24 ms·

I'm really upset with this decision. I have not gotten the vaccine as I prefer the known, extremely low risk of contacting COVID over the unknown longitudinal r

I'm really upset with this decision. I have not gotten the vaccine as I prefer the known, extremely low risk of contacting COVID over the unknown longitudinal risk of the vaccine. My right to make these personal decisions regarding my bodily autonomy is extremely important to me. Under no circumstances will I yield that decision to my employer! Their demand only further reinforces my desire not to take the vaccine. Which sucks, I like my job.

fruityrudy 5y ago
4 billion people have been vaccinated. Don’t oh think you have your risk numbers wrong? Do you think you are consistent in your risk judgement across all parts of your life? E.g have you ever taken drugs? Illicit or prescription?
blub 5y ago
You can try transferring to an EU office, it's unlikely that they can mandate vaccination there. :-)
- hef19898 5y ago
  I wouldn't bet on it. Which is a good thing if you ask me. Because without mandatory vaccinations we will prolong this shitty thing for another year, this time at the cost of children and people under 16, while we had the elderly taking the brunt of the cost so far. And all that because as a society we came to a point where we refuse to take one for the team. Not to mention we ignore our own personal health.
  - yobbo 5y ago
    Wut? In countries that had lockdowns, children and young adults arguably suffered worse than any other group. For a ten year-old, that's 10% of their life "gone". Children, teens and young adults have foregone life milestones, missed opportunities and friendships. Instead they have been charged with a ridiculous anxiety about something that is harmless to them. It is comparatively inconsequential for the elderly to isolate.
    - hef19898 5y ago
      And which took the biggest losses of life? Funny how children, up to 13 which my oldest age, not really complained that much. Opening everything up now, without a adequate vaccination rate, would just put them at a huge health risk. Right after the social impact they already had. And the social impact, IMHO, affected everyone.
      - Fine-Cut4983 5y ago
        Young children are at greater risk from influenza. Why do you think they have been barely affected by COVID this whole time, but somehow in the future, they will suddenly be the ones dying?
        hef19898 5y ago
        Delta is already worse among younger people. That means younger people, not just children, will be infected and affected more. Having unvaccinated children at school also makes future school closures more likely. We have to reach a point where Covid becomes endemic and we, people, society, are good to love with it. We will reach this point quicker the faster we vaccinate everyone. I guess we can agree school closures are not so good thing, right?
exo-pla-net 5y ago
Do you consider passing your diseases on to others to be among your various prerogatives?
- ReadEvalPost 5y ago
  Of course not. If I am sick I self-isolate.
  - exo-pla-net 5y ago
    And if you're asymptomatic, whoops?
    - Taurenking 5y ago
      The vaccine doesn't prevent you from being asymptomatic, so we're back to square 1 tbh
  - ddvvff 5y ago
    Covid can be asymptomatic, and transmissible, that's the thing. When you realize it's potentially already too late
- yobbo 5y ago
  To be fair, infections after the vaccine are so mild that few people notice them, thus will not isolate. And the effectiveness at preventing transmission drops by something like 10% every month after the vaccination. Maybe this is due to delta-variant increasing? And after delta, there will be epsilon ... and so on. Whatever strains escape the immunity created by the vaccines will be what spread. De facto, vaccinations will not stop the spread and will not stop mutations. But they do prevent serious disease and death.
mjburgess 5y ago
Are you factoring in risk to others? The aggregate risk of a poorly-vaccinated population is, presumably, still likely much higher than the "longitudinal risks" of vaccines? ie., it seems unlikely to me that vaccines will kill 100,000s (and, with covid continuing, 10s,000s+/yr). Even doing this based on individual preference alone, presumably you have preferences for the safety of (some) others; of your workplace; etc.
- ReadEvalPost 5y ago
  Yes, of course I think about others. I would never go in with symptoms of any infectious disease. Were I asked to work in a building away from people that are high-risk or are regularly in contact with high-risk people I would easily oblige. There are multiple possible solutions that do not violate my bodily autonomy. I agree with your assessment that major adverse effects are unlikely, but ultimately unknowns are impossible to quantify. I know the risk of COVID, I do not if I am being prescribed thalidomide.
  - ddvvff 5y ago
    What if you're asymptomatic?
  - Pyramus 5y ago
    How are you so sure you know the risk of Covid, that has both an immediate and longitudinal risk, that will likely increase due to fitness escapes? Let's not forget there are still unknown unknowns regarding the longitudinal risk of Covid.
    - ReadEvalPost 5y ago
      Evolutionary pressure selects for less deadly viruses over time. You're right though, there is still longitudinal risk as this does not preclude a vastly more deadly strain--but at that point the effectiveness of a vaccine is similarly unknown.
      - 5y ago
ddvvff 5y ago
I hope you're also pro-abortion, but somehow I doubt it
- exo-pla-net 5y ago
  Careful to not cause him too much cognitive dissonance. His brain might explode, splashing his proudly unvaccinated SARS-CoV-2 on everyone.
