Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines • Hacker News Board

Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines

#171

Post by calvano915 » Wed, Jul 28, 2021, 5:54 PM UTC

Panther34543 wrote: post #156

Ugg, why doesn't anybody, whether it be government officials, employers, whatever, ever consider those with natural immunity? It's like some weird joke. The official CDC estimates over 115 MILLION natural infections in the U.S. alone, and that only accounts for February 2020-March 2021 . It doesn't account for all the infections before February 2020 (I and most of my coworkers in downtown SF got it in January) nor an…

Individual preferences need not apply. The "smarter" mob demands you remove your mask and ignore acquired immunity and instead submit to experimental vaccines because they'll feel better about it.

Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines

#172

Post by Arnt » Wed, Jul 28, 2021, 5:54 PM UTC

azangru wrote: post #132

dgs_sgd wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people resistant to taking them are concerned with potential “long term”effects so by definition argue that it wouldn’t be known by now.

> The people resistant to taking them are concerned with potential “long term”effects Not necessarily long-term. I would suggest that short-term effects such as thrombosis of myocarditis, however rare, are also a valid cause for concern.

I computed that on the day when I got my vaccine (the first dose was AZ) and the risk of thrombosis from the vaccine was comparable to that of that of thrombosis from corona in the next few weeks, assuming that my risk of being infected was the average for the city and that the incidence would be stable over the next weeks.

Three weeks I think? So the vaccine raised my chance of thrombosis in the next two weeks by 50%, but cut my chance of thrombosis in the next six weeks by 50%. Pick a number according to the conclusion you'd like to see.

Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines

#173

Post by rolobio » Wed, Jul 28, 2021, 5:55 PM UTC

TulliusCicero wrote: post #154

rolobio wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We do have that right. Take cars for example, we drive extremely dangerous machines down the road that kill thousands each year. They also put out dangerous pollutants that kill many people. We all live in a world where there is a give and take. It is only recently that people decided we have a right to live risk-free.

No, you don't. We do accept some risks, but in the case of cars, there are quite a few mandatory things involved designed to limit the risk: it's illegal to drive without a license, illegal to drive while drunk, cars are required to have various safety features to be street-legal, etc. Same principle here. Vaccines don't completely eliminate the risk of danger from covid, they only reduce it, just like the car regula…

I can get a job without a car. How soon until I can't get a job without modifying my body?

Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines

#174

Post by benmw333 » Wed, Jul 28, 2021, 5:55 PM UTC

pb7 wrote: post #124

benmw333 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those who chose not to get vaccinated are doing nothing to you.

They are if you consider second order effects.

Well now you're just living the quantum life, brah.

Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines

#175

Post by TheHypnotist » Wed, Jul 28, 2021, 5:55 PM UTC

benmw333 wrote: post #152

TheHypnotist wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing you said makes sense or is based on reality, particularly the inane last line of your comment.

What is: government handing billions of us dollars to moderna, pfizer and janssen

Did you pay out of pocket for the vaccine?

Also, trillions to save 600,000 lives? What does that even mean?

Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines

#176

Post by pb7 » Wed, Jul 28, 2021, 5:55 PM UTC

jakebasile wrote: post #110

seanhunter wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Employers decide that about literally all the characteristics in the hiring process and all the conditions of continued employment. You may don't think it's ok that they get to fire you if you violate the "acceptable use" conditions of their information security policy either, but that doesn't actually matter. Since abiding by the acceptable use terms is (almost always) a condition of continued employment they can an…

Literally all characteristics? I think there are some which are protected by law and generally considered not cool to discriminate on. I'm just asking which ones are ok to discriminate on since apparently submission to medical procedures is one of the good ones. I wonder how people would feel if an employer required other medical treatments, or the inverse: if an employee had a medical procedure the employer doesn't…

Vaccines have been required for public schools (with government compelled attendance) for decades. This is nothing new.

Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines

#177

Post by fooey » Wed, Jul 28, 2021, 5:55 PM UTC

h_anna_h wrote: post #95

some-guy wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their company, their choice. As an employee, I would very much enjoy the freedom _from_ COVID-19.

Less of this argument please. I would not like companies to have the choice to fire racial minorities just because it is "their company, their choice". Edit: Protected classes is a legal term and is irrelevant to the topic here. If your argument can be used to support a statement or action that you consider incorrect or immoral then it is not a good argument. After all "Their company, their choice." has in fact been…

Minorities are a protected class. That argument has no bearing at all on this subject.

Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines

#178

Post by _djo_ » Wed, Jul 28, 2021, 5:55 PM UTC

Panther34543 wrote: post #156

Ugg, why doesn't anybody, whether it be government officials, employers, whatever, ever consider those with natural immunity? It's like some weird joke. The official CDC estimates over 115 MILLION natural infections in the U.S. alone, and that only accounts for February 2020-March 2021 . It doesn't account for all the infections before February 2020 (I and most of my coworkers in downtown SF got it in January) nor an…

Natural immunity is not as well understood as vaccine response and longevity for COVID-19. There's also increasing evidence that newer variants like Delta present a significant reinfection risk for those who were infected with the wildtype or even Alpha six or more months before.

Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines

#179

Post by jakebasile » Wed, Jul 28, 2021, 5:55 PM UTC

ollien wrote: post #57

jakebasile wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What other characteristics is it ok to use to determine who can earn a living or not?

This is a bad faith argument. Nowhere did I say, or even imply, you cannot earn a living. You can choose to work for someone who will not require it, such as a company who is remote-first, if this is a problem for you.

There is no bad faith argument from me. I'm simply asking what characteristics of an employee are acceptable to use to determine if they should be fired. What medical procedures can they choose to have?

Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines

#180

Post by yupper32 » Wed, Jul 28, 2021, 5:56 PM UTC

rolobio wrote: post #114

wffurr wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Literally the first line of the article: “ Google announced Wednesday it would require all in-office workers and visitors to be vaccinated” Maybe click on it and read it before flying off on the handle?

I'm calling it now, they will require all employees to have this, remote or not.

For what reason? Arbitrary control?

Why does the right think that every government mandate that they don't understand (masks are the big one) are just about arbitrary control over people? It seems like a very common theme.