They also masked more, since they didn't turn it into some political self identity thing like conservatives here did. In fact they were being overrun with it until they forced masking, and it didn't turn into some red state badge of courage there. There's some huge divisions in society on all sorts of issues, but the brunt of the animosity came from the antivax side on this one. The fact that you guys still care is proof enough of that, i got vaccinated and moved on years ago. I have covid right now, no big deal since I'm vaccinated, don't really care what people's opinions on the matter are, at all. My doctors suggested i get vaccinated, so i did, end of the story for me. That doesn't make me an uneducated sheep, on the contrary it simply made my body more resistant to the illness without the risks of getting it while i was undergoing chemo and didn't have a functional immune system.
What do you mean here? That we would vilify the source of what exactly? Alternative medicine with non medical journal sources as their proof? Yeah I'm gonna vilify that all day, because that's not where real medical science comes from. That's what is called media literacy, using the ability to tell instantly what is real and what is not simply by where it from where it comes from. The fact that Mick talked to a guy who said that horse dewormer is also effective is a cool story, but thats anecdotal at best, as much as i think that all parties involved are honest and trustworthy my health is worth more to me and so I'm gonna go with what my doctors say, and they go by what the studies say. That's what modern medicine is, and we're blessed to have it. If there are actual studies published demonstrating the efficacy of ivermectin I'll believe them, because then it would be from a reputable source. Until then nope, but since I'm vaccinated i simply don't care, I took the best medical advice available at the time and went with it, and i no longer need to bother. If my current infection for some reason gets bad, I'll go to the hospital and they'll treat me with some drug that has also undergone the same scrutiny in testing, because that's what modern science based medicine is.
We've come a long way from eating tiger bones and rhino horns and curing diseases with tobacco smoke and ritualistic dances, advancements and study in the medical field today are published in legit medical journals as they have been for over 100 years. Those studies are what i studied when i was doing chemo, and why i was able to catch and fix my original doctors ineptitude and save my own life from his malpractice, however well intentioned it was. Since i knew the studies, what they tested and their results, i could make logical informed decisions and could converse with my doctors on a more equal level, several actually got mad and wondered who i was talking to and was using to undercut their authority. I flatly denied second line treatment until they had fulfilled the requirements laid out in the standard of care guidelines, because i had read the studies that showed that complete remissions often look like partial ones on a pet scan because of inflammation, so a biopsy is needed to comfirm the partial remission. Without that i would have been subjected to much more and harsher chemo and a stem cell transplant, which i may have died from and likely would have resulted in much worse physical side effects. Sources matter, especially when it comes to stuff like this.