  - calsy 5y ago
    Who nominated you smartest person in the room, yourself?
    - exo-pla-net 5y ago
      I'm still awaiting that nomination, and my cat isn't obliging, but I'm smart enough to smell that I touched a nerve. Are you vaccinated, calsy?
      - calsy 5y ago
        Random people on the net who like to pretend they are smarter than everyone are usually the opposite. You're not that person are you?
        exo-pla-net 5y ago
        You're scared of me, hiding your vaccination status. So I think I'm bigger in your mind than you're pretending. But in case I'm mistaken, and you indeed look down on me, a question naturally arises: is bullying people you deem beneath you a lesson you want to impart to your daughters? Do you want them to hide their opinions and not stand up for what they believe in, like you? Do you want your daughters to be weak like their father? If you kill one of your daughters' relatives, owing to your extremist anti-vaccination stance, do you have a plan in place for how you'll explain it to them? The fact that their daddy has strong libertarian opinions that are worth more to him than the lives of grammy and grandpops? Because that's what it boils down to. You're a disease vector who cares for nobody but himself and his reality-detached ideology. You're a delusional whackjob who believes himself smarter than epidemiologists and medical professionals, when in truth you're capable of little more than throwing together PhP scripts. But what person am I? I'm the person that appears when you threaten the lives of another man's family with your decisions. We'll see how far your libertarian notions take you when push comes to shove.
ano88888 5y ago
Given dang's comment on guideline, I really don't want to comment back . However, I am just feeling so angry. So many people have unnecessarily died because someone has the wrong idea of risk calculation or political bias in disguise despite all the scientific data. I am sorry. You have a right to not be vaccinated. You have a right to whine about it. But government and organizations also have the right from preventing you to harm others. Still find it difficult to understand why are there so many selfish people in the world. I know it is wrong, but secretly I am not sorry about people like you getting infected or hospitalized. The world might be a better place. Sorry Dang, I deserve the downvotes for not following the guideline as this is an emotional response.
- grepfru_it 5y ago
  >I am not sorry about people like you getting infected or hospitalized. I was one of those people this time last year. No one was feeling sorry then either. Don't worry I'll get a booster shot when it is due, but I've done my part. Please don't lump me in with the unvaxxed. EDIT: to be clear, i was just an innocent bystander who caught covid-19 early on while no one could possibly believe i was having the symptoms that we are all so deathly afraid of now. i survived, i have this persistent feeling of weirdness and random twinges of pains, but i survived it without a vaccine. i don't know what a vaccine is going to do for me (at this junction in time, maybe T+12 months will be different lets see what the science says)
  - andrepd 5y ago
    Obviously he was referring to people with the possibility of having the vaccine which deliberately reject it, not people who couldn't have it.
  - f6v 5y ago
    > don't know what a vaccine is going to do for me (at this junction in time, maybe T+12 months will be different lets see what the science says) We do know what a vaccine does, especially in the case of viral vectors(they’ve been around for decades). What specifically seems to be unknown?
tmule 5y ago
In the healthcare field, getting an annual flu shot is typically mandated as a condition for employment. The principle is the same - risk to others is deemed too high. I bet you’d not enjoy being a patient at a hospital where a bunch of staff are carrying diseases while you’re vulnerable … because, let’s face it, it’s bad for patients and therefore bad for business. The same principle is now being extended to other companies and sectors now. I personally wouldn’t want to return to office if colleagues were unvaccinated (I also have a newborn at home). Many of my colleagues wouldn’t either. That would be bad for individuals and therefore bad for business. At least FB and Google have remote employment for the anti-vax crowd.
f6v 5y ago
Man, I work in bioinformatics and study some aspects of the immunity. Like, on a low level, down to specific molecules. Am I qualified to make a decision whether I should get vaccinated? Hell no! We’re talking about public health here, not just yours or mine. Something tells me we should have a bit of trust in people who studied epidemiology and vaccines all their lives. And the consensus in the scientific community is that herd immunity by vaccination is a way to go.
TulliusCicero 5y ago
We've had mandatory vaccinations for public schools for decades, and it's largely a settled issue. This is no different. If people want to put others at risk of harm, employers are under no obligation to indulge them.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- machinelearning 5y ago
  > This is no different. To be fair, it actually is different. The mechanism of action and the EUA timelines are different and unlike most other widely available vaccines. It is ok to disagree on the crux of the argument which is whether taking the vaccine is a net good, but non-factual arguments do not help.
  - TulliusCicero 5y ago
