Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Some states push to ban “discrimination” against unvaccinated people

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 248 posts

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

#131

Post by Nursie »

johnisgood wrote: post #113
Nursie wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They just started talking about how teenage boys get enlarged heart from it and so forth Inflammation/swelling of the heart, not enlarging, very rare given the number of shots that have been rolled out, and people recover pretty quickly. Definitely a concern, not a showstopper. > We did not know this before either, nor did we know about the AstraZeneca's blood clots. Again, an incredibly low risk and less risk than…

Sorry. I mean this, and this happens to children: > A CDC committee will hear about reports of 300 cases of the heart enlargement that have happened after children were vaccinated against COVID-19. The ailment is fairly common and easily treatable. The heart inflammation happens too, though. --- > Again, an incredibly low risk and less risk than harm from the virus. But that is not the point. The point is that we did…

> Sorry. I mean this, and this happens to children:

What source are you quoting there? I can find that line in an abc news feed, but no attribution and nothing much else about it. Every other source seems to be talking about inflammation of one sort or another (myocarditis or pericarditis), primarily in young men, very rarely and easily recoverable.

> The point is that we did not know this would be the case

We are learning all the time, that's true, but these side effects are very rare, and are becoming visible due to the large scale of the rollout. It doesn't fundamentally change the calculus, especially when we are now learning that the disease itself can cause lasting lung and brain damage.

> I asked the question twice with regarding to it so I am not going to do it again here.

See my other answers then.

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

#132

Post by johnisgood »

CogitoCogito wrote: post #127
johnisgood wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I have been exposed to COVID-19 at the hospital on a regular basis, and I have been quarantined before with people who were positive. It does not seem to pose such a risk that you are talking about to me . I have an immunologic autoimmune disorder, too. This is my personal experience and case. Plus I do not know if I was talking against getting vaccinated, I merely said that more side-effects may come to l…

> Personally I have been exposed to COVID-19 at the hospital on a regular basis, and I have been quarantined before with people who were positive. It does not seem to pose such a risk that you are talking about to me. I have an immunologic autoimmune disorder, too. This is my personal experience and case. There's nothing scientific about any of that. You could have some natural immunity. You could also simply have be…

> There's nothing scientific about any of that. You could have some natural immunity. You could also simply have been lucky. You might never be infected. You might also someday die from the disease. This is entirely anecdotal and basically useless information.

Not for me though it is not, and that is the only reason I mentioned it, that there are such occurrences, too. Whether or not you believe me, well, that is up to you, and you can do whatever you want with it. :) I did add "personal experience", so yes, of course, it is anecdotal.

> there's nothing very useful in the statement "we might know more in the future than now"

OK, time will tell regardless.

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

#133

Post by forcry »

jollybean wrote: post #119
forcry wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The discrimination against non-vaxxed people is based on the fact they are non-vaxxed and potential sources of risk. Poor people can be thought of a being more risky to be around, because they have low standard of living, can't afford prompt health care and so on, so there are chances that they might be carriers of contagious diseases.. So you can argue that being around poor people is riskier than being around rich…

1) Being poor doesn't materially increase the risk of anything. 2) There's the issue of inequity i.e. poor people don't have access to healthcare, whereas everyone has access to vaccines. 3) Driving the car that you own seems to be more of a freedom, frankly than the ability to enter a restaurant. You have neither the right nor freedom to go on someone else's private property. COVID is real, it's a deadly virus that…

>poor people don't have access to healthcare, whereas everyone has access to vaccines.

You are answering to some argument that I didn't make.

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

#134

Post by forcry »

CogitoCogito wrote: post #130
forcry wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>All information points the disease being worse than the vaccine. No, at some point you are trusting some external entities. You trust the information because you trust the entities that provide it. When you say that someone else is irrational, you are doing that because that person does not share your trust. And to that person, in all probability, what you are doing might be irrational. In the end, I think no one ha…

You don't have the right to simply ignore all the research going into this and be treated seriously. But I guess believe whatever you want if it makes you feel better.

>You don't have the right to simply ignore all the research going into this and be treated seriously.

Replace "research" with "stuff a bunch of people you believe say", and the situation will become much more clear.

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

#135

Post by johnisgood »

Nursie wrote: post #131
johnisgood wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry. I mean this, and this happens to children: > A CDC committee will hear about reports of 300 cases of the heart enlargement that have happened after children were vaccinated against COVID-19. The ailment is fairly common and easily treatable. The heart inflammation happens too, though. --- > Again, an incredibly low risk and less risk than harm from the virus. But that is not the point. The point is that we did…

> Sorry. I mean this, and this happens to children: What source are you quoting there? I can find that line in an abc news feed, but no attribution and nothing much else about it. Every other source seems to be talking about inflammation of one sort or another (myocarditis or pericarditis), primarily in young men, very rarely and easily recoverable. > The point is that we did not know this would be the case We are le…

> What source are you quoting there? I can find that line in an abc news feed, but no attribution and nothing much else about it. Every other source seems to be talking about inflammation of one sort or another (myocarditis or pericarditis), primarily in young men, very rarely and easily recoverable.

