Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

iapps.courts.state.ny.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 443 posts

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#321

Post by account42 »

xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #267
ms4720 wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok I have more vaccines then the law requires because I went places where it made sense to get more shots for more disease. I have not touched the COVID shot because I did not trust it for these reasons: - vaccines take years to test not months - there were new untested biotech involved - in short order I was being told that it does not work for this flavor of COVID. And now it is acknowledged to not protect you or p…

I am not debating the efficacy of a particular vaccine and I care not for your rationale -- save your breath. Your arguments, however you feel may be justified, are not in favor of vaccination, and by definition are anti-vax. Ask yourself what would need to be different for you to be in favor.

This kind of binary thinking where you want to put everyone not fully toeing the party line into the evil group is exactly what makes issues like this so politicized. All it does in the end is divide and thereby push people further into opposition of what you are trying to force on them. In other words if you want more people to actually become anti-vaxers rather than people questioning or just being hesitant about a specific novel vaccine, keep doing what you are doing.

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#322

Post by Amezarak »

xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #230
tlogan wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it is important to understand that not all people who against vax mandates are anti-vaxers.

I thought about this for several moments, and I disagree. Vaccines offer some personal protection but predominantly become effective by achieving herd immunity. Vaccine hesitancy undermines this goal and weakens the system. Being pro-vaccine is senseless without being in favor of enough people being vaccinated to provide strong immunity, including for those who cannot be vaccinated due to medical complications. Even…

We knew the odds the Covid vaccine would substantially reduce transmission were very low. Covid first impacts your mucosal immune compartment, which means an infection first gives you all the symptoms exhibited by a mild case of Covid. It also mostly spreads from there as you exhale.

The vaccine does not target your mucosal immune system. It's injected. Thus, the vaccine will help you if you develop a severe case of Covid that spreads beyond your throat/sinuses/lungs. Immune system compartments work largely independently. [1]

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK27169/

> The first is that immune responses induced within one compartment are largely confined in expression to that particular compartment. The second is that lymphocytes are restricted to particular compartments by expression of homing receptors that are bound by ligands, known as addressins, that are specifically expressed within the tissues of the compartment. (Immunobiology: The Immune System in Health and Disease. 5th edition.)

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#323

Post by zdragnar »

SamoyedFurFluff wrote: post #314
senorrib wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Covid was/is killing people, vaccines prevent that, so vaccines must be required. Very simple. This last sentence is such a massive slippery slope that an answer isn’t even necessary.

Forgive me, but what is it a slippery slope of? I immediately thought this logic was already applied to things like child toy regulation or lead paint warning regulation or food recall regulation or workplace safety regulation… it’s really common for the government to enforce people to do things (or ban people from doing other things) in certain contexts because of the danger otherwise.

> Covid was/is killing people, vaccines prevent that, so vaccines must be required. Very simple.

There's a pretty significant difference between "you may not sell dangerous products" and "you must use X medicine".

Next up, government mandated pedometers with minimum step counts, broccoli consumption, teeth brushing (prevents heart disease that kills people!), flossing, and minimum hours of sleep per night.

Once we've kept the fat, foul-breathed insomniacs out of society, government bans you from going into the wilderness (bears! bee allergies!), driving a car, riding a bike, running with scissors, and using a computer for more than a few hours a day.

Some of these things obviously kill more than others, but heart disease, cancer and "accident" are all leading causes of death in the US, with heart disease and cancer beating out COVID in 2020 and probably 2022.

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#324

Post by realjhol »

vkou wrote: post #305
zdragnar wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The effectiveness of the vaccines in terms of preventing spread weren't studied, per pharmaceutical company testimony to congress. The whole notion that you getting the vaccine would prevent grandma from dying was a whole-cloth fabrication.

And if they were, would that change the ethical calculation here? If we had a sterilizing vaccine, and you refused to take it, and got me sick, could I hold you responsible? I'm just trying to understand exactly to what extent other people's selfish choices should be allowed to endanger my life and livelihood.

Then things might be different, but in our present reality it was always transparently clear to anyone who had eyes to see that the justification for coercination was founded on nothing more than hysteria, lies and wishful thinking.

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#325

Post by mcculley »

realjhol wrote: post #318
curiousgal wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Us Americans are so obsessed with government overreach that you'd think our corporate overloads are actually treating us well and that the government is the bad guy. When the government wants to fuck us over, think what the NSA has been doing, they won't look for precedents so there's no point in treating every decision they make as a potential sliperry slope. Covid was/is killing people, vaccines prevent that, so va…

> Covid was/is killing people, vaccines prevent that, so vaccines must be required. Very simple. They don't though. None of the vaccines prevent transmission - they were never even tested for that. And only the extremely elderly or obese are in any significant danger of dieing of COVID. If you're not in either of those camps, or have natural immunity the risk is negligible.

