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

Courts block two Biden administration Covid vaccine mandates

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 402 posts

Re: Courts block two Biden administration Covid vaccine mandates

#391

Post by ghoward »

lpcvoid wrote: post #380
ghoward wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They are a life saving invention, where did we go as a society that this is suddenly up for debate? So condoms, another life-saving invention, should also be mandated? Should you lose your job if you don't wear your seat belt? (Wearing a seat belt does save others by preventing you from becoming an out-of-control projectile and hitting others.) Should people be prevented from buying unpasteurized milk if they want…

Your examples are, in my opinion, poorly chosen - the only ones of relevance are the seatbelt and the smoking ones, since those actually can harm others. And in these cases, there have been laws put in place to limit other people's exposure to this danger, like seatbelt driving laws and smoke free areas. What lies where there? The only point that I saw until now was the correlation of positive tests within 28 days th…

Lies like telling people they don't need to wear masks at the beginning (or maybe the lie was flipping to saying we did), or the admission that the goalposts were being moved on herd immunity, or the lie that gain of function research was not funded by the NIH. There are plenty of lies. And those are just the ones admitted. Never mind the fact that Fauci and others have stakes in pharma companies.

Regarding those laws, as I alluded to, they don't take away people's livelihoods. And they are actual laws, not edicts by a governor.

The vaccines may have science behind their creation, but engineering always comes into play when you have to actually create something. The science created the theory, but engineering creates implementations. And I don't trust these implementations the same way I might like theory behind a programming concept but not trust implementations. Like in cryptography.

Re: Courts block two Biden administration Covid vaccine mandates

#392

Post by kgwxd »

rglover wrote: post #170
hestefisk wrote: post #61

Whilst thousands of healthcare workers in the US —- those who are supposed to be proponents of public health measures and rational, scientific thinking - refuse to get vaccinated, ultimately resulting in stockpiles of vaccines getting destroyed … people in third world countries cannot get adequate access to vaccines. This is madness.

> Whilst thousands of healthcare workers in the US —- those who are supposed to be proponents of public health measures and rational, scientific thinking - refuse to get vaccinated [...] These people were considered heroes last year (and overwhelmingly exposed to this virus while everyone else stayed at home). Now their judgment is in question because they won't follow the herd, with all of their medical experience/e…

Your comment is based on the same strategies as the headlines and the book talks about. Define "These people". Hasty Generalization. "These people" don't move in unison like a school of fish, and every good faith reader knows that. There's no inconsistency.

Re: Courts block two Biden administration Covid vaccine mandates

#393

Post by redblacktree »

betwixthewires wrote: post #244
redblacktree wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would be up to the judicial branch to make those determinations. So far, they are broadly OK with the delegation that has happened.

...except for the delegation of power to mandate vaccines apparently, which is the focus of this discussion. If we are going to talk about what's the right answer from a position of "if the court says it that's how it goes" then I can assume you're happy with this court decision?

Yes, I'm happy with it from a "balance of power" perspective. I would like a different outcome, regarding vaccine mandates, but that responsibility lies with congress, and unfortunately one of our political parties is anti-science and anti-vaccine, which means it won't happen.

Still, I'm happy that we're not breaking the rules for the convenience of getting an outcome I'd like better.

Re: Courts block two Biden administration Covid vaccine mandates

#394

Post by rglover »

kgwxd wrote: post #392
rglover wrote: post #170

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Whilst thousands of healthcare workers in the US —- those who are supposed to be proponents of public health measures and rational, scientific thinking - refuse to get vaccinated [...] These people were considered heroes last year (and overwhelmingly exposed to this virus while everyone else stayed at home). Now their judgment is in question because they won't follow the herd, with all of their medical experience/e…

Your comment is based on the same strategies as the headlines and the book talks about. Define "These people". Hasty Generalization. "These people" don't move in unison like a school of fish, and every good faith reader knows that. There's no inconsistency.

These people = doctors, nurses, etc (medical professionals).

It's not a "hasty generalization."

Re: Courts block two Biden administration Covid vaccine mandates

#395

Post by javagram »

bingohbangoh wrote: post #387
javagram wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even though Congress already wrote a law that gave the agencies authority to do unprecedented actions? What I'm not seeing is engagement with the actual text of the statutes that Congress already wrote and put on the books. For instance, the OSHA Act specifically gave OSHA power to regulate "new hazards". https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2019-title29/html... "1) The Secretary shall provide, without regard t…

Literally any power can be constituted as appropriate under such a broad interpretation. At that point, why have congress at all?

Not really, for instance courts did examine the CDC eviction mandate and found it was overreaching the language of the law and voided it. I agree with that as the law provided examples of the power it was giving and the eviction mandate clearly didn’t fit with the others (fumigation, quarantine of positive cases, etc).

A mandate for vaccinating healthcare seems a lot closer to existing regulations that the law was designed to allow. It’s clearly a health and safety regulation just like the dozens of previous health regulations regulating quarantine, mask wearing, sanitation, safe handling of items, etc.

The reason congress doesn’t reserve this power is because in our system congress can’t react quickly or sometimes at all. It has to pass laws giving up this type of authority to the executive branch because it knows its own processes don’t work quickly or efficiently enough.

