e., processing fluency) underlies the illusory truth effect. Repetition makes statements easier to process (i.e., fluent) relative to new statements, leading people to the (sometimes) false conclusion that they are more truthful (Unkelbach, 2007; Unkelbach & Stahl, 2009).

The Illusion of Truth: Believing Something is True When it's Not - Exploring your mind Brief version

I think skepticism is useful for any subject especially those with profound influence on the public as a whole.​

 

[Kenny]

What was your source of information that there had been "many adverse reactions" to the Covid vaccine?

Norway warns frail patients over 80 of vaccine risks after deaths

Netherlands reports around 100 cases of side effects from Pfizer vaccine

Portuguese woman dies two days after getting Pfizer covid vaccine | Daily Mail Online


'Proceeding with an abundance of caution': Australia asks for more information on Pfizer jab after Norwegian deaths

I'm sure there is more since this is a cursory effort.

 

[Rival]

I recently posted an article coming here from Norway
apparently more than two dozen people died
most of them were old......but hey
so am I

I think @Rival frubaled the item

I am sceptical about this particular vaccine right now, not vaccines as a whole.

 

[dybmh]

Norway warns frail patients over 80 of vaccine risks after deaths

13 people died who were over the age of 80.

Netherlands reports around 100 cases of side effects from Pfizer vaccine

2 people had severe allergic reactions. 23 people died of unknown causes after getting the vaccine.

Portuguese woman dies two days after getting Pfizer covid vaccine | Daily Mail Online

1 person died, but her death after examination is likely not vaccine related. See below:

... preliminary data from the autopsy showed “no evidence of a causal relationship between her death and the vaccine she received.”
However, the Ministry did not reveal the specific cause of death, citing the “secrecy of justice”.​

Portuguese nurse dies two days after getting the Pfizer Covid vaccine; no side effects noted​

'Proceeding with an abundance of caution': Australia asks for more information on Pfizer jab after Norwegian deaths

This is a repeat of the first article you provided. 13 people over the age of 80 died.

I'm sure there is more since this is a cursory effort.

Just a cursory search did not result in "many adverse reactions". That's an exaggertion. The question is, why was it exaggerated?

 

[Left Coast]

I think the OP addresses that. He doesn't say that religious people tend to be anti-vaxxers; he's saying that anti-vaxxers tend to be religious. This still leaves room for most religious people to be pro-vax.

Most people on Earth are religious, so that wouldn't particularly surprise me. Is there any survey data showing that anti-vaxxers are disproportionately theistic? And if so, does it show which sorts of religious groups they're part of?

I'm not sure I see that.

Anyone who isn't a theist is going to be excluded from groups where theism is a requirement of membership. This make non-theists less likely than theists to hold the beliefs that those groups espouse.

It seems to me that most reasonably informed people in general - theist and atheist alike - believe that the COVID-19 vaccines are safe and effective. It's just that some of the anti-vaxxer groups tend to either focus on attracting theists or actively exclude atheists.

Again, some survey data would really help fill in the gaps here.

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

creating one copy.....to produce one soul
is a bit.....lacking

Man was created to form unique spirit

and one copy is enough?

apparently not

You aren't even attempting to respond to anything I said. As you are willing to believe things without sufficient evidence and often feel compelled to go to bat for such ideas (wherein you most certainly must dodge the actual, realistic answers to questions that are put to you and instead try to obfuscate any and all ideas so that they point in any direction but to those tough answers), this is not surprising, but still always strange nonetheless.

 

[firedragon]

I am fascinated by something that the news is barraging us with these days:

• there are many people, most of whom are religious believers, who do not believe that vaccines are safe and effective, and
• there are many other people who typically don't believe in gods (I am one), who are quite ready to believe in the efficacy and safety of vaccines, based on what science tells us.

Is this not odd?

What are the statistics?

 

[Kenny]

13 people died who were over the age of 80.

2 people had severe allergic reactions. 23 people died of unknown causes after getting the vaccine.


1 person died, but her death after examination is likely not vaccine related. See below:

... preliminary data from the autopsy showed “no evidence of a causal relationship between her death and the vaccine she received.”
However, the Ministry did not reveal the specific cause of death, citing the “secrecy of justice”.​

Portuguese nurse dies two days after getting the Pfizer Covid vaccine; no side effects noted​

This is a repeat of the first article you provided. 13 people over the age of 80 died.

Just a cursory search did not result in "many adverse reactions". That's an exaggertion. The question is, why was it exaggerated?

I'm so glad you take so lightly the death of loved ones.

Be happy to do more (and, of course, we have no long-term information) :

55 People Died in US After Receiving COVID-19 Vaccines: Reporting System - CatholicCitizens.org

Wife of 'Very Healthy' Physician Who Died Soon After Receiving COVID-19 Vaccine Speaks Out About Risks

13 people died during Moderna’s COVID vaccine trial

Remember.... all I am saying is that it is just rolling out, many people are on a "wait and see" and then judging whether it is going to be worth it.

I am not saying "I'm against vaccines".... just that reports are still coming in and people are wary because of the side-effects.... including nurses.

 

[dybmh]

55 People Died in US After Receiving COVID-19 Vaccines: Reporting System - CatholicCitizens.org

This is using the same faulty source, the VAERS system.

Wife of 'Very Healthy' Physician Who Died Soon After Receiving COVID-19 Vaccine Speaks Out About Risks

This appears to be unrelated to the vaccine: Health officials investigating death of Miami physician shortly after getting Pfizer vaccine

13 people died during Moderna’s COVID vaccine trial

Only 2 of these 13 died as a result of the vaccine.

Remember.... all I am saying is that it is just rolling out, many people are on a "wait and see" and then judging whether it is going to be worth it.

I am not saying "I'm against vaccines".... just that reports are still coming in and people are wary because of the side-effects.... including nurses.

You said there were many adverse reactions to the vaccine. It was exaggerating and spreading rumors.