Andrelton Simmons to refuse COVID-19 vaccine

Status
Not open for further replies.

RetractableRoof

tolerates intolerance
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2003
3,545
Quincy, MA
1) The word some folks are looking for, is E X P E R I M E N T A L. That is the what this particular shot (or set of shots) is called.
2) A survival rate of over 99.7% in his assumed demographic (healthy and under 70) should he contract covid-19.
3) There are viable treatment protocols for covid-19 should he get it.
4) His voice *IS* important in any discussion, and suggestions that it is valid to shame anyone into accepting an experimental medical treatment when we do not know his personal medical history, or the conversations he's had with his medical practitioner is concerning. Let's say for just a hypothetical moment that he's seen a video of someone convulsing and experiencing bells palsy after taking the shot (they are out there) and is literally afraid to take the shot. That makes him an asshole that deserves shaming? What's right for me, isn't necessarily what is right for him, and he doesn't owe me an explanation or the press either. Whether he gets the shot or not is NONE of my business, nor is it if the subject in question is my neighbor. My parents were both vaccinated, and while I discussed the subject with them, in the end, it was still none of my business what they chose. After the shot they are still advised not to have contact with people, still wear a mask, and still social distance. They still can't visit with their grandkids, they still can't hug their friends of 40 years. They were told there was no guarantee they wouldn't get covid anyway. It is still NONE of my business. I will make sure I keep my social distance from his position in the field when I next go to a game though, can't be too safe in the new normal.

Just my two cents.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
14,034
Maine
1) The word some folks are looking for, is E X P E R I M E N T A L. That is the what this particular shot (or set of shots) is called.
2) A survival rate of over 99.7% in his assumed demographic (healthy and under 70) should he contract covid-19.
3) There are viable treatment protocols for covid-19 should he get it.
4) His voice *IS* important in any discussion, and suggestions that it is valid to shame anyone into accepting an experimental medical treatment when we do not know his personal medical history, or the conversations he's had with his medical practitioner is concerning. Let's say for just a hypothetical moment that he's seen a video of someone convulsing and experiencing bells palsy after taking the shot (they are out there) and is literally afraid to take the shot. That makes him an asshole that deserves shaming? What's right for me, isn't necessarily what is right for him, and he doesn't owe me an explanation or the press either. Whether he gets the shot or not is NONE of my business, nor is it if the subject in question is my neighbor. My parents were both vaccinated, and while I discussed the subject with them, in the end, it was still none of my business what they chose. After the shot they are still advised not to have contact with people, still wear a mask, and still social distance. They still can't visit with their grandkids, they still can't hug their friends of 40 years. They were told there was no guarantee they wouldn't get covid anyway. It is still NONE of my business. I will make sure I keep my social distance from his position in the field when I next go to a game though, can't be too safe in the new normal.

Just my two cents.
Wait, so is his voice important or is it none of our business what he has to say or do? Because it can only be one or the other. If his voice is important, then he should have to explain his unsolicited public statement regarding the vaccine. If no one should give a shit what he has to say about the topic because it's "none of our business" then clearly his voice is unimportant in the discussion.

The line in his tweet about not advocating for the vaccine kinda gives away the game. If it's a personal medical reason for not getting it, that's not a reason for him to refuse to advocate for those who are medically cleared for the vaccine to get it as soon as they are eligible. He's philosophically opposed to the vaccine. Fine. I have zero qualms about calling him an asshole for that position.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
12,156
Regarding whether MLB can mandate that Simmons gets vaccinated:

While the answer is somewhere between "probably not" and "no", one answer that is not in doubt is whether countries can mandate vaccination before being allowed to cross their borders. And that answer is "yes", and that is the position most countries will adopt once the majority of their own residents are vaccinated. Assuming that the Blue Jays are back in Toronto by conclusion of the All Star break, Canada will be under zero obligation to allow Simmons to cross the border, and there will be nothing anyone can do about it.
 

RetractableRoof

tolerates intolerance
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2003
3,545
Quincy, MA
Wait, so is his voice important or is it none of our business what he has to say or do? Because it can only be one or the other. If his voice is important, then he should have to explain his unsolicited public statement regarding the vaccine. If no one should give a shit what he has to say about the topic because it's "none of our business" then clearly his voice is unimportant in the discussion.

The line in his tweet about not advocating for the vaccine kinda gives away the game. If it's a personal medical reason for not getting it, that's not a reason for him to refuse to advocate for those who are medically cleared for the vaccine to get it as soon as they are eligible. He's philosophically opposed to the vaccine. Fine. I have zero qualms about calling him an asshole for that position.
Hmmm, *I'm* saying that his voice is important, because you know, ALL voices are important - not just the ones that I agree with, or the ones that aren't held by people I believe to be assholes. I'm pretty consistent there, there can be no doubt.

