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

571–580 of 600 posts

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

#571

Post by salawat »

lamontcg wrote: post #475
salawat wrote: post #373

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Myocarditis. I know several mothers squeamish on risking their children to continual rolling of the dice w.r.t the mRNA vector vaccines. Also, I can unequivocally state that no other vaccine have I ever seen that has to be continually boosted to maintain it's efficacy, which sounds to me like a deficiency in memory cell formation. The bigger issue there, is that in spite of that being an interesting quirk of these va…

> Also, I can unequivocally state that no other vaccine have I ever seen that has to be continually boosted to maintain it's efficacy, which sounds to me like a deficiency in memory cell formation. The mRNA vaccines don't produce IgA-mediated sterilizing mucosal immunity and they would not have been expected to, and they should never have really been expected to or promoted as providing sterilizing immunity. The poin…

You didn't address half the concerns I brought up. I'll even give you your points on "not being designed to provide long term sterilizing immunity".

You still haven't addressed the anti-pattern of cranking out "vaccines of the month", the environmental impact of utilizing a protein from a natural source in a QC process intended to track pharma batches for multiple doses for every human on earth, the incentive problem that emerges from vaccinations not designed for long lasting, sterilizing immunity in that it's already been acknowledged by Goldman Sachs analysts that cures are not a good business model and that this approach to vaccine making seems eerily in that vein of taking this advice to heart.

Condescend on the DYOR folks all you want. If someone didn't, none would ever get done. I, for one, will continue to learn as much as I can, and will encourage people to do as much thinking for themselves as I can. Funny thing I noticed is half the people who say "leave it to the experts" tend to own stock in said experts.

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

#572

Post by guilhas »

Daishiman wrote: post #562
guilhas wrote: post #538

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

South Africa with only 23% double vaccinated, reported the same. R0 overtaken by hospitalization probability. Leading to an overall reduction in 80% of hospitalizations

Omicron Has 80% Lower Risk of Hospitalization in South Africa https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-12-22/omicron-h...

Omicron has passed peak in South Africa, causing relatively few deaths and hospitalizations, authorities say https://www.yahoo.com/news/omicron-passed-peak-south-africa-...

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

#573

Post by atoav »

peteradio wrote: post #543
atoav wrote: post #512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know how 64x1.2 GHz multicore CPUs can be faster than one single 1.2 GHz CPU? The same principle works in medicine. Instead of one institute doing 10 trials over 5 years you can also have 10 institutes doing 10 trials in a year (Note: these are not actual numbers, just a show of peinciple). The trials for the corona vaccines have not been done at a worse quality, as far as I can tell the opposite is actually the…

Science does not in general parallelize like that.

I did not claim this is the case in general, but the phases the vaccine trials were conducted more parallel than usually would be the case. See Nature.com:

> The world was able to develop COVID-19 vaccines so quickly because of years of previous research on related viruses and faster ways to manufacture vaccines, enormous funding that allowed firms to run multiple trials in parallel, and regulators moving more quickly than normal.

Source: https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03626-1

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

#574

Post by atoav »

blub wrote: post #534
atoav wrote: post #512

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know how 64x1.2 GHz multicore CPUs can be faster than one single 1.2 GHz CPU? The same principle works in medicine. Instead of one institute doing 10 trials over 5 years you can also have 10 institutes doing 10 trials in a year (Note: these are not actual numbers, just a show of peinciple). The trials for the corona vaccines have not been done at a worse quality, as far as I can tell the opposite is actually the…

While it's very unlikely, we simply don't know if some unknown side-effect will pop up in 10 years and the only way to find out is to wait 10 years and verify empirically.

This is a non-argument. We simply don't know many things before we actually observe them. We don't know whether the stone we let fall a thousand times will still fall after thousand-and-one times. But we can assume it does not, because this wouldn't match the rest of the rules we observed so far.

Granted, RNA vaccines are quite new (although a lot older than the pandemic), but the mechanisms behind RNA are older still. Out cells produce RNA all the time. What you propose is, that RNA produced by our cells today, will somehow miraculously show an effect a decade after it is gone. What is true for the RNA triggered by the vaccine must be true for our own RNA as well. That means our body would have to remember every piece of RNA produced in every cell for a decade.

I am not a medical expert, but I think this is highly unlikely. That would be like drinking a bottle of Schnaps today and being drunk 10 years after it left your body.

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

#575

Post by fjabre »

dang wrote: post #569
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 n…

Dang you spend more time banning accounts than constructively participating on the site. Just look at your comment history.

This goes against the spirit of HN. We value open discussion here.

Your actions should be brought to PGs attention. It seems you are abusing your power as moderator. This is not in HN’s best interest.

Just because you disagree with someone doesnt mean you should ban or silence them.

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

#576

Post by ukj »

dang wrote: post #416
ukj wrote: post #147

Quoted post unavailable.

Please don't post flamewar comments like this. It just takes threads further into flamewar hell—exactly what we don't want here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html (We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29758995 .)

Then how about you practice your own damn rules? This one in particular

  Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.
In the strongest possible interpretation (had you assumed good faith) my comment is NOT inflamatory.

I am pointing out that pandemics are a PvE (Player vs Environment) game, not PvP (Player vs Player) game. And I am stating the ovious: the E in PvE doesn't care about your rights.

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

#577

Post by bsaul »

u801e wrote: post #567
bsaul wrote: post #444

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 va…

the scenario you described is for vaccines that prevent infection. This is now obviously not the case with covid and 75% of the pop vaccinated, which still catch and transmit the disease enough to get the numbers we have now.

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

#578

Post by onos »

lalaland1125 wrote: post #478
onos wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In USA at least vaccination rates strongly correlate with class and so races with more poverty have higher unvaccinated rates - blacks and Hispanics. But the advocates here seem to follow the meme that the unvaccinated are all trump supporting deplorables…

That's outdated. Due to better vaccine outreach the vaccination rates between races have mostly equalized.

Thanks. I found a good article with visuals showing things have improved, as you say.

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/covid-vaccine-tracker-glo...

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

#579

Post by yostrovs »

MiroF wrote: post #548
yostrovs wrote: post #541

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My comment referred to people who got sick with AIDS in the 1990s when 10 year olds knew the dangers.

Most people who "got sick with AIDS in the 1990s" contracted HIV in the 80s. You don't seem to know much about the difference between AIDS/HIV or the latency period.

You don't want to acknowledge the moral dilemma that I'm presenting and instead bickering about the details. I'm a medical professional. I know about HIV and AIDS. You're just being a boob.

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

#580

Post by peteradio »

atoav wrote: post #573
peteradio wrote: post #543

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Science does not in general parallelize like that.

I did not claim this is the case in general, but the phases the vaccine trials were conducted more parallel than usually would be the case. See Nature.com: > The world was able to develop COVID-19 vaccines so quickly because of years of previous research on related viruses and faster ways to manufacture vaccines, enormous funding that allowed firms to run multiple trials in parallel, and regulators moving more quickl…

No amount of parallelism is going to impact the fundamental time constraint of 1 human body. So it goes with pregnancy and so it must go for trusting long term impact. In an ideal world we'd know the second generational impact which would necessarily take 20-40 years. Referring to the awesome parallelism is a red herring to distract from the lack of long term controlled study.
Post reply on HN