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

Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 437 posts

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#361

Post by ZetaZero »

ModernMech wrote: post #204
ZetaZero wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe this is due to the fact, that this is inherently undemocratic? SCOTUS ruled that mandatory vaccines are constitutional back in 1905. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacobson_v._Massachusetts

Undemocratic does not mean unconstitutional. The Electoral College is undemocratic, yet constitutional by definition, for instance. SCOTUS itself is undemocratic yet constitutional.

> Undemocratic ...

The USA has always been a Representative Democracy. We elect leaders whom have the power to enact rules and laws. And this is what happened here.

Don't confuse what we have with "direct democracy".

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#362

Post by ZetaZero »

anonygler wrote: post #232
dwaltrip wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don’t need to eliminate transmission for the vaccines to be useful. My understanding is that they do meaningfully reduce transmission, even for Delta. You are also missing another important factor. In addition to reducing transmission, the vaccines greatly reduce the chance of hospitalization, which together significantly reduces the peak load on the health system so that it continues to function well and serve no…

There are 2 separate issues. Reduce transmission, which it only does marginally. Preventing hospitalization is a separate matter and not really worthy of a mandate. Banning alcohol and fast food will save far more lives, in that case.

> Reduce transmission, which it only does marginally.

91% is a huge reduction.

"COVID-19 vaccines ... reduce the risk of infection by 91 percent"

https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/p0607-mrna-reduce-ri...

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#363

Post by lolsal »

Daishiman wrote: post #189
swayvil wrote: post #138

A new vaccine. Rushed to market. Pushed upon us before it was even approved. Then rushed to approval. That's strange. I need to get this vaccine, not to protect myself, but to protect you. That's strange. That's 2 strange things in a row. When you see 2 strange things in a row like that, it smells fishy.

It's strange if you don't know anything about the subject. For the several billion people vaccinated all over the world there's nothing strange.

Which point are you replying to? Are you objecting that the OP's opinion about those two points being strange is somehow wrong or misinformed?

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#364

Post by helen___keller »

tomohawk wrote: post #252

So, a CDC study found 78% of people hospitalized for covid were obese or overweight. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/08/covid-cdc-study-finds-roughl... What's to stop the president from issuing another OSHA rule to fire people who are overweight and not actively addressing this risk factor?

Politics, obviously.

The checks on power for the president are politics (reelection), legality / constitutionality via court system, and removal from office via impeachment trial.

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#365

Post by ZetaZero »

totony wrote: post #234
ZetaZero wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From NYT: "Ms. Psaki said that there would be some disability and religious exemptions for some"

Crazy to me religion and normal beliefs are not put in the same bucket. Why would a religious belief hold more weight than a normal belief?

1st Amendment still has a little power

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#366

Post by tomjen3 »

betterunix2 wrote: post #150
tomjen3 wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not only did you come forward with a political position while stating that it isn't, you are also wrong about what the vacines do and do not protect. If vacines didn't protect the person taking them, there wouldn't be any use to them at all.

For comparison the flu shot prevents infection in about 60% of people who receive it. The point is not to prevent infection in every single person who receives the shot, it is to prevent infection in or transmission from enough people that the virus will not spread from person to person. Vaccination is not a political position in the US. We require children to receive numerous vaccines from infancy onward and that po…

>Vaccination is not a political position in the US.

Antivaxers aren't new, but it became a serious political question/fight when the covid vacine hit. As for right now there was multiple post about it on /r/politics.

Just because you do not think it should be a political issue does not mean it isn't.

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#367

Post by simonh »

pharmakom wrote: post #339
fighterpilot wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's nothing inherently inconsistent between right-libertarian values and a vaccine mandate. Libertarians believe that force should be applied to person A to protect person B from person A in certain circumstances. If person A wants to punch person B in the face, restricting person A by force is perfectly consistent with libertarian values. If person A threatens to infect person B with a deadly disease due to refu…

People are libertarian for different reasons. Some of them just hate government and look for an ideological framework to justify it. I would say that driving licenses are a similar case.

Except that you don't need a driving license to drive, only to do so on public roads. These mandates are similar, you can be as un-vaccinated as you like as long as you stay at home.

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#368

Post by simonh »

nradov wrote: post #191
lamontcg wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Vaccination almost certainly reduces transmission. https://www.timesofisrael.com/80-of-vaccinated-covid-carrier... RNA levels spike to the same levels on PCR, but they decline faster, and culturable amounts of virus are lower in breakthrough infections, indicating a higher proportion of viral debris in breakthrough infections rather than virus: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.20.21262158v... Even if y…

What is your scientific basis for betting that Prof. Pollard is incorrect? Even though vaccination likely reduces the risk of transmission, we have no evidence that even a very high level of vaccination would be sufficient to reduce R0 below 1.0. It's impossible to reach 100% coverage and even countries with high vaccination levels are still experiencing uncontrolled community spread. We can flatten the curve to an e…

I'm afraid you're probably correct. I fully support vaccination, am vaccinated and support vaccine mandates. Still, the fact is here in Britain high vaccination rates are not stopping the propagation of the virus. Maybe if we also had a full lockdown as well that combined with vaccination might stop it spreading, but that's not a reasonable policy given the low risk of the virus to the vaccinated population and young people.

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#369

Post by fartingflamingo »

enkid wrote: post #301
fartingflamingo wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's word this more sharply. Hospital capacity being limited, should ill vaccine refusers be getting priority as they are getting right now? What if you get super unlucky, and you get contaminated and severely ill despite vaccination? Will they kick an unvaccinated covid patient from the one respirator?

Even more sharply, should the willfully unvaccinated take priority over lower priority but less life threatening diseases? If someone has the flu, and it looks like they'll make it, but the doctor wants them in the hospital just in case, should they get the bed over the unvaccinated person who is going to die without it?

That sounds like something different where the answer is not so clear-cut.

I've tried to rephrase the wording of the ethical dilemma I came up with to make it more neutral:

Imagine there's two covid patients coming into hospital at the same time: one vaccinated, one not. Both are in need of the same care, with the same urgency. Only one hospital bed is available. Which, if any, of these patients should receive priority in treatment?

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#370

Post by pharmakom »

simonh wrote: post #367
pharmakom wrote: post #339

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People are libertarian for different reasons. Some of them just hate government and look for an ideological framework to justify it. I would say that driving licenses are a similar case.

Except that you don't need a driving license to drive, only to do so on public roads. These mandates are similar, you can be as un-vaccinated as you like as long as you stay at home.

The similarity I’m drawing is that being out and about unvaccinated and driving without proper training both put others at risk, which violates NAP. Therefore both can (arguably) be mandated inside of a libertarian framework.
Post reply on HN