5 ms·

But if others are already vaccinated, how does an unvaccinated coworker infect a vaccinated coworker?

FreakyT 5y ago
IIRC, unvaccinated are more likely to get infected and also typically have higher viral loads, which corresponds to higher infectiousness.
- chitowneats 5y ago
  This contradicts the latest science from the CDC: https://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/experts-back-cdc-change-masks-delta-variant-spreads-rcna1526 https://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/experts-back-cd... "The CDC has found, however, that in rare breakthrough infections — instances where a fully vaccinated person tests positive for the virus — the amount of virus in that vaccinated person's system is similar to the viral load in an infected individual who is unvaccinated." One could be forgiven though for not being up to date on the latest oscillation.
bigmattystyles 5y ago
Breakthrough infections and questions about transmissibility even if vaccinated aside, consider this: a second unvaccinated coworker.
- epicureanideal 5y ago
  Breakthrough infections are rare, right? And a second unvaccinated coworker is also someone that has chosen not to be vaccinated, right? (Obviously there may be some individuals who can't get the vaccine, but that should be a relatively rare circumstance, and could have policies around dealing with it.)
  - kelnos 5y ago
    > Breakthrough infections are rare, right? Sort of; we don't (and won't) entirely know. With the delta variant becoming more common, it's seeming like vaccinated people might still be able to transmit the disease, even if they don't become infected themselves. There's also the matter of asymptomatic infection: remember that the 95% efficacy numbers reported by Pfizer and Moderna (for example) are about symptomatic infection; during their clinical trials, they only tested people if they showed symptoms. And if a vaccinated person is infected but asymptomatic, they may never even know about it. Technically we may or may not call that a "breakthrough infection", but that person could still presumably infect an unvaccinated person, and that's the thing that matters. > Obviously there may be some individuals who can't get the vaccine, but that should be a relatively rare circumstance, and could have policies around dealing with it. Right, and having people around them who are unvaccinated by choice is an unnecessary risk to those who can't be vaccinated.
  - spywaregorilla 5y ago
    Not that rare in the scheme of things. Odds are strong that if you're vaccinated a breakthrough infection will be much less serious though. However in either case, you've now inconvenienced the breakthrough infectee who has to be concerned with how they go on to infect others, e.g. unvaccinated children.
  - didjathinkmess 5y ago
    We have absolutely no idea because on May 1st the CDC stopped counting breakthrough cases that don't result in hospitalizations or death. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7021e3.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7021e3.htm
DrBenCarson 5y ago
Breakthrough case Not to mention if you don’t enforce the policy, unvaccinated-by-choice persons (henceforth referred to as “morons incapable of basic science and empathy”) will infect one another and further increase the probability of breakthrough cases
rad_gruchalski 5y ago
What if there are many unvaccinated in between the vaccinated?
paxys 5y ago
- Vaccines aren't 100% efficient - Lots of people cannot get vaccinated due to medical reasons
- throwaway199998 5y ago
  So what's sufficient for worthless imbeciles like yourself, 99.99%? Santa Clara county is at over 80% already.
version_five 5y ago
That's how you know it's not just a public health measure. For other vaccines, we rely on the majority being vaccinated so that any isolated outbreaks are naturally contained. I assume google doesn't ask you to prove you're vaccinated against measles for example. If one person is not vaccinated, it's to their detriment and irrelevant to everyone else. There are weak arguments about vaccine efficacy etc that some people could still get infected, but the point is that majority voluntary vaccination contains disease to the point that there is no justification of invasive personal measures (in this case disclosing personal health information to an information predator, but its unacceptable regardless of the employer). It seems to me this is much more about signaling to their various stakeholders about their politics rather than an actual public health campaign. FWIW I think (I think) they should be allowed to enforce this if they want, even if i dont like it. Although I might support measures to make this kind of discrimination illegal, I'd have to think more about that. Despite having my vaccine, I would not work for a company that asked me to prove it, however. I've got no beef with the vaccine, only with giving state or corporate actors power over my health choices.
- ViViDboarder 5y ago
  > I assume google doesn't ask you to prove you're vaccinated against measles for example. Is there a massive measles outbreak currently infecting millions of people? I don’t see how the fact that they don’t require proof of measles vaccine is in anyway proof that COVID vaccination isn’t in the interest of public health.
osigurdson 5y ago
Think of yourself at the center of a circle with a series of concentric rings. If you are vaccinated with a 90% effective vaccine, your chance of catching the bug is 10% from anyone in the first ring. However, if everyone in the first ring is vaccinated, the chance of catching the bug from anyone in the second ring is only 1% (i.e 0.1*0.1). Thus with enough people vaccinated even a crappy vaccine works pretty well. Perhaps a rather simplistic model, but somewhat illustrative.
throwaway9980 5y ago
The same way that my friend who is vaccinated was infected by his unvaccinated wife. Close quarters with an infected person is going to increase risk for some one who is vaccinated. The Pfizer vaccine is 38% effective [1] at preventing infection on average. It’s obvious that spending 8 hours next to someone who is actively infectious will reduce that efficacy rate. [1] for the Delta variant, which at this point is what matters
- imwillofficial 5y ago
  What about the vaccinated spreading the disease? https://nypost.com/2021/07/20/white-house-aide-nancy-pelosi-staffer-test-positive-for-covid/ https://nypost.com/2021/07/20/white-house-aide-nancy-pelosi-...
- s1artibartfast 5y ago
  38% is for the delta variant and a single shot. For the recommended 2 shots, protection from the delta is 88% compared to 93% for the alpha.
Spooky23 5y ago
Vaccination doesn’t mean you cannot be infected, and cannot spread it once infected. It lowers the chances of infection and presentation of symptoms. So when your unvaccinated coworker exercises his selfish right to be stupid, you’re putting others at risk. The difference here is that your exposing your coworkers children and others who cannot be vaccinated to infection. We socially tolerate people like this who choose to infect an entire office or daycare with rhinovirus, flu or the cold, because the impact is generally lower. COVID is different, and frankly, people don’t want to be around unvaccinated people just as they avoid people who display bad judgement in other ways.
- ds206 5y ago
  What's the point of a right if it can't be exercised?
  - belltaco 5y ago
    The company also has the right to fire you.
    - tored 5y ago
      Philosophically or legally? I’m fully aware that US has weak worker laws, but in Europe you can’t fire people based on whim.
      - dekhn 5y ago
        Employees at Google are mostly at-will. Google can fire them any time, although typically, they produce a 6+ month performance record with failure to do job before terminating (mostly to protect against lawsuits). However, Google has terminated people on the spot, with cause. The government will back Google firing people for not being vaccinated.
        tored 5y ago
        The takeaway is that the general left now is for firing employees for political or medical reasons, when historically they were against. Why that is, at least in Europe, is because the left is no longer majority working class, it is majority middle class.

