121–130 of 442 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
interesting precedent for the future. Whats an 'emergency'? Whats is the point of an FDA review at this point?
When the cost of not taking action (not vaccinating) exceeds the cost of taking action (vaccinating).
Good. Its time to stop messing around with this. The vaccines are tested and are safe.
Do they actually reduce spread or do they instead just make people who catch it more likely to avoid hospitalization and increase their survival chances? If it is the first I can see why they do it, if it is the second then I do not see the point of enforcing it. Although I wonder if they will consider workers who passed covid before (and thus have antibodies) as "vaccinated". > The vaccines are tested and are safe W…
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-07-22/los-ange...
> Among fully vaccinated people, there were about 27 coronavirus infections for every 100,000 county residents in June, according to figures presented Thursday. But among people not fully vaccinated, there were 125 infections for every 100,000 residents.
> That month, there were also 2 fully vaccinated people hospitalized for every 100,000 residents — much smaller than the comparable rate, 11, for people not fully vaccinated.
So per 100k fully vaccinated people, 27 cases and 2 hospitalizations. Or: 7.4% of cases resulting in hospitalization.
Per 100k not-fully-vaccinated: 125 cases and 11 hospitalizations. Or: 8.8% of cases resulting in hospitalization.
What this doesn't tell us is "how many cases were so mild and occurred in people who aren't getting test regularly that they went under the radar." I don't know of any data telling us anything about what the "mild case rate" looks like for vaccinated vs unvaccinated (it would be VERY hard to measure without widespread mandatory testing).
But if you've got a case that gets detected, the vaccine doesn't really seem to prevent that case from hospitalizing you at the same rate as before. It just prevents you from getting those cases nearly as frequently as the rest of the population.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, and on the demand side, I have a hunch that a company that implicitly or explicitly uses their lack of a vaccine requirement as a recruiting pitch would have a hard time recruiting a large subset of engineers.
The venn diagram of unvaxxed, exceptional engineers, willing to move to a new company is probably very, very small.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I care because despite being vaccinated and having had restrictions lifted, I am once again affected by them because of people that refuse to get vaccinated. If the consequences were siloed to unvaccinated people, I wouldn't care as that's their choice.
Those who chose not to get vaccinated are doing nothing to you.
I am saying this as someone who has both shots and generally supports the vaccination. From what I understand Google is known as a company with a "liberal" culture. Is demanding employees accept one side of an argument and adhere to it (or face the consequences) contrary to the definition of "liberal"? That's the problem with Western politics. Liberal vs. conservative is no longer about how permissive we are with ide…
You could argue the merits of Google not allowing employees the option to permanently work from home, but as far as their offices are concerned this is a very sane requirement for entry given the hazards that currently exist.
How are they going to even know you took the vaccine? Honor system? If they force you to disclose doesn't that break HIPAA? If it doesn't break HIPAA, then doesn't this create a precedent that employers can gain your medical history with arbitrary mandates? Seems like a lose-lose.
Hippa only applies to medical professionals i believe. Employers can always ask for your medical records. This has always been the case.
Government forces you to pay for the vaccine and then forces the company you work for to take it or lose your job. Liberty is long gone in America. Nothing chaps my ass more than hearing and seeing the "vaccines are free" propaganda. Not to mention the billions government has spent in marketing and advertising on this vaccine. When was the last time government spent trillions to save 600,000 lives?
Where Google goes, I expect the rest of the tech companies (including companies that just fancy themselves as tech companies) to follow. This is that moment when everyone is reminded of "at will" employment.
Tech companies won't move in lockstep on this. Battle for talent is too intense, not many companies can call shots like this like Google can. Some companies will be glad to differentiate to try and attract Googlers that do not want to return to the office, that do not want to be vaccinated (tho I think the number of tech workers that are not vax'd is small)
The hiring managers I know would take it as something being wrong with that candidate, who may not be so knowledgeable outside very specific fields, and has trouble working with others. So, which companies will be glad to differentiate? Are there any whose names are known to most people?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you are living in the USA why not get the Johnson and Johnson vaccine?
This is the third comment I've had to reply to to point out that the J&J vaccine is also based on barely tested technology. Is this really not widely understood? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viral_vector_vaccine
I am saying this as someone who has both shots and generally supports the vaccination. From what I understand Google is known as a company with a "liberal" culture. Is demanding employees accept one side of an argument and adhere to it (or face the consequences) contrary to the definition of "liberal"? That's the problem with Western politics. Liberal vs. conservative is no longer about how permissive we are with ide…