42 ms·

I don't mean this polemically, or rhetorically. I'm honestly asking because I've given this some thought, and it's not entirely obvious to me. "Who are the unv

I don't mean this polemically, or rhetorically. I'm honestly asking because I've given this some thought, and it's not entirely obvious to me. "Who are the unvaccinated hurting, exactly?" It appears to me that a pandemic of the unvaccinated harms the unvaccinated. "Those who cant get the vaccines" Now, some people will point out that some can't get the vaccines. Except that ppl with HIV, GBS, autoimmune etc are all encouraged by the CDC to get the vaccine. Children under 12 have ridiculous low rates of harm from COVID. So the folks getting hurt by not being vaccinated are the ones who chose to be unvaccinated. (I have a fairly serious auto-immune disease and it's not obvious to me that I should get the vaccine. Some of the reported side-effects are triggering my auto-immune disease. I'm waiting for my annual appointment my specialist next month to talk about this) "Herd immunity to end the pandemic" Another objection is that the pandemic will not end, we will not reach herd immunity, unless we vaccinate x amount of people. Except that it's not obvious to me that pandemic will ever end - we'll just co-evolve with COVID to be less harmful. The reasons being: 1. We'll never vaccinate Afghanistan or Central Asia in general, South Saharan Africa, etc. so COVID will never go extinct [1] 2. COVID-19, being a coronavirus, will likely evolve quickly out of our vaccines' scope. Furthermore, variants bifurcate so even if we can make new vaccines quickly, there will be too many variants to have to target. 3. Given points 1. and 2., heard immunity for a given country appears to be futile attempt. 4. Quickly vaccinating everyone before COVID bifurcates too much appears to be a fools errand. Anyway, you'd make more progress vaccinating the third world than trying to convince reluctant young people in the first world. In the third world the vaccines would be far more effective at stopping COVID's bifurcation (since they have a lot of young people who could safely be inoculated by getting the virus itself by removing all COVID restrictions) [1] Not a dig at those countries, but a statement of fact based on the mistrust the central asians have since rich countries highjacked UN vaccination programs to advance their geo-political goals. Or poor quality vaccines/equipment that spread diseases amongst Africans. [EDIT] While I am not vaccinated, I did sign up for a vaccine trial and was rejected. So please, try not to make this personal.

