There's probably something to be said for the fact that TDC is a small, remote community, so it shouldn't be surprising that its website is reminiscent of a smaller, more communal web... but I'm not going to try to read too much into it and let the story stand on its own.

> What, precisely, do you think happens when a doctor sticks a needle into a newborn? Magic?

A small amount of bleeding? That, if uncontrolled, can be quickly treated because it's administered in a hospital setting? I don't think bleeding from injection sites is the cause of VKDB fatalities!

> You know, during the whole Covid debacle I used to seethe every time I heard some self-righteous twit talk about "misinformation" and "disinformation", because they were selectively using those terms to silence and attack legitimate, independent scientists and medical professionals who were trying to advance the public's understanding and ultimately save lives.

Is this some attempt at praising the anti-COVID vaccine crowd? Because those people aren't the unjustly silenced "independent scientists and medical professionals," they're quacks who were wrong.

This was unfortunately a waste of time, because you don't seem to be interested in hearing about benefits of lifesaving medical interventions; instead, you just want to peddle conspiracies and invoke a fear of doctors. I am only glad that I made you so angry that you're hopefully done talking.

We're not just talking about a cut or scrape that bleeds uncontrollably, but also internal bleeding.

> Stop trying to push big pharma products by scaring people.

Vitamins? We're calling vitamins "big pharma products" now?

> Women have been delivering babies without needing to poke holes in them for as long as there have been women and babies.

Yeah, and I'm sure that there were deaths from VKDB back then, too. I'm not sure what this obsession with "poking holes" in babies is, either. It's an injection, they're not scary or traumatizing; it's a routine way of administering all kinds of medicine.

"Trust the science, don't do research" isn't really a thing that I've seen from the supporters of infant vaccination. Typically, "trust the science" means that there's a broad scientific consensus on something. Doing individual research is fine, but knowing the limits of your own expertise is important. In the anti-vax community, I often see people stressing the importance of doing your own research or questioning authority, but then they latch on to poor-quality research, or misinterpreting results because they don't understand how to read them correctly (see: the entirety of the movement that believes vaccines cause autism).

Vitamin fortified formula can supplement vitamin K, though my understanding is that most formulas still contain insufficient vitamin K. Maybe parents who plan to formula-feed can have that conversation with their doctor. Oral administration still comes with the risk of vitamin K deficient bleeding, so I would encourage parents going this route to still carefully consider why a shot is considered the best standard of care.[1]

> now you've got an overdose condition to deal with.[1]

Funnily enough, I've read the same article, and didn't come away with the idea that vitamin K excess was a possibility warranting much concern. The symptoms of vitamin K overdose can be concerning, but typically require large repeated doses of vitamin K. I guess, if I am making an assumption, it's that since we have been doing this for decades with no real negative consequences, that doctors and nurses are well aware of the doses required to boost infant vitamin K without harming them. My understanding is that allergic reactions are the most common complication, and even those are rare.

https://health.ucdavis.edu/blog/cultivating-health/facts-and...

Yeah, limiting the impact and effects of a COVID infection is a compelling and reasonable argument to me. I'd like my booster shot, please.

> What happened to "My body, my choice"?

It is your choice. I can and will mock you for your choice if your reasoning doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

> Do you seriously think that people would refuse the vaccine if the benefits were so overwhelming?

Yes, anti-vaxers are inherently irrational. Overwhelming benefits do not change their opinion because being anti-vaccine is a core part of their identity.

I'm not free to take it, anymore. As you said, it's been taken off the market for most people.

> Fuck shunning people for not doing something to their bodies because they don't consider the benefits "obvious" or sufficient.

No, I like shunning people who are wrong and dumb.

Ok? Give me all the vaccines. Being able to train our immune systems to recognize and attack harmful or even deadly pathogens is like a super power that we all have access to.

> Another point is the conspicuous lack of honesty surrounding the COVID vaccine,

You'd have to help me out here; the vaccines worked well, and are safe for the vast majority of people. I don't think there was any lack of honesty surrounding them except from the people who are anti-vaccine.

Per the article: "All newborns lack vitamin K. No matter how much vitamin K a mother consumes, it doesn’t sufficiently pass through the placenta, and breast milk contains only small amounts."

I guess I don't see the point in rejecting the shot. It's a vitamin, it has a clear benefit, and no drawback.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48039391

Points: 65

# Comments: 95

I am not a fan of US copyright law, but if I torrented millions of books, I would be facing a felony charge in criminal court and a (with statutory damages as high as $150,000 per title in cases of willful infringement) multi-billion dollar lawsuit in civil court.

In my opinion, this has nothing to do with whether or not AI training is transformative and this fair use, and everything to do with whether or not the laws apply to everyone equally. If Facebook isn't forced to pay billions and elect a sacrificial executive to serve prison time, then I will remain angry.

MGS always rides the line between "it's actually just tecnology" and "no, it was really supernatural." This is true of Psycho Mantis in MGS1 as well, and The Sorrow in MGS3 is literally a ghost. I assume that Kojima has read up on the Stargate Project and other psychic soldier projects and likes to think about "what if one of those bore fruit?" Anyway, in the context of Fortune, it's a dramatic take on that: her powers were actually a magnetic device planted on her by The Patriots, but ACTUALLY actually she really does have some psychic ability which allows her to fight Ocelot in her final moments.

> And what about the weird thing where you start sword fighting your father/president/clone?

Well, that's actually pretty straightforward. You fought Solidus Snake, who was the third clone of Big Boss, and the "main antagonist" of the game (scare quotes because arguably the Patriots are the real antagonists). At the end of the game, it is revealed that Raiden's girlfriend Rosemary is a) real, b) alive, c) pregnant and d) being held captive by the Patriots, and they task Raiden with killing Solidus if he ever wants to see her again. Why a sword fight? I dunno, some things we must simply chalk up to "because it's cool."

If you want to dive further into who Solidus was, yes, he was also a pseudo-father to Raiden, in the sense that Raiden was raised as a child soldier and Solidus was (at the time) his commander. Solidus was President during the events of MGS1 under the name George Sears, but by MGS2 he's leading the Sons of Liberty as part of his anti-Patriots plot. Unfortunately, Ocelot is still working as a Patriots double-agent at this point, and Raiden's involvement is in turn orchestrated by the Patriots, so it doesn't quite work and the whole operation is manipulated from the start.