15 ms·

Vaccines and our return to office plans

103 points by mji 5y ago

standardUser 5y ago
"First, anyone coming to work on our campuses will need to be vaccinated. We’re rolling this policy out in the U.S. in the coming weeks and will expand to other regions in the coming months." This is the trend in the last couple weeks among many companies and governments. It's just a shame the need for this wasn't realized 2-3 months ago. We could be far ahead of where we are today if more entities had been more aggressive about vaccine mandates. It almost feels like we're feigning collective surprise that a big chunk of Americans decided to take a staunchly anti-science, anti-medicine, anti-rationality stance. In reality, I think most of us saw this coming a mile away.
- throwawayboise 5y ago
  It almost feels like we're feigning collective surprise that a big chunk of Americans decided to take a staunchly skeptical stance against big government and big media hysteria and fear-pumping and make their own decisions based on their personal risk tolerance and waiting to see how things actually play out. I don't know about most of us, but I saw this coming a mile away.
  - standardUser 5y ago
    Around 99% of hospitalizations are among the unvaccinated, which means we are now seeing hundreds of deaths everyday from a preventable illness.
    - throwawayboise 5y ago
      There are hundreds of deaths everyday from many preventable causes, we generally don't force people to take medications or change their lifestyle to reduce them.
      - standardUser 5y ago
        "Preventable causes" are very different form "preventable illnesses". Avoiding a heart attack requires decades of actions and decisions. Avoiding polio requires one shot once. In the developed world, not many people die from diseases that are preventable by vaccine. Well, until now.
        deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
        throwawayboise 5y ago
        One argument that got thrown around a lot was that people in the hospital with COVID are taking medical resources away from others. You could make the same argument for people who choose to drink, smoke, remain obese, sedentary, have untreated diabetes or other chronic conditions that will eventually put them in the hospital needing a lot of very expensive care.
        Imnimo 5y ago
        Those conditions don't overwhelm hospital capacity because they don't produce exponential growth of illness, so I don't think you could make the same argument.
      - spywaregorilla 5y ago
        I can name dozens of lifestyle choices you're forbidden from doing due to risk to yourself and others.
        munk-a 5y ago
        Sadly my favorite past-time - driving tanks into office buildings - was outlawed by "big government". /s
      - objectivetruth 5y ago
        Heart disease, diabetes, and lung cancer aren't contagious. Kids can't catch coronary artery disease in the classroom.
    - GloriousKoji 5y ago
      It's actually 97% [1] and from anecdata from a friend there is at least one hospital where unvaccinated COVID hospitalizations is as low as 90% (and I want emphasize the obvious that it means 10% of hospitalized COVID patients are vaccinated). [1] https://www.npr.org/2021/07/16/1017012853/97-of-people-entering-hospitals-for-covid-19-are-unvaccinated https://www.npr.org/2021/07/16/1017012853/97-of-people-enter...
      - bonzini 5y ago
        Why is that surprising? If 100% of the population were vaccinated, 100% of the hospitalized would be vaccinated too. More plausibly, suppose the vaccine is 90% effective against severe disease and 60% of the population is vaccinated. Then you'd have 6/46ths of the hospitalizations (15% roughly) coming from the vaccinated. Effectiveness against severe symptoms is what matters the most (and effectiveness against transmission comes second). As long as the maths confirm the effectiveness of the vaccination, having a number of vaccinated people in hospitals is expected. A 90% effectiveness corresponds to having your ICU beds magically multiplied by 10, which is nothing to sneeze about.
    - a_conservative 5y ago
      That figure seems questionable. 1) high cycle PCR tests tend to produce false positives. [0] 2) recently (maybe now?) the CDC was recommending that the cycle count be lowered for vaccinated individuals (break through cases). [1] If unvaccinated individuals are being tested to a different standard, that would seem to muddy the waters, wouldn't it? [0] https://medicine.yale.edu/labmed/sections/virology/COVID-19%20Ct%20values_YNHH%20Aug.%202020%20_395430_36854_v1.pdf https://medicine.yale.edu/labmed/sections/virology/COVID-19%... [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20210623005911/https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/downloads/Information-for-laboratories-COVID-vaccine-breakthrough-case-investigation.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20210623005911/https://www.cdc.g...
      - a_conservative 5y ago
        I posted this comment in good faith. I would appreciate feedback rather than downvotes.
      - nullc 5y ago
        I'm not the downvoters but: I followed your link [1] and read the entire page multiple times and I can find no content which supports "recommending that the cycle count be lowered for vaccinated individuals". It says that samples submitted for sequencing should be positive when CT<=28 or are detected as positive by another modality.
        a_conservative 5y ago
        I wish I could find a "slam dunk" source that stated what the current threshold recommended by the CDC, but I can't quite find it. I've personally read many sources that talked about using cycle counts above 30 over the past year. Some more discussion on this topic was on HN yesterday [0] also, from last August: One solution would be to adjust the cycle threshold used now to decide that a patient is infected. Most tests set the limit at 40, a few at 37. This means that you are positive for the coronavirus if the test process required up to 40 cycles, or 37, to detect the virus. [1] [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27972195 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27972195 [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testin...
    - umvi 5y ago
      And? Why aren't people allowed to take risks anymore? If the vaccine is available and I choose not to get it and then die... Well, that's my own prerogative. We are quickly moving into a corporate and government nanny state where citizens and users can't be trusted with their own agency so their agency is removed.
      - ev1 5y ago
        > Well, that's my own prerogative. Does this also imply that you will be responsible for the cost of your own choices, and that you will not infect anyone else and not interact with the public?
        umvi 5y ago
        If I infect another unvaccinated person... so what? They made their choice as well. The vaccine is widely available enough now that anyone that doesn't have it chose not to get it (or they have an exceedingly rare medical reason)
        ev1 5y ago
        The vast majority of the world does not have effective mRNA-type vaccines, and have outbreaks following mass vaccination of ineffective ones (and in some cases, fraudulent locals use saline). Kids cannot receive it yet, as much as they want to, and there are numerous parents explicitly refusing their kids the consent to be vaccinated. The more spread, the more dice get rolled on creating further deficiencies in vaccination success. Honestly, my opinion - if everyone could be vaccinated and the vaccine was always 100% effective 100% of the time without exception, I would not care at all about "individual choice" or "I don't want to take it", I would not care about the extra mutations being created, I would not care about being next to an unvaccinated individual at all.
        umvi 5y ago
        > Kids cannot receive it yet, as much as they want to Do kids even need it? I was under the impression that child covid deaths (or even just severe reactions to the disease) were incredibly rare.
    - 13years 5y ago
      Are you aware of how that number is generated? Why is it exactly the opposite in other countries?
    - nanis 5y ago
