The alternative would be to allow doctors to dispose of the remaining doses as they please, and the moral hazard of that should be pretty obvious to everyone.
The Vaccine Had to Be Used. He Used It. He Was Fired
81–90 of 369 posts
Re: The Vaccine Had to Be Used. He Used It. He Was Fired
#82Nobody is safe from a social media drive by. But honestly I'm not surprised. Lockdowns and isolation have turned some of my more reasonable acquaintances into rabid social media junkies who do nothing but judge anyone for the smallest social infraction.
What does this have to do with social media? I can't find any mention of social media in the article. If anything, social media is going after the maliciously overzealous prosecutor on this.
We have a fickle king. Sometimes he executes you and sometimes he rewards you. Just because he does both doesn't mean it's a good situation.
Re: The Vaccine Had to Be Used. He Used It. He Was Fired
#83Spent a long time reading about how vast bureaucratic inefficiencies are created by people worrying that "the wrong person" will benefit from government programs or that someone "undeserving" might get theirs before I do. This falls squarely in that bucket. Tragic.
I was once involved with a young woman in a homeless program which was entirely defeated by this exact "wrong person" attitude. Get a homeless person an apartment? Great. But it didn't end there, there was a constant stream of documentation requirements, your employer had to, monthly, sign paperwork about how much you earned (advertise to employers that you are/were homeless). The program punished you for making mone…
Fraud is real, and vast, and if it creeps in it undermines the whole thing. What's the alternative?
Re: The Vaccine Had to Be Used. He Used It. He Was Fired
#84This is just Kafkaesque. People in a position of authority with blind adherence to rules intended for optimal scenarios. They're literally saying he should have just thrown them away instead of distributing them as best he was able. This whole thing is a logistical clusterfuck and they're trying to throw this dude under the bus. It's obscene.
The really telling part to me is that (seemingly) no one from any of the organizations involved (the hospital and the prosecutors office) will come forward and outright say that what was done was immoral. They are all hiding behind a veneer of "what he did broke the rules and my job is to enforce them", which is about the weakest argument one can make in defense this sort of thing.
Covering your ass isn’t a weak defense for the underlings. There exists a leader(s) somewhere that made the rules and that can change the rules. They are the only ones responsible, and I don’t see why anyone else should stick their neck out and risk their income for it.
It’s actually a strategy for leaders to want the underlings to stick their neck out, so that they can be sacrificed as a scapegoat when convenient.
(in these bureaurocratic situations, obviously I’m not talking about a leader asking people to murder others and them not being responsible for that).
Re: The Vaccine Had to Be Used. He Used It. He Was Fired
#85Spent a long time reading about how vast bureaucratic inefficiencies are created by people worrying that "the wrong person" will benefit from government programs or that someone "undeserving" might get theirs before I do. This falls squarely in that bucket. Tragic.
It’s a fundamental desire for fairness. Is it really that surprising?
Once people start viewing the system as inherently unfair, then it can start to fall apart pretty quickly.
Not saying that the vaccine situation in the article is an example of an unfair situation.
Re: The Vaccine Had to Be Used. He Used It. He Was Fired
#86This is just Kafkaesque. People in a position of authority with blind adherence to rules intended for optimal scenarios. They're literally saying he should have just thrown them away instead of distributing them as best he was able. This whole thing is a logistical clusterfuck and they're trying to throw this dude under the bus. It's obscene.
> They're literally saying he should have just thrown them away instead of distributing them as best he was able. I wouldn't necessarily object to that particular policy. It's a shame to waste perfectly good medicine in a pandemic, but would we feel the same if he had not found anybody vulnerable who was available, and instead ended up vaccinating his own children, who are fit and healthy? What if, instead, he taken…
> It's a shame to waste perfectly good medicine in a pandemic, but would we feel the same if he had not found anybody vulnerable who was available, and instead ended up vaccinating his own children, who are fit and healthy? What if, instead, he taken the vaccine vial to Beverly Hills and called up the rich and famous to try and find someone who wanted to be vaccinated?
If he can get from Texas to Beverly Hills in six hours, I'm fine with it. Every shot in an arm is a step closer to ending this thing. I'd rather it get couriered to Bill Gates than dropped in a trash can.
Re: The Vaccine Had to Be Used. He Used It. He Was Fired
#87Earlier quoted context omitted.
Politicians assume their position by winning a popularity contest, not a foresight-and-competency contest.
Its called leading from the rear, and that is basically what I thought when Greg Abbott (Texas gov) got his, since AFAIK he isn't in any of the identified groups. https://abc13.com/health/gov-greg-abbott-receives-covid-19-v... At least when Biden (referenced in the article) got his, he exceeded the age requirements in most states. The claim that they are doing it to show people its safe is a bit cynical IMHO.
that works if you show it publicly(and then there is the debate that its bad because you jumped the queue, or its bad because not getting a vaccine shows they aren't trustworthy)
But in spain the cases that have surfaced are of mainly politicians who got the shot and tried to keep quiet about it, which think we can all agree its bad.
Re: The Vaccine Had to Be Used. He Used It. He Was Fired
#88This is just Kafkaesque. People in a position of authority with blind adherence to rules intended for optimal scenarios. They're literally saying he should have just thrown them away instead of distributing them as best he was able. This whole thing is a logistical clusterfuck and they're trying to throw this dude under the bus. It's obscene.
It makes sense when you think about it. Without the rules, there's excuse to -not- find the people the vaccine is meant for and use it yourself. Anyone who thinks that this would not happen doesn't know human nature very well. They are welcome to post situations where such excuses haven't been taken advantage of. I'll take lack of replies as acceptance of my point.
If there were a list of "people the vaccine is meant for", I'd tend to agree with your point. As it happened there was no such list, and his attempts to find front-line workers to give the vaccine to failed. He was unable to find "people the vaccine is meant for", so I'm willing to give him some leeway there.
Re: The Vaccine Had to Be Used. He Used It. He Was Fired
#89This is a complex issue. Ideally we would have a much better organized rollout avoiding these scenarios. I don't think we ever want individual physicians using their own contacts list to find candidates regardless of good intention, it just opens the door up too much abuse. I don't think the penalty matches the crime, certainly not a criminal prosecution.
If we can confidently confirm that 1) there are leftover vaccines, 2) good-faith efforts were made to administer them to the target audience, and 3) there were leftover vaccines that were definitely otherwise going to go to waste then I'm 100% fine with people administering to their contact list. I'd rather that 1000x over than unused vaccines be tossed into the garbage. We all lose with unused vaccines.
Re: The Vaccine Had to Be Used. He Used It. He Was Fired
#90Earlier quoted context omitted.
What does this have to do with social media? I can't find any mention of social media in the article. If anything, social media is going after the maliciously overzealous prosecutor on this.
We have a fickle king. Sometimes he executes you and sometimes he rewards you. Just because he does both doesn't mean it's a good situation.
Sometimes he's not involved at all, but people still try to blame him because they've got an ax to grind. There's no indication social media had anything to do with his actions or the ensuing punishment.