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

891–900 of 1001 posts

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

#891

Post by landemva »

codeyperson wrote: post #232
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…

It does prevent spread. > I do not understand the infantilization of society. The real infantilization would be catering to people that aren't prepared to do their bit for society. These are the children, that in the face of the evidence, will do ANYTHING to prevent the bruising of their egos.

The real infantilization would be catering to people that aren't prepared to do their bit for society by AVOIDING SODA, CEREAL, AND SUGAR SO THEY CAN LOSE 30 POUNDS and walk up a flight of stairs.

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

#892

Post by a_conservative »

namlem wrote: post #887
a_conservative wrote: post #884

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For me personally, it's decreased general trust. I don't see the establishment as having a lot of credibility at this point. Bad smells that make me distrust: Changing definitions of the word vaccine, so that the Covid 19 injections can be considered a vaccine. It becoming impermissible to question the vaccine. If you tell me there isn't room to doubt, then my response to you is bullshit. I've been a skeptic my entir…

In what way are these vaccines not vaccines? Because they are based on mRNA rather than inactive viruses or virus fragments?

I'm not claiming that they aren't vaccines. Words change definition to follow usage. However, Merriam-Webster literally changed their definition of vaccine in the past 6 months or so. [0][1]

My argument is that by including these injections under the term vaccine, they are getting a halo effect from past vaccines that isn't warranted. Questioning vaccines is the lowest of the low, almost unthinkable, but these "vaccines" aren't like the old ones.

[0] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vaccine

[1] https://archive.is/XGfdr

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

#893

Post by freemint »

ctrlp wrote: post #713
chinathrow wrote: post #696

Earlier quoted context omitted.

mRNA vaccines are not altering your genes and are not generally viewed as "gene therapy".

Nature.com doesn't agree with you. At least in 2019 it wasn't controversial to say so: "Because mRNA falls into the broad vaccine category of genetic immunogens, many of the guiding principles that have been defined for DNA vaccines (162) and gene therapy vectors (163,164) can likely be applied to mRNA with some adaptations to reflect the unique features of mRNA." [0] And still in 2021, Nature.com felt they were gene…

And the FDA disagrees with that definition of gene therapy: "Gene therapy is a technique that modifies a person’s genes to treat or cure disease. Gene therapies can work by several mechanisms:

Replacing a disease-causing gene with a healthy copy of the gene

Inactivating a disease-causing gene that is not functioning properly

Introducing a new or modified gene into the body to help treat a disease" [1]

Yes there are competing definitions. However the important part of the grandparent remains unchanged. mRNA are extremely unlikely to modify genetic information of your body.

[1] https://www.fda.gov/vaccines-blood-biologics/cellular-gene-t...

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

#894

Post by landemva »

boplicity wrote: post #533
mfer wrote: post #429

Earlier quoted context omitted.

An interesting element is my choice vs choices put on me. There is another angle people talk about... The building I work in was designed and built by others. Regulations mean they can't cut corners in their impact of me. A vaccine that protects me from getting the virus or getting a serious case. It's a difference between others work impacting my safety and my own choices impacting my safety. This is an area worth p…

Should we have freedom to harm others? Sometimes? Where we draw that line is very important, for sure.

Supreme Court already drew the line as a right to privacy.

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

#895

Post by freemint »

FpUser wrote: post #101
pokeymcsnatch wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I sent a message. I'm really interested in the HN discussion of this.. it's disappointing to see it just drop off the site.

Probably because someone makes sure that we all follow the proper party line.

Assume good faith

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

#896

Post by a_conservative »

namlem wrote: post #888
a_conservative wrote: post #882

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. Arguments around hypocrisy cut both ways! Consider how weak pro-choice arguments sound right now to people who don't want to be forced to take a vaccine. I'm assuming we will never ever hear "My body, my choice" as a pro-choice argument ever again, it w…

There is no legal penalty for refusing the vaccine. You still have the choice to undergo testing instead. Mandating either testing or vaccination is a perfectly reasonable workplace safety requirement during a pandemic. No one's bodily autonomy is being violated by this rule.

I mostly agree with you, but what about the company's autonomy? This isn't coming from the company, it's coming from OSHA. What will the penalty be for companies who don't comply?

I wonder how long there won't be a legal penalty? Biden was visibly and audibly angry when talking about the unvaccinated. I caught a clip of a late night talk show host laughing about denying healthcare to the unvaccinated. The audience laughed. There is some serious demonizing going on right now.

edit: I realize now that I drifted from the original comparison with abortion rights. Although, I don't think the person seeking the abortion is prosecuted either (in most cases).

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

#897

Post by coryfklein »

jasonlaramburu wrote: post #811
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…

There seems to be consensus that the delta wave won't end until the US reaches at least 85% herd immunity (either through vaccination or infection). It's clear from polling that there is a large enough minority of American adults who won't take the vaccine voluntarily (under any circumstances) to achieve this level of immunity, so that leaves infection. Letting covid 'rip' through the remaining unvaccinated populatio…

> Letting covid 'rip' through the remaining unvaccinated population

Aren't unvaccinated individuals the ones who made this decision? You may disagree with the conclusion of their dubious risk analyses, but if you choose not to get vaccinated then all bets are off.

Or is it that the risk that the unvaccinated pose to the vaccinated are so high that they warrant strong arm solutions?

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

#898

Post by zardo »

jasonlaramburu wrote: post #811
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…

There seems to be consensus that the delta wave won't end until the US reaches at least 85% herd immunity (either through vaccination or infection). It's clear from polling that there is a large enough minority of American adults who won't take the vaccine voluntarily (under any circumstances) to achieve this level of immunity, so that leaves infection. Letting covid 'rip' through the remaining unvaccinated populatio…

> Letting covid 'rip' through the remaining unvaccinated population will bring tens or hundreds of thousands of additional, unnecessary deaths, even with wide availability of current therapeutics.

The more cases, the more the variants. Getting everyone infected might bring about herd immunity to one strain, and create a dozen more.

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

#899

Post by coryfklein »

sterlind wrote: post #876
moistrobot wrote: post #833

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

> 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. I'm disabled and it's not my fault. I'm a healthy weight, I have a vegetarian diet high in vegetables, I do my rehab exercises every day and see the doctor frequently. And yet my condition is progr…

Would you advocate for government mandates on everyone else for your sole benefit? Or do you feel that you're a representative sample of the high-risk group?

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

#900

Post by Hallucinaut »

a_conservative wrote: post #892
namlem wrote: post #887

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In what way are these vaccines not vaccines? Because they are based on mRNA rather than inactive viruses or virus fragments?

I'm not claiming that they aren't vaccines. Words change definition to follow usage. However, Merriam-Webster literally changed their definition of vaccine in the past 6 months or so. [0][1] My argument is that by including these injections under the term vaccine, they are getting a halo effect from past vaccines that isn't warranted. Questioning vaccines is the lowest of the low, almost unthinkable, but these "vacci…

Then why wouldn't you just take one of the vaccines that meets the old definition of vaccine that you hold the esteem for? I get that anything new is less trustworthy by default, but that's only two mRNA "vaccines". The rest are attenuated, or inactivated, or sub-units of other viruses or COVID itself.

In all cases they make your body respond to proteins, that's all. Given the respective effective rates from mRNA vs. traditional vaccine methods if anything it's the halo effect of the effectiveness of the mRNA that are boosting the success rates.

Post reply on HN