Some states push to ban “discrimination” against unvaccinated people • Hacker News Board

Re: Some states push to ban “discrimination” against unvaccinated people

#101

Post by Nursie » Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 10:06 AM UTC

johnisgood wrote: post #96

oshkarr wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Truly staggering" is 4 million dead people and maybe 61 million more who are dealing with "long-Covid" symptoms. The quotes you cited are just people being considerate of others. Sometimes doing the right thing doesn't need—or hasn't time—to be scientifically proven.

There is no right thing. I can fight rhetoric with rhetoric, too. Say: "Those who are afraid can stay home, mandating a new vaccine with no long-term track record is pure evil.". I am saying this because of such statements: > From a societal standpoint, he said people who skip the vaccine could compromise the safety of others. > I hear everyone saying deciding to get vaccinated is an individual choice, but the calcul…

> From a societal standpoint, he said people who skip the vaccine could compromise the safety of others.

But this is a discussion of fact, not an appeal to emotions.

> we have literally no clue with regarding to its long-term effects

Except we have a great deal of information on the long term effects of vaccination, from studying many vaccines. It's quite wrong to say we have no idea.

Re: Some states push to ban “discrimination” against unvaccinated people

#102

Post by johnisgood » Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 10:07 AM UTC

raxxorrax wrote: post #6

forcry wrote: post #3

>This removes any opportunity to nudge more people toward getting the shots, he added.“The whole idea behind a good vaccination campaign is making not getting vaccinated the harder choice, and getting vaccinated the easy choice. Right now it’s the exact opposite — it’s easier not to be vaccinated." So people are supposed to be "nudged" into it? And they are supposed to do it because it is easier, as opposed to safer?…

It is ridiculous really. I have been vaccinated with Moderna, which didn't even bring anything else to the market as far as I know. Listening to these people wanting to nudge others I wish I didn't get vaccinated. I think the damage Covid can cause is significant, but this is an experimental treatment. To my disappointment I didn't get magnetic, but doctors claiming there cannot be any unforseen dangers are lying to…

> doctors claiming there cannot be any unforseen dangers are lying to you

We have to sign a paper that we cannot hold anyone liable for any potential harm that might come from the vaccine (any time in the future). 5.6 million people have signed it and got the vaccine.

Re: Some states push to ban “discrimination” against unvaccinated people

#103

Post by johnisgood » Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 10:09 AM UTC

stefan_ wrote: post #19

raxxorrax wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is ridiculous really. I have been vaccinated with Moderna, which didn't even bring anything else to the market as far as I know. Listening to these people wanting to nudge others I wish I didn't get vaccinated. I think the damage Covid can cause is significant, but this is an experimental treatment. To my disappointment I didn't get magnetic, but doctors claiming there cannot be any unforseen dangers are lying to…

There have been hundreds of millions of vaccinations. What unforseen danger is there at this point? Be precise.

It needs time to manifest. Sometimes it takes decades. Not every side-effect is going to immediately manifest.

Re: Some states push to ban “discrimination” against unvaccinated people

#104

Post by Nursie » Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 10:10 AM UTC

johnisgood wrote: post #100

CogitoCogito wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Secondly, I'm getting the COVID vaccine not because they believe that there is a high risk of getting serious COVID myself, but to help others -- some at-risk people can't get the vaccine at all, and immune-suppresed people are still at significant risk post-vaccine (although still lower risk than without). People not getting the vaccine who are able are being incredibly selfish. They are exercising the opposite of…

It's people's personal responsibility to not harm themselves, too.

Indeed, and as the vaccines do very little harm compared to the virus, it's definitely a good thing to get vaccinated. Especially as we are now getting the fuller picture that covid can lead to last lung and brain damage.

Re: Some states push to ban “discrimination” against unvaccinated people

#105

Post by johnisgood » Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 10:11 AM UTC

Nursie wrote: post #104

johnisgood wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's people's personal responsibility to not harm themselves, too.

Indeed, and as the vaccines do very little harm compared to the virus, it's definitely a good thing to get vaccinated. Especially as we are now getting the fuller picture that covid can lead to last lung and brain damage.

I am not so sure. Some side-effects do take time to manifest. They just started talking about how teens get heart issues from it and so forth. We did not know this before either, nor did we know about the AstraZeneca's blood clots. Some take longer time though. We simply do not know. Anyone leaning towards "it is safe" and "it is not safe" is silly, because we just simply have no idea, you cannot claim either for certain.

> Especially as we are now getting the fuller picture that covid can lead to last lung and brain damage.

Yes, we are just now getting the fuller picture of COVID-19 that it can lead to this and that. The very same can happen to the vaccines, and it is actually happening to some of these vaccines.

Re: Some states push to ban “discrimination” against unvaccinated people

#106

Post by Nursie » Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 10:12 AM UTC

premium-gecko wrote: post #89

Mordisquitos wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I will be willing to admit I am wrong if, in a given country, we're still doing whatever -variant 6 months after the vaccination of school-age children is completed.