I’ve received some questions and some requests regarding the vaccine. And for personal reasons and past experience I will not be taking it or advocating for it. I hope I don’t have to explain myself. And hope you all make the best decision for you and your family’s health
a) His statement is that he's received questions and some requests (maybe his employers asking him to make a pro-vaccine PSA???). On what planet do you take that to mean that he offered an unsolicited public statement? He's pretty clear in that, I've got no reason to disbelieve him. Sounds like you are the one who wants it both ways to be honest.

b) No, he won't be taking the vaccine, nor advocating for it. So, IMO, he has fulfilled any obligation he has as a public voice having been specifically asked the question. He was respectful, and said the decision was personal. So, NO, beyond that statement, it is NONE of my business. There's no inconsistency on my part. He IS a public figure, he HAS been asked the question, he answered the question politely, and wished everyone else the best decision for them and their family. That's as graceful as it gets from a modern athlete, while actually answering the question. The fact that you don't like his personal decision, or that because of the inference you drew based on him declining to advocate for it makes him an asshole in your eyes is more a reflection on you than it is on him.

Again, you don't know his personal experiences (which he did reference). But you've decided he is an asshole. You do you. I for example talked to my physician about the vaccines. His answer was that the "actual data about covid from a science perspective was all over the map". He recommended following all safety protocols to prevent spread and contracting covid. But his response was that anyone that was of reproductive age should think long and hard before accepting an experimental medical procedure that used a medical strategy never implemented before (my paraphrased words: mucking with DNA) and which had NEVER been substantially tested on humans previously. So, if following that summary of information from my medical doctor who knows my specific medical history, and has treated me for over 10 years places me in the asshole bucket in your eyes, I'll live with it.

Finally: This baseball player who has his own private family and medical history (and I assume with the medical advice of his own physician) has made his choice not to take it. If, he further decided he couldn't then in good conscience advocate someone else to make a different decision than he did - it would indicate he was a person of principle, not an asshole. I don't have to agree with him, to respect that he wasn't going to advocate for/make a PSA that he didn't believe in. [All conjecture on my part, I'm assuming the 'requests' part.]

Experimental medical procedure with a DNA modification strategy never implemented before and not substantially tested in humans to prevent an event with a 99.7% or better survival rate in healthy people younger than 70.
 
Apr 8, 2017
3
Experimental medical procedure with a DNA modification strategy never implemented before and not substantially tested in humans to prevent an event with a 99.7% or better survival rate in healthy people younger than 70.

Are you talking about the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines? They're mRNA vaccines. There's no "DNA modification strategy" involved. Did your doctor tell you that? If so get a new doctor.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
14,034
Maine
a) His statement is that he's received questions and some requests (maybe his employers asking him to make a pro-vaccine PSA???). On what planet do you take that to mean that he offered an unsolicited public statement? He's pretty clear in that, I've got no reason to disbelieve him. Sounds like you are the one who wants it both ways to be honest.
Were those questions and requests public too? I mean, if my neighbor asked me about what to do with a tree along our property border, should I answer him directly or should I post about it on Twitter? Unless he was getting public requests, offering a public answer seems extraneous and unsolicited to me.
 

RetractableRoof

tolerates intolerance
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2003
3,545
Quincy, MA
Were those questions and requests public too? I mean, if my neighbor asked me about what to do with a tree along our property border, should I answer him directly or should I post about it on Twitter? Unless he was getting public requests, offering a public answer seems extraneous and unsolicited to me.
So now you are tilting at windmills. He is in the public eye and publicly stated he'd gotten questions and requests. Now you want details about the timing/location of the questions. Just cut to the chase... anyone that doesn't get this experimental medical procedure so that you can feel comfortable getting back to normal (i.e. going to a ballgame) is an asshole in your eyes. I understand, and don't need to continue any further.
 

Red(s)HawksFan

Well-Known Member
Silver Supporter
SoSH Member
Jan 23, 2009
14,034
Maine
So now you are tilting at windmills. He is in the public eye and publicly stated he'd gotten questions and requests. Now you want details about the timing/location of the questions. Just cut to the chase... anyone that doesn't get this experimental medical procedure so that you can feel comfortable getting back to normal (i.e. going to a ballgame) is an asshole in your eyes. I understand, and don't need to continue any further.
Bingo. Didn't realize I wasn't being explicit about it.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Staff member
Dope
What Andrelton Simmons says online is not likely to affect the vaccine rollout, just as what Curt Schilling says will not affect LGBT rights. But we recognize there is value in making it socially unacceptable to express bigoted views. I believe there is also value in marginalizing people who call into question the safety and efficacy of vaccines.

The analogy isn’t perfect; it matters that Simmons’s opinions are borne out of ignorance rather than malice. But it doesn’t follow that Simmons should simply be ignored. Even if Simmons is unpersuadable, maybe the blowback he gets will persuade the next dumbass celebrity to keep his/her benighted views private.
 

nattysez

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2010
5,273
FWIW, Simmons is far from alone. At least two of the GS Warriors have said they won't get vaccinated. There's a lot of misinformation out there, as evidenced by RF, so it's going to take some work to get 85% buy-in.
 

nattysez

Member
SoSH Member
Sep 30, 2010
5,273

cromulence

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 25, 2009
5,272
So now you are tilting at windmills. He is in the public eye and publicly stated he'd gotten questions and requests. Now you want details about the timing/location of the questions. Just cut to the chase... anyone that doesn't get this experimental medical procedure so that you can feel comfortable getting back to normal (i.e. going to a ballgame) is an asshole in your eyes. I understand, and don't need to continue any further.
Dude, we get it - you're an asshole and you believe in asshole rights. Fine.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.