>I am with you, vaccines risks are rare and unlikely, but they do >exist. >Risk data available online is only there to either debunk it, or is >written by kooks. Real data doesn't exist. > >This is an issue of populations, not a person. > >The refusal to discuss risks, as remote as they may be, is a POLITICAL >CHOICE with a clear agenda. It may even be the right thing to do. But >it is not a lie.
I'm lost by this whole argument. Global climate change is a rich, complex issue but the science itself is fairly clear. Wait. I've said this all before: http://seclists.org/funsec/2009/q3/123 In fact, it seems that we all keep repeating ourselves on this matter, those for and against the argument. Alex -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Gadi Evron Sent: Thursday, November 26, 2009 2:51 PM To: [email protected] Cc: funsec; Rich Kulawiec Subject: Re: [funsec] Was the ClimateGate Hacker Justified? Join the Debate! [email protected] wrote: > On Thu, 26 Nov 2009 20:28:27 +0200, Gadi Evron said: > >> Take vaccinations for example. They are in the vast majority safe, >> and if the populaton isn't innoculated, rather than the person, shit >> happens. And yet the entire industry just insists they are PERFECTLY >> SAFE. NO RISKS. NO DISCUSSION. > > Odd, I recently got my seasonal flu shot - and wasn't permitted to get > it till I had read a nice little handout that listed the common and > uncommon risks attached to it. Yeah, had the muscle soreness warned > about, and no, didn't have the allergic reactions, but had been warned what > to look for.... > > But when you start looking at the *actual* risks, and realize that the > poor person is more likely to get killed in a car accident on the way > to/from the clinic to get the shot than to have serious > life-threatening side effects, what *do* you do to make Joe Sixpack > want to do it? Advertise it as "no risk", or attach lengthy > disclaimer comparing the actual risks with things like driving to the > clinic, with enough explanations of statistics so the person can evaluate it? > > Remember Gadi - you're trying to get that guy who asked you "Do you > want fries with that?" yesterday to get the shot. What do you tell him? I am with you, vaccines risks are rare and unlikely, but they do exist. Risk data available online is only there to either debunk it, or is written by kooks. Real data doesn't exist. This is an issue of populations, not a person. The refusal to discuss risks, as remote as they may be, is a POLITICAL CHOICE with a clear agenda. It may even be the right thing to do. But it is not a lie. Gadi. _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list. _______________________________________________ Fun and Misc security discussion for OT posts. https://linuxbox.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/funsec Note: funsec is a public and open mailing list.
