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

561–570 of 722 posts

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

#561

Post by TulliusCicero »

cactus2093 wrote: post #539
nindalf wrote: post #184

I’ve typed out 3 comments to 3 separate people before deleting them. I didn’t see the point. Folks, it’s a good idea to heed dang’s warning at the top of the thread. I’ve read all the comments and can confidently say there’s nothing worth reading here. Just people absolutely convinced of their ideas and principles, shouting past each other. Nothing we haven’t seen on this topic 50 times before. You’re better off goin…

I get what you and dang are saying, but I'm not so sure it's that simple. If I follow this idea to its logical conclusion, I'm left with simply nihilism. You can use this same reasoning about anything. Why go out and march or protest or do anything for ____ (insert any cause here)? Any single action you do is unlikely to solve a big problem. But everyone can't just give up on everything and go for a walk when things…

This comment, 100%.

It's true that if you zoom in, it's hard to believe that some comment arguing on the internet will have any impact. But in aggregate, probably it does make a difference. Hell, a lot of the conspiracy stuff spread over the internet in the first place.

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

#562

Post by TulliusCicero »

oldcigarette wrote: post #99
b0sk wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vaccination is not a "this is a cultural decision at the society level". It has saved millions and millions of lives. Maybe change your employer if you are so pissed at them?

Is there a coherent thought here? I don't disagree the vaccine has saved lives or even that you shouldn't get it. I can enjoy my job and what I do and disapprove of decisions made by leadership at the same time. It's easily the best place and people I've ever worked with.

It's a very basic responsibility of an employer to try and make their workplace a safe place to work. I'm not sure why that's so difficult to understand.

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

#563

Post by TulliusCicero »

off_sounder wrote: post #501
Marcus9 wrote: post #492

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Your wrong. That's like saying a taxi cab driver who drove a criminal to a place where he committed a murder is partly responsible for the crime. The virus is the thing that's causing harm. You can't blame an individual for being skeptical about a vaccine (that has more voluntarily reports of causing harm than any other vaccine in recent history, btw) that's experimental, and unapproved. Also, the science is in on th…

Your analogy would hold if there was a way for taxi drivers to vaccinate against transporting criminals who are in the middle of committing a crime.

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

#564

Post by bawolff »

machinelearning wrote: post #395
bawolff wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> most vaccines developed in the recent past have either been recombinant, attenuated/inactivated viruses or adenovirus vectored vaccines If you list every other type of vaccine other than mRNA, then yes the majority of vaccines are one of those. I mean, you even listed adenovirus which is extremely new and only used in covid & ebola vaccines, which makes me suspect you don't actually care about the underlying techno…

> "adenovirus which is extremely new and only used in covid & ebola vaccines" So you are agreeing with me that there is prior evidence that adenovirus vector vaccines are safe and efficacious? Because that is exactly what I am trying to say. If you feel that there isn't enough evidence, feel free to omit that from the list and the point still stands. Perhaps even more so for OP's point about school-mandated vaccines.…

> So you are agreeing with me that there is prior evidence that adenovirus vector vaccines are safe and efficacious

I mean, the evidence isn't as strong as it is with mRNA vaccines, but nonetheless they are effective and reasonably safe.

I just think your division of categories is totally arbitrary and not grounded in any evidence.

> From what I understand the vaccine hesitant population includes medical professionals and many well informed people who are simply waiting for more evidence about its safety

You could describe the flat earth movement the same way. The world has a lot of people in it, the set of beliefs contained within run the gamuet. Some people think X is true for all X. I don't think that says much about the answer to the question one way or another.

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

#565

Post by muyuu »

fruityrudy wrote: post #364
oldcigarette wrote: post #90

I work at google and am vaxxed but this pisses me off. I decided that the vaccine was worth the risk and for the best overall but if someone makes a different calculus I can understand and respect that. IMHO they gone way outside the reasonable scope of an employer - this is a cultural decision at the society level - why the fuck does my employer give a shit about this. Unless the employees are only commuting back an…

> “I decided the risk was worth it” It’s funny though how you say this phrase for a vaccine and not for the hundreds of other riskier situations you face daily. “I drove a car…risk was worth it I decided”. It sounds a bit self-important. Vaccines are just something you do. For me it was not a decision. It’s an interesting exploration in psychology where people oppose something mostly because they are told to do it. L…

> It’s funny though how you say this phrase for a vaccine and not for the hundreds of other riskier situations you face daily. “I drove a car…risk was worth it I decided”.

epistemic risk is fundamentally different from empirical risk

you started off strong with the max level condescendence and ignorance

but I do agree with the rest of the message, roughly at least

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

#566

Post by CyberDildonics »

bananabiscuit wrote: post #554
CyberDildonics wrote: post #500

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

Let me address all of these different people will have different risk/benefit profiles: should be self evident that these vaccines are still in fact experimental: all current COVID vaccines are still being distributed under a EUA. that there is no reproductive toxicity report for these vaccines: I checked on the status of this again, so far this study [1] that will be published next month seems to be all we have. Not…

None of those links actually back up what you are saying or even come remotely close. Why do you think they do?

