Biologist and Knackeditor Dirk Draulans asks for some consequence from Jean-Marie Dedecker in performing ‘Darwin’.
A while ago I made a promise to myself that I would never, ever again say a word to the notorious know-it-all Jean-Marie Dedecker, never afraid to tear something down, rarely willing to propose anything constructive. But when I heard on the radio last week that he was abusing my great guru Charles Darwin to spew nonsense about the corona crisis for the umpteenth time, I couldn’t resist and broke the promise I had made to myself. Need breaks not only law, but also expensive oaths.
As a Member of Parliament – I had almost forgotten that in addition to his mayorship of Middelkerke he still has a federal political mandate – he fulminated against Health Minister Frank Vandenbroucke (Vooruit) that he should let ‘Darwin’ take precedence over ‘Stalin’. He apparently meant that the coronavirus should just be allowed to proliferate and that people would naturally build up immunity, without the need for mandatory vaccines and covid safe tickets and other measures – at least that’s how I understood it.
Dedecker did not testify to ‘advancing insight’: adjusting visions in the light of new developments. It has been clear for a year and a half that herd immunity is an unrealistic starting point in the context of a virus that regularly changes strongly enough to cause new problems – if he looks up what happened in the Brazilian Amazon city of Manaus, for example, he will see how wrong he sits. It has also long been clear that pursuing herd immunity without accompanying measures will take an unacceptably high toll on human lives and long-term ill patients. But no, Dedecker discovered ‘Darwin’ and thinks he was right.
Darwin would be guaranteed to be vaccinated
What Dedecker clearly doesn’t know is that Charles Darwin spent his life searching for adequate treatment for a chronic illness that he probably acquired during his long journey around the world. The master himself was clearly not a fan of the ‘Darwing thought of Dedecker’, which implies that one should just let nature take its course, also with regard to the fight against ailments. He would be vaccinated today without hesitation!
For Dedecker, the question that human civilization has spawned all kinds of technical and medical devices is apparently of little value. We have to pretend they don’t exist, because they aren’t “Darwin” enough. The fighter in Dedecker wants to let the law of the fittest prevail (which, incidentally, is a misinterpretation of the Darwinian concept of natural selection).
Would he, for example, refuse chemotherapy for cancer treatment for himself or a loved one, because his Darwinian idea could also play a role in this, especially now that our immune system has turned out to be a very important weapon in the fight against cancer? A little consequence in this regard would be desirable.
If unvaccinated people make the choice not to protect themselves, I don’t think they should be a priority in our health care
I do have another proposal to let ‘Darwin’ play in the fight against the consequences of the corona pandemic: instead of giving unvaccinated corona patients priority over people with cancer, for example, who are waiting for a treatment described as ‘non-urgent’. , I would let them wait until a bed is available. If they choose not to protect themselves, I don’t think they should be a priority in our health care. If they choose ‘Darwin’, they will have to bear the consequences. They can be taken care of – we are not so uncivilized as to want to leave them to their own devices – but at the back of the pecking order and not the front. That seems logical to me.
Just a reiteration of some hard scientific facts for those who would doubt it. Vaccination reduces the risk of regular hospitalization by a factor of nine for people under 65 and a factor of three for people over 65. After vaccination, the chance of a stay in intensive care decreases by a factor of fourteen for people under 65 and 4.5 for people over 65. Vaccination reduces the risk of a corona infection by half, and the risk of infecting others by 63 percent (and these are figures for the contagious delta variant of the virus). Vaccination guarantees a lot of people a life without the consequences of being infected with the coronavirus! It’s too ridiculous for words to give that up for ‘Darwin’.
Incidentally, if Jean-Marie Dedecker likes to perform ‘Darwin’ after all, I have a suggestion for him: that he let the large seagulls that come to breed on roofs in his and other coastal municipalities and supposedly cause nuisance to citizens, because also they do nothing but lean on Darwinian principles. Chasing those gulls away is a very ‘Un-Darwinian’ attitude.
A while ago I made a promise to myself that I would never, ever again say a word to the notorious know-it-all Jean-Marie Dedecker, never afraid to tear something down, rarely willing to propose anything constructive. But when I heard on the radio last week that he was abusing my great guru Charles Darwin to spew nonsense about the corona crisis for the umpteenth time, I couldn’t resist and broke the promise I had made to myself. Emergency does not only break the law, but also expensive oaths. As a Member of Parliament – I had almost forgotten that in addition to his mayorship of Middelkerke, he still has a federal political mandate – he fulminated against Health Minister Frank Vandenbroucke (Vooruit) that this ‘Darwin’ should let it take precedence over ‘Stalin’. He apparently meant by this that people should just let the corona virus proliferate and that people would naturally build up immunity, without the need for mandatory vaccines and covid safe tickets and other measures – at least that’s how I understood it. insight’: adjusting visions in the light of new developments. It has been clear for a year and a half that herd immunity is an unrealistic starting point in the context of a virus that regularly changes strongly enough to cause new problems – if he looks up what happened in the Brazilian Amazon city of Manaus, for example, he will see how wrong he sits. It has also long been clear that pursuing herd immunity without accompanying measures will take an unacceptably high toll on human lives and long-term ill patients. But no, Dedecker discovered ‘Darwin’ and thinks he was right. What Dedecker clearly doesn’t know is that Charles Darwin spent his life looking for an adequate treatment for a chronic illness that he probably had during his long life. traveled around the world. The master himself was clearly not a fan of the ‘Darwing thought of Dedecker’, which implies that one should just let nature take its course, also with regard to the fight against ailments. He would be vaccinated today without hesitation! For Dedecker, the question that human civilization has spawned all kinds of technical and medical devices is apparently of little value. We have to pretend they don’t exist, because they aren’t “Darwin” enough. The fighter in Dedecker wants to let the law of the strongest prevail (which, incidentally, is an incorrect interpretation of the Darwinian concept of natural selection). Could you play Darwin’s idea, especially now that our immune system has been shown to be a very important weapon in the fight against cancer? A little consequence in this regard would be desirable. I do have another proposal to let ‘Darwin’ play in the fight against the consequences of the corona pandemic: instead of giving unvaccinated corona patients priority over people with cancer, for example, who are waiting for a treatment described as ‘non-urgent’, I would let them wait until a bed is available. If they choose not to protect themselves, I don’t think they should be a priority in our health care. If they choose ‘Darwin’, they will have to bear the consequences. They can be taken care of – we are not so uncivilized as to want to leave them to their own devices – but at the back of the pecking order and not the front. That seems logical to me. Just a reiteration of some hard scientific facts for those who would doubt it. Vaccination reduces the risk of regular hospitalization by a factor of nine for people under 65 and a factor of three for people over 65. After vaccination, the chance of a stay in intensive care decreases by a factor of fourteen for people under 65 and 4.5 for people over 65. Vaccination reduces the risk of a corona infection by half, and the risk of infecting others by 63 percent (and these are figures for the contagious delta variant of the virus). Vaccination guarantees a lot of people a life without the consequences of being infected with the corona virus! It’s too ridiculous for words to give that up for ‘Darwin’. Incidentally, if Jean-Marie Dedecker likes to perform ‘Darwin’ so much, I have a suggestion for him: that he let the large gulls that breed on roofs in his and other coastal municipalities and supposedly cause nuisance to citizens, because also they do nothing but lean on Darwinian principles. Chasing away those gulls is a very ‘Un-Darwinian’ attitude.
– .