      > Around 99% of hospitalizations are among the unvaccinated "unvaccinated" includes people who have had one dose or people who had the second dose less than two weeks ago[1]: >> a vaccine breakthrough infection is defined as the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA or antigen in a respiratory specimen collected from a person ≥14 days after receipt of all recommended doses of an FDA-authorized COVID-19 vaccine.[1] >> ... A total of 10,262 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine breakthrough infections had been reported from 46 U.S. states and territories as of April 30, 2021. Among these cases, 6,446 (63%) occurred in females, and the median patient age was 58 years (interquartile range = 40–74 years). Based on preliminary data, 2,725 (27%) vaccine breakthrough infections were asymptomatic, 995 (10%) patients were known to be hospitalized, and 160 (2%) patients died.[1] >> ... As of April 30, 2021, approximately 101 million persons in the United States had been fully vaccinated against COVID-19. [1] Now, let's look at a more recent report[2]: >>> As of July 19, 2021, more than 161 million people in the United States had been fully vaccinated against COVID-19. >>> Hospitalizations* 5,601 (95%) >>> Deaths† 1,141 (19%) So, "fully vaccinated" increased by 60% over that period, but deaths among the fully vaccinated increased by 613%. That's curious. [1]: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7021e3.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7021e3.htm [2]: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/health-departments/breakthrough-cases.html https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/health-departments/bre...
      - neogodless 5y ago
        Two minor adjustments: > Beginning May 1, 2021, CDC transitioned from monitoring all reported COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough infections to investigating only those among patients who are hospitalized or die, thereby focusing on the cases of highest clinical and public health significance. This is just to keep in mind the % of cases that result in death will be higher based on the different focus of the monitoring. > 292 (26%) of 1,141 fatal cases reported as asymptomatic or not related to COVID-19. So you're saying 1,141 - 292 = 849 or 430% increase over 160 deaths recorded before. Still significant. This is at the same time that Delta is increasingly dominant[0][1]. So it does seem like this Delta variant may be more deadly, even to the vaccinated, though still massively less deadly when compared directly to the unvaccinated. From April 30th through about yesterday, there were about 35,000 total deaths in the U.S. from COVID-19[2]. That number dwarfs the total 850 or so that have died while vaccinated since the beginning of vaccination availability. [0] https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/07/17/us/delta-variant-us-growth.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/07/17/us/delta-vari... [1] https://static01.nyt.com/images/2021/07/15/us/delta-variant-us-growth-promo-1626401728082/delta-variant-us-growth-promo-1626401728082-superJumbo-v2.png https://static01.nyt.com/images/2021/07/15/us/delta-variant-... [2] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - munk-a 5y ago
    There are three things put forth in the declaration of independence: Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness - for some reason America has decided that #2 trumps 1 & 3 to an extreme degree - but in the rest of the world 1 & 3 are also viewed as fundamentally necessary freedoms.
- 13415 5y ago
  To be honest, it is rather surprising, don't you think so? At the beginning of the vaccination campaigns it was natural for people to be skeptic of vaccines that had been developed so quickly, but you'd really expect these feelings to go away after so many millions have been vaccinated without problems. What's strange about it is that some colleagues of my girlfriend apparently continue to peddle vaccination conspiracies after they've got their second Pfizer shot. What's going on?
  - throwawayboise 5y ago
    You simply cannot be certain there are no long term side effects until "long term" (at least a few years) has passed. For the vaccine holdouts, some may be more easily pursuaded next year or the year after, assuming COVID is still a problem then. Historically, flu pandemics naturally burn out after a year or two.
    - standardUser 5y ago
      You can't be certain until you die (hopefully many, many decades from now) that there were no side effects. But we can be "reasonably certain" based on the sum of knowledge and data we have regarding vaccines in particular and medicine in general. Waiting 3 years, from a scientific perspective, is completely arbitrary. The length of clinical trials is not arbitrary.
      - throwawayboise 5y ago
        Yes, I'm just saying that the more time passes, and the more people see that their friends and neighbors are suffering no side effects, that this particular concern/objection will decline. It was very naive to think that 100% of the population would enthusiastically be on board with getting this vaccine. That never happens. I am too young to remember but I would guess there were holdouts on the first polio vaccines as well (though maybe not as many, as it affected mostly children and the diesease had much worse outcomes).
        5y ago
- minikites 5y ago
  >It almost feels like we're feigning collective surprise that a big chunk of Americans decided to take a staunchly anti-science, anti-medicine, anti-rationality stance. This is the natural result of 40+ years of sustained attack on the idea of government, on the effectiveness of public institutions, on the concepts of authority and expertise: >Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge"
  - UnpossibleJim 5y ago
    I'm pro science, pro medicine and vaccinated, but as far as "the sustained attack on the idea of government" and "the concept of authority"; you don't think the fairly obvious and rampant corruption in the government, itself has something to do with that? Political donations have become a "buy your senator" campaign for corporate influence without the need for subtlety or subterfuge, and we've been at a state of declared war for 30 years, with expanded governmental control, with no end in sight. This doesn't seem like an attack on the idea of government, but an attack on the idea of a corrupted governing body.
- yongjik 5y ago
  Err, I don't think we could have had vaccine mandates much earlier than now. At most a month or so. In the spring there were fewer doses than people who wanted them - people were flying to other states to get vaccines. Mandating vaccination wouldn't have sped it up much, while making workers' lives even harder.
  - wombat-man 5y ago
    You could mandate it at the office. As more people get vaccinated, more are eligible to return. Eventually you could add in mandatory attendance as the vaccine is more available.
- ghaff 5y ago
  It probably hasn't been (or has barely been) a couple of months since someone not in a higher risk group could have easily been fully vaccinated (2 weeks after second shot).
  - standardUser 5y ago
    Everyone I know reached "fully vaccinated" status before the end of May, so about two months ago. I suppose availability varied by state/region for a while though. But the bigger point is, we should have been implementing more incentives back then such as the ones we are seeing implemented now.
- johnbobby 5y ago
  "Anti-science". And here we go, let's start talking down to people like neanderthals because nothing in "science" has ever been wrong. It was also anti-science to even talk about masks.
- johnbobby 5y ago
  Not sure why my comment got deleted, even with people agreeing with it. Seems you have to be very careful if you don't agree with the above statement. Just a note for everyone else.
maxwellito 5y ago
I'm curious to see how enforcing the vaccination policy will work out. I haven't seen any other big company doing this move, and to my knowledge there are many engineers refusing to be vaccinated.
- mavhc 5y ago
  Thus proving that no group can be vaccinated against idiocy
  - matz1 5y ago
    How is not wanting to be vaccinated is idiot ? Vaccination should be personal preference.
    - JaimeThompson 5y ago
      Should speed limits and building codes be personal preference as well?
      - yarcob 5y ago
        Speed limits and building codes generally don't have side effects that can kill you. A bunch of otherwise healthy people have died from the vaccine. You can argue that it's a numbers game, and that getting vaccinated is still less risky, but the decision should not be forced on anyone.
        mavhc 5y ago
        A bunch? How many, to the nearest 100.