    Obviously some of the details are different, they're different for every contagion, but the principle is the same: the interest in public health overrides the normal interest in preserving individual bodily autonomy, just like with vaccinations and schooling.
    - machinelearning 5y ago
      The details are the important part here. If you understand why people are against the vaccine, it is because they are not convinced that the vaccine results in the greatest public health. Whether this is right or wrong, trying to gloss over the differences in the details doesn't work here since the conflict is at the level of details. And no I don't agree with your point about vaccines being "different for every contagion". That is patently untrue, most vaccines developed in the recent past have either been recombinant, attenuated/inactivated viruses or adenovirus vectored vaccines that have undergone extensive FDA approval by now. This is especially true for the vaccines required for schooling.
      - 5y ago
randomsearch 5y ago
I understand and respect your comments about the relative risk for you personally. That's a personal judgement and your position on that does not seem unreasonable. Vaccination also protects other people by reducing the spread in the population. By not being vaccinated, you will increase the chances of other people being infected. How do you factor the risk to others into your decision?
yosito 5y ago
Honest question: why do you say the risk of COVID is known, while the risks of the vaccines are not? Both have been around and exceptionally well studied for more than a year. We have pretty thorough data on the risks of both, don't we?
- bellyfullofbac 5y ago
  Not OP, but I guess some anti-vaxxers are wary that what if the vaccination has some "time-bomb" where bad things happen say 5 years after you take it. But if they're worried about that, they should also be worried about stuff the virus might do in the long term.
- Cocojumbo 5y ago
  I have to disagree here. I have diabetes and have the two shots already. My wife is pregnant and we decided not to risk it with the shots. Impact on pregnant women and babies is still not known. Some trials have started, but you can't just say it's been exceptionally well studied. Astrazeneca did cause blood clot in some people who ended up dead. Yes, it's a very tiny fraction but this goes against what people are claiming to be the perfect cure. I personally believe people should have the choice to take the shot.
  - ViViDboarder 5y ago
    My wife got the vaccine while pregnant at the advice of her doctors due to the comorbidities associated with contracting COVID while pregnant. Added bonus is that our baby (recently gave birth) has antibodies as well. I do understand that it ought to be a choice, and it still is, even with these companies. It looks like they are carving out polices for exceptions because there are folks that are unable to get vaccinated. I would hope that being in a class of people who haven’t been rigorously tested (pregnant women) would qualify. Beyond that, they aren’t requiring all employees to be vaccinated, but anyone who will be working from an office where they may put other employees at risk. The choice still belongs with the individual.
  - yosito 5y ago
    What exactly do you disagree with? Do you think that a diabetic or pregnant person would fare better with COVID than with the vaccine?
Layke1123 5y ago
What fucking longitudinal risks of the vaccine? Its just the spike protein. What about the longitudinal effects of a novel virus you idiot!?
jsolson 5y ago
> I prefer the known, extremely low risk of contacting COVID I'm a little confused by this. I live in King County, WA (and I work at Google). According to data reported by the county (as tabulated by the NY Times), one in 19 residents have contracted COVID[0]. That's >5% -- with a 1.8% case fatality rate in the US[1]. That's a bit below a one in 1000 chance of having died of COVID if you live in my county, including the infection fraction. If you look a the risk of just contracting it, based on the county, the risk is higher than any other disease I'm aware of. Am I missing something? [0]: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/us/king-washington-covid-cases.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/us/king-washington-... [1]: https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality
- JesseMReeves 5y ago
  Yes, you missed stratifying by age and preexisting conditions and BMI. This data was missing in the beginning, but we have more than the overall mortality rate now. This is indeed relevant for young people, which tech largely consists of. Here is one of many risk calculators, based on UK data: https://qcovid.org/ https://qcovid.org/ Unknown factors for the unvaccinated are the severity of new strains (against which the vaccines may not work well though, see the CureVac trials) and long covid (which does exist but is not well studied yet). Unknown factors for the vaccinated are the potential of the spike protein to create havoc in your vascular system (yet a real infection gives you an uncontrollable large dose of it), and the related anecdata about rare severe vascular side effects. Such unknowns have to be respected when making personal, political and employer decisions. Overconfidence easily slips into failure. People have issues with the related cognitive dissonances and prefer to take and rage defending sides.
- DavidPeiffer 5y ago
