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

The Plague of the Poor

tabletmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 181 posts

Re: The Plague of the Poor

#41

Post by sethammons »

generj wrote: post #34
robomartin wrote: post #20

Last night I had a few interesting conversations with a range of people at a birthday party. The group I was speaking with were mostly in the sciences and technology with a couple of high school teachers and a college professor in the mix. The perspectives were interesting. I won't get into all the details here. I'll just say that the well-reasoned opinions spanned a range. The teachers had legitimate concerns about…

And sometimes education comes from the rest of society saying “you are welcome to your beliefs, but not welcome to pollute my air at our workplace until you aren’t a danger to me.” We set the precedent for forced vaccination nearly a century ago. There is no slippery slope here, or at least if there is we already slid down the hill and are resting comfortably on flat ground.

From the article, among the points is that this is a slippery slope that led to uninformed sterilization of black and native people:

> It is rarely acknowledged that this decision also made possible the Supreme Court’s ruling in the 1927 case of Buck v. Bell, in which the court determined: “The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes.” This ruling legitimized eugenics laws and led to 70,000 forced sterilizations in the United States

Many people still don't trust forced medical proceedings.

Re: The Plague of the Poor

#42

Post by protomyth »

paulcole wrote: post #39
protomyth wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one is advocating for people to get infected, but many front line workers have already had COVID while they were doing their hero work. Since studies are now showing they have better immunity than those who have received a vaccination, it is foolish to have them vaccinate. If you've had Measles, you aren't required to get a vaccination, so there is a well established precedent. The politicalization of the vaccine…

Isn’t it just easier (and with virtually no risk) to require people to vaccinate rather than debate over who did/did not actually have COVID?

There is always a risk with vaccination as with any medication. It's small, but why take it? Taking a vaccine to make other people feel better is emotional and not scientific. There is no debate, there are blood tests. The same logic has been applied to measles.

Re: The Plague of the Poor

#43

Post by jjtheblunt »

Aeolun wrote: post #11

I’m willing to read these articles, and even sort of willing to consider other viewpoints, but this is mostly garbage. What stands out is the authors’ favor of natural immunity being better than vaccination. It may well be, but it has this small caveat that you need to have had the virus to become naturally immune. E.g. you need to take that 1-2% of not surviving entirely, and if too many people take that chance at t…

> you need to have had the virus to become naturally immune

According to oft cited data early on, many people were naturally resistant (perhaps not immune) from similarly packaged (viral envelope) coronaviruses with less dangerous infections, including a 2019-2020 season variant of the common cold.

I don't see those articles anymore. It was also supported by data (and cited by clinicians including at the Mayo Clinic) that folks with current MMR vaccinations and the tuberculosis vaccination given in India tended to test as resistant.

Anyway, just data points from real medical data at a research institute of international reknown not cited...

Re: The Plague of the Poor

#44

Post by [deleted] »

unnamed76ri wrote: post #4
blacktulip wrote: post #3

> So whose interests are served by mandating a leaky vaccine that prevents neither infection nor transmission of a disease that is chiefly dangerous to people over 75 or with serious preexisting medical conditions? Should I keep reading? I think not

Should I explore perspectives outside of accepted party narratives? I think not

[deleted]

Re: The Plague of the Poor

#45

Post by unnamed76ri »

alignItems wrote: post #40

The Politicisation of the Plague in the USA is the real story here, and I think many in the US are unaware that it’s not like that in other places. For example in the UK vaccination rates amongst Conservative and Labour voters are the same. So why is there such disparity in the US between Biden voters and Trump voters when it comes to Covid-denialism, pseudo-cures, and antivaxxing?

An interesting wrinkle to this is all the media personalities and Democrat politicians (including our current VP) that we’re staunchly opposed to the vaccine while Trump was still president.

Now that Biden is president, it is apparently a different vaccine (for both sides of the aisle)

Re: The Plague of the Poor

#46

Post by diego_moita »

unnamed76ri wrote: post #4
blacktulip wrote: post #3

> So whose interests are served by mandating a leaky vaccine that prevents neither infection nor transmission of a disease that is chiefly dangerous to people over 75 or with serious preexisting medical conditions? Should I keep reading? I think not

Should I explore perspectives outside of accepted party narratives? I think not

Should I eat manure to know it tastes awful? I think not, it is enough to know where it comes from.

But, if you disagree, by all means feast yourself.

Re: The Plague of the Poor

#47

Post by sethammons »

alignItems wrote: post #40

The Politicisation of the Plague in the USA is the real story here, and I think many in the US are unaware that it’s not like that in other places. For example in the UK vaccination rates amongst Conservative and Labour voters are the same. So why is there such disparity in the US between Biden voters and Trump voters when it comes to Covid-denialism, pseudo-cures, and antivaxxing?

I think a contributing factor is the general demographics of the parties. Conservative areas tend to rural and less densely populated compared to liberal areas that tend to be higher density populations. Rural communities are more "take care of yourself" and I thinks a lot of our inability to meet eye to eye comes from different base assumptions.

Re: The Plague of the Poor

#48

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

Aeolun wrote: post #11

I’m willing to read these articles, and even sort of willing to consider other viewpoints, but this is mostly garbage. What stands out is the authors’ favor of natural immunity being better than vaccination. It may well be, but it has this small caveat that you need to have had the virus to become naturally immune. E.g. you need to take that 1-2% of not surviving entirely, and if too many people take that chance at t…

Couldn't agree more. It's so frustrating to have topics worthy of debate come up with a shit article where the author tries to cloak his transparent bias in "false righteous rationality".

Just look at the first paragraph:

> he stated that these measures were necessary to “protect vaccinated workers from unvaccinated co-workers.” But isn’t the vaccine itself supposed to be what protects the vaccinated? Not well enough, apparently. So whose interests are served by mandating a leaky vaccine that prevents neither infection nor transmission of a disease that is chiefly dangerous to people over 75 or with serious preexisting medical conditions?

Any competent scientist could easily explain that even with an extremely effective vaccine (which Pfizer and Moderna are, at least in relation to virtually any other vaccine, not the "leaky vaccine" he wants to imply), risk will still be high if there is widespread community transmission. This is not a difficult concept to understand, it's simply basic math with any vaccine that has less than 100% effectiveness (i.e. all of them).

Besides, I've always interpreted more of "protect the vaccinated from the unvaccinated" is that our ICUs we're very recently filled to capacity overwhelmingly due to unvaccinated people getting sick, and that has serious negative consequences on everyone.

Re: The Plague of the Poor

#50

Post by sethammons »

paulcole wrote: post #39
protomyth wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No one is advocating for people to get infected, but many front line workers have already had COVID while they were doing their hero work. Since studies are now showing they have better immunity than those who have received a vaccination, it is foolish to have them vaccinate. If you've had Measles, you aren't required to get a vaccination, so there is a well established precedent. The politicalization of the vaccine…

Isn’t it just easier (and with virtually no risk) to require people to vaccinate rather than debate over who did/did not actually have COVID?

I don't have a large social circle. I know of 2 vaccine related deaths (stroke), 2 vaccine related hospitalizations (heart issues), and one person now with tinnitus soon after the vaccine. Is the vaccine a better option than COVID? Data says yes (unless maybe for younger people, especially males). Is the vaccine 100% safe? No.
Post reply on HN