        yarcob 5y ago
        Enough that some governments recommend Astra Zeneca only for elderly patients, because risk/reward might be too big for healthy, young patients. I just don't think anybody should force anyone to get a shot. That should be a personal decision.
dilap 5y ago
How many people are familiar w/ the phenomenon of antibody-dependent enhancement of corona viruses? If you are familiar, how confident are you that it won't be an issue with the current vaccines, and for what reasons? It's very surprising to me how much support there is in general for outsourcing extremely important, previously personal medical decisions to employers. The concept of autonomy of our own bodies as an important right has taken a major step into the background. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41564-020-00789-5 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41564-020-00789-5 (For the record, I did get vaccinated, but it seems crazy to me to mandate or compel it.)
- ulfw 5y ago
  Considering no vaccine is 100% effective, it doesn't seem crazy to me to mandate vaccination (nor to mandate mask wearing) as protection works best when everyone is protected.
- standardUser 5y ago
  Where are the prominent voices among researchers and doctors and health officials discussing this? Where are the published papers that have garnered a lot of attention? By all accounts, this appears to be an entirely speculative concern, one among many others that are not well substantiated.
- selestify 5y ago
  > (For the record, I did get vaccinated, but it seems crazy to me to mandate or compel it.) Why not? Regular vaccines are already compulsory for public schools.
  - ShrigmaMale 5y ago
    All states but 5 have exemption for religion or belief or both: https://www.ncsl.org/research/health/school-immunization-exemption-state-laws.aspx https://www.ncsl.org/research/health/school-immunization-exe...
    - MSM 5y ago
breck 5y ago
Why not a policy of “vaccinated or recovered”? The data is pretty clear that the latter have ~~10x better immunity against reinfection. They also arguably provide better protection for the rest of us, since their natural immunity is less a monoculture.
- runawaybottle 5y ago
  That is my thought as well. If you had Covid, isn’t that the best vaccine you can get?
  - scott_s 5y ago
    No. https://www.jhsph.edu/covid-19/articles/why-covid-19-vaccines-offer-better-protection-than-infection.html https://www.jhsph.edu/covid-19/articles/why-covid-19-vaccine...
    - throwaway3neu94 5y ago
      In addition to all the points that article makes, two more: 1. There are a lot of people that believe they already had Covid, but actually didn't. 2. A "vaccinated or recovered" policy is even harder to enforce, as there are vaccination certificates but no recovery certificates. (Yes, vaccination certificates can be faked, but it seems likely to me that a significant part of the population would be willing to lie but not falsify documents.)
      - throwawayboise 5y ago
        There are tests for both presence of antibodies (quick and cheap, you can get one at many pharmacies or quick-care clinics) and T-cell immununity (IDK the cost or availabilty of those).
    - breck 5y ago
      She's lying. Notice how she links to no actual datasets. On the contrary, all the big datasets show clearly a long lasting, low risk of reinfection for the recovered. Here, I include an actual dataset (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.03.06.21253051v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.03.06.21253051v...) unlike "Virologist Sabra Klein".
lazyjones 5y ago
Will they fire people who cannot get the vaccine for medical or religious reasons?
- CubsFan1060 5y ago
  I take it you didn't even bother to open the article and search for "medical"?
  - aynyc 5y ago
    Username checked out.
  - lazyjones 5y ago
    It just says they'll tell us later about their "exceptions process". Which probably means, they'll decide later when they see how many it concerns.
- worker767424 5y ago
  I'm not very sympathetic to the religious argument. Islamic leaders are approving vaccines, even if they contain pork gelatin.
  - amrcnimgrnt 5y ago
    Who cares about Islamic leaders? Don't Muslims have freedom of conscience independently of them. Religion is, ultimately, about the individual's relationship with the higher. To dismiss someone's religious complaint because of a supposed leader is to destroy freedom of conscience. If you had said "Pope" instead of "Islamic leader" it would have been classic WASP anti-Catholic bigotry that JFK faced in when running for president. [EDIT] changed post to reflect that I don't have any problems against muslims' opinions (half my family is muslim in fact), just their leaders.
  - nanis 5y ago
    > Islamic leaders are approving vaccines, Oh, that's a clear indication that you do not understand Islam. Fatwas are only binding on the person who issues them. Same for lesser opinions. Islam is different. While there are currently a lot of Islamic dictatorships, Islam is the genuine religion of personal choice and freedom.
pmastela 5y ago
Someone needed to go first to try and get a leg up on the competition in terms of productivity or whatever KPI the company is tracking, and it seems Google is first Big Tech Co to go. It will be interesting to see just how exactly this all will play out considering some in the workforce are vaccine hesitant. I wonder if, besides proof of vaccination, health checks will be required to enter the campus, or if masks will need to be worn at all times indoors, or if social distancing will still need to be observed.
dcolkitt 5y ago
Why not extend it to the end of the year? Delta is not a joke, and the evidence isn't firm that vaccinated people are fully safe against it. It's increasingly looking like there may be similar variants, some even more vaccine resistant. Given the lack of information, no major company should be committing to the end of WFH until the results are clearer. That definitely isn't going to be the case until well after Labor Day. I don't understand why the major tech companies are so hellbent on re-opening the offices in the fall. It's like they've drawn a line in the sand and they can't even consider reversing course. Which doesn't even make any sense, because for all intents and purposes they've been doing fine. Most tech company's stock price and profits are above their pre-WFH levels. Surely extending WFH until January isn't going to ruin their business.
- supergeek133 5y ago
  They said that in the blog... > At the same time, we recognize that many Googlers are seeing spikes in their communities caused by the Delta variant and are concerned about returning to the office. This extension will allow us time to ramp back into work while providing flexibility for those who need it. We’ll continue watching the data carefully and let you know at least 30 days in advance before transitioning into our full return to office plans.
- ev1 5y ago
  There is one thing to note though, I would assume Google and maybe a few others might have more people willing to transition to a hybrid model or spend days back in the office specifically for the huge amount of amenities they offer, and the food's pretty good. Contrast this with contractor body shops, small or medium businesses in regular buildings where your day is a screaming hellhole of a tiny cubicle with low walls or an open plan office that also has support with loud headsets next to you, the only lunch option is an overpriced sandwich or salad, the commute is over an hour each way in a cramped, standing room only transit and not a private company shuttle with wifi and clean seats. If I was working out of MV I would be more inclined to spend a day or two a week voluntarily at the office. If I was in an open plan cube farm where I give myself mild tinnitus just having noise cancelling headphones cranked up to eleven for the entire duration, then an hour and a half ACE/Caltrain/BART multiple transfers home, fuck that, 100% remote, if I get pushback on the remote part I leave.
krona 5y ago
I'm not vaccinated. Why? Because before I had the opportunity to receive the vaccine, I had an antibody test for the virus, revealing I have a standard deviation more antibodies (after 6 months) for the virus than the average person does after 2 doses of the Pfizer vaccine (and ~3 months). There isn't conclusive data (AFAIK) on the relationship between antibody levels and immunity for this particular virus, but it is not unlikely that people like me have better immunity than the average vaccinated person. I would've thought an inclusive company like Google would take such basic immunological nuances in to account when stigmatising their own employees?