  Around 1 in 1000 may have died in King County, however the risk to an individual varies with age and comorbidities. If GP is young, isn't overweight, and doesn't work in close proximity to others, their risk of death is about an order of magnitude lower just by basic social distancing and exposure reduction. [0] shows COVID involved in about 3% of all deaths in the 18-29 group and about 13% in 85+. Personally, I can't imagine the guilt if I knew I caused a close family member or friend to contract COVID, and have remained pretty cautious even after we have all been vaccinated. [0] https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm
_Algernon_ 5y ago
Imagine if we had the echochambers of today around when polio was still running rampant. We would never have gotten it as close to extinction as we have now.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
patrec 5y ago
> I have not gotten the vaccine as I prefer the known, extremely low risk of contacting COVID Your risk of getting Covid if not vaccinated (and leading a remotely normal lifestyle) is close to 100%. With an R0 of 6 you can't just free-ride of people who take the "unknown longitudinal risk", because even if a lot of people take the jab it's extremely unlikely we will achieve herd immunity any time soon -- even if the jabs (or prior infection) granted perfect and permanent immunity which they don't. I'm suprised you think otherwise, and would like to hear your reasoning, in quantitative terms if possible.
- selphy1 5y ago
  Not OP but if he has not gotten it so far with his lifestyle in 16+ months then it could be easy to think you won't get it for another 16+. Other's just don't care, me for example. I lived in a heavily lockdown country and then said fuck it, travelled to somewhere with (near) 0 covid rules and went nightclubbing almost daily till I got it. Wasn't that bad for me. And my preference is to have it again than being coerced into putting something I don't want into my body. If my employer makes that decision for me, then that is fucked up and I am quitting, or better yet, questioning the legality of it.
  - rdaystrom 5y ago
    If an employer mandates it, then the employer is liable for anything bad that happens, the employers don't have immunity like the vaccine manufacturers. This of course assumes that there is rule of law.
  - ViViDboarder 5y ago
    The thing missing from this perspective is the additional people you come in contact with while contagious (potentially while asymptomatic). Saying, “I don’t care if I get sick” ignores the others you may spread the virus to. This is why folks are pointing out the public health aspect as opposed to a focus on individual health.
  - patrec 5y ago
    > it could be easy to think you won't get it for another 16+. And the relevance of 16 months would be? At this point it's pretty much a given that covid will become endemic. Due to general idiocy we've missed our chance of eradication. In the 16 months you cited Covid has become both more virulent and almost twice as infectious. We'd now need around 85% population immunity to stop it from spreading, and the best vaccines only have below 90% effectiveness against symptomatic infection, and less against asymptomatic it seems. And evolution likely still has more low hanging fruit to find to make a virus that only made the jump to humans very recently better adapted to its new host. So even if OP only has a 20% chance of contracting Covid in any one year interval (and it's likely higher), over 10 years that's a 90% chance (and 99.5% over 25). I have no idea what OP's belief that they have a extremely low chance of contracting covid is based on (that's why I asked, but unsurprisingly received no answer).
bawolff 5y ago
And if the risk was only to yourself, by all means that would be reasonable. But it isn't. When we work, we give all sorts of autonomy up. That what work literally is, exchanging some autonomy for some money. Most obviously that means doing parts of the job you don't like (docs aint going to write themselves). Some places it means wearing a tie (eww). My last job made me sign a document saying i agree never to bring a firearm to work. All these things hinder my autonomy. Some may be more aceptable than others (eww dress code. Not interested in wearing a tie. But also wouldn't want to work at a nudist workplace either). In any case, almost every workplace has policies that prevent you from doing things that threaten the safety of other employees or their families. This is hardly much different.
- jdthedisciple 5y ago
  All such bad examples. It's not nearly as intrusive to say you can't bring your firearm or wear a tie. It's literally a momentary thing, now I a wear a tie now I don't. To compare that to forcing somebody into taking a novel vaccine with questionable long- or even short-term health effects is absolutely disingenious and quite cynical to be frank.
  - ViViDboarder 5y ago
    How about comparing it to requiring people to get vaccines? This already happens in schools. When I went to work in a local school district it was required to have a TDAP vaccine.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
lifeformed 5y ago
It's not about you, it's about your community.
cactus2093 5y ago
Maybe this is part of the point? Clearly you have poor decision making skills, if you quit your job you get to make a statement about freedom and the average level of intelligence on your team surely goes up!
CogitoCogito 5y ago
> I have not gotten the vaccine as I prefer the known, extremely low risk of contacting COVID over the unknown longitudinal risk of the vaccine. There's also a longitudinal risk of covid as well. Given that the future is unknown, why would you count that as a reason not to get vaccinated instead as opposed to a reason to get vaccinated? You should really basically be considering the longitudinal risk as neutral since you don't really have any information saying it's issue.

