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

Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)

edmontonjournal.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

491–500 of 600 posts

Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)

#491

Post by rdtsc »

superkuh wrote: post #165
hannob wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your problem seems to be that you don't understand the concept of probabilities. Something can work 80-90% of the time, but not 100%.

And the greater problem with science communication regarding intramuscular vaccines, and the political theater surrounding it, is that neither "side" actually gives the full story because they worry nuance would be lost and facts without context used against them. Yes, intramuscular vaccines for sars-cov-2 work, for about 6 months, to significantly reduce the likelyhood of serious disease in the internal organs. They…

I just wanted to thank you for the great explanation. It made a few things clear about which I wasn’t sure before.

Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)

#492

Post by gassiss »

bmeski wrote: post #488
gassiss wrote: post #485

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's mostly to watch for allergic reactions, which if you get you need medical assistance asap. Nothing to do with the covid vaccine itself.

So the vaccine that they inject into you, that would cause an allergic reaction, has nothing to do with the allergic reaction?

Well that's with all vaccines. I meant it's not specific to the covid one

Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)

#493

Post by seized »

bmeski wrote: post #488
gassiss wrote: post #485

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's mostly to watch for allergic reactions, which if you get you need medical assistance asap. Nothing to do with the covid vaccine itself.

So the vaccine that they inject into you, that would cause an allergic reaction, has nothing to do with the allergic reaction?

That wait is for most or all vaccines, including pre COVID times. Any parent will be familiar with that instruction to wait after the shot.

And you're being deliberately obtuse. Like most medicines, vaccine injections have other ingredients like preservatives, the carrier fluid, etc. People can be allergic to the other ingredients but not the mRNA/TDAP/Influenza/whatever vaccine.

Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)

#494

Post by seized »

loudtieblahblah wrote: post #53
PopeUrbanX wrote: post #30

Good. Take away their free healthcare, too, so that they stop taking up ICU beds that smarter people might need.

Good. Do fat people, smokers, and drinkers next.

Except they aren't jamming up hospitals all at once due to their choices. That's the critical difference.

Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)

#495

Post by dang »

Radim wrote: post #431
dang wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please do not take HN threads into flamewar hell. This is way over the top. We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29758807 .

What can I say. It's your site, your rules. But I disagree strongly with your "way over the top" Daniel – that's just rude. Mine was an on-topic factual response, substantiated with relevant links, articulated in a perfectly civil manner. Along with my sibling responses. I bet you many people were not aware of these facts, or the broader historical context. All perfectly appropriate given the thread topic. I'm kinda…

By "way over the top" I meant that your analogy was excessive and distracting. This should not be hard to understand. As everyone knows, there's a vast history of people arguing ad Hitlerum in internet flamewars. It was already a cliché decades ago—in fact it is the most notorious internet cliché of all time. When invoked in the context of contemporary political debates, it's pure flamebait. That's against the site guidelines because it leads to flamewars, which we don't want here.

Not only that but your comment contained other flamebait besides the Holocaust invocation. "Don't worry, there's plenty of time yet" and "So excuse me for not being impressed by your" were obvious provocations. That's not "a perfectly civil manner".

"Factual" is a red herring - there are infinitely many facts. They don't select themselves; humans do that. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&qu...

Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)

#496

Post by klipklop »

14 wrote: post #243
theodorejb wrote: post #31

It seems we are heading in a direction where those who don't take the jab will be blocked from receiving government services, prevented from patronizing various businesses, and even restricted from traveling and the ability to work. Are most citizens really okay with this medical apartheid, or are they afraid of speaking out against it?

Health care worker here in Canada. It’s complete BS. I can’t believe it. Where are the protests I want in. Sadly if you have ever visited r/Canada it is full of people who believe this kind of thing is the right thing to do. I have to believe it is a state campaign with dozens of fake accounts promoting a narrative. This is too messed up for January 1st 2022.

Reddit is very far from reality. You can’t trust the people that run that site or the moderators.

The company has had petty CEOs that did shady things with users posts and data.

Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)

#497

Post by seized »

djbebs wrote: post #40
Orphis wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Horrible logic. Seatbelts are in the same position. They are mandatory and greatly reduce harm done in an accident. Same thing for the vaccines, you won't die and won't likely be using an ICU bed that other patients need. Go spread your FUD elsewhere.

Seat belts shouldn't be mandatory either.

And what is your logic behind that?

Is your next statement something like "Restaurants shouldn't be required to follow food prep laws or other laws like refrigeration temperature requirements"?

Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)

#498

Post by rainbowzootsuit »

huntertwo wrote: post #391

Is there room for those of us who believe the mRNA vaccines are effective at reducing transmission and severe disease yet don’t want to relegate our fellow citizens to second class status for not wanting to inject themselves with something they’re not sure about? We seem all too ready to ruin the lives of those who don’t want the jab.

I concur with this sentiment as well. The only thing that causes equivocation for me is the possibility of overloaded hospitals. However, at this point, I don't think an attempt to strong arm people is going to improve the adoption of the vaccine by those who have not already received it.

I also, having taken the full course of an mRNA vaccine and booster, am not willing to participate in the "vaccination card ID to enter businesses" that is recently popular in some places.

Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)

#499

Post by charlieyu1 »

atoav wrote: post #311
charlieyu1 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no science if doubts aren’t allowed.

Slight change: There is no science if reasonable doubts aren't allowed. The thing with this pandemic is, that the time where you could have a reasonable doubt in the vaccines are over for a while now. We vaccinated half of earths population. If there would have been horrible side effects they would have shown. The more data we gather the clearer the picture becomes and the less reasonable certain doubts become. The t…

Doubting a vaccine that is developed in a few months instead of years like how it was done in the past, is already reasonable doubt

Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)

#500

Post by charlieyu1 »

egberts1 wrote: post #152
charlieyu1 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no science if doubts aren’t allowed.

There is no science if the facts are not allowed either.

So what are the facts actually? I’m not following covid news 24/7 but at least I’ve heard that developers of such vaccines refuse to release data on its effectiveness
Post reply on HN