Posted by alexandra_k on December 10, 2020, at 15:38:21
nz accuses first world countries of stockpiling vaccine.
first world countries invested in companies to allow them to pay employees to do quality research and develop and make vaccines. and then to make the equipment for it to be manufactured more widely and so on.
i don't think it is fair to accuse a nation of 'hoarding' when it is the case that the nation commissioned or paid in advance for the thing to be developed and produced.
nz accuses other countries of that which it sees in itself. in double-think fashion. let me explain it. nz thinks itself a first world country. it recently learned that it can't manage a flu vaccine because what happens is the 'doctors' the university councils saw fit to select to train and graduate refuse to get the vaccine to the people who most need it because they think they can turn a greater profit from hoarding it and then selling it to highest bidders a little later.
nz sees in itself this tendancy to hoard and takes itself to be first world. so now it tells the world (and the new zealand people) that it is a problem that first world countries hoard vaccines and that is why new zealanders don't have access.
nz says that some nations brought enough vaccine to vaccinate their entire population three times over!
but two vaccinations are required for over 90 per cent immunity, they think. and who knows how that was going to turn out... it might have turned out that three doses would be required. it might have turned out that more than three doses would be required, even. we don't know how long immunity lasts... it might only be a couple months... in which case they will be pleased they had the foresight to have purchased... well... enough for 3 vaccines per person...
cry cry cry for hand-outs, nz.
cry cry cry while contributing next to nothing towards the costs of production.
and it's not about hte money.
that's the real kicker. how little it is about the money, really, and how very very very very much it is about everything else.___________________________________
the government is still going on about healthcare workers getting prority access to vaccination.
why?
does vaccination prevent the person becoming a vector? if a healthcare worker on the front line gets a vaccination so they don't believe they are at personal risk of getting covid...
will they really revert in their behaviors, then? i mean, they'll stop campaigning for access (they still don't have access to) N95 masks -- right? they don't need to wear masks for their own personal protection. handwashing etc...
but they can still be vectors. transmit the disease from people in their care to other people...
that's the scariest situation of all. healthcare workers who know they are not themselves in any danger at all but who have the power to transmit it from person to person to person.
see why it would be irresponsible to give vaccine doses to new zealand?
the healthcare workers (not the high risk ones, the low risk ones) will steal for themselves and sell to the highest bidder.
in order for the rich to get richer and the mass extermination of those who were refused / denied / declined doses of vaccine.
i am getting a better handle on how new zealand thinks about vaccine.
my thesis didn't really speak to new zealanders because of the whole rich getting richer psychopathic aspect of things where people genuinely thought vaccines were good and they were intentionally withholding them from others.
but then the cases of incompetent vaccine shots, as well. in the pacific islands... the mmr vaccine... mixed with expired anasthetic...
______________________-
Faucci and some of the doctors are grrrrrrrrrrr angry upset confused having a hard time understanding why people are refusing to follow the rules...
the issue is in how different people have different needs.
if you put a person like me into a over-crowded concert or lecture hall or whatever where the people are all bumping up and jostling and so on it's torture for me.
but other people NEED that kind of social contact. they NEED it.
and the small group environments where people have their guard down. the 2 or 5 or 10 or 20 or the crowded bar... where people are intimate. whispering sweet nothings. yelling in the face of. chest bumping fist bumping breathing all over.
some people NEED that kind of social contact. they NEED it.
i don't think it is that people don't believe in Covid. i think it is that people NEED teh kind of social contact that teh public health etc people are saying are super-spreader events.
i think it is a genuine need for these people. because they seemed compelled to congregate... even if the police shot at them. they were compelled to congregate. i am not meaning to disparage the message of black lives matter or anything.. but i do think if that wasn't the reason / pretext there would have been another reason that would have served as a common cause for mass public congregation with masks off...
people seem to NEED it.
not all of them... but... most of them.
i think young people have the hardest time forsaking that kind of social contact.
i guess it is a kind of risky behavior with what we know about disease and disease transmission.
but i think that people genuinely are saying 'i'd rather be dead than forsake these freedoms -- this is how important doing those things is to me'.
genuinely.
it's not stupid.
genuinely.
it's a real expression of their psychological need. physiological need.
that needs to be understood and... things figured out about it... how to... cater to it / work with it...
yeah.
poster:alexandra_k
thread:1112875
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/poli/20200805/msgs/1112875.html