IIRC, unvaccinated are more likely to get infected and also typically have higher viral loads, which corresponds to higher infectiousness.

chitowneats 5y ago
This contradicts the latest science from the CDC: https://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/experts-back-cdc-change-masks-delta-variant-spreads-rcna1526 https://www.nbcnews.com/science/science-news/experts-back-cd... "The CDC has found, however, that in rare breakthrough infections — instances where a fully vaccinated person tests positive for the virus — the amount of virus in that vaccinated person's system is similar to the viral load in an infected individual who is unvaccinated." One could be forgiven though for not being up to date on the latest oscillation.

bigmattystyles 5y ago

Breakthrough infections and questions about transmissibility even if vaccinated aside, consider this: a second unvaccinated coworker.

epicureanideal 5y ago
Breakthrough infections are rare, right? And a second unvaccinated coworker is also someone that has chosen not to be vaccinated, right? (Obviously there may be some individuals who can't get the vaccine, but that should be a relatively rare circumstance, and could have policies around dealing with it.)
- kelnos 5y ago
  > Breakthrough infections are rare, right? Sort of; we don't (and won't) entirely know. With the delta variant becoming more common, it's seeming like vaccinated people might still be able to transmit the disease, even if they don't become infected themselves. There's also the matter of asymptomatic infection: remember that the 95% efficacy numbers reported by Pfizer and Moderna (for example) are about symptomatic infection; during their clinical trials, they only tested people if they showed symptoms. And if a vaccinated person is infected but asymptomatic, they may never even know about it. Technically we may or may not call that a "breakthrough infection", but that person could still presumably infect an unvaccinated person, and that's the thing that matters. > Obviously there may be some individuals who can't get the vaccine, but that should be a relatively rare circumstance, and could have policies around dealing with it. Right, and having people around them who are unvaccinated by choice is an unnecessary risk to those who can't be vaccinated.
- spywaregorilla 5y ago
  Not that rare in the scheme of things. Odds are strong that if you're vaccinated a breakthrough infection will be much less serious though. However in either case, you've now inconvenienced the breakthrough infectee who has to be concerned with how they go on to infect others, e.g. unvaccinated children.
- didjathinkmess 5y ago
  We have absolutely no idea because on May 1st the CDC stopped counting breakthrough cases that don't result in hospitalizations or death. https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7021e3.htm https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7021e3.htm