- fsund 5y ago
  Goog is not "inclusive". That's fascist language to divide/conquer those that oppose the leftist agenda.
- standardUser 5y ago
  Natural immunity comes in a lot of variations, and sometimes its even so weak that reinfection can occur. Immunity by vaccine is comparatively very predictable and by nearly all accounts at least as strong as most natural immunity, with plenty of studies finding it to be stronger. So, that is part of the concern. Additionally, antibody tests are not fully reliable, whereas being vaccinated is never going to be "wrong". It's simply you are or you aren't, with no chance of false positives.
- wonnage 5y ago
  Get the vaccine, dude. You are not a special snowflake.
- fragmede 5y ago
  You skip over the fact that it means you caught covid (either through malfeasance or ignorance) and were lucky enough to have survived, you admit to your ignorance about the relationship between antibody levels and immunity, you don't even mention which antibody test you took (which belies an indifference or an ignorance for the details of immuniology and our collective ignorance about Covid), and then want us to believe that you're a) smarter than Google, and b) more immune than most people to Covid. I'm glad that it didn't kill you, and that you're not suffering from the effects of long covid. That shit is no joke! Did you have rigorous scientific testing done before you caught covid so that you knew it wouldn't affect you? The awkward truth is that we know very little about how immunity works for covid. We knew enough to build a vaccine and have a year's worth of scientific papers about it and the disease, but the analogy is the difference between knowing enough to build a ship to sail the ocean find the Americas in the 1400s, and Google maps satellite imagery on smartphones. Ethics review boards know it's amoral to intentionally expose people to virus, even ones we've vaccinated (Even with informed consent society is just too warped for that choice to be made ethically, given the risks.), which means we're not sure, at the edges, how to test for how protective the vaccine is, because, especially with the delta variant becoming more prevalent, we don't know. This isn't an argument against taking the vaccine. Get the vaccine. The broad empirical data says it's hugely protective. But if it turns out between testing for IgM and IgG, B-cells and T-cells (and the three types of them) that we're using the wrong kind of test to test for protectivity, and that by the same fluke of chance that whatever antibody test you took that you have higher levels of makes you more vulnerable than the rest of the population, Google isn't willing to accept the liability as your hypothetical employer that they knowingly gave you covid and killed you/someone in your family (children in eligible to be vaccinated, or an unvaccinated elder) through gross negligence that could be argued over in a court of law. I'm not remotely an immunolgist, but I've read enough wikipedia after testing negative for IgM antibodies for covid despite having it, to say that the human immune system is ridiculously complex, and (in part, thanks to our lack of universal healthcare) we lack the scientifically rigorous data to know what we're looking for. The measles vaccine has something like 0.02% of non-responders. That is, a tiny number of people who get the vaccine don't develop antibodies for measles. That's something we know and can account for and deal with and handle. But with covid, we're still not even sure what to test for!
fsund 5y ago
Good time to quit. Google is filled with SJWs, liberals, commies and the like. Maybe not as bad as Jack Dorsey's Ministry of Truth but still pretty bad. Also, I hope all of you lockdown assholes realize that WFH was never going to be an option - you all caved to authoritarian fascists over the past year for nothing. You reap what you sow.
- lonesomemoo 5y ago
  You strike me as someone who definitely does not work at google lol
fsund 5y ago
8==================O - - - --- -
13years 5y ago
It is a violation of the Nuremberg code. If you work at google, you might want to send them this. Sample letter from lawyer Robert Barnes https://vivabarneslaw.locals.com/post/689810/vaccine-mandate-employee-letter-example https://vivabarneslaw.locals.com/post/689810/vaccine-mandate...
- scdp 5y ago
  Fucking lol. I'm glad that you think Joe Schmoe has outsmarted Google legal, but losing your god-given right to work at Google if you don't get vaccinated is actually not a violation of the Nuremberg code.
  - krona 5y ago
    I suppose ethics don't mean anything to you or Google?
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - scdp 5y ago
      Yep we're pure evil. Imagine your favorite boogeyman but twice as scary.
      - 13years 5y ago
        Nobody expects evil to self identify. The greatest atrocities in human history were by those who wanted to make the world a better place.
  - 13years 5y ago
    Yes, this Joe Schmoe is the lawyer who successfully defended Wesley Snipes against the entire corrupt system of injustice and won a landmark case. He also successfully defended Ralph Nader to the supreme court. https://www.barneslawllp.com/civil-rights-law https://www.barneslawllp.com/civil-rights-law
throwitaway1235 5y ago
And 6 months from now it's booster shot or no more employment. Same with 6 months after that. Use your heads, this isn't supposed to end.
- 13years 5y ago
  Exactly. This is idiocy. There is already Delta-plus and other variants. It is now spreading more in the vaccinated than the unvaccinated. https://fredbrownbill.wordpress.com/2021/07/20/covid-cases-exploding-in-heaviest-vaccinated-countries-why/ https://fredbrownbill.wordpress.com/2021/07/20/covid-cases-e...
- armada651 5y ago
  I don't see what the big deal is with getting a booster shot? I got the first two shots, call me a sheep but I'd happily take a third. > Use your heads, this isn't supposed to end. That's a self-fulfilling prophecy, the lower the vaccination rate the longer the pandemic will last.
  - 13years 5y ago
    How about a monthly dose? https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-9775925/Can-long-Covid-cured-monthly-dose-vaccine.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-9775925/Can-long-... The more times you take it, you are increasing your risk of an adverse reaction. Yes, nothing to worry about here. 2 Weeks to flatten the curve didn't expand into anything else.
    - armada651 5y ago
      That monthly dose has nothing to do with preventing covid infections. It's an attempt at curing the long-term side effects of a covid infection.
      - 13years 5y ago
        I know, it is about the never ending saga that evolves into ever more unexpected needs/requirements that truly begin to look absurd. We are all playing a game of Simon Says.
13years 5y ago
For everyone calling people idiots who have an opposing view. This is a fascinating paper on those with the opposing view. “their approach to the pandemic is grounded in more scientific rigor, not less.” https://centipedenation.com/transmissions/mit-study-finds-that-anti-maskers-are-anything-but-unscientific/ https://centipedenation.com/transmissions/mit-study-finds-th... How about we not label anyone idiots and simply debate the data? Whatever your perspective, maybe there is data you haven't seen.
- standardUser 5y ago
  That is about masks with no mention of vaccines, and I hope that any person truly interested in the topic would understand that masks are not settled science. Vaccines however have bene proven safe and effective over and over and over with virtually no contradictory data. It is settled science (though not all the details obviously).
  - 13years 5y ago
    We are not talking about vaccines other than covid. Do you think those who question vaccines are very different group of people than those who question masks and are using different methodologies to do so?
    - standardUser 5y ago
      I'm saying that those who question masks (what the article is about) have a leg to stand on. Those who question the COVID vaccines do not, in terms of data or quality studies.
      - 13years 5y ago
        Are you aware the the inventor of the mRNA Covid vaccines is questioning the data and studies?
        standardUser 5y ago