fruityrudy 5y ago

4 billion people have been vaccinated. Don’t oh think you have your risk numbers wrong? Do you think you are consistent in your risk judgement across all parts of your life? E.g have you ever taken drugs? Illicit or prescription?

blub 5y ago

You can try transferring to an EU office, it's unlikely that they can mandate vaccination there. :-)

hef19898 5y ago
I wouldn't bet on it. Which is a good thing if you ask me. Because without mandatory vaccinations we will prolong this shitty thing for another year, this time at the cost of children and people under 16, while we had the elderly taking the brunt of the cost so far. And all that because as a society we came to a point where we refuse to take one for the team. Not to mention we ignore our own personal health.
- yobbo 5y ago
  Wut? In countries that had lockdowns, children and young adults arguably suffered worse than any other group. For a ten year-old, that's 10% of their life "gone". Children, teens and young adults have foregone life milestones, missed opportunities and friendships. Instead they have been charged with a ridiculous anxiety about something that is harmless to them. It is comparatively inconsequential for the elderly to isolate.
  - hef19898 5y ago
    And which took the biggest losses of life? Funny how children, up to 13 which my oldest age, not really complained that much. Opening everything up now, without a adequate vaccination rate, would just put them at a huge health risk. Right after the social impact they already had. And the social impact, IMHO, affected everyone.
    - Fine-Cut4983 5y ago
      Young children are at greater risk from influenza. Why do you think they have been barely affected by COVID this whole time, but somehow in the future, they will suddenly be the ones dying?
      - hef19898 5y ago
        Delta is already worse among younger people. That means younger people, not just children, will be infected and affected more. Having unvaccinated children at school also makes future school closures more likely. We have to reach a point where Covid becomes endemic and we, people, society, are good to love with it. We will reach this point quicker the faster we vaccinate everyone. I guess we can agree school closures are not so good thing, right?

exo-pla-net 5y ago

Do you consider passing your diseases on to others to be among your various prerogatives?

ReadEvalPost 5y ago
Of course not. If I am sick I self-isolate.
- exo-pla-net 5y ago
  And if you're asymptomatic, whoops?
  - Taurenking 5y ago
    The vaccine doesn't prevent you from being asymptomatic, so we're back to square 1 tbh
- ddvvff 5y ago
  Covid can be asymptomatic, and transmissible, that's the thing. When you realize it's potentially already too late
yobbo 5y ago
To be fair, infections after the vaccine are so mild that few people notice them, thus will not isolate. And the effectiveness at preventing transmission drops by something like 10% every month after the vaccination. Maybe this is due to delta-variant increasing? And after delta, there will be epsilon ... and so on. Whatever strains escape the immunity created by the vaccines will be what spread. De facto, vaccinations will not stop the spread and will not stop mutations. But they do prevent serious disease and death.

mjburgess 5y ago

Are you factoring in risk to others? The aggregate risk of a poorly-vaccinated population is, presumably, still likely much higher than the "longitudinal risks" of vaccines? ie., it seems unlikely to me that vaccines will kill 100,000s (and, with covid continuing, 10s,000s+/yr). Even doing this based on individual preference alone, presumably you have preferences for the safety of (some) others; of your workplace; etc.

ReadEvalPost 5y ago
Yes, of course I think about others. I would never go in with symptoms of any infectious disease. Were I asked to work in a building away from people that are high-risk or are regularly in contact with high-risk people I would easily oblige. There are multiple possible solutions that do not violate my bodily autonomy. I agree with your assessment that major adverse effects are unlikely, but ultimately unknowns are impossible to quantify. I know the risk of COVID, I do not if I am being prescribed thalidomide.
- ddvvff 5y ago
  What if you're asymptomatic?
- Pyramus 5y ago
  How are you so sure you know the risk of Covid, that has both an immediate and longitudinal risk, that will likely increase due to fitness escapes? Let's not forget there are still unknown unknowns regarding the longitudinal risk of Covid.
  - ReadEvalPost 5y ago
    Evolutionary pressure selects for less deadly viruses over time. You're right though, there is still longitudinal risk as this does not preclude a vastly more deadly strain--but at that point the effectiveness of a vaccine is similarly unknown.
    - 5y ago

