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

601–610 of 722 posts

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

#601

Post by joshuahughes »

dekhn wrote: post #458
joshuahughes wrote: post #435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"it's incredibly harmless" The two healthy middle-aged people I know who have died within 24hrs of vaccination would beg to differ.

please stop lying/distorting reality. You have absolutely zero proof that what you observed has to do with the vaccine.

I know it’s comforting to imagine that anyone who says something that you don’t like is just a troll, but I’m not here to lie, distort reality, or say things without proof. Both cases were clearly proven, but what does that matter when you obviously know the situation of my friends better than me…

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

#602

Post by himinlomax »

penultimatebro wrote: post #600
himinlomax wrote: post #596

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't want to be forced to be around potentially infectious people. The vaccine, like all others, is not 100% effective. Unvaccinated people pose an avoidable risk to my health. I don't want them around me. I don't want to be forced to be around them. Unvaccinated people have made a choice to risk their lives, they don't get the choice to risk mine.

Then you’ll be opting to stay home? If everyone in the office is vaccinated you’ll be around only potentially infectious people. >Unvaccinated people have made a choice to risk their lives, they don’t get the choice to risk mine. Doesn’t the vaccine cover for this? You get the vaccine and it reduces your symptoms, making you less likely to end up hospitalized or die. Even vaccinated you can still get infected, get si…

I said *avoidable* risk. Avoidable is the key. Driving a car has risks, that doesn't excuse idiots driving drunk or racing into my vehicle. Unvaccinated people are literally like drunks. They can be drunk at home, they don't get to be drunk while on the road, and I shouldn't have to stay home so that they can drive dangerously.

> Doesn’t the vaccine cover for this? You get the vaccine and it reduces your symptom

I don't want reduced symptoms, I just don't want your germs. And I wear seat belt or helmet but that doesn't give you a pass to booze up your commute, even though it would reduce the symptoms of rear ending me.

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

#603

Post by himinlomax »

makomk wrote: post #236
deanc wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a counter point to yours, just as valid, where folks don’t want to be around unvaccinated folks. Maybe they have an immunocompromised relative or child at home. Maybe they don’t feel safe with unvaccinated folks around. This is a game of odds. People keep acting like this is binary. You’re statistically more likely to have and spread covid without the vaccine. I would be delighted if my employer enforced thi…

Honestly, anyone who's genuinely at risk enough that they can't risk being exposed despite being vaccinated - as opposed to the people who were convinced they are because of stupid media culture war bullshit - probably shouldn't be working in an office, because at that point they're going to be at reasonably comparable risk from the common cold. Seriously. The other four endemic human coronaviruses, for example, are…

So people who have health concerns should be penalized to accommodate people who are scared of needles?

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

#604

Post by didjathinkmess »

alex504 wrote: post #573
Closi wrote: post #537

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. Mandating vaccines is going a step further - it's forcing people to do an action, which might reduce their chances of causing harm in the future . If the sole goal was to prevent people to cause harm to others, we should prevent people from driving (the…

I was in the same boat as to thinking vaccination should be an individual decision but I have come around to the idea of mandates in the last month. As far as I can tell there is no reasonable justification for an individual not to get vaccinated unless they are immunocompromised. It is a purely selfish thing to do. Choosing not to get vaccinated is essentially saying that you want everyone else to get the vaccine bu…

Your post seems to ignore natural immunity completely. As in people who have had covid already and are immune, or already have cross reactive immunity from a coronavirus strain in a previous cold season.

This Doctor in the Wall Street Journal last month brings attention to herd immunity gained through previous infection.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-power-of-natural-immunity-1...

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

#605

Post by Fine-Cut4983 »

fruityrudy wrote: post #446
Fine-Cut4983 wrote: post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course you made a decision, unless you are an automaton? (ignoring the question of free will here). If the vaccine killed 90% of those who took it, you would of course take it, because "vaccines are just something you do"? No, you evaluated the risk. And yes, driving a car absolutely is a risk, as is just about everything.

> If the vaccine killed 90% Yes I would take it. Because if there is a vaccine available and recommended to the general population that has 90% kill rate, the thing it’s protecting against would undoubtedly have a higher kill rate then this. End of days scenarios we would be talking about nonetheless.

So you are the type of person who will always do anything the authorities tell you to do. I suppose we are not likely to see eye to eye.

