9 ms·

It’s easy to judge the unvaccinated.

10 points by fspacef 5y ago

toiletaccount 5y ago
Fuck em, don't let them in the hospitals. Some states now go so far as to pay you to get vaccinated but if a drunk driver t-bones me I potentially can't get life saving care? This is below the level of "mentally handicapped". At what point does society stop bending over to accommodate their stupidity? Sorry I'm not too excited about the prospect of investing in their future instead of Johnny-Got-T-Boned.
- brigandish 5y ago
  Would you say the same of an obese person in need of care, or a smoker? What about those who have side effects from a vaccine that need treatment? They chose to take it, they knew there are risks. Perhaps you wouldn't even want to treat pregnant women who chose to put themselves in that position. Hard to tell where your "philosophy" will find a moral balance that is also consistent.
  - toiletaccount 5y ago
    ...and yet ICU beds are filled with the sub-retards who refused vaccines they'd (potentially) be payed to get. None of these other groups are rendering local hospitals useless.
    - brigandish 5y ago
      You're begging the question by assuming the thing you're trying to prove. If a bed is taken up by anyone then it is unavailable to someone else. They only get given out because someone needs it (medically). They are not given out because you deemed certain reasons good reasons and other people cannot have them because you deemed them bad reasons. Those beds are serving a use that is decided by medical need, a reasonably objective standard. As I wrote, I didn't think you could make you statement balance consistency with morality but you've actually gone beyond that by seeming not to care about either.
      - toiletaccount 5y ago
        Gosh I don't know what to tell you other than they're assholes and I don't want to be disadvantaged or inconvenienced in the slightest for their sake. Let's not miss a perfect opportunity for evolution.
        a0-prw 5y ago
        If it's evolution you are looking for, covid would have taken care of things for you: The old, fat and sick are overwhelmingly the ones who die.
  - orwin 5y ago
    > Would you say the same of an obese person in need of care, or a smoker? Playing the devil's advocate here, but yes? Most people who are big on personal responsibility think that anyway. I'm more of a social determinist myself, so i agree with you anyway.
    - brigandish 5y ago
      I'm glad we agree, Devil away! :) Actually, I am one of those personal responsibility types and would advocate for some kind of insurance based system that took into account lifestyle (I don't support either the UK system nor the crazy implementation in the US). I know that's usually painted as every man for themselves but I advocate for it because I think general health would increase as would availability of care. Regardless, whichever system we pick, my ideal or any of the current ones, denying people care based on this ill-considered and heavily politicised public "good" is an anathema to all of them. I don't think these people are biological nor social determinists, they seem more religious, like a puritanical temperance movement or something just as sinister.
- nradov 5y ago
  For US hospitals with emergency rooms, the EMTALA requires them to care for such patients. Denying them care would require a change in federal law. Also note that there's no completely reliable way for a hospital to determine whether a particular patient has been vaccinated. Most states have immunization registries but those aren't updated in real time and data entry errors are common.
Pxtl 5y ago
Clinicians have a moral obligation not to judge their patients' decisions as a standard of the profession, and I respect that. I am not a clinician. Anti-vaxxers can suck it.
- dang 5y ago
  Please stop posting flamewar comments to HN, regardless of how wrong other people are or you feel they are. It's not what this site is for. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
proggy 5y ago
While I understand the purpose of neutrality when administering health care — surgeons must operate on wounded saints and murderers alike — I believe the author fails to make an important distinction. There are choices that have an impact on individuals (or relatively small groups of people), and choices that exponentially affect public health. The one-two punch of choosing to abstain from vaccination and going about daily life unmasked is a terribly irresponsible combination, one that has the potential to kill innocent bystanders by proxy. Perhaps it’s most comparable to driving under the influence or arson, even though the worst case casualty counts of those are still only in the hundreds, while a “Typhoid Mary or Mark” could bring about the demise of untold numbers of vulnerable folks over the full course of time. So yes, if you forgo vaccination and get sick it’s your own fault (consequence of a personal decision), but it also means that you bear some responsibility for every person you have now caused to be infected down the line. Perhaps it isn’t right to judge people for self-inflicted wounds, but I believe it is quite appropriate to judge people for the fire they’ve perpetuated. So while it’s simpler for physicians to just treat everyone and not get bogged down in who caused what — my goodness, how the rest of us should judge and scorn those who made choices that risk the well being of us all.
- brigandish 5y ago
  > Perhaps it’s most comparable to driving under the influence or arson > you bear some responsibility for every person you have now caused to be infected Unless you actively inject virus into someone's bloodstream or something of that ilk, no one is causing - sticking with the tone of mens rea you gave earlier - anyone to be infected. People who show symptoms who interact with others and don't take precautions like wearing a mask are no doubt being irresponsible and worthy of opprobrium but that's it. If you wish to compare it to driving under the influence, it's more like being drunk and those around you deciding to continue in whatever escapade you're engaged in together. If I'm with someone and they start coughing and refuse a mask, I'm going to tell them to put it on and isolate or I'm going to leave. They're not a criminal nor anything like it. > if you forgo vaccination and get sick it’s your own fault Would you say that of the huge numbers of people with comorbidity factors caused by their lifestyle? If just 4/5ths were more disciplined in their daily consumption of calories then we'd highly likely be looking at a very different outcome. They outnumber non-vaccinated by 2 to 1 (though there will no doubt be overlap), does that make them more culpable in your eyes? Edit: removed a rogue asterisk
nradov 5y ago
Shaming people for making unhealthy choices isn't an effective public health measure. It didn't work for the HIV/AIDS pandemic. It won't work now. Let's focus on education instead.
sgammon 5y ago
"I don’t ask “Why?” when a patient with Covid-19 tells me they are unvaccinated for the same reason I don’t ask why someone whose alcohol level is four times the legal limit decided to drive" -- I am judging them but just doing it silently instead of vocally like the rest of you Distinction looking for a difference
- sgammon 5y ago
  To be clear, I am saying he should simply be vocal because social pressure in this case is good and right and healthy