103 points by mji 5y ago

"First, anyone coming to work on our campuses will need to be vaccinated. We’re rolling this policy out in the U.S. in the coming weeks and will expand to other regions in the coming months." This is the trend in the last couple weeks among many companies and governments. It's just a shame the need for this wasn't realized 2-3 months ago. We could be far ahead of where we are today if more entities had been more aggressive about vaccine mandates. It almost feels like we're feigning collective surprise that a big chunk of Americans decided to take a staunchly anti-science, anti-medicine, anti-rationality stance. In reality, I think most of us saw this coming a mile away.

throwawayboise 5y ago
It almost feels like we're feigning collective surprise that a big chunk of Americans decided to take a staunchly skeptical stance against big government and big media hysteria and fear-pumping and make their own decisions based on their personal risk tolerance and waiting to see how things actually play out. I don't know about most of us, but I saw this coming a mile away.
- standardUser 5y ago
  Around 99% of hospitalizations are among the unvaccinated, which means we are now seeing hundreds of deaths everyday from a preventable illness.
  - throwawayboise 5y ago
    There are hundreds of deaths everyday from many preventable causes, we generally don't force people to take medications or change their lifestyle to reduce them.
    - standardUser 5y ago
      "Preventable causes" are very different form "preventable illnesses". Avoiding a heart attack requires decades of actions and decisions. Avoiding polio requires one shot once. In the developed world, not many people die from diseases that are preventable by vaccine. Well, until now.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
      - throwawayboise 5y ago
        One argument that got thrown around a lot was that people in the hospital with COVID are taking medical resources away from others. You could make the same argument for people who choose to drink, smoke, remain obese, sedentary, have untreated diabetes or other chronic conditions that will eventually put them in the hospital needing a lot of very expensive care.
        Imnimo 5y ago
        Those conditions don't overwhelm hospital capacity because they don't produce exponential growth of illness, so I don't think you could make the same argument.
    - spywaregorilla 5y ago
      I can name dozens of lifestyle choices you're forbidden from doing due to risk to yourself and others.
      - munk-a 5y ago
        Sadly my favorite past-time - driving tanks into office buildings - was outlawed by "big government". /s
    - objectivetruth 5y ago
      Heart disease, diabetes, and lung cancer aren't contagious. Kids can't catch coronary artery disease in the classroom.
  - GloriousKoji 5y ago
    It's actually 97% [1] and from anecdata from a friend there is at least one hospital where unvaccinated COVID hospitalizations is as low as 90% (and I want emphasize the obvious that it means 10% of hospitalized COVID patients are vaccinated). [1] https://www.npr.org/2021/07/16/1017012853/97-of-people-entering-hospitals-for-covid-19-are-unvaccinated https://www.npr.org/2021/07/16/1017012853/97-of-people-enter...
    - bonzini 5y ago
      Why is that surprising? If 100% of the population were vaccinated, 100% of the hospitalized would be vaccinated too. More plausibly, suppose the vaccine is 90% effective against severe disease and 60% of the population is vaccinated. Then you'd have 6/46ths of the hospitalizations (15% roughly) coming from the vaccinated. Effectiveness against severe symptoms is what matters the most (and effectiveness against transmission comes second). As long as the maths confirm the effectiveness of the vaccination, having a number of vaccinated people in hospitals is expected. A 90% effectiveness corresponds to having your ICU beds magically multiplied by 10, which is nothing to sneeze about.
  - a_conservative 5y ago
    That figure seems questionable. 1) high cycle PCR tests tend to produce false positives. [0] 2) recently (maybe now?) the CDC was recommending that the cycle count be lowered for vaccinated individuals (break through cases). [1] If unvaccinated individuals are being tested to a different standard, that would seem to muddy the waters, wouldn't it? [0] https://medicine.yale.edu/labmed/sections/virology/COVID-19%20Ct%20values_YNHH%20Aug.%202020%20_395430_36854_v1.pdf https://medicine.yale.edu/labmed/sections/virology/COVID-19%... [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20210623005911/https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/downloads/Information-for-laboratories-COVID-vaccine-breakthrough-case-investigation.pdf https://web.archive.org/web/20210623005911/https://www.cdc.g...
    - a_conservative 5y ago
      I posted this comment in good faith. I would appreciate feedback rather than downvotes.
    - nullc 5y ago
      I'm not the downvoters but: I followed your link [1] and read the entire page multiple times and I can find no content which supports "recommending that the cycle count be lowered for vaccinated individuals". It says that samples submitted for sequencing should be positive when CT<=28 or are detected as positive by another modality.
      - a_conservative 5y ago
        I wish I could find a "slam dunk" source that stated what the current threshold recommended by the CDC, but I can't quite find it. I've personally read many sources that talked about using cycle counts above 30 over the past year. Some more discussion on this topic was on HN yesterday [0] also, from last August: One solution would be to adjust the cycle threshold used now to decide that a patient is infected. Most tests set the limit at 40, a few at 37. This means that you are positive for the coronavirus if the test process required up to 40 cycles, or 37, to detect the virus. [1] [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27972195 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27972195 [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testin...
  - umvi 5y ago
    And? Why aren't people allowed to take risks anymore? If the vaccine is available and I choose not to get it and then die... Well, that's my own prerogative. We are quickly moving into a corporate and government nanny state where citizens and users can't be trusted with their own agency so their agency is removed.
    - ev1 5y ago
      > Well, that's my own prerogative. Does this also imply that you will be responsible for the cost of your own choices, and that you will not infect anyone else and not interact with the public?
      - umvi 5y ago
        If I infect another unvaccinated person... so what? They made their choice as well. The vaccine is widely available enough now that anyone that doesn't have it chose not to get it (or they have an exceedingly rare medical reason)
        ev1 5y ago
        The vast majority of the world does not have effective mRNA-type vaccines, and have outbreaks following mass vaccination of ineffective ones (and in some cases, fraudulent locals use saline). Kids cannot receive it yet, as much as they want to, and there are numerous parents explicitly refusing their kids the consent to be vaccinated. The more spread, the more dice get rolled on creating further deficiencies in vaccination success. Honestly, my opinion - if everyone could be vaccinated and the vaccine was always 100% effective 100% of the time without exception, I would not care at all about "individual choice" or "I don't want to take it", I would not care about the extra mutations being created, I would not care about being next to an unvaccinated individual at all.
        umvi 5y ago
        > Kids cannot receive it yet, as much as they want to Do kids even need it? I was under the impression that child covid deaths (or even just severe reactions to the disease) were incredibly rare.
  - 13years 5y ago
