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

561–570 of 600 posts

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

#561

Post by Daishiman »

hotz wrote: post #516
Daishiman wrote: post #509

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My sources are friends who work in radiology and cancer wards who are tired of COVID inducing totally preventable deaths. I just canceled my flight to visit one of them because the circulation of Omicron is too high to risk it, as they're being asked to quarantine just 5 days as there's not enough staff around, an unprecedented situation. It is an enormously, totally different thing. How the hell are people still den…

Omicron is a mild flu. Live your life and have fun. Don't be a victim to fear mongering. I'm never getting vaccinated, I haven't been sick since this thing started. I'm South African, our vaccination rates are well below the rest of the world and we're relaxing restrictions. You wanna tell me us Africans have more common sense than the West? Don't let the media and politicians imprison you and turn you against the pe…

That's why your life expectancy is what it is.

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

#562

Post by Daishiman »

guilhas wrote: post #538
Daishiman wrote: post #441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the disease has changed. Are you ignorant of that?

Yes it changed to be less deadly, making vaccines, "reduction of severe disease", less necessary? So will they revise and lower the vaccination targets? Omicron up to 70% less likely to need hospital care https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-59769969

No, because with an increase in R0 in counties with low vaccination rates the hospital wards get filled up.

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

#563

Post by kbelder »

jquery wrote: post #205
cft wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was sick with 101.5F for a week, excruciating headaches, confirmed by a positive PCR after Moderna vaccination. My girlfriend as well, two months after the second dose. How much higher would our viral load be without Moderna?

Whatever your experience with the virus was, it would’ve been a lot worse if you were unvaccinated.

Probably. Don't overstate your certainty. It's an error and moves you farther from the truth, not closer.

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

#564

Post by [deleted] »

bsaul wrote: post #444
throw0101a wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The vast majority of young healthy people are completely asymptomatic, they don’t need a vaccine, nor would it be a wise investment of limited doses. Of course they need a vaccine. Just because you don't have symptoms does not mean (a) that you're not carrying it, and (b) can't infect someone who may not be as healthy as you. Further it's difficult to predict ahead of time how an individual will react to being infe…

We never had that many people vaccinated, and we also never had that many cases. Still trying to prove that mass vaccination will prevent the epidemic spread doesn’t belong to a scientific forum. It is becoming anti-experimental at this point.

[deleted]

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

#565

Post by Daishiman »

egberts1 wrote: post #557
Daishiman wrote: post #502

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then you've heard wrong. /r/covid19 has torrents of papers by researchers from all over the globe showing the effectiveness of vaccines.

so we did not have “breakthrough” (vaccinated folks catching COVID-19) cases on the Delta-variant of COVID-19 vaccine, right?

Why are you moving the conversation to something else? Breakthrough cases can be had while still dramatically reducing disease severity, transmissibility, hospitalizations, and chances of long COVID. All those things matter; all those are objectively improved by vaccination, even more by boosters.

The only way you can actually ask this is by trying maliciously move the conversation to a nonsensical point. Neither myself nor anyone else has ever made the point that vaccines protect you completely, which is the entire point why even with vaccination there is still an objective to reduce case counts.

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

#566

Post by lenkite »

bell-cot wrote: post #480
lalaland1125 wrote: post #477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The vaccines do protect people. Look at the data. Vaccinated people are like 5-20x less likely to die or get hospitalized.

Many people seem to expect "vaccinated" to mean "enjoy utter immunity to". Kinda like some World of EverDungeon video game, where having the Amulet of Foozaz makes you utterly immune to any & all poisons. Anti-vaxer's love to play up that meme. A better analogy would be the body armor that Marines wear in combat zones. No Marine is stupid enough to believe that wearing body armor will make him completely immune to bu…

Well, the definition of vaccine changed late last year after it was found that the Covid vaccinations did not prevent infections.

Definition before late-2020:

"a product that stimulates a person's immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease, thereby protecting against that disease",

To

"a preparation used to stimulate the body's immune response against a specific disease".

Now, we are realising that the Covid vaccines are helpless against the new variants, so I guess the definition will be changed even further.

Compared to something like the Smallpox vaccine (lifelong/multi-decade immunity), the Covid vaccine is mostly useless.

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

#567

Post by u801e »

bsaul wrote: post #444
throw0101a wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The vast majority of young healthy people are completely asymptomatic, they don’t need a vaccine, nor would it be a wise investment of limited doses. Of course they need a vaccine. Just because you don't have symptoms does not mean (a) that you're not carrying it, and (b) can't infect someone who may not be as healthy as you. Further it's difficult to predict ahead of time how an individual will react to being infe…

We never had that many people vaccinated, and we also never had that many cases. Still trying to prove that mass vaccination will prevent the epidemic spread doesn’t belong to a scientific forum. It is becoming anti-experimental at this point.

Mass vaccination is the standard way to minimize the spread of viral infections. For example, there were routine outbreaks of varicella infections amongst children despite the fact more than 99.5% Of the adult population had natural immunity to it. After the vaccine became part of the standard schedule, outbreaks are virtually unheard of.

The same can happen with COVID-19 if the percentage of the population that's vaccinated is high enough. Of course, if that percentage drops below the herd immunity threshold, then outbreaks may occur. In fact, that happened several years ago with the measles virus because asubset of the population refused vaccination.

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

#568

Post by dang »

random314 wrote: post #559
dang wrote: post #552

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please don't start this distasteful, absurd flamewar up again.

Part of why this is personal to me, is that I am immunocompromised and vaccines don't work for me. I got the shots but efficacy numbers for people like me are very poor. I haven't stepped out in 2 years because of antivaxxers. Now they are pretending to be holocaust victims, because employers are now prioritizing employee safety. I am compelled to overturn this narrative wherever I find it.

I hear you and I'm sorry that things have been so difficult. Nonetheless, please don't do that here—it's not what this site is for, and it destroys what it is for.

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

#569

Post by dang »

PopeUrbanX wrote: post #30

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

Please do not post flamewar comments to Hacker News, regardless of how wrong other people are, or how much smarter you are, or how wrong you feel they are, or how smart you feel you are. Flamewar hell is not what this site is for, and it destroys what it is for.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Edit: actually, you've been breaking the site guidelines so egregiously that I've banned the account. It's not ok to post like this here:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29674183

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29674176

We're trying for a different sort of website, one in which people have thoughtful, curious conversation across differences. If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the intended spirit in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

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

#570

Post by helloworld11 »

Daishiman wrote: post #501
peteradio wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need to justify the marginal benefit of force vaccinating young healthy people. That conversation never properly happened. First it was "that's not even being talked about, fuck off antivaxxer" then the next it was "are you kidding me we already decided this for you, fuck off antivaxxer". You can believe that vaccines are beneficial at preventing serious illness while doubting if they ought be required to a recov…

Pediatric COVID cases are a thing. COVID reinfections are a thing. None of these things are up for discussion.

Oh please, many events are a "thing" without being likely at all or likely enough to force a mass, obligatory response to them. Every year in the world a small number of children also die of the flu, this hasn't been used to justify forced, mandatory flu vaccinations on a national and global scale. It's very reasonable to argue against these things without self important response like yours. Furthermore, look at the WHO's list of known cases of vaccine side effects. By your own logic of things simply being a "thing" as justification for strict measures, plenty of argument could be made specifically against olbigatory vaccinations, especially of young people.
Post reply on HN