ddvvff 5y ago

I hope you're also pro-abortion, but somehow I doubt it

exo-pla-net 5y ago
Careful to not cause him too much cognitive dissonance. His brain might explode, splashing his proudly unvaccinated SARS-CoV-2 on everyone.
- calsy 5y ago
  Who nominated you smartest person in the room, yourself?
  - exo-pla-net 5y ago
    I'm still awaiting that nomination, and my cat isn't obliging, but I'm smart enough to smell that I touched a nerve. Are you vaccinated, calsy?
    - calsy 5y ago
      Random people on the net who like to pretend they are smarter than everyone are usually the opposite. You're not that person are you?
      - exo-pla-net 5y ago
        You're scared of me, hiding your vaccination status. So I think I'm bigger in your mind than you're pretending. But in case I'm mistaken, and you indeed look down on me, a question naturally arises: is bullying people you deem beneath you a lesson you want to impart to your daughters? Do you want them to hide their opinions and not stand up for what they believe in, like you? Do you want your daughters to be weak like their father? If you kill one of your daughters' relatives, owing to your extremist anti-vaccination stance, do you have a plan in place for how you'll explain it to them? The fact that their daddy has strong libertarian opinions that are worth more to him than the lives of grammy and grandpops? Because that's what it boils down to. You're a disease vector who cares for nobody but himself and his reality-detached ideology. You're a delusional whackjob who believes himself smarter than epidemiologists and medical professionals, when in truth you're capable of little more than throwing together PhP scripts. But what person am I? I'm the person that appears when you threaten the lives of another man's family with your decisions. We'll see how far your libertarian notions take you when push comes to shove.

ano88888 5y ago

Given dang's comment on guideline, I really don't want to comment back . However, I am just feeling so angry. So many people have unnecessarily died because someone has the wrong idea of risk calculation or political bias in disguise despite all the scientific data. I am sorry. You have a right to not be vaccinated. You have a right to whine about it. But government and organizations also have the right from preventing you to harm others. Still find it difficult to understand why are there so many selfish people in the world. I know it is wrong, but secretly I am not sorry about people like you getting infected or hospitalized. The world might be a better place. Sorry Dang, I deserve the downvotes for not following the guideline as this is an emotional response.

grepfru_it 5y ago
>I am not sorry about people like you getting infected or hospitalized. I was one of those people this time last year. No one was feeling sorry then either. Don't worry I'll get a booster shot when it is due, but I've done my part. Please don't lump me in with the unvaxxed. EDIT: to be clear, i was just an innocent bystander who caught covid-19 early on while no one could possibly believe i was having the symptoms that we are all so deathly afraid of now. i survived, i have this persistent feeling of weirdness and random twinges of pains, but i survived it without a vaccine. i don't know what a vaccine is going to do for me (at this junction in time, maybe T+12 months will be different lets see what the science says)
- andrepd 5y ago
  Obviously he was referring to people with the possibility of having the vaccine which deliberately reject it, not people who couldn't have it.
- f6v 5y ago
  > don't know what a vaccine is going to do for me (at this junction in time, maybe T+12 months will be different lets see what the science says) We do know what a vaccine does, especially in the case of viral vectors(they’ve been around for decades). What specifically seems to be unknown?

tmule 5y ago

In the healthcare field, getting an annual flu shot is typically mandated as a condition for employment. The principle is the same - risk to others is deemed too high. I bet you’d not enjoy being a patient at a hospital where a bunch of staff are carrying diseases while you’re vulnerable … because, let’s face it, it’s bad for patients and therefore bad for business. The same principle is now being extended to other companies and sectors now. I personally wouldn’t want to return to office if colleagues were unvaccinated (I also have a newborn at home). Many of my colleagues wouldn’t either. That would be bad for individuals and therefore bad for business. At least FB and Google have remote employment for the anti-vax crowd.

f6v 5y ago

Man, I work in bioinformatics and study some aspects of the immunity. Like, on a low level, down to specific molecules. Am I qualified to make a decision whether I should get vaccinated? Hell no! We’re talking about public health here, not just yours or mine. Something tells me we should have a bit of trust in people who studied epidemiology and vaccines all their lives. And the consensus in the scientific community is that herd immunity by vaccination is a way to go.