Congress did give itself instead the authority to veto regulations it doesn’t like, using the Congressional Review Act. It used to give itself even stronger authority using the one-house legislative veto, but the Supreme Court struck that down. https://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article...>

Re: Courts block two Biden administration Covid vaccine mandates

#396

Post by kgwxd »

rglover wrote: post #394
kgwxd wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your comment is based on the same strategies as the headlines and the book talks about. Define "These people". Hasty Generalization. "These people" don't move in unison like a school of fish, and every good faith reader knows that. There's no inconsistency.

These people = doctors, nurses, etc (medical professionals). It's not a "hasty generalization."

> These people were considered heroes last year

> Now their judgment is in question

> These people = doctors, nurses, etc (medical professionals).

Those professions were considered heroic, not every single person individually. Yes, many that served those positions well were individually celebrated too. The ones that didn't, and there were plenty, had their judgment heavily questioned, even last year.

Drawing conclusions about an individual based on a broad category they happen to fall into is "hasty generalization", by the book.

Re: Courts block two Biden administration Covid vaccine mandates

#397

Post by exodust »

cmh89 wrote: post #389
exodust wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I have the choice to stop wearing clothes to my job The difference is you flipped the switch and decided to turn up to work without clothes. You decided to radically change your behavior and actions in the workplace. This will obviously have consequences due to your unsightly naked body offending co-workers. When someone doesn't flip any switch, but continues to work exactly as they did before, they have not done a…

The difference is totally irrelevant. >Unvaccinated people are not suddenly shedding and dangerous, in the way a naked person is shedding pubic hairs everywhere. Unvaccinated people are inherently dangerous. The change is that we now have the ability for them to become vaccinated people who aren't nearly as dangerous to their clients. In June 2020, we had no choice but to have unvaccinated health care workers. Today,…

> Unvaccinated people are inherently dangerous.

They are not dangerous. A person who has access to sharp knives but is currently not holding a knife, is no more dangerous than someone who does not have access to knives.

But even that analogy doesn't fit, since vaccinated people can certainly still get sick and transmit the virus.

Besides, I am not restricting my position in this debate to health care workers. I am talking about anyone with a job, who is now required to get vaccinated. That's what happened where I live (Australia). Everyone in my state from barristers, to builders, office workers, truck drivers... literally every professional who isn't working from home, is required to get the vaccine or lose their job.

Many are pissed off with the expanding scope of mandates.

I can understand the requirement for health workers to be vaccinated. But even then, they should have the option to be tested regularly instead.

This is what happens... incremental laws expand and eliminate choice. Suddenly you live in a world where you must get jabbed every 6 months, and repeatedly prove your vaccine status to everyone every day. Tagged, tracked and validated for walking around doing normal things is not a world we should be encouraging, even in pandemic times. If we must disagree on that point, then fine, we disagree.

Re: Courts block two Biden administration Covid vaccine mandates

#398

Post by dang »

loudtieblahblah wrote: post #59
belltaco wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are healthcare workers. Jobs have requirements. They're free to quit instead of increasing the dangers of disease for their sick and older patients who are at highest risk for covid. No one is controlling their body any more than making it show up at work in order to get paid. Coal miners are forced to work in dangerous conditions around the world in order to keep their job. Getting a vaccine is far less risk,…

so you'd be cool with employers banning employees who get an abortion. something, something, consequences.

Would you please stop posting flamewar comments and otherwise breaking the site guidelines? You've unfortunately done it a lot lately. We ban that sort of account because it destroys what this site is supposed to be for.

If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to the rules when posting here, we'd appreciate it.

Re: Courts block two Biden administration Covid vaccine mandates

#399

Post by gertrunde »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #243
gertrunde wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is my biggest worry as well, what are people who clearly do not believe in medical science doing working in a medical capacity? Are these people performing treatments on patients that they do not believe work? The mind boggles.

Maybe their assessment of the medical science does not match yours. And maybe they are in a better position than you to evaluate it. And, of course, others who are also in that better position evaluate the evidence differently. One could draw two conclusions from this: "People are idiots", or "the evidence is not as clear-cut as we're being told".

And yet the vaccination rate within the medical community is consistently higher than the general population (90% vs 70% in the UK).

(Edit: although it is plausible that this is due to some bias in the statistics - e.g. medical workers are expected to be working age adults (who are statistically more likely to be vaccinated anyway), and the general population is obviously a wider range)

So does this suggest that those in the know are more likely to be vaccinated? Or that those in the know are taking a wait-and-see approach?

Re: Courts block two Biden administration Covid vaccine mandates

#400

Post by a45a33s »

commandlinefan wrote: post #211

Wow... I thought it was just tinfoil hat types that were avoiding this vaccine because they were afraid Bill Gates was using it to implant a tracking chip inside them. But if healthcare workers - who actually know what's in this thing - are so vaccine-hesitant that the government has to mandate it to them, I'm suddenly worried whether or not I should think twice about getting a booster (or worse, giving it to my chil…

as an anecdotal data point, my wife has a phd in a relevant field. her dissertation involved the lipid nanoparticles used by the pfizer vaccine as a delivery mechanism.

in her words no one really knows how the lipid nanoparticles actually work, and it is much too soon to be forcing this onto the public, and thats just the delivery mechanism. so you have a novel mRNA vaccine, with a novel delivery mechanism, and very little long term safety data. she does not feel like these have been tested to the same standard as other vaccines, we are at the point where if this is mandated for our children we will probably move somewhere they are not.

Post reply on HN