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

831–840 of 1001 posts

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

#831

Post by generj »

reportgunner wrote: post #633
dadoge wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me guess, seat belt mandates are also “authoritarian”? What about measles vaccine requirements? Have you complained about those recently? Believe it or not, there was a time when measles wasn’t a thing and very few question the need for a measles vaccine now. What about the broad polio vaccine rollout? Vaccine hesitancy has been a thing, but never this strongly along party lines

You can't lose your job over not wearing a seat belt can you ?

You definitely can if you are driving on the clock.

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

#832

Post by spookthesunset »

Cederfjard wrote: post #314
guscost wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Normalcy” is gone for good. If you’re actually still hoping for some future that looks like the pre-COVID times, you’re going to be disappointed. Hoping to avoid war is more in alignment with reality, at this point.

What permanent changes are you envisioning?

You think all this vaccine passport and mask crap is going away anytime soon? This crap is gonna be with us for a long, long time. We will be flying with masks on for years after this, mark my words (and I fully expect people to reply on why this is a good thing).

There is a large group of people who refuse to move on from covid. We have a vaccine that keeps you out of the hospital. Once you take it, you have a moral right to return to full normal.

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

#833

Post by moistrobot »

kbos87 wrote: post #754

The number of comments here that fall back on some sort of a slippery slope argument, based in a worry about government overreach, is really disheartening. If COVID has proven anything in the US, it's how little control the federal government actually has. They've barely been able to enforce mask mandates. The slippery slope argument doesn't hold water here. I think we can look at the facts - 700,000 people dead, hos…

> The number of comments here that fall back on some sort of a slippery slope argument, based in a worry about government overreach, is really disheartening. If COVID has proven anything in the US, it's how little control the federal government actually has. They've barely been able to enforce mask mandates.

This is by design. We don't want a strong federal government.

> The slippery slope argument doesn't hold water here. I think we can look at the facts - 700,000 people dead, hospitals overwhelmed, countless people injured or disabled from COVID, and no end in sight - and decide that a strong mandate makes sense here, and that a mandate won't make sense in future cases.

here's some more facts that change the landscape significantly. 5% of COVID deaths were without co-morbidities. On average, a person who died of COVID had 4.0 co-morbidities. (https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm#Co...) The vast majority of those dying are 65+. We don't have a COVID problem, we have a health problem. Has the government been encouraging people to take vitamin D, get fresh air, exercise, and get to a healthy weight? The rhetoric has been sit down and get the jab.

> The "government is always bad, personal choice should always win" mindset runs deep in this country unfortunately, and from what I can see, it's often based in nothing other than veiled conservatism and a preference for division and anti-cooperativeness.

The government polices are extreme overreactions by any measure of the data, and government doesn't give power back once it has it.

> Above all else, this sentiment holds very little water when it's coming from people who speak out against a vaccine mandate but choose to stay quiet on things like abortion rights.

I can almost agree here, except the pro-choice people seem to overlap heavily with the pro-mandate people. I don't think you can logically hold both of those positions

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

#834

Post by seanmcdirmid »

jimmygrapes wrote: post #50
dmitrygr wrote: post #3

> OSHA will issue an Emergency Temporary > Standard (ETS) to implement this requirement Is this "temporary" in the same way that the PATRIOT act and our invasion of Afghanistan in 2001 were "temporary"? Well, I guess one should never let a good crisis go to waste...

My concern is why OSHA has not issued emergency mandatory ventilation and air circulation orders, since that's actually within their wheelhouse vs this extension into medical demands which until now had been limited strongly to vague recommendations and couched in informed consent language (e.g. Hepatitis awareness)

> My concern is why OSHA has not issued emergency mandatory ventilation and air circulation orders

Low hanging fruit.

One is easy to order, cheap to implement, and cheap to verify, the other would be expensive to implement and even more expensive to verify.

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

#835

Post by dntrkv »

flavius29663 wrote: post #790
dntrkv wrote: post #786

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Driving is just as vital to survival as having a job in most of the US.

but not driving drunk...you choose to drink, which is entirely optional. Driving drunk is something you choose to do. Getting a vaccine by mandate is something the state decides you have to do, with no way around it, if you want to continue working.

I was commenting on the insurance part, not the drunk driving. But we don't even have to go that far, we require licenses to drive, and if you aren't fit to drive, you can be denied that privilege outright.

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

#836

Post by spookthesunset »

criticaltinker wrote: post #19

It's pretty egregious that there is no mention of accommodation for individuals who have already acquired effective immunity through previous infection. Other countries are well ahead of the U.S in this regard. These mandates appear to completely neglect entire aspects of scientific consensus.

Natural immunity, or any discussion of our immune system doing its job, is a right wing talking point.

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

#837

Post by AndrewBissell »

halfmatthalfcat wrote: post #278
TigeriusKirk wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I vaccinated within days of becoming eligible and I'm 100% against this mandate. To such an extent that I'll become a single-issue voter over it.

I’ll cancel out your vote then because I’m 100% for this.

Just FYI, no amount of coercive mandates and force applied against your fellow human beings to make them take these shots, which are marginally protective against transmission at best, will actually do anything to make you safer from Covid or reduce your paralyzing fear of it. TPTB will continue to menace you with the specter of The Virus as long as it is making you behave in ways useful to them -- namely, by handing them more power.

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

#838

Post by antattack »

over_the_raibow wrote: post #196
antattack wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Due to it's high transmissibility, pretty much everyone will be exposed to it. When it happens, you'll be in much better shape if you're vaccinated because dying from it is not the only complication. To put it plainly, problem with COVID-19 is that it makes your own immune system damage your body as it scrambles defenses, confused. With vaccine, much less so.

No. You will not. Immunity from getting the virus is better than vaccine aquired immunity

If you're counting on acquiring immunity naturally consider this:

1. You got sick and now you have antibodies but your internal organs, like lungs are scarred. You'd have likely avoided some if not all of that damage if you were vaccinated.

2. Your immune system might be targeting parts of the virus that are less universal across virus' mutations so it gives you less or little immunity against mutants. mRNA vaccine is specifically targeting the spike protein which so far has been unchanged enough for vaccines to be more or less effective against mutations.

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

#840

Post by SkyBelow »

robmccoll wrote: post #364
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?

Yeah what's next? Making other behaviors that have a small but established likelihood of endangering the lives of others or their property illegal at little to no cost to the liberty of an individual? Pretty soon I won't be able to drive my car under the influence, or without proper insurance, or while not wearing a seatbelt, or I won't be able to discharge my firearms in my 0.2 acre backyard in a suburban area. 650,…

>Yeah what's next? Making other behaviors that have a small but established likelihood of endangering the lives of others or their property illegal at little to no cost to the liberty of an individual? Pretty soon I won't be able to drive my car under the influence, or without proper insurance, or while not wearing a seatbelt, or I won't be able to discharge my firearms in my 0.2 acre backyard in a suburban area.

I wonder how many lives we could save if we required every car to have a breathalyzer that has to be used to start the car, and maybe a second test once 2 miles have been driven.

Also, if you want to get technical, most of those car laws only apply to public roads. On a private road you can get away with far far more.

Post reply on HN