    Are you aware of how that number is generated? Why is it exactly the opposite in other countries?
  - nanis 5y ago
    > Around 99% of hospitalizations are among the unvaccinated "unvaccinated" includes people who have had one dose or people who had the second dose less than two weeks ago[1]: >> a vaccine breakthrough infection is defined as the detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA or antigen in a respiratory specimen collected from a person ≥14 days after receipt of all recommended doses of an FDA-authorized COVID-19 vaccine.[1] >> ... A total of 10,262 SARS-CoV-2 vaccine breakthrough infections had been reported from 46 U.S. states and territories as of April 30, 2021. Among these cases, 6,446 (63%) occurred in females, and the median patient age was 58 years (interquartile range = 40–74 years). Based on preliminary data, 2,725 (27%) vaccine breakthrough infections were asymptomatic, 995 (10%) patients were known to be hospitalized, and 160 (2%) patients died.[1] >> ... As of April 30, 2021, approximately 101 million persons in the United States had been fully vaccinated against COVID-19. [1] Now, let's look at a more recent report[2]: >>> As of July 19, 2021, more than 161 million people in the United States had been fully vaccinated against COVID-19. >>> Hospitalizations* 5,601 (95%) >>> Deaths† 1,141 (19%) So, "fully vaccinated" increased by 60% over that period, but deaths among the fully vaccinated increased by 613%. That's curious. [1]: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7021e3.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7021e3.htm [2]: https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/health-departments/breakthrough-cases.html https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/health-departments/bre...
    - neogodless 5y ago
      Two minor adjustments: > Beginning May 1, 2021, CDC transitioned from monitoring all reported COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough infections to investigating only those among patients who are hospitalized or die, thereby focusing on the cases of highest clinical and public health significance. This is just to keep in mind the % of cases that result in death will be higher based on the different focus of the monitoring. > 292 (26%) of 1,141 fatal cases reported as asymptomatic or not related to COVID-19. So you're saying 1,141 - 292 = 849 or 430% increase over 160 deaths recorded before. Still significant. This is at the same time that Delta is increasingly dominant[0][1]. So it does seem like this Delta variant may be more deadly, even to the vaccinated, though still massively less deadly when compared directly to the unvaccinated. From April 30th through about yesterday, there were about 35,000 total deaths in the U.S. from COVID-19[2]. That number dwarfs the total 850 or so that have died while vaccinated since the beginning of vaccination availability. [0] https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/07/17/us/delta-variant-us-growth.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/07/17/us/delta-vari... [1] https://static01.nyt.com/images/2021/07/15/us/delta-variant-us-growth-promo-1626401728082/delta-variant-us-growth-promo-1626401728082-superJumbo-v2.png https://static01.nyt.com/images/2021/07/15/us/delta-variant-... [2] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/ https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- munk-a 5y ago
  There are three things put forth in the declaration of independence: Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness - for some reason America has decided that #2 trumps 1 & 3 to an extreme degree - but in the rest of the world 1 & 3 are also viewed as fundamentally necessary freedoms.
13415 5y ago
To be honest, it is rather surprising, don't you think so? At the beginning of the vaccination campaigns it was natural for people to be skeptic of vaccines that had been developed so quickly, but you'd really expect these feelings to go away after so many millions have been vaccinated without problems. What's strange about it is that some colleagues of my girlfriend apparently continue to peddle vaccination conspiracies after they've got their second Pfizer shot. What's going on?
- throwawayboise 5y ago
  You simply cannot be certain there are no long term side effects until "long term" (at least a few years) has passed. For the vaccine holdouts, some may be more easily pursuaded next year or the year after, assuming COVID is still a problem then. Historically, flu pandemics naturally burn out after a year or two.
  - standardUser 5y ago
    You can't be certain until you die (hopefully many, many decades from now) that there were no side effects. But we can be "reasonably certain" based on the sum of knowledge and data we have regarding vaccines in particular and medicine in general. Waiting 3 years, from a scientific perspective, is completely arbitrary. The length of clinical trials is not arbitrary.
    - throwawayboise 5y ago
      Yes, I'm just saying that the more time passes, and the more people see that their friends and neighbors are suffering no side effects, that this particular concern/objection will decline. It was very naive to think that 100% of the population would enthusiastically be on board with getting this vaccine. That never happens. I am too young to remember but I would guess there were holdouts on the first polio vaccines as well (though maybe not as many, as it affected mostly children and the diesease had much worse outcomes).
      - 5y ago
minikites 5y ago
>It almost feels like we're feigning collective surprise that a big chunk of Americans decided to take a staunchly anti-science, anti-medicine, anti-rationality stance. This is the natural result of 40+ years of sustained attack on the idea of government, on the effectiveness of public institutions, on the concepts of authority and expertise: >Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge"
- UnpossibleJim 5y ago
  I'm pro science, pro medicine and vaccinated, but as far as "the sustained attack on the idea of government" and "the concept of authority"; you don't think the fairly obvious and rampant corruption in the government, itself has something to do with that? Political donations have become a "buy your senator" campaign for corporate influence without the need for subtlety or subterfuge, and we've been at a state of declared war for 30 years, with expanded governmental control, with no end in sight. This doesn't seem like an attack on the idea of government, but an attack on the idea of a corrupted governing body.
yongjik 5y ago
Err, I don't think we could have had vaccine mandates much earlier than now. At most a month or so. In the spring there were fewer doses than people who wanted them - people were flying to other states to get vaccines. Mandating vaccination wouldn't have sped it up much, while making workers' lives even harder.
- wombat-man 5y ago
  You could mandate it at the office. As more people get vaccinated, more are eligible to return. Eventually you could add in mandatory attendance as the vaccine is more available.
ghaff 5y ago
It probably hasn't been (or has barely been) a couple of months since someone not in a higher risk group could have easily been fully vaccinated (2 weeks after second shot).
- standardUser 5y ago
  Everyone I know reached "fully vaccinated" status before the end of May, so about two months ago. I suppose availability varied by state/region for a while though. But the bigger point is, we should have been implementing more incentives back then such as the ones we are seeing implemented now.
johnbobby 5y ago
"Anti-science". And here we go, let's start talking down to people like neanderthals because nothing in "science" has ever been wrong. It was also anti-science to even talk about masks.
johnbobby 5y ago
Not sure why my comment got deleted, even with people agreeing with it. Seems you have to be very careful if you don't agree with the above statement. Just a note for everyone else.