TulliusCicero 5y ago

We've had mandatory vaccinations for public schools for decades, and it's largely a settled issue. This is no different. If people want to put others at risk of harm, employers are under no obligation to indulge them.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
machinelearning 5y ago
> This is no different. To be fair, it actually is different. The mechanism of action and the EUA timelines are different and unlike most other widely available vaccines. It is ok to disagree on the crux of the argument which is whether taking the vaccine is a net good, but non-factual arguments do not help.
- TulliusCicero 5y ago
  Obviously some of the details are different, they're different for every contagion, but the principle is the same: the interest in public health overrides the normal interest in preserving individual bodily autonomy, just like with vaccinations and schooling.
  - machinelearning 5y ago
    The details are the important part here. If you understand why people are against the vaccine, it is because they are not convinced that the vaccine results in the greatest public health. Whether this is right or wrong, trying to gloss over the differences in the details doesn't work here since the conflict is at the level of details. And no I don't agree with your point about vaccines being "different for every contagion". That is patently untrue, most vaccines developed in the recent past have either been recombinant, attenuated/inactivated viruses or adenovirus vectored vaccines that have undergone extensive FDA approval by now. This is especially true for the vaccines required for schooling.
    - 5y ago

randomsearch 5y ago

I understand and respect your comments about the relative risk for you personally. That's a personal judgement and your position on that does not seem unreasonable. Vaccination also protects other people by reducing the spread in the population. By not being vaccinated, you will increase the chances of other people being infected. How do you factor the risk to others into your decision?

yosito 5y ago

Honest question: why do you say the risk of COVID is known, while the risks of the vaccines are not? Both have been around and exceptionally well studied for more than a year. We have pretty thorough data on the risks of both, don't we?

bellyfullofbac 5y ago
Not OP, but I guess some anti-vaxxers are wary that what if the vaccination has some "time-bomb" where bad things happen say 5 years after you take it. But if they're worried about that, they should also be worried about stuff the virus might do in the long term.
Cocojumbo 5y ago
I have to disagree here. I have diabetes and have the two shots already. My wife is pregnant and we decided not to risk it with the shots. Impact on pregnant women and babies is still not known. Some trials have started, but you can't just say it's been exceptionally well studied. Astrazeneca did cause blood clot in some people who ended up dead. Yes, it's a very tiny fraction but this goes against what people are claiming to be the perfect cure. I personally believe people should have the choice to take the shot.
- ViViDboarder 5y ago
  My wife got the vaccine while pregnant at the advice of her doctors due to the comorbidities associated with contracting COVID while pregnant. Added bonus is that our baby (recently gave birth) has antibodies as well. I do understand that it ought to be a choice, and it still is, even with these companies. It looks like they are carving out polices for exceptions because there are folks that are unable to get vaccinated. I would hope that being in a class of people who haven’t been rigorously tested (pregnant women) would qualify. Beyond that, they aren’t requiring all employees to be vaccinated, but anyone who will be working from an office where they may put other employees at risk. The choice still belongs with the individual.
- yosito 5y ago
  What exactly do you disagree with? Do you think that a diabetic or pregnant person would fare better with COVID than with the vaccine?

Layke1123 5y ago

What fucking longitudinal risks of the vaccine? Its just the spike protein. What about the longitudinal effects of a novel virus you idiot!?

jsolson 5y ago

> I prefer the known, extremely low risk of contacting COVID I'm a little confused by this. I live in King County, WA (and I work at Google). According to data reported by the county (as tabulated by the NY Times), one in 19 residents have contracted COVID[0]. That's >5% -- with a 1.8% case fatality rate in the US[1]. That's a bit below a one in 1000 chance of having died of COVID if you live in my county, including the infection fraction. If you look a the risk of just contracting it, based on the county, the risk is higher than any other disease I'm aware of. Am I missing something? [0]: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/us/king-washington-covid-cases.html https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/us/king-washington-... [1]: https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality

JesseMReeves 5y ago
Yes, you missed stratifying by age and preexisting conditions and BMI. This data was missing in the beginning, but we have more than the overall mortality rate now. This is indeed relevant for young people, which tech largely consists of. Here is one of many risk calculators, based on UK data: https://qcovid.org/ https://qcovid.org/ Unknown factors for the unvaccinated are the severity of new strains (against which the vaccines may not work well though, see the CureVac trials) and long covid (which does exist but is not well studied yet). Unknown factors for the vaccinated are the potential of the spike protein to create havoc in your vascular system (yet a real infection gives you an uncontrollable large dose of it), and the related anecdata about rare severe vascular side effects. Such unknowns have to be respected when making personal, political and employer decisions. Overconfidence easily slips into failure. People have issues with the related cognitive dissonances and prefer to take and rage defending sides.
DavidPeiffer 5y ago
Around 1 in 1000 may have died in King County, however the risk to an individual varies with age and comorbidities. If GP is young, isn't overweight, and doesn't work in close proximity to others, their risk of death is about an order of magnitude lower just by basic social distancing and exposure reduction. [0] shows COVID involved in about 3% of all deaths in the 18-29 group and about 13% in 85+. Personally, I can't imagine the guilt if I knew I caused a close family member or friend to contract COVID, and have remained pretty cautious even after we have all been vaccinated. [0] https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid_weekly/index.htm