Are school-age children at risk from this virus? If not, what is the medical justification for performing a medical procedure on them?

If it's virtually zero risk and it protects others, that's pretty justified. You know, like how we already take into account more than just individual risk when we vaccinate children.

Stop trying to make out like this is some sort of new or extreme position.

FYI - there have been about 30 kids in hospital in the UK with covid in the last month, so the risks are non-negligible.

Re: Some states push to ban “discrimination” against unvaccinated people

#107

Post by CogitoCogito » Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 10:13 AM UTC

raxxorrax wrote: post #87

CogitoCogito wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course you can't exclude the risk, but there is _no_ usable information in that fear. Just because something can happen down the line, doesn't mean it's actionable. What if these vaccines start giving us super human strength in a few years? Can we discount that possibility? Why or why not? Should I act on that possibility today? All we can consider is _actionable_ information. All information so far points to the…

I believe this to be actionable enough that the decision to take it or not should remain an individual decision and I believe that is the extend what people demand. Nobody is talking about throwing it off the market because it isn't deemed safe.

I never said this shouldn't be anyone's individual choice. All I said was that I'm disgusted that so many people would make the choice.

Re: Some states push to ban “discrimination” against unvaccinated people

#108

Post by CogitoCogito » Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 10:15 AM UTC

forcry wrote: post #83

CogitoCogito wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Secondly, I'm getting the COVID vaccine not because they believe that there is a high risk of getting serious COVID myself, but to help others -- some at-risk people can't get the vaccine at all, and immune-suppresed people are still at significant risk post-vaccine (although still lower risk than without). People not getting the vaccine who are able are being incredibly selfish. They are exercising the opposite of…

> It's your personal responsibility not the harm those around you as much as possible Sure. But there is also a bigger responsibility to oneself. To not do things that might harm themselves. So with that conflicting forces, it becomes a matter of opinion and perception. So it becomes no longer selfish, and just common sense.

> So with that conflicting forces, it becomes a matter of opinion and perception. So it becomes no longer selfish, and just common sense.

All information points the disease being worse than the vaccine. It's not common sense to avoid it. It's highly irrational. If people are really concerned with not harming themselves, they _will_ get vaccinated.

Re: Some states push to ban “discrimination” against unvaccinated people

#109

Post by johnisgood » Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 10:19 AM UTC

Nursie wrote: post #101

johnisgood wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no right thing. I can fight rhetoric with rhetoric, too. Say: "Those who are afraid can stay home, mandating a new vaccine with no long-term track record is pure evil.". I am saying this because of such statements: > From a societal standpoint, he said people who skip the vaccine could compromise the safety of others. > I hear everyone saying deciding to get vaccinated is an individual choice, but the calcul…

> From a societal standpoint, he said people who skip the vaccine could compromise the safety of others. But this is a discussion of fact, not an appeal to emotions. > we have literally no clue with regarding to its long-term effects Except we have a great deal of information on the long term effects of vaccination, from studying many vaccines. It's quite wrong to say we have no idea.

> Except we have a great deal of information on the long term effects of vaccination, from studying many vaccines. It's quite wrong to say we have no idea.

Are you talking about mRNA vaccines? How many people have gotten such a vaccine before the COVID-19 vaccines and when?

Re: Some states push to ban “discrimination” against unvaccinated people

#110

Post by johnisgood » Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 10:20 AM UTC

Nursie wrote: post #99

johnisgood wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Does nobody understand the amount of time needed to do this kind of study properly and thoroughly? Plus they do not get that new vaccines (I am not referring to vaccines using the same technology as the previous ones, I thought that was obvious) usually take 10-15 years (!) to develop. How long did it take to develop this one with a tech that has not yet been used on humans? Months?

> Plus they do not get that new vaccines usually take 10-15 years This is outdated info, vaccines don't typically take that long any more, and there was a bit of a head-start here due to the work on SARS and MERS. > How long did it take to develop this one with a tech that has not yet been used on humans? Which tech are you talking about? And which vaccine? J&J and AZ, for instance, are more 'traditional' and based o…

Yes, and we have seasonal flu vaccines that do not take that much of a long time to develop, we know that. The same case with other vaccines that are based on what our other vaccines are using.

I was talking about the mRNA vaccines. When was the first time that any mRNA vaccine has been approved for human use?

---

To the down-voters of my previous comment:

This is the source of my claim: https://www.historyofvaccines.org/content/articles/vaccine-d...

Or take a look at https://www.uchicagomedicine.org/forefront/coronavirus-disea... which says:

> The process of getting a vaccine approved for use in the general public is no picnic and can take several years

---

If you know it differently, let me know. Please consider that I was not referring to seasonal flu vaccines and the like.

In fact, currently, no coronavirus vaccine is fully approved by the FDA, but three (or more by now?) were given emergency use authorization by the agency.

Plus, I did say the word "develop", but I was thinking about the whole process, my bad.