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

NYC to mandate proof of vaccination for many indoor settings

nypost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 1001 posts

Re: NYC to mandate proof of vaccination for many indoor settings

#181

Post by danhak »

bob33212 wrote: post #165
cm2187 wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not the only reasons people wouldn't want to take the vaccine. For instance lots of people already had covid (particularly in NYC), and developed a natural immunity, which from the low reinfection rate, seems to be rock solid. It doesn't make a lot of sense to require that population to take a vaccine. As for the vaccine being more or less dangerous than the virus, I think for any population over 40 or in poor…

How is this any different than requiring people to wear shoes in specific locations? Some people prefer not to wear shoes, but for the legal liability and the risk of injury many locations require shoes. Don't go to those places if you feel strongly about not getting the vaccine or wearing shoes

The government does not have a shoe mandate. As far as I know, individual businesses are free to have whatever policies they wish regarding shoes.

Re: NYC to mandate proof of vaccination for many indoor settings

#182

Post by TomVDB »

SirensOfTitan wrote: post #39

To preface: I got the vaccine months ago (as soon as I had access), I'm a big believer in vaccines. With that being said, this policy doesn't sit well with me. None of the currently available vaccines in the US are FDA approved. Of course, a lot of people have received those vaccines, but I also don't necessarily fault individuals for feeling hesitant (the nuance here is that I think people ought to get the vaccine).…

> None of the currently available vaccines in the US are FDA approved.

On one hand, I can't wait for the Pfizer vaccine to be fully FDA approved in September. On the other, everybody who uses that argument today will simply forget about it and move goalposts.

Re: NYC to mandate proof of vaccination for many indoor settings

#183

Post by oezi »

zepto wrote: post #34
q3k wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You wouldn't want strangers mandating injections into your body that you don't want. I mean, compulsory vaccination is a thing in many countries, and I think it's a net good for the world?

Compulsory injection with compounds that are not medically approved because they haven’t been tested to accepted standards is a good thing? For what it’s worth, I’m vaccinated and wear a mask in every public encounter until I’ve discussed the risks with whoever I am dealing with whether required to or not. However I strongly disagree with mandatory medical treatment of any kind. I could imagine a law for emergency va…

Hundreds of million of people is pretty good testing by now. Consider that they caught the blood clots with AstraZeneka which is less than 1 in 100,000. The vigilance systems works very well.

Re: NYC to mandate proof of vaccination for many indoor settings

#184

Post by Daishiman »

gr1zzlybe4r wrote: post #137

This is the point where we have to stop making trade offs of choice and liberty in the name of "security". Give the public open data about the effectiveness of the vaccine and then let people make their own decisions about what to do. The moralization and judgement about the vaccine has become ludicrous. If you're scared to do things around others even if you're vaccinated, then that's fine. We cannot accept a societ…

I'm sorry but the whole "let people make their own decisions" is BS.

Making epidemiological decisions isn't something that most people are qualified to do. I have seen the takes from random people and 99% of them are abject garbage.

Re: NYC to mandate proof of vaccination for many indoor settings

#185

Post by 908B64B197 »

chimeracoder wrote: post #159
cm2187 wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not the only reasons people wouldn't want to take the vaccine. For instance lots of people already had covid (particularly in NYC), and developed a natural immunity, which from the low reinfection rate, seems to be rock solid. It doesn't make a lot of sense to require that population to take a vaccine. As for the vaccine being more or less dangerous than the virus, I think for any population over 40 or in poor…

> As for the vaccine being more or less dangerous than the virus, I think for any population over 40 or in poor health, the trade off is clearly in favour of the vaccine. But if you are 20 and in good health, I am not sure it is that obvious. The risks of complications from the virus are many orders of magnitude higher than risks of complications from the vaccine, even for people in their 20s.

> The risks of complications from the virus are many orders of magnitude higher than risks of complications from the vaccine, even for people in their 20s.

For those who already had the virus and developed an immune response the risks are different.

Re: NYC to mandate proof of vaccination for many indoor settings

#186

Post by cm2187 »

bob33212 wrote: post #165
cm2187 wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's not the only reasons people wouldn't want to take the vaccine. For instance lots of people already had covid (particularly in NYC), and developed a natural immunity, which from the low reinfection rate, seems to be rock solid. It doesn't make a lot of sense to require that population to take a vaccine. As for the vaccine being more or less dangerous than the virus, I think for any population over 40 or in poor…

How is this any different than requiring people to wear shoes in specific locations? Some people prefer not to wear shoes, but for the legal liability and the risk of injury many locations require shoes. Don't go to those places if you feel strongly about not getting the vaccine or wearing shoes

I got sick like a dog for a day after my first dose, and had a pain in the arm for a week after my second dose. You can't compare injecting a pathogen in someone's body to wearing clothes.

