Live data from Hacker News

Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

npr.org

391–400 of 437 posts

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#391
post #255
post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(1) It is population level rational to have diversity. Sometimes acting irrationally has payoffs because something wildly unexpected happens. (2) There is an almost endless list of things people do that are to their detriment. A core part of libertarianism is that people have to be free to make their own mistakes. We don't mandate exercise, prudent spending, safe sex practices or sensible family planning. The reasons…

avoiding exercise doesn't cause people around you to get fatter though.

But it could weaken your immune system, making you a better vector for all kinds of diseases.

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#392
post #276

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also that leads to questions like should we refuse care for healthy but dangerous activities like swimming and drowning. Or breaking a leg or arm during sports? Or concussions? These clearly could have been avoided by choosing safer options or ways. Thus should be refused care?

When the ICU is past capacity, these questions must be asked regardless. Who gets treated first and why? Unvaccinated covid patients are the ones pushing ICUs past capacity, not drivers or swimmers or soccer players or obese people. This is not a hypothetical thought experiment. Doctors are having to make these decisions right now.

Actually most people with COVID needing extra healthcare are obese: https://www.radboudumc.nl/en/news-items/2021/patients-who-ar...

Also from March 2020: https://www.dutchnews.nl/news/2020/03/coronavirus-death-toll...

> Meanwhile, Diederik Gommers, chairman of the Dutch intensive care association, told television talk show Jinek on Friday evening that 66% to 80% of corona patients on intensive care wards that he had seen are overweight.

> A specialist on the programme gave a similar picture. ‘Almost all the patients on an IC ward are overweight,’ Peter van der Voort of Groningen University’s teaching hospital said.

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most groups of people are susceptible to misinformation. I also wouldn't be surprised if there's a bias among nurses, who know enough to be in the medical field, but use that confidence to overestimate their ability to make medical decisions like getting the Covid vaccine. 96% of doctors have gotten the vaccine. Top medical researchers in the immunology recommend the vaccine. etc. etc. These people are less (but not…

We also have to account for demographics and understand the risk/benefit analysis. That 96% number is from a WebMD survey of about 300 physicians. The ages are mostly over 50 with only 7% being under 35. So they are in the somewhat higher risk groups. They also work a job that runs a high risk of exposure. This means they might see their risk of infection and serious illness being high enough to justify it without fe…

I can't find exact distributions, but the average ago for nurses and the average age for doctors are the same. Around 51 years old. Seems like poor argument to use.

At the end of the day, doctors and medical researchers are producing the highest quality opinions on the subject. If you're not following their lead, then you are very likely in the wrong.

Are they sometimes wrong? Absolutely. But the key point: to think that you are more likely to be correct is absurd.

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#394

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> CDC says vaccines are only 66 percent effective at preventing Delta infection WITH A 95% CONFIDENCE INTERVAL OF 26% TO 84% They only statistically modeled how much their unvaccinated population was already recovered from coronavirus based on estimates of community spread, among other issues with that number. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7034e4.htm And when you have a CI of something like that size, of c…

Or 30%, to be fair.

published on the CDC site today: 77% (74%-80%) VE for pfizer and 92% (89%-93%) VE for moderna. With only some evidence of reduced VE against delta and/or waning in those > 75 years old:

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7037e2.htm

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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...

Maybe so --- but places like Iceland still have big COVID waves despite very high vaccination rates, so clearly, the vaccine doesn't reduce the risk of infection enough to stop the spread, and that's what matters.

With the delta variant, experts believe we need 90% vaccinations to achieve herd immunity. Iceland is at 72.8%.

There is every reason to believe that the vaccine would stop the transmission once enough people had the vaccine.

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#396
post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are vaccines. Everyone that wants a vaccine already got it or can easily get it. People say they are extremely good at eliminate severe covid, that's what I got one myself. But at this point taking a vaccine or not is a personal decision. People are punching themselves in the face all the time, see obesity crisis for example. Should we ban hamburgers & fries next?

People aren't allowed to drive drunk not because it's a risk to themselves, but because it's a risk to other people. This is the same with the vaccine. You are putting at risk children, the immunocompromised, or people who have legitimate medical reasons they can't get the vaccine, do your logic falls apart. Not to mention the risks and costs associated with an overburdened healthcare system.

Actually, refusing the vaccine isnt the same as driving drunk. To be in a situation where you're endangering others by driving drunk requires an action: drinking alcohol recklessly (action) Refusing the vaccine requires no action on the person's part, but somehow are still considered to be endangering others (even if they're healthy and without COVID).

