sci-fi author, beatmaker

Category: Culture Rants/Shares Page 4 of 21

Vaccine Hesitancy and the Pursuit of Purity

Recently I unsubscribed from Chris Masterjohn’s YouTube channel. While previously I’d found his perspective on vitamin D and other nutrition research to be interesting and helpful, the fact that he got Covid twice and still won’t take the vaccine was just too much for me. I just don’t have any patience for vaccine hesitancy when there is so much evidence that the vaccine offers protection against severe disease and death from Covid. I don’t disagree with Masterjohn that some supplements (such as vitamin D and zinc) can also offer protection against severe Covid. And of course contracting and surviving Covid offers some natural immunity as well. But as I’ve written about before, continually rolling the dice when the stakes are so high just isn’t a good strategy. There are just too many cases of robustly healthy people who take all the right supplements getting severely sick from Covid.

So what’s behind vaccine hesitancy? Academics who have looked into the issue associate vaccine hesitancy with values such as purity and personal liberty. Many people are willing to accept the larger risk of Covid (or measles, or other serious diseases) to avoid the much smaller risks of adverse side effects from vaccines.

It makes me think of other health areas where priorities get mixed up in the pursuit of purity and optimization. For example:

  • Suffering from dehydration because you don’t want to drink tap water (which is mostly safe — though in some parts of the U.S. it isn’t)
  • Avoiding the sun so much (to prevent skin cancer) that you become deficient in vitamin D, and miss the blood-pressure lowering/nitric-oxide-releasing benefits of direct sunlight
  • Not getting enough calories or nutrients because of strict dietary restrictions (organic-only, veganism, etc.)

Tolerating some levels of impurity (in air, water, food, radiation and chemical exposure) can ultimately improve health outcomes.

More on Ideological Subversion

I’m trying to learn more about ideological subversion, specifically the KGB-backed, bring-down-the-USA kind. Last week I linked to this NYT Op-Ed that serves as a kind of broad introduction to the concept. This week I read a post on Paul Orlando’s blog Unintended Consequences that gets into some more details. (The post is concise and illuminating, please click through and read.) Orlando summarizes the four stages of ideological subversion as outlined by ex-KGB agent Yuri Bezmenov:

Strategic Thinking: What Has Changed?

Lately I’ve been playing chess. I’m not very good. After a hundred-or-so games in recent weeks, I can beat the lichess.org computer at level 4 only about 20% of the time (no time limit). For the first few weeks I was getting back into chess, I played human beings from around the world in timed games. But I found that playing computer opponents, without a time limit, is less stressful and helps me learn more quickly.

My main weakness in chess is getting too excited about my plan, and moving my pieces before carefully evaluating the board. One question I’ve been asking myself lately after my opponent’s move is what has changed?

I find this question more useful than trying to ask myself what my opponent’s intentions are. A single move in chess often does multiple things, opening up multiple avenues of attack but also weakening defenses. My opponent may not even realize all the repercussions of their move. And if I don’t look carefully, I certainly won’t.

I’ve been considering this same question in different contexts, including my personal life, the trajectory of the United States, and global climate and ecosystems. Developments in the United States are most relevant to strategic, competitive thinking; our nation and way of life has actual enemies trying to bring us down.

Rejecting the Covid Vaccine is a Poor-Odds Bet

Even among the well educated, people are avoiding or delaying the Covid vaccine.

Some of the reasons for vaccine avoidance, like the fear of getting microchipped, are ridiculous.

Other reasons, such as fear of side effects, are more rational.

But no matter how you slice the pie, avoiding the vaccine is a terrible decision, statistically. This is true even though most people who avoid the vaccine will not die or get seriously ill from Covid.

If someone offered you a small reward, say $10, for taking a risk with a low likelihood of occurring, but potentially dire consequences, you would be wise to turn down that bet. You wouldn’t play Russian roulette for $10, even if the revolver chambered a hundred bullets and ninety-nine were empty.

Betting your health, reputation, or your entire net worth is an all-in bet. Even if the potential rewards are amazing, all-in bets are always a bad idea.

When you take on risk, the winning strategy is always to take on the least risk possible for the greatest possible reward. Rejecting the Covid vaccine is the opposite kind of bet: low reward but potentially high risk. It’s the same kind of bet you take if you don’t wear a seat belt in a car, or don’t wear a helmet while riding a motorcycle.

The reward for rejecting the Covid vaccine is avoiding 1-2 days of normal side effects (I had them, they’re unpleasant), and also avoiding the extremely small chance (~1 in 250,000 at the most) of serious side effects. The risk is that you’ll become seriously ill or die of Covid. If you’re young and healthy, perhaps this is only a 1 in 1,000 chance, but it could be as high as 1 in 50 if you’re older and/or have underlying health conditions.

If you want to take risks with your health, take small risks that have potentially great rewards. Take multiple walks every day. There are risks associated with taking walks, even if you’re careful how you go about it. But the risks are generally low, and the rewards (better mood, better cardiovascular health, reduced risk of diabetes) are huge.

Life is full of risk, much of it unavoidable. But when we consciously choose to take on more risk, we should make sure the upside is worth it.

A Solarpunk Manifesto

The other day I found A Solarpunk Manifesto in my inbox, thanks to Joe Stech and his News Refinery newsletter.

I was vaguely aware of solarpunk as a genre, associating it with progressive technological optimism, an alternative to both dystopian science fiction and steampunk. But I’d never read any attempt to describe it explicitly.

Reading the manifesto, my general reaction was yes. Count me in for science fiction as activism, post-scarcity, post-capitalism, post-hierarchical society, and the whole shebang.

While I’ve never described the Reclaimed Earth series as solarpunk, the Ringstation Coalition culture checks all of the boxes. So do aspects of my novelette The Icelandic Cure, and many of my short stories.

So yeah, I guess I’m a solarpunk author, at least in part.

Here’s the manifesto in full, shared via Creative Commons license:

Page 4 of 21

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén