Live data from Hacker News

OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

whitehouse.gov

991–1000 of 1001 posts

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

#991

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Non-zero. If COVID had a 100% death rate and was contagious like COVID we’d be vaccinating everyone against their will.

Such efforts would likely grind to a halt after the first several waves of vaccination crew member killings. There are a lot of unhinged people out there and forced vaccination crosses a red line.

A 100% death rate would look a lot like Bird Box. Probably a society ender.

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

#992

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that's really the issue (it's not), then this can be addressed far more directly, by penalizing the unvaccinated when allocating ICU beds during shortages. But please be consistent and also penalize those who deliberately engage in other actions that put them at risk of needing medical care, like the obese, or those who abuse drugs and alcohol. What bothers me is the inconsistency. It's opportunistically seizing o…

Sexual promiscuity does not clog up hospitals. Speeding motorists do not clog up hospitals. Obese people do not clog up hospitals. Covid patients disproportionately clog up ICUs. Surely you see that difference? If our health safety net (hospitals) were not being affected, then yes, covid promiscuity would be treated identically to any of the above. There's principles here that you don't want to acknowledge.

Sexual promiscuity imposes massive costs on the healthcare system. HIV treatment costs $1,800 to $4,500 per month, for life. The resources expended on treating those who contract HIV through high-risk sexual activity could have instead been used for medical research to cure other non-preventable diseases, if they hadn't engaged in that behavior.

But of course, it goes without saying that the vast majority of vaccine mandate supporters have never considered supporting laws restricting high risk sexual behavior. They would never have even entertained the thought, no matter what the facts. Their hypocrisy is staggering.

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

#993

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that's really the issue (it's not), then this can be addressed far more directly, by penalizing the unvaccinated when allocating ICU beds during shortages. But please be consistent and also penalize those who deliberately engage in other actions that put them at risk of needing medical care, like the obese, or those who abuse drugs and alcohol. What bothers me is the inconsistency. It's opportunistically seizing o…

There is no safe, free and effective vaccine against HIV, so these are not equivalent.

That doesn't address my point.

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

#994

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

they reduce it by a nonzero amount, which I believe to be an appropriate threshold, given the lack of common, significant side effects you probably have a different threshold, which is okay, but it is likely one you will have to persuade the majority to adopt, if you want to get your way

It doesn't reduce it enough to provide herd immunity, meaning the virus will continue to propagate until every one has been exposed. See Iceland's experience:

https://twitter.com/eliaseythorsson/status/14240115421950238...

The Oxford Vaccine Group says herd immunity through vaccination is infeasible now:

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/10/delta-variant-...

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

#995
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…

So what?

At any given time, someone the population is weak in some way.

Had there not been covid, most of those people would be alive.

Cause of death is covid. That covid killed them more easily is a different matter.

Today, those same people can get a vaccine and are extremely likely to avoid the hospital and death.

I am consistently shocked at just how willing so many of us are to blame others. And that is all.

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

#996

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

It is a shared risk.

Overwhelming the hospitals puts everyone at greater risk.

So any cases means more mutations more quickly. This too is a shared risk.

There just is not any way around all this. The human condition is not an individual affair.

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

#997
post #888

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 la…

Companies operate under license and the terms of that license include adherence to regulation.

Comply or be fined. That's what happens.

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

#998

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the contrary it's the vaccinated people who are sick but don't know that they're sick who are spreading the virus.

Mostly to people that are unvaccinated... If 90% of people were vaccinated r would be less than 1 and there would be no spread.

The FDA application for boosters claims that efficacy against transmission for delta for persons vaccinated when the vaccine became generally available is now 42%. That isn't enough to drop Reff below 1 even with 100% vaccination-- in fact, it leaves delta with an Reff higher than the original L strain had absent vaccination.

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

#999
post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US, all 50 states have some type of mandatory vaccination for public schools ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccination_policy_in_the_Unit... ). Most, but not all, allow religious or similar exemptions; some (including California) only allow medical exemptions. I think your point--which is spot-on--is that a lot of the outraged reactions appear to be from people who are unaware (or unwilling to acknowledge) t…

> I think your point--which is spot-on--is that a lot of the outraged reactions appear to be from people who are unaware (or unwilling to acknowledge) the very long history of compulsory vaccination (and who probably had such vaccines themselves as children). I think this is a strawman argument as virtually everybody is aware of past childhood vaccine requirements and acknowledges that they existed for a long time. W…

> The medical establishment seemed desperately against even trying alternative medical treatments (HCQ, Ivermectin) due to the vaccines emergency use authorization being tied to no treatments being available.

No, they have always been against use of drugs that have not been shown useful. That is the job of the FDA. It seems you aren’t aware that they did approve some treatments? Didn’t really affect the vaccine development, since the two aren’t really that dependent: their goal is to promote the best option.

> Has even one health leader recommended steps to lose weight and get some sunshine for instance despite the clear worse Covid health outcomes for fat people with Vitamin D deficiencies?

Yes, they are surprising reluctant to engaging in victim-blaming. You aren’t the only person who heard these may be helpful; I think it was pretty widely popularized since the beginning that poor health is a risk factor.

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

#1000
post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If your employer paid you to come in early or stay late to get the vaccine -- why refuse? Because I make my own decisions and my willingness to do something is inversely proportional to how hard it is being pushed on me.

> Because I make my own decisions and my willingness to do something is inversely proportional to how hard it is being pushed on me. I don't know you but I find this hard to believe. Which side of the road do you drive on? Do you wear a seatbelt? How fast do you drive? Do you throw your trash in the bin or on the ground? Do you wear clothes outside or go out naked? Do you go around threatening to harm people around y…

Come on, man, of course I don't hold "must always oppose" as a steadfast rule for everything. As you point out, that would be ludicrous. It's more that if I don't see the merit of doing something, I shouldn't do it anyway just because of peer pressure.

Driving on the designated side of the road is something I see merit in, so I do it. It avoids vehicles hitting each other with a massive success rate (unlike the vaccine, or any of the other totalitarian responses to the mind virus COVID-19).

Likewise, I don't litter because it's a destructive habit for the planet and property. It's rude. It makes all of our lives worse. Those reasons are not rooted in "people push not littering", I avoid littering because I find it distasteful and wrong by my own measures.

And on and on.

Post reply on HN