Wednesday 11 November 2020

This is the better arm for the vaccine, nurse

In that post of mine two days ago, about the announcement of the first Covid-19 vaccine, I expressed some hesitation about accepting an early invitation to be inoculated, just in case there were longer-term side-effects that the very extensive, but short, trials hadn't yet brought to light. 

I now think my hesitation could be misinterpreted! 

To be clear: I am - most certainly - not one of those habitual naysayers who are against everything. Nor am I a fearful soul, afraid of everything until it's proven to be 100% safe (which is an impossibility). I am merely cautious, in a way I wouldn't have been twenty years ago. It's natural to look before you leap, when you are older. 

But actually it all comes down to a rational judgement of risk. 

For me, the more immediate (and well-proven) danger is from getting infected, and then having a bad and possibly fatal illness. That's the thing to keep in mind. The possibility of some as yet unknown general problem emerging many months after innoculation shouldn't be dismissed, but at present there are no indications of any such problem; and if the vaccine passes its stringent safety appraisal by the competent health authorities, and gets certified for use, then rationally I ought to take my place in the queue for it. 

After all, I eagerly queued up for this winter's ordinary flu jab, and had no thought for any unwelcome side-effects. And surely that ordinary flu vaccine wouldn't have had so much intensive testing as the new Covid-19 vaccine. 

I hear that on Social Media a boatload of anti-vaccine rumours are flying around. I can't see them of course, and haven't read them, as I don't have any Social Media apps installed. I rely instead on the regular news sources. Nothing I know about Social Media makes me want to join Facebook or Twitter, or any of the rest. I am certain that I'm serene, relaxed and mentally stable in a way I couldn't be, if I were constantly watching what people put up on those platforms. 

However, is this blog itself part of Social Media? 

I wouldn't say so, as it has never been any kind of discussion forum, even in its heyday a decade ago. And nowadays it's just a place for writing about things that catch my eye, my personal interests, my travels, and for building up an autobiographical record. 

I'd hate to think that any post of mine had influenced somebody in a bad way, or deflected them from acting in their own interest. Even blog writers like me have a duty not to cause harm. 

2 comments:

  1. When bloggers started flooding onto early facebook I resisted their requests to follow them for quite a while but when so many stopped blogging I relented. I read the horrendous terms and conditions, possibly one of the few who ever bothered, then joined with extreme caution. it soom became clear that little of interest was being written and it was infested with infantile apps and quizzes all of which were designed to harvest as much data on everyone AND their contacts if you just read the terms and condition!.

    About a year ago Zuckerberg had the nerve to swear to US congress and our parliament that he had no idea that the things I had found to be going on were active on the thing he invented! We are treated like fools.

    I quit that antisocial media site and felt immediate relief. It's legacy will be comparable to the devastation of the current virus pandemic if humanity ever survives either.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I feel the same way. I always thought that Facebook had a sinister side, and its bad effect on the mentally vulnerable is now well-documented. Even more so, Twitter. And the more recent Instagram has made artificial image-making an end in itself. My own particular aversions to Facebook are based on feeling stalked during my brief acquaintance with it years ago, its triviality (which irks you too) and the maddening smugness and arrogance of Mr Zuckerberg and his exploitative and responsibility-dodging team (ditto). It makes me shudder.

    The regular media are no saints, either, but at least the BBC et al don't put stupid ideas into weak-headed minds, or push them towards suicide.

    Lucy

    ReplyDelete


This blog is public, and I expect comments from many sources and points of view. They will be welcome if sincere, well-expressed and add something worthwhile to the post. If not, they face removal.

Ideally I want to hear from bloggers, who, like myself, are knowable as real people and can be contacted. Anyone whose identity is questionable or impossible to verify may have their comments removed. Commercially-inspired comments will certainly be deleted - I do not allow free advertising.

Whoever you are, if you wish to make a private comment, rather than a public one, then do consider emailing me - see my Blogger Profile for the address.

Lucy Melford