maxwellito 5y ago

I'm curious to see how enforcing the vaccination policy will work out. I haven't seen any other big company doing this move, and to my knowledge there are many engineers refusing to be vaccinated.

mavhc 5y ago
Thus proving that no group can be vaccinated against idiocy
- matz1 5y ago
  How is not wanting to be vaccinated is idiot ? Vaccination should be personal preference.
  - JaimeThompson 5y ago
    Should speed limits and building codes be personal preference as well?
    - yarcob 5y ago
      Speed limits and building codes generally don't have side effects that can kill you. A bunch of otherwise healthy people have died from the vaccine. You can argue that it's a numbers game, and that getting vaccinated is still less risky, but the decision should not be forced on anyone.
      - mavhc 5y ago
        A bunch? How many, to the nearest 100.
        yarcob 5y ago
        Enough that some governments recommend Astra Zeneca only for elderly patients, because risk/reward might be too big for healthy, young patients. I just don't think anybody should force anyone to get a shot. That should be a personal decision.

dilap 5y ago

How many people are familiar w/ the phenomenon of antibody-dependent enhancement of corona viruses? If you are familiar, how confident are you that it won't be an issue with the current vaccines, and for what reasons? It's very surprising to me how much support there is in general for outsourcing extremely important, previously personal medical decisions to employers. The concept of autonomy of our own bodies as an important right has taken a major step into the background. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41564-020-00789-5 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41564-020-00789-5 (For the record, I did get vaccinated, but it seems crazy to me to mandate or compel it.)

ulfw 5y ago
Considering no vaccine is 100% effective, it doesn't seem crazy to me to mandate vaccination (nor to mandate mask wearing) as protection works best when everyone is protected.
standardUser 5y ago
Where are the prominent voices among researchers and doctors and health officials discussing this? Where are the published papers that have garnered a lot of attention? By all accounts, this appears to be an entirely speculative concern, one among many others that are not well substantiated.
selestify 5y ago
> (For the record, I did get vaccinated, but it seems crazy to me to mandate or compel it.) Why not? Regular vaccines are already compulsory for public schools.
- ShrigmaMale 5y ago
  All states but 5 have exemption for religion or belief or both: https://www.ncsl.org/research/health/school-immunization-exemption-state-laws.aspx https://www.ncsl.org/research/health/school-immunization-exe...
  - MSM 5y ago

breck 5y ago

Why not a policy of “vaccinated or recovered”? The data is pretty clear that the latter have ~~10x better immunity against reinfection. They also arguably provide better protection for the rest of us, since their natural immunity is less a monoculture.

runawaybottle 5y ago
That is my thought as well. If you had Covid, isn’t that the best vaccine you can get?
- scott_s 5y ago
  No. https://www.jhsph.edu/covid-19/articles/why-covid-19-vaccines-offer-better-protection-than-infection.html https://www.jhsph.edu/covid-19/articles/why-covid-19-vaccine...
  - throwaway3neu94 5y ago
    In addition to all the points that article makes, two more: 1. There are a lot of people that believe they already had Covid, but actually didn't. 2. A "vaccinated or recovered" policy is even harder to enforce, as there are vaccination certificates but no recovery certificates. (Yes, vaccination certificates can be faked, but it seems likely to me that a significant part of the population would be willing to lie but not falsify documents.)
    - throwawayboise 5y ago
      There are tests for both presence of antibodies (quick and cheap, you can get one at many pharmacies or quick-care clinics) and T-cell immununity (IDK the cost or availabilty of those).
  - breck 5y ago
    She's lying. Notice how she links to no actual datasets. On the contrary, all the big datasets show clearly a long lasting, low risk of reinfection for the recovered. Here, I include an actual dataset (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.03.06.21253051v1 https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.03.06.21253051v...) unlike "Virologist Sabra Klein".

lazyjones 5y ago

Will they fire people who cannot get the vaccine for medical or religious reasons?

CubsFan1060 5y ago
I take it you didn't even bother to open the article and search for "medical"?
- aynyc 5y ago
  Username checked out.
- lazyjones 5y ago
  It just says they'll tell us later about their "exceptions process". Which probably means, they'll decide later when they see how many it concerns.
worker767424 5y ago
I'm not very sympathetic to the religious argument. Islamic leaders are approving vaccines, even if they contain pork gelatin.
- amrcnimgrnt 5y ago
  Who cares about Islamic leaders? Don't Muslims have freedom of conscience independently of them. Religion is, ultimately, about the individual's relationship with the higher. To dismiss someone's religious complaint because of a supposed leader is to destroy freedom of conscience. If you had said "Pope" instead of "Islamic leader" it would have been classic WASP anti-Catholic bigotry that JFK faced in when running for president. [EDIT] changed post to reflect that I don't have any problems against muslims' opinions (half my family is muslim in fact), just their leaders.
- nanis 5y ago
  > Islamic leaders are approving vaccines, Oh, that's a clear indication that you do not understand Islam. Fatwas are only binding on the person who issues them. Same for lesser opinions. Islam is different. While there are currently a lot of Islamic dictatorships, Islam is the genuine religion of personal choice and freedom.

pmastela 5y ago

Someone needed to go first to try and get a leg up on the competition in terms of productivity or whatever KPI the company is tracking, and it seems Google is first Big Tech Co to go. It will be interesting to see just how exactly this all will play out considering some in the workforce are vaccine hesitant. I wonder if, besides proof of vaccination, health checks will be required to enter the campus, or if masks will need to be worn at all times indoors, or if social distancing will still need to be observed.

dcolkitt 5y ago

Why not extend it to the end of the year? Delta is not a joke, and the evidence isn't firm that vaccinated people are fully safe against it. It's increasingly looking like there may be similar variants, some even more vaccine resistant. Given the lack of information, no major company should be committing to the end of WFH until the results are clearer. That definitely isn't going to be the case until well after Labor Day. I don't understand why the major tech companies are so hellbent on re-opening the offices in the fall. It's like they've drawn a line in the sand and they can't even consider reversing course. Which doesn't even make any sense, because for all intents and purposes they've been doing fine. Most tech company's stock price and profits are above their pre-WFH levels. Surely extending WFH until January isn't going to ruin their business.

supergeek133 5y ago
They said that in the blog... > At the same time, we recognize that many Googlers are seeing spikes in their communities caused by the Delta variant and are concerned about returning to the office. This extension will allow us time to ramp back into work while providing flexibility for those who need it. We’ll continue watching the data carefully and let you know at least 30 days in advance before transitioning into our full return to office plans.
ev1 5y ago
There is one thing to note though, I would assume Google and maybe a few others might have more people willing to transition to a hybrid model or spend days back in the office specifically for the huge amount of amenities they offer, and the food's pretty good. Contrast this with contractor body shops, small or medium businesses in regular buildings where your day is a screaming hellhole of a tiny cubicle with low walls or an open plan office that also has support with loud headsets next to you, the only lunch option is an overpriced sandwich or salad, the commute is over an hour each way in a cramped, standing room only transit and not a private company shuttle with wifi and clean seats. If I was working out of MV I would be more inclined to spend a day or two a week voluntarily at the office. If I was in an open plan cube farm where I give myself mild tinnitus just having noise cancelling headphones cranked up to eleven for the entire duration, then an hour and a half ACE/Caltrain/BART multiple transfers home, fuck that, 100% remote, if I get pushback on the remote part I leave.

krona 5y ago

I'm not vaccinated. Why? Because before I had the opportunity to receive the vaccine, I had an antibody test for the virus, revealing I have a standard deviation more antibodies (after 6 months) for the virus than the average person does after 2 doses of the Pfizer vaccine (and ~3 months). There isn't conclusive data (AFAIK) on the relationship between antibody levels and immunity for this particular virus, but it is not unlikely that people like me have better immunity than the average vaccinated person. I would've thought an inclusive company like Google would take such basic immunological nuances in to account when stigmatising their own employees?

