That's the point. And, as medical professionals they should see little difference in getting a vaccine for other diseases vs Covid. That they don't, to me, signifies they have been influenced politically. Sorry if you disagree, but that is the way I see it, especially given the numbers from the ANA and AMA and some of the stories I have seen that much of these medical professionals are located in Red states. Not all. But a whole bunch.
Isn't that exactly my point? Not sure what you are getting at here.
I find it strange that those in the medical community are so adverse to getting the Covid vaccine when, just to be hired by most medical facilities you have to be up to date or get vaccinated against things like MMR, Hepatitis A and B and rabies. I can't help but think that the distaste for vaccination from Covid, in most of those in that community, is down to politics and nothing else. Which is sad.
Could it possibly have anything to do with the fact that COVID is not those other diseases and the COVID vaccines are not the MMR, Hepatitis and rabies vaccines?
I thought your point was that it came down to politics and nothing else. Not that people might evaluate diseases and vaccines individually.
I don't even have a problem with your conclusion. The logic is faulty. You observe that this group of people should know enough to make X decision. They don't make that decision. Your assumption is that they are wrong and therefore politics is to blame. That's certainly an opinion, but a weakly supported one. Why wouldn't it occur to you, if you were to accept the premise that the group is positioned to be well-informed, that they made informed decisions and that there are good reasons for their decisions?
Sometimes your answer is in your question. But you won't find it if you assume the conclusion.
Are there legitimate reasons not to get the vaccine? I haven't seen one.
That's a separate discussion that I won't derail this particular chain of conversation with.
My point here is simply about the flaw in looking at people who you think should have a certain level of understanding about something, and yet concluding something different than you as being indicative of them being influenced by politics and little else. That itself seems like a potentially politically influenced conclusion, or at least just flawed reasoning. Because if you accept that they are in positions to have a certain level of understanding, it stands that their conclusions might indicate merit on the part of those conclusions.
I don't think it's true that health care workers necessarily are better positioned to make health decisions. But if they are, when they make counter-intuitive ones, you can't simply conclude that they are wrong if you're also attributing the conclusions of those you agree with to their standing in the medical field.
Basically: Nurse agrees with me- I must be correct if I agree with this nurse. Nurse doesn't agree with me- what's wrong with this nurse?