They are citing ONS figures of excess deaths as proof the vaccines are killing people. I tried to explain that not being able to get a doctor’s appointment, staying home and getting fat, etc explain the figures (official sources have said it too) but they said it’s “gaslighting” and then said their family doctor wouldn’t get the vaccine.
A lot of people are saying cut them off, but I have a family member who was into the anti-vax conspiracy theories and kinda still is, but it’s much less of a focus now and is pretty obviously just being carried forward by cognitive dissonance at this point. There will never be total victory, but there can be a reasonable truce.
What I’d suggest is the most counter-intuitive strategy - show genuine interest. Say “Ok, I want to know more, but I need you to be specific. Tell me what your theory is and what the evidence is, I’ll take my time looking at it, and respond in detail.”
Keep in mind, they probably won’t pay attention to whatever your respond with. That’s ok. The response isn’t the point, pinning them down on what they think is. So often these things are purely emotional, and forcing them into a logical framework will make them do the work for you. As for the response, odds are it’s some combination of cherry-picked data and spurious correlations, if not outright made up facts. Think of alternate explanations for what they’re showing you that are more plausible than a vaccine killing people. And remember that if the vaccine really was killing people, it would be really obvious, not something we need look deep into the matrix to find.
My sister once tried to come at me with the 5g antenna vaccine thing.
“Do you have a source? That sounds like fox news.”
She spent almost an hour on her phone trying to find something credible and then never brought it up again.
I’ve been waiting for over a year now for my dad to send me his source for “the new information that’s come out about the vaccines” when he asked me if I regretted getting it yet…
Wow, wasn’t expecting a reasonable and emotionally grounded response as one of the top comments.
Keep up the good work my dude.
You’re not going to satisfy unmet emotional needs with logical arguments.
So often these things are purely emotional, and forcing them into a logical framework will make them do the work for you.
This is a good point. While I was recruiting, they used to say that people make decisions based on emotion and then later go back and try to use logic to explain why they did it.
I have been also suggesting to these people I meet in the real world that it’s probably the micro-plastics that are causing the rise in deaths/autism/whatever bullshit they say. I’m trying to get them to focus on more environmental stuff and blaming companies.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Tell them that you’re a sheeple, and got the safe dose of the vaccine, since they want to keep the compliant people around. Tell them it’s too bad they’re on “the list” of bad people.
Tell them that’s completely true, and that if they keeps spreading the truth the black vans will come for them, they know too much.
The birds have already heard the rumors, and the clock is ticking. They better do something and shut up before they end up in “the facility”.
Every time he lies about vaccines you break one of his fingers and tell him lying is bad for his health.
Jokes aside, ask him who his doctor is, call up his doctor on speaker and ask the doctor if they’d recommend vaccines. He is almost certainly lying to you because he thinks “you believe doctors, ergo I will lie and say a doctor supports my position in an attempt to manipulate you”.
If you think they’d be open to it, try Bayes’ theorem. Ask them to give percent likelihoods for the following:
A. The odds that the government (or whoever) is trying to kill everyone, before taking the evidence of excess deaths into account
B. The odds of seeing excess deaths for any possible reason, not just their conspiracy hypothesis
C. The odds of seeing excess deaths if the conspiracy hypothesis were true.Then logically, the odds of the conspiracy being real given the excess deaths should be A*C/B. If you disagree with them on the outcome, you must disagree on one or more of the assumptions (probably A—if it’s B, you can find the objective odds by checking historical data).
If you still disagree on the prior assumption (A), you can set aside the excess deaths argument and ask what other evidence led them to form that prior assumption. Then you can repeat the process until you either reach agreement or they’re left with an assumption they have no evidence for.
…You are asking people who… willfully choose to be idiots to… do science?
I mean, you do you, but at the point someone is willing to believe “the top scientists in the world are trying to get you killed” you might as well consider them lost, as they are ignoring elementary-level statistics.
People are different and respond to the same message differently depending on the source. OP might have an in with their loved one and therefore a chance of changing their minds.
That’s a nice sentiment but no, it won’t work. If your family member rattles conspiranoia to your face, it means they already don’t care about you to enough a point to not only openly do that, but also they are probably unvaxxed and likely unmasked at the moment. Or every single time.
At that point, they don’t care for you. Period.
Or they care about you and want you to “see the light”. Most people drinking the conspiracy kool-aid aren’t evil, just gullible and ignorant.
You can’t use logic to talk someone out of a position they didn’t use logic to get into in the first place
Well, not with that attitude.
IIRC there was a study where people with strong opinions talked to an Al and the process changed their minds.
Edit:
Durably reducing conspiracy beliefs through dialogues with AI https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.adq1814
Just mock them.
“Yeah, sure. It’s all apart of Elvis’s plan to return as the antichrist.”
“If you think the world’s top scientists are trying to kill you, then why would you listen to any expert about anything? They’ll save you from yourself when you’re wrong anyway. Would you do the same for them? That’s why they’re trustworthy, and you and your sources are not.”
Seriously. Take your car to a baker next time you have trouble.
“Bye.”
Then leave and stay gone.
Not everything requires a response and at some point you have to pick your battles. They have revealed to you that they are an idiot. It is not your job to fix them.
Seriously, I’ve had multiple conversations with my BIL where he comes over to me and says something insane, and my response is just “huh okayyy…” and I walk away without saying anything else. I don’t care to be polite anymore.
Sometimes the best response is no response at all. Silence can be deafening.
I’m often a dick. I probably wouldn’t say anything immediately, and then use that asinine opinion to dismiss anything else the person says later. Forever. They say something about <whatever topic>, “Yeah, but you also think vaccines kill people, so we already know you are an idiot.” Just on repeat on every opinion they voice, until they never want to say anything around me or talk to me.
Yup. This is the answer.
It depends on how invested you are in their health. I wouldn’t do that to my mother, for instance.
You can’t logic someone out of something they didn’t logic themselves into, and they definitely got emotionally attached to antivax before they found “statistics” to back shit up.
This is the answer.
You can’t reason someone out of an unreasonable position.
The only response is to ask them what evidence they would require to change their position.
They’ll inevitably reveal that their assertions are merely beliefs because it’s not practically possible to prove nor disprove them.
I generally reframe it from a perspective even they think they understand: Money.
Governments want their money. Less Population = Less Taxes for them to take, ergo, no government is trying to lower their population. And do they, the audience, think that the government is willing to have less money?
I don’t think so!
Maybe not the answer you’re looking for, but I have an uncle like that.
I suggest going no contact if you can.
Reason being, they don’t care about facts, nothing you say will convince them.