fsund 5y ago
Goog is not "inclusive". That's fascist language to divide/conquer those that oppose the leftist agenda.
standardUser 5y ago
Natural immunity comes in a lot of variations, and sometimes its even so weak that reinfection can occur. Immunity by vaccine is comparatively very predictable and by nearly all accounts at least as strong as most natural immunity, with plenty of studies finding it to be stronger. So, that is part of the concern. Additionally, antibody tests are not fully reliable, whereas being vaccinated is never going to be "wrong". It's simply you are or you aren't, with no chance of false positives.
wonnage 5y ago
Get the vaccine, dude. You are not a special snowflake.
fragmede 5y ago
You skip over the fact that it means you caught covid (either through malfeasance or ignorance) and were lucky enough to have survived, you admit to your ignorance about the relationship between antibody levels and immunity, you don't even mention which antibody test you took (which belies an indifference or an ignorance for the details of immuniology and our collective ignorance about Covid), and then want us to believe that you're a) smarter than Google, and b) more immune than most people to Covid. I'm glad that it didn't kill you, and that you're not suffering from the effects of long covid. That shit is no joke! Did you have rigorous scientific testing done before you caught covid so that you knew it wouldn't affect you? The awkward truth is that we know very little about how immunity works for covid. We knew enough to build a vaccine and have a year's worth of scientific papers about it and the disease, but the analogy is the difference between knowing enough to build a ship to sail the ocean find the Americas in the 1400s, and Google maps satellite imagery on smartphones. Ethics review boards know it's amoral to intentionally expose people to virus, even ones we've vaccinated (Even with informed consent society is just too warped for that choice to be made ethically, given the risks.), which means we're not sure, at the edges, how to test for how protective the vaccine is, because, especially with the delta variant becoming more prevalent, we don't know. This isn't an argument against taking the vaccine. Get the vaccine. The broad empirical data says it's hugely protective. But if it turns out between testing for IgM and IgG, B-cells and T-cells (and the three types of them) that we're using the wrong kind of test to test for protectivity, and that by the same fluke of chance that whatever antibody test you took that you have higher levels of makes you more vulnerable than the rest of the population, Google isn't willing to accept the liability as your hypothetical employer that they knowingly gave you covid and killed you/someone in your family (children in eligible to be vaccinated, or an unvaccinated elder) through gross negligence that could be argued over in a court of law. I'm not remotely an immunolgist, but I've read enough wikipedia after testing negative for IgM antibodies for covid despite having it, to say that the human immune system is ridiculously complex, and (in part, thanks to our lack of universal healthcare) we lack the scientifically rigorous data to know what we're looking for. The measles vaccine has something like 0.02% of non-responders. That is, a tiny number of people who get the vaccine don't develop antibodies for measles. That's something we know and can account for and deal with and handle. But with covid, we're still not even sure what to test for!

fsund 5y ago

Good time to quit. Google is filled with SJWs, liberals, commies and the like. Maybe not as bad as Jack Dorsey's Ministry of Truth but still pretty bad. Also, I hope all of you lockdown assholes realize that WFH was never going to be an option - you all caved to authoritarian fascists over the past year for nothing. You reap what you sow.

lonesomemoo 5y ago
You strike me as someone who definitely does not work at google lol

fsund 5y ago

8==================O - - - --- -

13years 5y ago

It is a violation of the Nuremberg code. If you work at google, you might want to send them this. Sample letter from lawyer Robert Barnes https://vivabarneslaw.locals.com/post/689810/vaccine-mandate-employee-letter-example https://vivabarneslaw.locals.com/post/689810/vaccine-mandate...

scdp 5y ago
Fucking lol. I'm glad that you think Joe Schmoe has outsmarted Google legal, but losing your god-given right to work at Google if you don't get vaccinated is actually not a violation of the Nuremberg code.
- krona 5y ago
  I suppose ethics don't mean anything to you or Google?
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - scdp 5y ago
    Yep we're pure evil. Imagine your favorite boogeyman but twice as scary.
    - 13years 5y ago
      Nobody expects evil to self identify. The greatest atrocities in human history were by those who wanted to make the world a better place.
- 13years 5y ago
  Yes, this Joe Schmoe is the lawyer who successfully defended Wesley Snipes against the entire corrupt system of injustice and won a landmark case. He also successfully defended Ralph Nader to the supreme court. https://www.barneslawllp.com/civil-rights-law https://www.barneslawllp.com/civil-rights-law

throwitaway1235 5y ago

And 6 months from now it's booster shot or no more employment. Same with 6 months after that. Use your heads, this isn't supposed to end.

13years 5y ago
Exactly. This is idiocy. There is already Delta-plus and other variants. It is now spreading more in the vaccinated than the unvaccinated. https://fredbrownbill.wordpress.com/2021/07/20/covid-cases-exploding-in-heaviest-vaccinated-countries-why/ https://fredbrownbill.wordpress.com/2021/07/20/covid-cases-e...
armada651 5y ago
I don't see what the big deal is with getting a booster shot? I got the first two shots, call me a sheep but I'd happily take a third. > Use your heads, this isn't supposed to end. That's a self-fulfilling prophecy, the lower the vaccination rate the longer the pandemic will last.
- 13years 5y ago
  How about a monthly dose? https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-9775925/Can-long-Covid-cured-monthly-dose-vaccine.html https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-9775925/Can-long-... The more times you take it, you are increasing your risk of an adverse reaction. Yes, nothing to worry about here. 2 Weeks to flatten the curve didn't expand into anything else.
  - armada651 5y ago
    That monthly dose has nothing to do with preventing covid infections. It's an attempt at curing the long-term side effects of a covid infection.
    - 13years 5y ago
      I know, it is about the never ending saga that evolves into ever more unexpected needs/requirements that truly begin to look absurd. We are all playing a game of Simon Says.

13years 5y ago

For everyone calling people idiots who have an opposing view. This is a fascinating paper on those with the opposing view. “their approach to the pandemic is grounded in more scientific rigor, not less.” https://centipedenation.com/transmissions/mit-study-finds-that-anti-maskers-are-anything-but-unscientific/ https://centipedenation.com/transmissions/mit-study-finds-th... How about we not label anyone idiots and simply debate the data? Whatever your perspective, maybe there is data you haven't seen.

standardUser 5y ago
That is about masks with no mention of vaccines, and I hope that any person truly interested in the topic would understand that masks are not settled science. Vaccines however have bene proven safe and effective over and over and over with virtually no contradictory data. It is settled science (though not all the details obviously).
- 13years 5y ago
  We are not talking about vaccines other than covid. Do you think those who question vaccines are very different group of people than those who question masks and are using different methodologies to do so?
  - standardUser 5y ago
    I'm saying that those who question masks (what the article is about) have a leg to stand on. Those who question the COVID vaccines do not, in terms of data or quality studies.
    - 13years 5y ago
      Are you aware the the inventor of the mRNA Covid vaccines is questioning the data and studies?
      - standardUser 5y ago