Re: NYC to mandate proof of vaccination for many indoor settings

#187

Post by bingidingi »

SirensOfTitan wrote: post #158
threatofrain wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the vaccine is as effective as it seems, then this decision feels positively nanny state to me. It takes away an individual's agency to inform themselves of the risks on both sides and make an informed decision. Do people feel the same way about schools requiring vaccines, or children getting the MMR, Hep B, or Polio vaccines?

As I clearly mentioned, this vaccine is not FDA approved. We have no idea of the long term effects. I find it fairly reasonable to not want to be a test subject.

So if the FDA approved it you’d be ok with it?

Re: NYC to mandate proof of vaccination for many indoor settings

#188

Post by timr »

clukic wrote: post #156
timr wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am pro-vaccine (and fully vaccinated), but I don't support this policy at all. I don't believe this will have much of a net effect on vaccination rate, I believe it will disproportionately negatively impact poor and minority populations in NYC who already have a bad/mistrustful relationship with health care and government, and it is obviously a huge new governmental intrusion into our daily lives. It might well lea…

The vulnerable populations aren't vaccinated. The vaccination rate in Brooklyn for people 65+ is just a bit over 50% (51% white/54% African American). If cases keep rising I don't see any reason why hospitalizations and deaths won't follow. Unless the delta variant is less dangerous or treatments have improved tremendously. So, the options are 1)Stop indoor dining 2)Accept the public health implications or 3) Require…

> The vulnerable populations aren't vaccinated. The vaccination rate in Brooklyn for people 65+ is just a bit over 50% (51% white/54% African American).

Yes, they are. In NYC, 73% of adults over 65 are fully vaccinated, and 77% have had at least one dose:

https://www1.nyc.gov/site/doh/covid/covid-19-data-vaccines.p...

You're cherry-picking regions of low vaccination, but ignoring the overall metrics.

Re: NYC to mandate proof of vaccination for many indoor settings

#189

Post by timr »

afavour wrote: post #171
timr wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Literally not true. Kids under 12 are not able to be vaccinated, which puts a limit on the activities they and their families can do. If they're able to know that everyone inside a restaurant is vaccinated they'll be more likely to visit. This policy is also hysterical, and not based in science. Kids should not be under any restrictions due to SARS-CoV2. Please see my comment from yesterday as to why I believe this…

> the most fearful 5% of people can force it upon their children and stop holding the rest of the world hostage To be clear, as a parent, it's not because I'm fearful, it's because a positive COVID test from any child in my kid's school means that it shuts down for two weeks, completely messing up our lives, jobs etc. I'm not going to defend that policy for a second as I don't think it's a good idea either, but it's…

> To be clear, as a parent, it's not because I'm fearful, it's because a positive COVID test from any child in my kid's school means that it shuts down for two weeks, completely messing up our lives, jobs etc.

Completely agreed. This is a stupid, hysterical policy, and we should all be against it. I include it with my previous comment that children should face no restrictions from SARS-CoV2. What we've done to kids in the last year is so unethical that it makes me furious.

I don't mean to imply that you specifically, are hysterical, but this stuff is coming from a group of people who are operating based on fear and lack knowledge. And unfortunately, a great many of them are in positions of power.

Re: NYC to mandate proof of vaccination for many indoor settings

#190

Post by Daishiman »

tboyd47 wrote: post #5
mandmandam wrote: post #2

Privacy watchdogs, data protection groups, and human rights councils have largely condemned these "vaccine passports". To date, I haven't seen their concerns mentioned - mentioned - in any of these pronouncements. I get that there are enough people willing to go along with this that they'll likely stick around for a bit - but another thing I haven't seen is an end game. Corona is in the deer, it's in pets. Are they a…

It seems that the endgame is to keep on pushing tighter and tighter restrictions on certain communities of people, strongly discouraging open debate, leaving dissenters no other option but to physically remove themselves, until only the most compliant remain, forming a tight-knit, ideologically homogenous group.

That would be the point if it weren't for the fact that the "debate", from the point of view of those who have actually kept up with the medical, epidemiomological, and ethical literature has been settled.

Yeah, I'm all for pushing willfully ignorant discussion out of the public eye.

Post reply on HN