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

OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

whitehouse.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 1001 posts

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#201

Post by sbelskie »

iluvcommunism wrote: post #156
xupybd wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A hard hat isn't a medical procedure. Some die from this vaccine. I weighed up the options and decided it was by far the lower risk option. I think people need to be free to make that choice. Freedom is so valuable.

VAERS shows several thousand have died. Some estimate 45k based on a Harvard study on VAERS indicating a % that goes unreported.

“The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database contains information on *unverified* reports of adverse events (illnesses, health problems and/or symptoms) following immunization with US-licensed vaccines. *Reports are accepted from anyone*…”

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#202

Post by IgorPartola »

captainredbeard wrote: post #11

Why must I be vaccinated if the vaccine doesn't prevent spread? Preventing spread to other people is the only plausible reason to force everyone to take it. I am comfortable catching the disease and even comfortable dying from it (the numbers are vastly on my side). I do far riskier things on a regular basis (extreme sports) and I do not understand the infantilization of society. Join the feedlot if you want but I wi…

This is probably the most willfully ignorant and blatantly selfish comment in this discussion. Bravo for this twattastic display.

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#203

Post by ctrlp »

Whether or not you agree if there is legal authority for mandates for this vaccine or this pandemic, where does it end? The trajectory we're on is for all people to be monitored by the State for compliance with the vaccine programs.

Israel is already saying 4 shots (and more) will required [0] to participate in that society. Australia, New Zealand, and Canada are quasi-police states [1] and will probably mandate vaccination+boosters soon.

The writing on the wall is that the 'booster' is being repackaged as a 'series' of vaccines. The health authorities and pharma are going to modify and approve vaccines for endless mutations. Will these be independently tested? I don't expect so, despite using the novel mRNA platform. The end game is to treat Covid vaccines like annual (or semi-annual) flu vaccines. Moderna is already packaging both together [2]. Except flu vaccine is not mandated (yet). There is a LOT of money to be made in mandatory vaccine mandates. Think how easy it would be to grow rich if everyone had to use your products, you had no competition, and the government indemnified you against any responsibility for harm. It's hard to see how this stops. The pandemic is a gift for technocratic-authoritarians everywhere.

Here's a prediction. In a few years, if the people don't stand up against this, the pandemic will not be 'over' politically. Nominally 'free' Western governments will have become de facto CCP-style management firms. We will be required to comply with ongoing health directives from the central authorities for vaccination to prevent further restrictions. Our compliance will be monitored via digital passes (or onerous paper-work for the poor). Our employment and freedom of movement will depend on our compliance. Those who disagree and are foolish enough to say something will find themselves censored (for health disinformation) and fined (or imprisoned [3]). Traveling to see grandma without having gotten the latest booster will risk quarantine.

So, if you're pro-mandates, I invite you to come back in a couple of years and ridicule me and this warning if it's wrong (if it hasn't been scrubbed from the internet). I hope you're right! I wonder what you'll say if you're wrong? Maybe post your predictions for posterity.

[0] https://www.timesofisrael.com/virus-czar-calls-to-begin-read... [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/31/world/australia/new-zeala..., https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/jun/01/austr... [2] https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/...

[3] https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/jun/01/austr...

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#204

Post by kylecordes »

anonymouse008 wrote: post #131
tibbydudeza wrote: post #120

Our largest healthcare provider has already mandated vaccines for their staff and insurance companies are now following suit because they got hammered with life insurance payouts for 2020 and first half of 2021. Waiting for retailers to announce this as well at some point.

Maybe slightly off topic, but it’s always been odd to me how life insurance tests with vigor for tobacco use but lack that enthusiasm for metabolic health / diet.

With this kind of testing, they might find so few acceptable customers that it wouldn't be worth being in the insurance business anymore.

