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

741–750 of 1001 posts

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

#741

Post by tomrod »

steverb wrote: post #247
ctrlp wrote: post #203

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 vacc…

I predict that by December of 2021 enough people will have gotten the vaccine or have had COVID that the hospitalization numbers will drop precipitously and then we can all go back to a normal life. The OSHA requirement will hang around, but people won't be freaking out about it because it will be normal. Within two years there will be a childhood COVID vaccine that is safe and effective and it will be required for s…

Personally I think sooner, unless another variant worse than Delta springs up. Right now Mu, Lambda are known but Delta appears to out compete.

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

#742

Post by xyzzy21 »

tomrod wrote: post #722
a_conservative wrote: post #540

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what about unknown long-haul effects from newly developed vaccines? Are we permitted to be concerned about those?

Of course we are. The long haul effects of COVID are partially known and are super bad. The expected long haul effects of the vaccine are pretty well known (J&J, AZ) or use well understood pathways (Pfizer, Moderna).

We largely know what causes Long Haul COVID - it's depletion and interference with vitamin B metabolic pathways.

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

#743

Post by maxerickson »

julianlam wrote: post #385
pibechorro wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

goal posts keep moving to fit the agenda of handing a select few billions of dollars at our expense.

It always surprises me when conservatives use the economic argument wrt vaccine deployment because doing so means they assume an intrinsic value of $0 on human lives. Penny wise, pound foolish.

Even valuing lives at $0 the economic benefits of vaccination are much higher than the costs.

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

#744

Post by Paradigma11 »

erklik wrote: post #709
Paradigma11 wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They would be making a lot more money without the vaccines.

How's that?

Sick people are far far more profitable than those few bucks for vaccines. If you add long covid then pharma is missing out on a goldmine.

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

#745

Post by tolmasky »

clairity wrote: post #723
burntwater wrote: post #474

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I never understand this whole "99% survival rate" being presented as if that's low. I don't know about you, but if I'm around something that has a 1 in 100 chance of killing me, I'm going to do everything I can to not let it, because those are NOT low odds. It also conveniently ignores the known and unknown long-haul effects from Covid, which impacts a significant percentage (20%?). I, for one, like staying in relati…

> “…but if I'm around something that has a 1 in 100 chance of killing me, I'm going to do everything I can to not let it, because those are NOT low odds.” then you should avoid any and all cars as you have a 1 in 100 lifetime chance of dying in a car accident. or birth, as babies have 0.6% chance of dying around birth. covid suffers severely from availability and recency bias because our lives are so exceedingly safe…

I actually do try to stay away from cars. I think we are absolutely horrible at addressing risk accurately, and someday when we have some sort of carless society (or maybe self-driving cars?) we will not understand how we could possibly have accepted the mortality rates associated with cars. Not to mention the less immediate effects on long term health from exhaust, etc.

Although I feel you were trying to make the opposite case, I think events like COVID should illuminate the dangers and inadequacies of other elements of our lives. If you've read "The Maniac of New York" comic, it makes a similar point: a murderer that can't be stopped eventually just becomes accepted by society. Perhaps we have recency bias with COVID, but we have a more worrying complacency bias with other elements of our lives, like cars. Dramatic life extensions and quality of life improvements come when people stop accepting that "meh, people get sick and die," and instead get curious and start pushing for "burdensome" things like public sanitation.

Perhaps more importantly though, the ICU is getting filled up and causing other unrelated ailments to become worse. This isn't the case with most the other things you listed.

> babies have 0.6% chance of dying around birth

This one is hard to avoid unfortunately, unless you believe in Pixar's "pre life" world from "Soul". Also, arguably avoiding it leads to 100% mortality depending on how you count "not living". Neither here nor there, but I wasn't really a fan of that movie.

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

#746

Post by Dma54rhs »

zxcvbn4038 wrote: post #462
Ekaros wrote: post #258

I wonder should we also start mandating yearly influenza shots from everyone? And bar those who are not tested or vaccinated from work places? It would certainly save some lives wouldn't it?