tablespoon 5y ago
> "Who are the unvaccinated hurting, exactly?" My kids, who are too young to be vaccinated. I don't appreciate you being blase about their health. My father, who is quite possibly immunocompromised, and may not have acquired a strong immunity from his vaccine.
- amrcnimgrnt 5y ago
  I asked honestly, and seriously. I want to be taught, explained to. Not given lip. I take (strong) exception to be characterized as "blase". My kids aren't eligible for vaccination either. I can assure you Im not "blase" about their health. You might want to look at the actual statistics of the harm of COVID for under 12. If that frightens you, that's fine, but then I would encourage you to look at other daily behaviors and their risks. As to your father, you're right, he may have not acquired a strong response. However, the vaccines are, rightly, praised for being very effective. Including among people who are immunocompromised. As a society we take "accept" hypothetical small risks and will continue to do so until we ban cars inside cities (which I'm in favor of, btw).
  - tablespoon 5y ago
    >> "Who are the unvaccinated hurting, exactly?" > You might want to look at the actual statistics of the harm of COVID for under 12. If that frightens you, that's fine, but then I would encourage you to look at other daily behaviors and their risks. It doesn't matter what the statistics are, it's a risk they're exposed to because of the unvaccinated, anti-maskers, and people looking for every fucking excuse they can think of to avoid addressing this infectious disease.
    - amrcnimgrnt 5y ago
      My only objection to your original post was your tone. Specifically dismissing my question as blase. Otherwise I thought your father's condition was the only good objection I've read so far. In fact, my wife being temporarily immunocompromised herself is why I signed up to a vaccine trial. But then you go off and swear at me on your subsequent post. As to your italized "because of the vaccinated" your kids are at risk (irregardless the small risk): that's really no different than me having to walk in a city surrounded by texting motorists. The difference being that texting kills far more people and yet, despite laws to the contrary, nothing is done about it. Seriously, let's mandate locking up phones that are moving more than 5mph. It'll save far more <12 year old lives than vaccinating everyone.
roberttod 5y ago
Not addressing the harm it might do to vaccinated people - don't we have some responsibility to encourage unvaccinated people to get the vaccine for their own good? It's all very well saying "if they want to take the risk, then that's their decision" but in reality many of them have been manipulated by mis and disinformation. Maybe not the hacker news types that are being skeptical and looking at the data and thinking logically, but the vast majority just don't understand the science and look to others for direction.
- amrcnimgrnt 5y ago
  I understand your point, but saving others from themselves is paternalism writ large. It's not to be taken lightly. Anyway, the COVID death rates right now are bellow diabetes, smoking [1], etc. On a purely "save people from themselves" COVID ranks really low right now. You could argue that the vaccine is a small cost to save a person (vs. the cost of banning soda or smoking), but that's pretty paternalistic. [1] https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/health_effects/tobacco_related_mortality/index.htm https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/heal...
lossolo 5y ago
> It appears to me that a pandemic of the unvaccinated harms the unvaccinated. I'm vaccinated with two shots but I can't go on holidays because some people do not want to get vaccinated, I need to go out in mask, business of my friend has lower income now because of covid limitations. On next wave hospitals in my country will get overrun again which means a lot of other vaccinated people will die because of untreated medical issues, we will get another lockdown, which will hurt vaccinated people financially.
- amrcnimgrnt 5y ago
  Those are really just issues with your government and their decision about what are the appropriate responses. It's not the unvaccinated that are hurting you here, but the government response to them. If the unvaccinated are fine dying and not killing those who fear COVID, why have all the restrictions? Imagine if the government told you you can't wear a short skirt because a religious extremist might stab you. In what world does is this edict fair? And to make this comparison fair, this case, the religious extremist is also wearing a short skirt!
  - lossolo 5y ago
    > Those are really just issues with your government and their decision about what are the appropriate responses. Well, mandatory vaccinations then should not be a problem too, right? they would also be only issues with your government. > If the unvaccinated are fine dying and not killing those who fear COVID, why have all the restrictions? Because none of them is fine with dying. I guarantee you that 99.9% of the unvaccinated people when confrontend with death will NOT say "oh, I've covid just let me die" which means hospitals will be overrun again = affecting vaccinated people in every way that I mentioned in my previous response. > Imagine if the government told you you can't wear a short skirt because a religious extremist might stab you. Ruling by the European Court of Human Rights set the precedent that obligatory vaccinations do not contravene the European Convention on Human Rights. I don't know about the rest of the world, I live in Europe. In your example government would do something ridiculously against common sense and Convention on Human Rights. Maybe you should find better analogy. EDIT: And let me ask you this as I see you have kids and you are unvaccinated, if you get sick and will be offered place and care in hospital that could save your life, will you choose to accept it? Or based on principles you will deny and let your kids live without father? I think we both know the answer to that question (unless you don't care about your kids). And now you are affecting vaccinated people by taking place in hospital/using hospital staff time that could be used for/on vaccinated people.
astura 5y ago
From a purely business perspective a COVID-19 infection is highly disruptive to business operations. If you're following CDC guidelines (and some businesses legally must) then a COVID-19 infection causes you to not only lose the infected employee for the duration of their illness, but you lose every other non-vaccinated employee who has had contact with that employee for two weeks. I know of at least five businesses near me that had to close down for two weeks in the fall/winter due to COVID-19 infection - they didn't have enough non-sick, non-quarantined employees to operate. That's why an employer might mandate vaccinations for their employees.
- amrcnimgrnt 5y ago
  Sure, don't hire the non-vaccinated. But my question is: "Who are the unvaccinated hurting, exactly?" if not themselves? All the reasons you gave me are examples of harm from government rules trying to, it appears to me, save people from themselves.
amrcnimgrnt 5y ago
I want to thank all those who answered my questions politely. I'm pleased to say you appear to have been the majority. Unfortunately, I'm still unconvinced that the unvaccinated are harming anyone other than themselves. This opens a good topic on the role of paternalism to force people to better themselves. But that'll be for another day.
- hbt 5y ago
  unvaccinated people are two to three times more contagious than vaccinated people. therefore they are spreaders. please note I'm only repeating what I heard from the cbc. the other arguments are mostly economics and logistics. e.g delaying surgeries
  - lpqiu3699 5y ago
    Unvaccinated people are not more contagious. Latest study shows they have about the same viral load.

tablespoon 5y ago

> "Who are the unvaccinated hurting, exactly?" My kids, who are too young to be vaccinated. I don't appreciate you being blase about their health. My father, who is quite possibly immunocompromised, and may not have acquired a strong immunity from his vaccine.

amrcnimgrnt 5y ago
I asked honestly, and seriously. I want to be taught, explained to. Not given lip. I take (strong) exception to be characterized as "blase". My kids aren't eligible for vaccination either. I can assure you Im not "blase" about their health. You might want to look at the actual statistics of the harm of COVID for under 12. If that frightens you, that's fine, but then I would encourage you to look at other daily behaviors and their risks. As to your father, you're right, he may have not acquired a strong response. However, the vaccines are, rightly, praised for being very effective. Including among people who are immunocompromised. As a society we take "accept" hypothetical small risks and will continue to do so until we ban cars inside cities (which I'm in favor of, btw).
- tablespoon 5y ago
  >> "Who are the unvaccinated hurting, exactly?" > You might want to look at the actual statistics of the harm of COVID for under 12. If that frightens you, that's fine, but then I would encourage you to look at other daily behaviors and their risks. It doesn't matter what the statistics are, it's a risk they're exposed to because of the unvaccinated, anti-maskers, and people looking for every fucking excuse they can think of to avoid addressing this infectious disease.
  - amrcnimgrnt 5y ago
    My only objection to your original post was your tone. Specifically dismissing my question as blase. Otherwise I thought your father's condition was the only good objection I've read so far. In fact, my wife being temporarily immunocompromised herself is why I signed up to a vaccine trial. But then you go off and swear at me on your subsequent post. As to your italized "because of the vaccinated" your kids are at risk (irregardless the small risk): that's really no different than me having to walk in a city surrounded by texting motorists. The difference being that texting kills far more people and yet, despite laws to the contrary, nothing is done about it. Seriously, let's mandate locking up phones that are moving more than 5mph. It'll save far more <12 year old lives than vaccinating everyone.