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#397
post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

CDC says vaccines are still better: https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/s0806-vaccination-pr... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/search/research-news/12157/ This paper says natural immunity better: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v... Unfortunately the science is evolving so fast and the variants are coming so fast, it's impossible to keep up!

The headline of that CDC article is misleading: the actual study compares the protection given by being previously infected with that given by being previously infected and then also vaccinated. There's no comparison against people who're relying only on vaccination to protect them. This is also a pretty weak justification, since if I remember rightly there's a comparable improvement by using one of the more effectiv…

Plus, the article is old (before delta) and an opinionated piece by one of the most biased news outlets ever. yikes....

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#398
post #345
post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm still wrong because I point out based on facts that I'm correct? No, you're wrong because you said "more protection is always better". That isn't true - sometimes the protection turns out to be worse than nothing. > Is your freedom not impeding on other peoples freedoms (to live)? There isn't a freedom "to live", it doesn't mean anything. Everybody dies in the end no matter what. Nobody has ever had a "freedom"…

> No, you're wrong because you said "more protection is always better". That isn't true - sometimes the protection turns out to be worse than nothing. You're arguing the semantics of "always" while ignoring the context provided. You're trying to win an argument, regardless if it's relevant to the topic. The protection against covid (the vaccine/s) isn't worse than nothing. That is a fact, and what I'm arguing. You're…

> You're trying to win an argument, regardless if it's relevant to the topic.

Are you not trying to make an argument? I would suggest you challenge yourself about why you are arguing so much if you don't want to. You have the option of stating your opinion then leaving it at that.

> The protection against covid (the vaccine/s) isn't worse than nothing. That is a fact, and what I'm arguing.

If you don't mean "always" then you should take the easy path and say "Well, you're right it isn't always better, but it is different words". Some people got vaccinated and then died from it - it is pretty clear that is worse than nothing. It is hard for the outcome of a vaccination to be worse than death. It is most certainly not an unalloyed good, there are risks even assuming the manufacturers don't stuff it up.

> So does that mean that I have complete freedom to endanger others with my actions? I assume you don't think so, so there's obviously a line somewhere.

Sure, but people being unvaccinated isn't the biggest risk, particularly since something like 30% of them have probably already had COVID and developed antibodies the natural way - and the diesease may well burn through the unvacced population before the authorities manage to strap them down and force-vaccinate them. If you go down the list of risks from biggest to smallest, the larger chance is getting COVID from someone who is vaccinated and never had the original disease.

I was talking to a doctor friend of mine who was emphatic that the vaccines didn't stop the spread at all, and I didn't understand why at the time but I've since learned it was probably because the vaccines didn't target the mucosal immune system. So it doesn't make sense to forcing people to do something they don't want to do, for a not-that-meaningful gain (everyone is still going to be exposed to coronavirus sooner or later, vaccines or no).

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#399

As a part-time libertarian, one of the frustrating parts of the pandemic has been discovering how many people need the nanny state to step to stop them punching themselves in the face. Near the start of the pandemic, I thought the most intrusive state powers would barely be needed. Why would you ever need to make a vaccine mandatory? What rational person would refuse a lifesaving medicine offered to them for free? We…

Punching yourself in the face, or nanny state discussions, is more akin to something like a seat belt law. We have seat belt laws to stop the individual from hurting themselves, not because we're afraid they're going to launch out as a projectile and hurt others. But vaccination is a community thing more than an individual thing. If it were just about hurting yourself, then I'd agree that the discussion should be fra…

'But vaccination is a community thing...'

A vaccine goes into an individual body, so it is a personal thing subject to medical privacy.

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...that is why I could never be a libertarian. People have repeatedly proved themselves unwilling or unable to live up to the libertarian ideal of behaving "rationally."

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…

Wait…what? You think forcing a person to accept a substance into their body under force isn’t inconsistent with libertarian values? As a classical liberal, I can’t think of something more offensive to my values and I am a fully vaccinated person and wished everyone else was too. This is absolutely f’ing horrifying and will ultimately be used against everyone at some point in the future.

The body is the absolute individual. Having maximum control over the individual is probably the most basal libertarian value there is. This is not some external restraint to prevent the commission of a crime. It’s not even punishment for a commission of a crime. It’s the mandated forcing of a substance internally into an individual’s body against their will with a sketchy societal benefit behind its justification. Sketchy because now with Delta there is apparently no scientific basis to believe that the vaccines eliminate the risk of spread of the virus but at this point it only seems to prevent serious illness.

BTW, watch as the GOP uses this mandate to justify the individual state prohibition of abortion. They will be able to too, because this is going to pretty much kill the DNC’s ability to win anything for at least 8-10 years.

Post reply on HN