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

#606

Post by grepfru_it »

yosito wrote: post #291
grepfru_it wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I expect that I challenge you to try again without assumptions! Unless you are saying, for those who are unsure of long term health risks, to just follow your expectations? Please take a pause before replying to understand why people are hesitant to blindly follow the blind

Thank you for making a good point. I'm saying we should use the limited data we have to make the best predictions we can until all of the data comes in. Of course, predictions don't always end up being right, weather forecasts being the obvious example, but there is still value in making them and trusting them (with a grain of salt).

>limited data

Yes! And do not forget, the limited data includes the botched 1970s flu vaccine as well. Don't forget the infamous Tuskgee experiment. These are all valid data points that people can use to say "well i'm not going to be a guinea pig until the long term data comes out". There is also data that most people don't find out they are allergic until the first shot. That's anxiety inducing!

When you start becoming empathetic to the other side, you realize that there are gaps where simply hand waving doesn't make the problem go away. And this is a problem everyone with an opinion, on this topic, seems to forget

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

#607

Post by didjathinkmess »

dekhn wrote: post #458
joshuahughes wrote: post #435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"it's incredibly harmless" The two healthy middle-aged people I know who have died within 24hrs of vaccination would beg to differ.

please stop lying/distorting reality. You have absolutely zero proof that what you observed has to do with the vaccine.

And then over 10000 deaths within days of the vaccine in the US alone? (CDC's own data) Those must be coincidence as well.

Using that logic, there's only a few hundred COVID deaths then. Everyone else died with COVID, not because of COVID.

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

#608

Post by alex504 »

SnowProblem wrote: post #591
alex504 wrote: post #582

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think waiting for long-term effects to be clear is a defensible position. Unless you get infected, in which case you made a pretty big mistake. So then your basically saying you don't want to get vaccinated or get covid. I'm guessing you probably also want to stop social distancing. in which case you would eventually certainly get covid if it weren't for the existence of the vaccines. So the choices are: - Don't…

Curious, how does Ivermectin fit into your worldview? https://www.wsj.com/articles/fda-ivermectin-covid-19-coronav...

I haven't looked at it much but it doesn't seem like a reliable enough treatment that one wouldn't want to be vaccinated. It seems like there are a bunch of different drugs that have shown to be effective but none are in the ballpark of two doses of Pfizer or Moderna

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

#609

Post by alex504 »

didjathinkmess wrote: post #604
alex504 wrote: post #573

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was in the same boat as to thinking vaccination should be an individual decision but I have come around to the idea of mandates in the last month. As far as I can tell there is no reasonable justification for an individual not to get vaccinated unless they are immunocompromised. It is a purely selfish thing to do. Choosing not to get vaccinated is essentially saying that you want everyone else to get the vaccine bu…

Your post seems to ignore natural immunity completely. As in people who have had covid already and are immune, or already have cross reactive immunity from a coronavirus strain in a previous cold season. This Doctor in the Wall Street Journal last month brings attention to herd immunity gained through previous infection. https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-power-of-natural-immunity-1...

You are right it does ignore it. I would be fine to make an exception for someone who has natural immunity. It might make it needlessly complicated which explains why businesses are making it simple and mandating vaccinations.

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

#610

Post by penultimatebro »

himinlomax wrote: post #602
penultimatebro wrote: post #600

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then you’ll be opting to stay home? If everyone in the office is vaccinated you’ll be around only potentially infectious people. >Unvaccinated people have made a choice to risk their lives, they don’t get the choice to risk mine. Doesn’t the vaccine cover for this? You get the vaccine and it reduces your symptoms, making you less likely to end up hospitalized or die. Even vaccinated you can still get infected, get si…

I said *avoidable* risk. Avoidable is the key. Driving a car has risks, that doesn't excuse idiots driving drunk or racing into my vehicle. Unvaccinated people are literally like drunks. They can be drunk at home, they don't get to be drunk while on the road, and I shouldn't have to stay home so that they can drive dangerously. > Doesn’t the vaccine cover for this? You get the vaccine and it reduces your symptom I do…

What you said was you don’t want to be forced to be around potentially infectious people. So anyone who’s been fully vaccinated and unvaccinated people who are currently infected. The only people to my knowledge who don’t spread are unvaccinated who have been previously infected. Robust natural immunity can be had from previous infection or cross reactive immunity from a previous coronavirus strain.

Back to your last point. If you don’t want germs, I’m not sure an office environment is for you. A 100% vaccinated office will still be susceptible to spreading COVID, especially if the Delta variant takes off like it did in the UK and Israel.

Post reply on HN