Smoking kills 500,000 people per year in the US - which is only slightly less then COVID at current rates - I don't see anyone rushing to shut that down. Heart disease kills 650,000 per year, but there is still a McDonalds and Taco Bell on every corner.

They should introduce scales in addition to big events, since we know the obese are the main ones that overflow the hospitals. Pandemic over 1.5yrs now.. Plenty of time to do your job and lose weight.

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

#747

Post by thehappypm »

xupybd wrote: post #225
thehappypm wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Has anyone died from Pfizer? I’ve seen cases of heart inflammation, but I haven’t heard of any deaths.

We have had one death in NZ. We're a small population so it's significant. https://i.stuff.co.nz/national/health/coronavirus/126225003/...

Yeah, I suppose deaths are always possible from anything. You could give out a million lollipops and someone would choke. Someone has probably had an infection just from the needle itself.

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

#748

Post by tomrod »

vxNsr wrote: post #480
ctrlp wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I also see a familiar pattern with sentiments like yours. There is little to no concern for people whose livelihoods or psychological health were harmed by health policies that prioritize the vulnerable minority over everyone else, including children. Health policy diktats aimed at saving every life will inevitably harm many in subtle and not-so-subtle ways. Will the cumulative harms ever be counted? Not likely as it…

I’ve seen arguments made that we’ve lost a significant number of ppl due to suicide, dementia, etc.

It's possible. We can compare year over year deaths to investigate excess deaths (which is really the best approach to fully appreciate the mortality impact). Such an analysis misses long term side effects like Long COVID, but does capture things like changes to traffic deaths and suicides. The CDC publishes this info.

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

#749

Post by Hunter235711 »

kbos87 wrote: post #731
Hunter235711 wrote: post #687

I am not anti-vax, but I STRONGLY oppose this vaccine mandate. Looking at the CDC data here: ( https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Deaths-by-Sex... ) there have been 3,043 covid deaths in the 18-29 year range out of 103,738 total deaths in that same age range. I'm 29 and in good health. I know I'm much more likely to die from activities I enjoy like rock climbing, farm work, skydiving, driving my car, but…

There are so many conveniently chosen facts and holes in your argument that I don’t even know where to begin. The CDC dataset you cite above only reflects death, not the serious illness and disability ~30% of people end up with. Yes, vaccinated individuals can spread COVID, but this is dramatically less likely if you are vaccinated. You assume you’ll be less likely to spread delta because you’ll quarantine, but you i…

Vaccinated individuals are less likely to spread delta than unvaccinated people who have never been infected, but what about those who have recovered? The fact that they are 13 times less likely to be infected with delta makes me think natural immunity is better for variants. There have already been several covid variants this year. I would rather be contagious for a few days once than every time a new variant comes around.

I'm definitely not declining the vaccine because it is inconvenient, I have really thought this through, and my doctor agrees with me. It isn't because I'm just being "selfish and unwilling to cooperate".

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

#750

Post by clairity »

robmccoll wrote: post #438
disneygibson wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it isn’t comparable, because those diseases wiped out 3/4 of the population. That obviously isn’t the case with COVID, even if our terrified-of-everything populace thinks it is.

Have you considered that we took a lot of precautions that made it possible that as relatively few people died as did? Even with shutdowns, lockdowns, and extreme measures in healthcare, we lost about 0.2% of the population. If we had done nothing, we might have reached 1%. If a group was going door to door randomly killing 1 in every 100 people in your neighborhood, would you consider it reasonable to stop answering…

have you considered that if all we’d done was immediate quarantine the aged and infirm (with generously compensated volunteer caretakers), recommend indoor distancing, and perhaps recommend masks in homes, we’d likely be at a similar and possibly lower level, that all the “measures” were not about reducing spread but rather prolonging the time that the mediopolitical machine had to take advantage of the fear and uncertainty they continually manufacture?
Post reply on HN