> only the extremely elderly or obese are in any significant danger of dieing of COVID

We should not make policy decisions as long as only the elderly and otherwise vulnerable are at risk?

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#326

Post by DiogenesKynikos »

origin_path wrote: post #319
DiogenesKynikos wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Being vaccinated does not prevent an individual from contracting or transmitting Covid-19. This was not true before Omicron. Vaccination was never a 100% protection against contracting or transmitting SARS-CoV-2, but it did significantly reduce the rate of both. People who refused to vaccinate themselves were, in fact, putting people around them at greater risk. That protection has decreased with Omicron, though it…

That's not the case. Even against Delta effectiveness dropped very rapidly and then actually went negative. The UK is one of the few countries that kept regularly publishing case stats even after this happened and it showed that once the initial vaccine 'high' wore off, vaccinated people were getting infected more frequently than the unvaccinated. Omicron didn't change this. This sort of thing is unintuitive but has…

> Even against Delta effectiveness dropped very rapidly and then actually went negative.

Effectiveness against Delta did not go negative. Protection against infection decreased, but was still quite significant. A single booster also greatly increased protection against Delta, which is why many countries initiated booster campaigns in the Fall of 2021.

> Unfortunately the trials did not detect this, probably due to bad use of statistics

The trials were always designed to test protection against symptomatic disease, severe cases and death. They were not designed to test protection against infection. Everyone who read the trial registrations and the studies knew this from the beginning. The fact that this has recently been presented as a big revelation in the media just shows how uninformed the public (and much of the media) is. It's also a reflection of the revisionist narrative (i.e., we shouldn't have done anything about CoVID) taking hold.

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#327

Post by krisoft »

xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #230
tlogan wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it is important to understand that not all people who against vax mandates are anti-vaxers.

I thought about this for several moments, and I disagree. Vaccines offer some personal protection but predominantly become effective by achieving herd immunity. Vaccine hesitancy undermines this goal and weakens the system. Being pro-vaccine is senseless without being in favor of enough people being vaccinated to provide strong immunity, including for those who cannot be vaccinated due to medical complications. Even…

One can be absolutely pro-vaccine, want to drive down vaccine hesitancy rates and still think that mandating vaccinations is not the way to go.

For example they could argue that people will rebel against "you must do X" reflectively, but a well designed and sensitive information campaign might win them over.

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#328

Post by Karsteski »

vkou wrote: post #305
zdragnar wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The effectiveness of the vaccines in terms of preventing spread weren't studied, per pharmaceutical company testimony to congress. The whole notion that you getting the vaccine would prevent grandma from dying was a whole-cloth fabrication.

And if they were, would that change the ethical calculation here? If we had a sterilizing vaccine, and you refused to take it, and got me sick, could I hold you responsible? I'm just trying to understand exactly to what extent other people's selfish choices should be allowed to endanger my life and livelihood.

While I agree with you that people should get vaccinated (if they want. Their body their choice), I feel like the argument of "to what extent other people's selfish choices should be allowed to endanger my life and livelihood" doesn't hold up.

You probably live in some developed country. If it's the US or Canada, I can say for sure that you live in a country that was founded on the exploitation of others. We continue to knowingly benefit off of such exploitation by importing and purchasing products produced by cheap and often abusive labour. We use electronic devices whose manufacture is mostly in China and other such countries where there is recorded abuses and in some cases downright modern day slavery. We continue to use these devices despite knowing that many of their essential metals are mined by exploited children in Africa.

I'm trying to understand exactly to what extent our selfish choices should be allowed to endanger others' lives and livelihoods

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#329

Post by tlogan »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #317
tlogan wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that this is a very first mandate for vaccination we ever imposed on ordinary people. The US has very complex society and diverse population, so mandates do not work and might create backclash. I think mass vaccination can be easily achieved by mass marketing. Mandates just made this way too political: and as we can see did not achieve a thing.

> The problem is that this is a very first mandate for vaccination we ever imposed on ordinary people. That's not true! It used to be you had to show your smallpox vaccine scar (the vaccine left a distinctive mark) in order to enter many businesses.

That is true. I forgot about that.

And why did they check for scars? Because people were forging their vaccination certificate (like now with COVID). So this mandate thing did not really worked well.

Re: NY Supreme Court reinstates NYC's fired unvaccinated employees, orders backpay

#330

Post by refurb »

sky_rw wrote: post #139
spaetzleesser wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do firefighters have no effect on tourism? Without them you can not run a city. Same for many other jobs like garbage collection.

Well clearly there is an elite class to whom body autonomy is granted, and an underclass who must follow arbitrary and capricious rules. OP appreciates that celebrities and entertainers are our betters and should not be held to the same standard.

This is the issue. Politicians claim it about health and saving "grandma", but when the number of dollars get big enough, all that goes out the window.

So apparently getting vaccinated is critically important, but not more important than money.

Post reply on HN