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

Google and Facebook mandate vaccines for employees at U.S. offices

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 722 posts

Re: Google and Facebook mandate vaccines for employees at U.S. offices

#491

Post by f6v »

JesseMReeves wrote: post #428
f6v wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This reasoning works only if you believe the society isn’t supposed to help the vulnerable. It’s clear that the older you get, the worse your immunity works. A vaccine isn’t 100% efficient in the first place and will work worse on a 70 yo than on a 30 yo. This means that in order to protect the vulnerable, the society has to achieve herd immunity.

Herd immunity would only occur if the vaccine stopped transmission, right? Sadly, this is not the case. Vaccinated people achieve high viral loads too.

Except the viral load is decreased if you’re vaccinated https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-crucial-vacci...

Re: Google and Facebook mandate vaccines for employees at U.S. offices

#492

Post by Marcus9 »

WhyNotHugo wrote: post #474

This is extremely shady. I'm in complete favour of vaccination, but I'm amazed that it's even legal for an employer in the US to ask such specific details about one's medical history. My employer doesn't need to know what vaccines I've taken, or anything else from my medical record, unless I decide to share it. Mind you, I'll still tell my team "I'll be about this morning for vaccination". But there's a difference be…

It's weird to pretend this is about "one's medical history" when it's clearly about minimizing risk of harm to others.

People need to accept the reality that spreading a disease is causing harm, and that preventing people from causing harm is a core function of the rules of society.

Spreading disease is unique- unlike assault or robbery or rape or murder it doesn't require the harmer to intend to cause harm, so many people resist accepting that they are hurting other people.

We need to update our societal understanding of causing harm to understand it includes harm which was unintentional, unknown, or done passively.

Re: Google and Facebook mandate vaccines for employees at U.S. offices

#494

Post by f6v »

Fine-Cut4983 wrote: post #427
f6v wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> don't know what a vaccine is going to do for me (at this junction in time, maybe T+12 months will be different lets see what the science says) We do know what a vaccine does, especially in the case of viral vectors(they’ve been around for decades). What specifically seems to be unknown?

Can you provide a reference to a single viral vector vaccine with widespread usage prior to this year?

I’m talking about viral vector as a delivery method. And you’re talking about testing a COVID-19 vaccine, right? Of course there’s none. But there’s no way to do a long-term testing of a particular COVID-19 vaccine. By the time you finish the study it’s going to be too late. So if someone says “But a vaccine hasn’t been studied long enough!” they just propose to not vaccinate at all and rely on lockdowns/post-illness immunity. However, we’ve got sufficient knowledge about the mechanism of the used vaccines to say they’re sufficiently safe.

Re: Google and Facebook mandate vaccines for employees at U.S. offices

#495

Post by wait_a_minute »

colechristensen wrote: post #303
White_Wolf wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe I'm missing something obvious here but arent those that don't want the vaccine a risk just for themselves? If they want to risk it it's their problem/choice. One thing everyone seems to ignore is those people that have immunity/antibodies and don't actually need a vaccine. Why is that? As far as I managed to read here and there not even the shot I had protects me from catching or spreading the virus. It only re…

Whichever vaccine you had, it has a high chance (90ish percent) of preventing any detectable infection, and as a corollary being contagious. If you do lose the odds and develop an infection, the rates of various outcomes are all better. i.e. very low chance of death or ICU visit, very high chance of no or extremely mild symptoms People don’t have a good understanding of statistics, of how to treat risk, or of basic d…

Is this the same with antibodies from having had covid already?

Re: Google and Facebook mandate vaccines for employees at U.S. offices

#496

Post by gvd »

WhyNotHugo wrote: post #474

This is extremely shady. I'm in complete favour of vaccination, but I'm amazed that it's even legal for an employer in the US to ask such specific details about one's medical history. My employer doesn't need to know what vaccines I've taken, or anything else from my medical record, unless I decide to share it. Mind you, I'll still tell my team "I'll be about this morning for vaccination". But there's a difference be…

There is also the difference with me having been patient for some pay off this population to come to terms with their stupidity and pfft. Vax or go to space

Re: Google and Facebook mandate vaccines for employees at U.S. offices

#497

Post by blub »

johnny53169 wrote: post #389
blub wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's nothing selfish about not wanting to undergo a medical procedure to help strangers . A vaccine is first and foremost a method for protecting oneself and one's family from disease. The only critical aspect of this situation is that there are kids and people who can't get the vaccine. It would be great if we could protect them and people who work with kids/medical personnel should be obligated to get the vaccin…

> There's nothing selfish about not wanting to undergo a medical procedure to help strangers. Not wanting to do something to help others is the definition of selfish, even if it's your right.

My replies were throttled and someone beat me to the punch... :-)

It's not that simple and a very important factor is what that something is. To give an extreme example, we don't call people that don't donate a kidney to help others selfish, even if the others may die without the kidney. We don't even call those that don't want to donate organs after death selfish.

The more accurate statement is therefore that those who get vaccinated (primarily) to help others are selfless. It's good for the rest of us that they exist, but we can't and should not make those that don't want to do this feel guilty, because there's like I mentioned nothing to be guilty of, given the current state of the pandemic.

It's probably a good idea to make it mandatory for medical professionals and people working with kids, as long as the government (or even better the vaccine manufacturer) takes responsibility for any and all side-effects. And if the pandemic changes course and vaccines stop working, putting us in an endless cycle of flare-ups and vaccinations - then it would be worth it to consider vaccination a duty for all people.

Re: Google and Facebook mandate vaccines for employees at U.S. offices

#498

Post by CyberDildonics »

throwaway_12_12 wrote: post #480
CyberDildonics wrote: post #467

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't "dehumanizing" someone when they ignore substantial and overwhelming evidence and others point that out.

This is exactly what these people can tell to you too, that you `ignore substantial and overwhelming evidence` - making statements like this does not help to solve the issue.

And what is "the issue"? Is it people saying they are being "dehumanized" because the propaganda they watch makes them feel uncomfortable with something that has already had four billion doses given out?

https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations?country=OWID_W...

Re: Google and Facebook mandate vaccines for employees at U.S. offices

#499

Post by detaro »

throwaway_12_12 wrote: post #461
ngc248 wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>> "Liberty" isn't the freedom to put yourself at risk with no consequences to anyone or anything else. >>> It is recognizing that there must be, at some point, a prioritization of giving people choices that might impact others. There will always be a set of people who prioritize themselves over others and in the case of corona as we have seen it just takes 1 selfish person to start the snowballing effectt. We are s…

Do you really believe what you have written here? People who chose not to take a jab are zombies to you?

That's not what they wrote.

Re: Google and Facebook mandate vaccines for employees at U.S. offices

#500

Post by CyberDildonics »

bananabiscuit wrote: post #482
CyberDildonics wrote: post #467

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It isn't "dehumanizing" someone when they ignore substantial and overwhelming evidence and others point that out.

Agreed. Let’s not ignore that: different people will have different risk/benefit profiles; that these vaccines are still in fact experimental; that there is no reproductive toxicity report for these vaccines; that there is data showing that the lipid nanoparticles from this vaccine accumulate in the ovaries; the rushed COVID vaccines are responsible for more all-cause deaths than the last 30 years of vaccines combine…

What you are saying here is conspiracy theory nonsense unless you can source substantial evidence or even explain how any of this could be true.

What would not be experimental to you? There have been 4 billion doses given out. How many more billions of doses do you need before you start saying things that have evidence instead of things that do not?

https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations?country=OWID_W...

Post reply on HN