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

951–960 of 1001 posts

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

#951

Post by landemva »

mysterydip wrote: post #147
op00to wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is this different from requiring hard hats? A hard hat won’t save you from getting a cut on your head from a dropped hammer but it will save you from having it break your head in two. Should OSHA stop requiring PPE?

From what others are saying, it's the unknown long term effects that are the difference. What if, knowing what we do now about it, OSHA required asbestos-lined jackets?

I am required to wear (chemical-infused) flame retardant clothing on oil and gas wells. Some people have to work despite the chemicals rubbing their skin all day.

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

#952

Post by iammisc »

TOMDM wrote: post #937
iammisc wrote: post #914

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When it first came out, the data made the vax an obviously net positive. Given what we now know about cases amongst the vaccinated and how they can spread it... It's no longer an obvious positive. The vax has made covid more pervasive because of bad data at the beginning.

I could maybe buy people being lax about masks and social distancing because of the vaccine, but surely you don't think the vaccine itself has made the virus more pervasive?

Well what is the effect and purpose of the vax other than to make people lax about social distancing and masks. The vaccine was correctly developed expressly for the purposes of rendering both unnecessary.

If the vax had worked to sterilize or mostly sterilize the virus as originally it was sold to us as, then this would be okay.

Instead it did not really work, thus spreading covid more.

So in the end, we locked down and destroyed the economy in hopes of a vaccine, but the vaz didn't fully work and now we're going to have to open anyway to avert major economic and social disaster.

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

#953

Post by CryptoPunk »

jasonlaramburu wrote: post #866
moistrobot wrote: post #857

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because obesity will kill them. That's the message that's not being said in a COVID context. Healthy at every size is one of the biggest health lies in America

>Because obesity will kill them. That's the message that's not being said in a COVID context. Heart disease is the leading cause of death in America, and obesity is the #1 risk factor for it. This message has been clear and emphasized since the 1970s. Despite messaging, obesity has gotten worse, not better. You are wrong and oversimplifying the problem if you think COVID can be solved by telling people to lose weight…

That message can be reinforced in the context of COVID, given obesity is the leading preventable risk factor for COVID.

Instead, a huge number of people are laser focused on rationalizing the imposition of mandates, especially on extremely low-risk group, even children.

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

#954

Post by CryptoPunk »

mbfg wrote: post #943
moistrobot wrote: post #857

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because obesity will kill them. That's the message that's not being said in a COVID context. Healthy at every size is one of the biggest health lies in America

if i'm fat, my fat won't jump onto you and kill you.

COVID vaccines don't stop transmission, so don't protect other people.

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

#955

Post by CryptoPunk »

billyhoffman wrote: post #944
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…

> 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 It’s about how your personal choices impact other people. To be deliberately shocking to help show why these are different: You can’t cough on me and give me an abortion. I can’t choose to have an abortion and that creates a super spreader event that gives everyone around me…

COVID vaccines don't stop transmission, so this is not about protecting other people.

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

#956

Post by angelzen »

maxlybbert wrote: post #949
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…

It’s amusing how last year people said they couldn’t trust any vaccine approved by the FDA while Trump was president and running for re-election. Now those same people believe those same vaccines will save the world, not because the FDA released more data or that additional studies have proven the vaccines more effective than they were last year, but because there’s a new president. If your idea of “trust the science…

s/amusing/tragic/

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

#957

Post by CryptoPunk »

jasonlaramburu wrote: post #903
coryfklein wrote: post #897

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

The more unvaccinated people there are, the more cases of severe covid there will be. This puts tremendous strain on the hospital system, and if they’re uninsured it means the taxpayers are covering the cost of their treatment. Rampant spread also promotes the emergence of new variants.It’s not only a personal decision— declining the shot negatively impacts your community, workplace and the country as a whole.

We have never used this justification to institute invasive laws to prohibit habits that lead to obesity, or to prohibit drug-use or alcohol consumption for that matter. And such laws would always come from the social conservative right, if they were ever instituted, not the people advocating vaccine mandates.

Now socialization of medical expenses is being used to rationalize institutionalized discrimination against the unvaccinated, because it aligns with a particular political tribe's agenda. A tribe that also advocates the socialization of medical expenses.

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

#958

Post by mbfg »

CryptoPunk wrote: post #954
mbfg wrote: post #943

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if i'm fat, my fat won't jump onto you and kill you.

COVID vaccines don't stop transmission, so don't protect other people.

For individuals this is true, for populations this is false.

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

#959

Post by steverb »

landemva wrote: post #945
steverb wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're forgetting about driver's licenses, pilots licenses, cosmetology licenses, ID requirements and searches to fly on a plane, having to be over 21 to buy alcohol and tobacco, selective service, income taxes, property taxes, traffic laws, building codes...

Most of those examples do not apply to persons who are not engaged in commerce. 21+ to buy products should be 18. At some age children become adults. Study the personal income tax and you will find it is primarily enforced through your employer. If each of us had to save and write a check there would be little compliance. For non-commercial property, if the property is not cataloged by county assessor, it doesn't get…

Driver's Licenses and the need to show ID and submit to a search certainly do apply.

I and a lot of people do have to save a write a check (I pre-pay estimated actually). You do not want to get on the wrong side of the IRS.

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

#960

Post by FpUser »

freemint wrote: post #895
FpUser wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Assume good faith

I normally do. But after spending enough time here I do see a pattern
Post reply on HN