DrBenCarson 5y ago

Breakthrough case Not to mention if you don’t enforce the policy, unvaccinated-by-choice persons (henceforth referred to as “morons incapable of basic science and empathy”) will infect one another and further increase the probability of breakthrough cases

rad_gruchalski 5y ago

What if there are many unvaccinated in between the vaccinated?

paxys 5y ago

- Vaccines aren't 100% efficient - Lots of people cannot get vaccinated due to medical reasons

throwaway199998 5y ago
So what's sufficient for worthless imbeciles like yourself, 99.99%? Santa Clara county is at over 80% already.

version_five 5y ago

That's how you know it's not just a public health measure. For other vaccines, we rely on the majority being vaccinated so that any isolated outbreaks are naturally contained. I assume google doesn't ask you to prove you're vaccinated against measles for example. If one person is not vaccinated, it's to their detriment and irrelevant to everyone else. There are weak arguments about vaccine efficacy etc that some people could still get infected, but the point is that majority voluntary vaccination contains disease to the point that there is no justification of invasive personal measures (in this case disclosing personal health information to an information predator, but its unacceptable regardless of the employer). It seems to me this is much more about signaling to their various stakeholders about their politics rather than an actual public health campaign. FWIW I think (I think) they should be allowed to enforce this if they want, even if i dont like it. Although I might support measures to make this kind of discrimination illegal, I'd have to think more about that. Despite having my vaccine, I would not work for a company that asked me to prove it, however. I've got no beef with the vaccine, only with giving state or corporate actors power over my health choices.

ViViDboarder 5y ago
> I assume google doesn't ask you to prove you're vaccinated against measles for example. Is there a massive measles outbreak currently infecting millions of people? I don’t see how the fact that they don’t require proof of measles vaccine is in anyway proof that COVID vaccination isn’t in the interest of public health.

osigurdson 5y ago

Think of yourself at the center of a circle with a series of concentric rings. If you are vaccinated with a 90% effective vaccine, your chance of catching the bug is 10% from anyone in the first ring. However, if everyone in the first ring is vaccinated, the chance of catching the bug from anyone in the second ring is only 1% (i.e 0.1*0.1). Thus with enough people vaccinated even a crappy vaccine works pretty well. Perhaps a rather simplistic model, but somewhat illustrative.

throwaway9980 5y ago

The same way that my friend who is vaccinated was infected by his unvaccinated wife. Close quarters with an infected person is going to increase risk for some one who is vaccinated. The Pfizer vaccine is 38% effective [1] at preventing infection on average. It’s obvious that spending 8 hours next to someone who is actively infectious will reduce that efficacy rate. [1] for the Delta variant, which at this point is what matters

imwillofficial 5y ago
What about the vaccinated spreading the disease? https://nypost.com/2021/07/20/white-house-aide-nancy-pelosi-staffer-test-positive-for-covid/ https://nypost.com/2021/07/20/white-house-aide-nancy-pelosi-...
s1artibartfast 5y ago
38% is for the delta variant and a single shot. For the recommended 2 shots, protection from the delta is 88% compared to 93% for the alpha.

Spooky23 5y ago

Vaccination doesn’t mean you cannot be infected, and cannot spread it once infected. It lowers the chances of infection and presentation of symptoms. So when your unvaccinated coworker exercises his selfish right to be stupid, you’re putting others at risk. The difference here is that your exposing your coworkers children and others who cannot be vaccinated to infection. We socially tolerate people like this who choose to infect an entire office or daycare with rhinovirus, flu or the cold, because the impact is generally lower. COVID is different, and frankly, people don’t want to be around unvaccinated people just as they avoid people who display bad judgement in other ways.

ds206 5y ago
What's the point of a right if it can't be exercised?
- belltaco 5y ago
  The company also has the right to fire you.
  - tored 5y ago
    Philosophically or legally? I’m fully aware that US has weak worker laws, but in Europe you can’t fire people based on whim.
    - dekhn 5y ago
      Employees at Google are mostly at-will. Google can fire them any time, although typically, they produce a 6+ month performance record with failure to do job before terminating (mostly to protect against lawsuits). However, Google has terminated people on the spot, with cause. The government will back Google firing people for not being vaccinated.
      - tored 5y ago
        The takeaway is that the general left now is for firing employees for political or medical reasons, when historically they were against. Why that is, at least in Europe, is because the left is no longer majority working class, it is majority middle class.