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

Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 442 posts

Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines

#271

Post by endisneigh »

dekhn wrote: post #259
endisneigh wrote: post #91

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.

Here's a quick comparison of HIPAA and HIPPA (what you original said) that will help clear up the confusion. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E3dxHFYVcAAM3V8?format=png&name=... I don't understand why so many people are obsessed how the company can find out whether you got the vaccine. I mean, as an employee you could lie or otherwise misrepresent your status and probably get away with it, at least for a short time, befor…

> I don't understand why so many people are obsessed how the company can find out whether you got the vaccine. I mean, as an employee you could lie or otherwise misrepresent your status and probably get away with it, at least for a short time, before they terminated your employment.

It's not about the vaccine - it's about the normalization of employers knowing your medical history. Personally I wouldn't care if I was asked as I've taken the vaccine and would say so.

However I can understand why people might be concerned about employers demanding proof.

Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines

#272

Post by dekhn »

halfjoking wrote: post #25

All WHO approved vaccines? I'm thinking of leaving the country to try to get an inactive virus vaccine. I don't let anyone else run RNA code in my cells. The attack surface is too large.

you're pretty much letting other people run RNA code in your cells all the time. Thats why your skin is covered in RNAses.

Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines

#273

Post by halfjoking »

majormajor wrote: post #204
halfjoking wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are more types of RNA than just mRNA. https://www.livescience.com/25988-rna-versatile-molecules.ht... I'm not an expert so I'm not going to speculate which type might be used, but the risk that the government is using (soon to be mandatory) shots as a way to insert a biological backdoor into the masses far outweighs the risk of catching covid again. They want backdoors into all software systems... why wouldn't…

You shouldn't be willing to have any shot if that's your perception of the threat level. Why create a back door when you're literally opening a front door through the shot? Who gives a shit if it claims to be mRNA or not in that scenario? Don't breathe unfiltered air either. Why not just distribute this backdoor as an aerosol?

It's a new technology with new capabilities. That's why VCs are investing billions in RNA tech to treat disease.

I'd take the Chinese one because China open-sources their inactive virus vaccine and exports raw materials to other nations to manufacture them: http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2021-01/12/c_139661608.htm

A plot to add some "secret sauce" to a vaccine wouldn't work in that scenario.

Bill Gates on the other hand has said it's impossible for others to manufacture these vaccines because "safety and security issues": https://www.indiatoday.in/technology/news/story/bill-gates-b...

I think that's BS. If the vaccine is free - why isn't it open-source? If it's not open-source, why should I trust it?

Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines

#274

Post by dekhn »

silicon2401 wrote: post #224
calvano915 wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems that many commentors in this thread believe that the time for questioning has passed regarding EUA vaccines with completely new mechanisms. If it goes wrong later, well don't go blaming any of them since it was all "at-will" and "your choice".

Many commenters and members of the public in general don't believe in questioning, full stop. Fauci says XYZ is good, so XYZ is good.

no, what I don't believe in is bad-faith questioning that is done primarily to create fear, uncertainty, and doubt. From what I can tell, Rand Paul is not operating in good faith, he's specifically saying what he's saying to reduce believe in Fauci's statements.

Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines

#275

Post by roberttod »

amrcnimgrnt wrote: post #240

I don't mean this polemically, or rhetorically. I'm honestly asking because I've given this some thought, and it's not entirely obvious to me. "Who are the unvaccinated hurting, exactly?" It appears to me that a pandemic of the unvaccinated harms the unvaccinated. "Those who cant get the vaccines" Now, some people will point out that some can't get the vaccines. Except that ppl with HIV, GBS, autoimmune etc are all e…

Not addressing the harm it might do to vaccinated people - don't we have some responsibility to encourage unvaccinated people to get the vaccine for their own good? It's all very well saying "if they want to take the risk, then that's their decision" but in reality many of them have been manipulated by mis and disinformation. Maybe not the hacker news types that are being skeptical and looking at the data and thinking logically, but the vast majority just don't understand the science and look to others for direction.

Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines

#276

Post by tome »

ericmay wrote: post #250
tome wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Can you articulate in a scientific manner why an adenovirus would be treated differently as it relates to the creation of vaccines and the body's response to them? For whatever reason that is not the prevailing method when it comes to regulating new medical interventions.

I'll take that as a no.

You're welcome to. However, I'm curious why your question is relevant. I can't articulate a scientific reason that thalidomide caused birth defects, for example.

Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines

#277

Post by dekhn »

endisneigh wrote: post #271
dekhn wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a quick comparison of HIPAA and HIPPA (what you original said) that will help clear up the confusion. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/E3dxHFYVcAAM3V8?format=png&name=... I don't understand why so many people are obsessed how the company can find out whether you got the vaccine. I mean, as an employee you could lie or otherwise misrepresent your status and probably get away with it, at least for a short time, befor…

> I don't understand why so many people are obsessed how the company can find out whether you got the vaccine. I mean, as an employee you could lie or otherwise misrepresent your status and probably get away with it, at least for a short time, before they terminated your employment. It's not about the vaccine - it's about the normalization of employers knowing your medical history. Personally I wouldn't care if I was…

So... you're willing to have millions of people die to protect some employees from having their employer knowing their medical history? From what I can see, companies are doing this to reduce their exposure to legal risk from employee-employee infection in the office.

Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines

#278

Post by thisiscorrect »

pb7 wrote: post #187
jakebasile wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're vaccinated, and the vaccine works, how does an unvaccinated person endanger you so greatly that you feel the need to discriminate against them?

The variants all come from unvaccinated people. With enough time, a vaccine resistant variant could come around and infect vaccinated folks who are forced to be around you.

"The variants all come from unvaccinated people." This is not necessarily correct. It's clear by now that none of the widely available SARS-CoV-2 vaccines (or maybe none at all) prevent infection by the virus. [1] discusses the role of vaccination in immune escape.

[1] https://www.nature.com/articles/s41579-021-00573-0

Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines

#279

Post by IG_Semmelweiss »

gomox wrote: post #59
giarc wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's been nearly 4 billion shots delivered across the world in the past 8 months. I suspect if they were to cause great harm, we would have known by now.

Radiation, asbestos, lead paint and a bunch of others would like a word.

Can we put smoking on that list ?

Re: Google Offices to Mandate Vaccines

#280

Post by tfehring »

bruceb wrote: post #139
giarc wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but the harm from COVID is pretty evident in the 600,000 deaths in the states in the past 18 months. No one has said the vaccine is 100% safe, it does list side effects after all, but this whole notion of "I'm waiting until all the data is out/it's only approved for emergency use" is just nonsensical.

If you are young and in shape, then the likely hood of you dying is extremely low.

Yeah, mortality risk is only part of the picture, and probably not the most relevant part for young and healthy people. But there are lots of other medium-term (at least) impacts of COVID that have already been observed, and at this point I think it's really unlikely that the expected long-term harm from the vaccine is anywhere close to the expected long-term harm from COVID even in young, healthy people.

The cognitive effects of COVID alone (discussed recently at [0]) are probably much more harmful in expectation than the vaccine side-effects, even accounting for the relatively high likelihood that those effects are not real, not causal, and/or reversible.

[0] https://old.reddit.com/r/COVID19/comments/oq4vho/cognitive_d...

Post reply on HN