I cannot find the source where I found it first, but that could be the case that they confused the two, I am not sure. Some are talking about hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. In any case, it can lead to chronically enlarged heart, which is dilated cardiomyopathy. Whatever.

> We are learning all the time, that's true, but these side effects are very rare, and are becoming visible due to the large scale of the rollout. It doesn't fundamentally change the calculus, especially when we are now learning that the disease itself can cause lasting lung and brain damage.

I suppose continuing discussing this is not very useful. If there are long-term side-effects, then we will know about them. If there are no long-term side-effects, same story.

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

#136

Post by Mordisquitos »

johnisgood wrote: post #122
Mordisquitos wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no reason to believe mRNA vaccine technology poses any particular risk compared to conventional vaccines. In fact, I would be willing to bet that they're less likely to cause problems than viral vector vaccines.

Less likely to cause short-term or long-term problems or both? By the way, the "I would be willing to bet" is what I am talking about. We do not know, we can bet and all. All my comments started because I know that many people excluded the possibility that there could be any potential side-effects that may manifest a year from now or so. I am not talking against vaccination, just that we should not exclude this possi…

Yes, of course the possibility is there, but it needs a huge leap of the imagination to even hypothesise what that short or long term adverse effect from mRNA vaccinations could be. Don't forget that coronaviruses are themselves "mRNA vaccines", with the significant difference that they actually reproduce, are contagious, and cause disease.

One could also argue that there's the possibility that SARS-CoV-2 will trigger an epidemic of extreme early-onset Alzheimer's in people who are currently suffering from long COVID. I don't think this is likely either, but I would argue it's significantly more so than an abstract unknown unknown about mRNA vaccine side effects surfacing in the future.

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

#137

Post by CogitoCogito »

forcry wrote: post #134
CogitoCogito wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't have the right to simply ignore all the research going into this and be treated seriously. But I guess believe whatever you want if it makes you feel better.

>You don't have the right to simply ignore all the research going into this and be treated seriously. Replace "research" with "stuff a bunch of people you believe say", and the situation will become much more clear.

Don't think that I don't understand the banal point you're trying to make.

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

#138

Post by CogitoCogito »

johnisgood wrote: post #132
CogitoCogito wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Personally I have been exposed to COVID-19 at the hospital on a regular basis, and I have been quarantined before with people who were positive. It does not seem to pose such a risk that you are talking about to me. I have an immunologic autoimmune disorder, too. This is my personal experience and case. There's nothing scientific about any of that. You could have some natural immunity. You could also simply have be…

> There's nothing scientific about any of that. You could have some natural immunity. You could also simply have been lucky. You might never be infected. You might also someday die from the disease. This is entirely anecdotal and basically useless information. Not for me though it is not, and that is the only reason I mentioned it, that there are such occurrences, too. Whether or not you believe me, well, that is up…

> Not for me though it is not, and that is the only reason I mentioned it, that there are such occurrences, too. Whether or not you believe me, well, that is up to you, and you can do whatever you want with it. :)

I never said I don't believe you. I just said there was nothing scientific in your reasoning. It's completely obvious that not all people get covid that are exposed to people. I've also been exposed to covid and not been infected. But it's just anecdotal information. I could get covid and die just the same. Drawing any conclusions off of these individual occurrence is not very intelligent.

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

#139

Post by johnisgood »

CogitoCogito wrote: post #138
johnisgood wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's nothing scientific about any of that. You could have some natural immunity. You could also simply have been lucky. You might never be infected. You might also someday die from the disease. This is entirely anecdotal and basically useless information. Not for me though it is not, and that is the only reason I mentioned it, that there are such occurrences, too. Whether or not you believe me, well, that is up…

> Not for me though it is not, and that is the only reason I mentioned it, that there are such occurrences, too. Whether or not you believe me, well, that is up to you, and you can do whatever you want with it. :) I never said I don't believe you. I just said there was nothing scientific in your reasoning. It's completely obvious that not all people get covid that are exposed to people. I've also been exposed to covi…

Why I was mentioning that is because I personally would not like to get the vaccine because: I am in my twenties, I have an immunological autoimmune disorder (and I recently developed allergies, to my luck), and I have not caught COVID-19 despite constant exposure to it.

Does it sound a good enough reason for not getting vaccinated?

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

#140

Post by forcry »

CogitoCogito wrote: post #137
forcry wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>You don't have the right to simply ignore all the research going into this and be treated seriously. Replace "research" with "stuff a bunch of people you believe say", and the situation will become much more clear.

Don't think that I don't understand the banal point you're trying to make.

Try https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27817926
Post reply on HN