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#205

Post by kaydub »

reidjs wrote: post #10
adamrezich wrote: post #7

if they try to pull this here, I know for a fact my 65-year-old coworker—who has been working from home ever since we were mandated to wear a mask only in the building lobby (this ended July 1st)—won't put up with it, and I won't either, so that's 2/3 of the school district programmers they'd have to fire. thankfully our governor has already stated she's going to take any such actions to court.

Are you guys irreplaceable?

No, they're definitely replaceable.

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#206

Post by White_Wolf »

captainredbeard wrote: post #28
tfehring wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think “prevent” is too imprecise a term here. The vaccines don’t eliminate the risk of spreading the virus to others. They do materially reduce the risk of spreading the virus to others.

How much pro-social good is required to force me to take a medical treatment I do not consent to?

I don't think anyone should be forced to take any medicine against their will as long as they are not in a coma or incapacitated and unable to reason.

I personally had the vaccine because I have very high blood pressure, have pretty high blood sugar (even though I'm fit/in shape) and am almost 40. It was MY CHOICE in the risk vs reward game of numbers it I did it only for myself with a good life insurance already in place that covers death/incapacity from medication too(covers COVID vaccines too).

What if I would of ended up like that BBC presenter? Dead. For me it's down to my family and that is it.

This will be a bit exagerated but (hopefully) shold get the point across: At the end of the day anyone else is disposable as long as my family is safe from harm.

As long as the vaccine is not 100% safe nobody should be allowed to force anyone else to take it.

Edit: One thing that puzzles me though - Why is nobody talking about those that are immune or already have the antibodies and don't need a vaccine? Why force them to have it if those vaccinated are safe?

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#207

Post by k__ »

over_the_raibow wrote: post #177
probably_wrong wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why must I be vaccinated if the vaccine doesn't prevent spread? (...) I am comfortable catching the disease and even comfortable dying from it Became it's not about you , it's about everyone around you as a group. Those who are "comfortable catching the disease" are taking up a non-insignificant portion of available hospital beds, for instance, keeping health workers at their limit and preventing other people from…

>Became it's not about you, it's about everyone around you as a group. Those who are "comfortable catching the disease" are taking... Bla bla... Then why are you smoking, or why are you eating fast food, why are you not exercising? These actions also put a burden on the health system. Why do covid and not tobacco? You know the answer already. This is not about anyone s health

Whataboutism, really?

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#208

Post by md_ »

sAbakumoff wrote: post #199
the-dude wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What makes you think it is different in other countries?

Most EU countries reached high vaccination rate without extreme measures because people here are not poisoned with right wing propaganda.

Not true. Germany has the "three g" mandate (and it has faced significant pushback). France has no vaccination mandate but does have policies to encourage it, which have also faced massive protests. Both and the US have first-dose vaccination rates within ten percentage points of each other.

In all three countries, the pushback is primarily from populist/right-wing political movements. This is not a strictly American phenomenon.

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#209

Post by davrosthedalek »

FpUser wrote: post #91
lalaland1125 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would argue that if you are acting with the sole purpose to oppose other people, you aren't really making your own decisions. Blind opposition is just as silly as blindly following the flow.

>"Blind opposition is just as silly as blindly following the flow" I think opposition to being pressured regardless of the reasons is quite normal and healthy behavior because in most of the life situations people are being pressured into something that benefits somebody else.

It's a good heuristic to be suspicious, bit not a reason by itself.

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#210

Post by tomrod »

anonymouse008 wrote: post #192
tomrod wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can control your tobacco use. That is why Pigovian taxation is effective.

I’ll go where you’re alluding A “food desert” doesn’t account for the person who consistently orders two flavors in their tall iced coffee (usually equates to 6+ oz of simple syrup); that’s a choice — and a severe negative externality.

Indeed. Tax that at point of sale, like cigarettes and other tobacco.

Risk pooling in insurance is simply an added benefit, but a less clear moral approach when the disease is not necessarily controllable by the person. Metabolic disorders exist. Tobacco disorders, not as much except conditioning and addiction.

But, it should be a focus for wellness programs so that metabolic disorders are destigmatized.

Post reply on HN