roberttod 5y ago

Not addressing the harm it might do to vaccinated people - don't we have some responsibility to encourage unvaccinated people to get the vaccine for their own good? It's all very well saying "if they want to take the risk, then that's their decision" but in reality many of them have been manipulated by mis and disinformation. Maybe not the hacker news types that are being skeptical and looking at the data and thinking logically, but the vast majority just don't understand the science and look to others for direction.

amrcnimgrnt 5y ago
I understand your point, but saving others from themselves is paternalism writ large. It's not to be taken lightly. Anyway, the COVID death rates right now are bellow diabetes, smoking [1], etc. On a purely "save people from themselves" COVID ranks really low right now. You could argue that the vaccine is a small cost to save a person (vs. the cost of banning soda or smoking), but that's pretty paternalistic. [1] https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/health_effects/tobacco_related_mortality/index.htm https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/heal...

lossolo 5y ago

> It appears to me that a pandemic of the unvaccinated harms the unvaccinated. I'm vaccinated with two shots but I can't go on holidays because some people do not want to get vaccinated, I need to go out in mask, business of my friend has lower income now because of covid limitations. On next wave hospitals in my country will get overrun again which means a lot of other vaccinated people will die because of untreated medical issues, we will get another lockdown, which will hurt vaccinated people financially.

amrcnimgrnt 5y ago
Those are really just issues with your government and their decision about what are the appropriate responses. It's not the unvaccinated that are hurting you here, but the government response to them. If the unvaccinated are fine dying and not killing those who fear COVID, why have all the restrictions? Imagine if the government told you you can't wear a short skirt because a religious extremist might stab you. In what world does is this edict fair? And to make this comparison fair, this case, the religious extremist is also wearing a short skirt!
- lossolo 5y ago
  > Those are really just issues with your government and their decision about what are the appropriate responses. Well, mandatory vaccinations then should not be a problem too, right? they would also be only issues with your government. > If the unvaccinated are fine dying and not killing those who fear COVID, why have all the restrictions? Because none of them is fine with dying. I guarantee you that 99.9% of the unvaccinated people when confrontend with death will NOT say "oh, I've covid just let me die" which means hospitals will be overrun again = affecting vaccinated people in every way that I mentioned in my previous response. > Imagine if the government told you you can't wear a short skirt because a religious extremist might stab you. Ruling by the European Court of Human Rights set the precedent that obligatory vaccinations do not contravene the European Convention on Human Rights. I don't know about the rest of the world, I live in Europe. In your example government would do something ridiculously against common sense and Convention on Human Rights. Maybe you should find better analogy. EDIT: And let me ask you this as I see you have kids and you are unvaccinated, if you get sick and will be offered place and care in hospital that could save your life, will you choose to accept it? Or based on principles you will deny and let your kids live without father? I think we both know the answer to that question (unless you don't care about your kids). And now you are affecting vaccinated people by taking place in hospital/using hospital staff time that could be used for/on vaccinated people.

astura 5y ago

From a purely business perspective a COVID-19 infection is highly disruptive to business operations. If you're following CDC guidelines (and some businesses legally must) then a COVID-19 infection causes you to not only lose the infected employee for the duration of their illness, but you lose every other non-vaccinated employee who has had contact with that employee for two weeks. I know of at least five businesses near me that had to close down for two weeks in the fall/winter due to COVID-19 infection - they didn't have enough non-sick, non-quarantined employees to operate. That's why an employer might mandate vaccinations for their employees.

amrcnimgrnt 5y ago
Sure, don't hire the non-vaccinated. But my question is: "Who are the unvaccinated hurting, exactly?" if not themselves? All the reasons you gave me are examples of harm from government rules trying to, it appears to me, save people from themselves.

amrcnimgrnt 5y ago

I want to thank all those who answered my questions politely. I'm pleased to say you appear to have been the majority. Unfortunately, I'm still unconvinced that the unvaccinated are harming anyone other than themselves. This opens a good topic on the role of paternalism to force people to better themselves. But that'll be for another day.

hbt 5y ago
unvaccinated people are two to three times more contagious than vaccinated people. therefore they are spreaders. please note I'm only repeating what I heard from the cbc. the other arguments are mostly economics and logistics. e.g delaying surgeries
- lpqiu3699 5y ago
  Unvaccinated people are not more contagious. Latest study shows they have about the same viral load.