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

#568

Post by bwship »

acituan wrote: post #285
nindalf wrote: post #184

I’ve typed out 3 comments to 3 separate people before deleting them. I didn’t see the point. Folks, it’s a good idea to heed dang’s warning at the top of the thread. I’ve read all the comments and can confidently say there’s nothing worth reading here. Just people absolutely convinced of their ideas and principles, shouting past each other. Nothing we haven’t seen on this topic 50 times before. You’re better off goin…

> I’ve read all the comments and can confidently say there’s nothing worth reading here I particularly dislike this type of comments, which tell people what to feel and think about a thread, however well meaning it might be. You're in a performative contradiction when you shallowly dismiss the entire thread with an overgeneralization and with that make it definitely less useful. Yes, this thread is more divided than…

Yea, those first two comments on here made me excited to read the rest of the thread.

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

#569

Post by bananabiscuit »

CyberDildonics wrote: post #566
bananabiscuit wrote: post #554

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me address all of these different people will have different risk/benefit profiles: should be self evident that these vaccines are still in fact experimental: all current COVID vaccines are still being distributed under a EUA. that there is no reproductive toxicity report for these vaccines: I checked on the status of this again, so far this study [1] that will be published next month seems to be all we have. Not…

None of those links actually back up what you are saying or even come remotely close. Why do you think they do?

Not really sure what you mean.

With regards to reproductive toxicity report, I’m not really sure how to prove the absence of something, but the best study I found is on 44 rats. Let me know if you can do better. Aside from that, the VAERS miscarriage data directly supports the hypothesis that the COVID vaccines do indeed have some sort of effect on reproductive health. Can you provide some other explanation for that data?

The VAERS data also directly supports my statement about there being more deaths due to this vaccine than all the rest of the previous 20 years put together.

I am finding many articles that support the fact that natural immunity is at least as good as the vaccines. Here’s another study if the WHO isn’t good enough for you. https://www.precisionvaccinations.com/natural-immunity-after... please let me know if you find anything to the contrary.

Recent evidence supports ADE, but I agree it’s not something to be concluded just yet. The ADE hypothesis directly explains higher titer rates in vaccinated cases unvaccinated and also the fact that more vaccinated counties in California have higher case rates currently. This needs to be looked into further, but if the deleted NBC article is anything to go by, ADE will instead be memory-holed.

Anything else that you specifically have a problem with?

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

#570

Post by machinelearning »

bawolff wrote: post #564
machinelearning wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "adenovirus which is extremely new and only used in covid & ebola vaccines" So you are agreeing with me that there is prior evidence that adenovirus vector vaccines are safe and efficacious? Because that is exactly what I am trying to say. If you feel that there isn't enough evidence, feel free to omit that from the list and the point still stands. Perhaps even more so for OP's point about school-mandated vaccines.…

> So you are agreeing with me that there is prior evidence that adenovirus vector vaccines are safe and efficacious I mean, the evidence isn't as strong as it is with mRNA vaccines, but nonetheless they are effective and reasonably safe. I just think your division of categories is totally arbitrary and not grounded in any evidence. > From what I understand the vaccine hesitant population includes medical professional…

> I just think your division of categories is totally arbitrary and not grounded in any evidence.

You just agreed that adenoviruses are proven to be safe and effective at scale. I don't think anyone can argue conclusively that mRNA vaccines are, though there is mounting evidence that the incidence of short-time side effects is low. If you follow that rule, it should be obvious what rule the division of categories take and why they are grounded in evidence.

> You could describe the flat earth movement the same way.

Now that is a strawman if I've ever heard one, not sure if you actually intend to be taken seriously with that. There are provable ways to show that the earth is round based on physical laws. There is not enough evidence that the covid mRNA vaccine is safe and effective. One could argue about what would constitute evidence for safe and effective, but pick any reasonable metric (e.g. full FDA approval, long term studies). In fact, I would argue that to think that the COVID vaccines are completely safe without enough evidence to conclusively prove that falls under the kind of beliefs that you describe.

There are always going to be people who are non-rigorous and choose to believe what they want to but I hazard a guess that a large portion of the vaccine hesitant crowd falls under the category of people who want to see a rigorous analysis of the long term side effects of the vaccine before taking it.

Before you strawman this argument again by saying that you can apply this logic to anything, do some research about the history of mRNA vaccines and its associated risks (autoimmune disorders, myocardial inflammation, all the anecdotal reports of persistent side effects, etc.).

The point is not that mRNA vaccines produce these side effects with high probability but that there is high uncertainty as to whether they do or not because of the lack of long term studies.

Post reply on HN