_Algernon_ 5y ago

Imagine if we had the echochambers of today around when polio was still running rampant. We would never have gotten it as close to extinction as we have now.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

patrec 5y ago

> I have not gotten the vaccine as I prefer the known, extremely low risk of contacting COVID Your risk of getting Covid if not vaccinated (and leading a remotely normal lifestyle) is close to 100%. With an R0 of 6 you can't just free-ride of people who take the "unknown longitudinal risk", because even if a lot of people take the jab it's extremely unlikely we will achieve herd immunity any time soon -- even if the jabs (or prior infection) granted perfect and permanent immunity which they don't. I'm suprised you think otherwise, and would like to hear your reasoning, in quantitative terms if possible.

selphy1 5y ago
Not OP but if he has not gotten it so far with his lifestyle in 16+ months then it could be easy to think you won't get it for another 16+. Other's just don't care, me for example. I lived in a heavily lockdown country and then said fuck it, travelled to somewhere with (near) 0 covid rules and went nightclubbing almost daily till I got it. Wasn't that bad for me. And my preference is to have it again than being coerced into putting something I don't want into my body. If my employer makes that decision for me, then that is fucked up and I am quitting, or better yet, questioning the legality of it.
- rdaystrom 5y ago
  If an employer mandates it, then the employer is liable for anything bad that happens, the employers don't have immunity like the vaccine manufacturers. This of course assumes that there is rule of law.
- ViViDboarder 5y ago
  The thing missing from this perspective is the additional people you come in contact with while contagious (potentially while asymptomatic). Saying, “I don’t care if I get sick” ignores the others you may spread the virus to. This is why folks are pointing out the public health aspect as opposed to a focus on individual health.
- patrec 5y ago
  > it could be easy to think you won't get it for another 16+. And the relevance of 16 months would be? At this point it's pretty much a given that covid will become endemic. Due to general idiocy we've missed our chance of eradication. In the 16 months you cited Covid has become both more virulent and almost twice as infectious. We'd now need around 85% population immunity to stop it from spreading, and the best vaccines only have below 90% effectiveness against symptomatic infection, and less against asymptomatic it seems. And evolution likely still has more low hanging fruit to find to make a virus that only made the jump to humans very recently better adapted to its new host. So even if OP only has a 20% chance of contracting Covid in any one year interval (and it's likely higher), over 10 years that's a 90% chance (and 99.5% over 25). I have no idea what OP's belief that they have a extremely low chance of contracting covid is based on (that's why I asked, but unsurprisingly received no answer).

bawolff 5y ago

And if the risk was only to yourself, by all means that would be reasonable. But it isn't. When we work, we give all sorts of autonomy up. That what work literally is, exchanging some autonomy for some money. Most obviously that means doing parts of the job you don't like (docs aint going to write themselves). Some places it means wearing a tie (eww). My last job made me sign a document saying i agree never to bring a firearm to work. All these things hinder my autonomy. Some may be more aceptable than others (eww dress code. Not interested in wearing a tie. But also wouldn't want to work at a nudist workplace either). In any case, almost every workplace has policies that prevent you from doing things that threaten the safety of other employees or their families. This is hardly much different.

jdthedisciple 5y ago
All such bad examples. It's not nearly as intrusive to say you can't bring your firearm or wear a tie. It's literally a momentary thing, now I a wear a tie now I don't. To compare that to forcing somebody into taking a novel vaccine with questionable long- or even short-term health effects is absolutely disingenious and quite cynical to be frank.
- ViViDboarder 5y ago
  How about comparing it to requiring people to get vaccines? This already happens in schools. When I went to work in a local school district it was required to have a TDAP vaccine.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]

lifeformed 5y ago

It's not about you, it's about your community.

cactus2093 5y ago

Maybe this is part of the point? Clearly you have poor decision making skills, if you quit your job you get to make a statement about freedom and the average level of intelligence on your team surely goes up!

CogitoCogito 5y ago

> I have not gotten the vaccine as I prefer the known, extremely low risk of contacting COVID over the unknown longitudinal risk of the vaccine. There's also a longitudinal risk of covid as well. Given that the future is unknown, why would you count that as a reason not to get vaccinated instead as opposed to a reason to get vaccinated? You should really basically be considering the longitudinal risk as neutral since you don't really have any information saying it's issue.