10 points by fspacef 5y ago

Fuck em, don't let them in the hospitals. Some states now go so far as to pay you to get vaccinated but if a drunk driver t-bones me I potentially can't get life saving care? This is below the level of "mentally handicapped". At what point does society stop bending over to accommodate their stupidity? Sorry I'm not too excited about the prospect of investing in their future instead of Johnny-Got-T-Boned.

brigandish 5y ago
Would you say the same of an obese person in need of care, or a smoker? What about those who have side effects from a vaccine that need treatment? They chose to take it, they knew there are risks. Perhaps you wouldn't even want to treat pregnant women who chose to put themselves in that position. Hard to tell where your "philosophy" will find a moral balance that is also consistent.
- toiletaccount 5y ago
  ...and yet ICU beds are filled with the sub-retards who refused vaccines they'd (potentially) be payed to get. None of these other groups are rendering local hospitals useless.
  - brigandish 5y ago
    You're begging the question by assuming the thing you're trying to prove. If a bed is taken up by anyone then it is unavailable to someone else. They only get given out because someone needs it (medically). They are not given out because you deemed certain reasons good reasons and other people cannot have them because you deemed them bad reasons. Those beds are serving a use that is decided by medical need, a reasonably objective standard. As I wrote, I didn't think you could make you statement balance consistency with morality but you've actually gone beyond that by seeming not to care about either.
    - toiletaccount 5y ago
      Gosh I don't know what to tell you other than they're assholes and I don't want to be disadvantaged or inconvenienced in the slightest for their sake. Let's not miss a perfect opportunity for evolution.
      - a0-prw 5y ago
        If it's evolution you are looking for, covid would have taken care of things for you: The old, fat and sick are overwhelmingly the ones who die.
- orwin 5y ago
  > Would you say the same of an obese person in need of care, or a smoker? Playing the devil's advocate here, but yes? Most people who are big on personal responsibility think that anyway. I'm more of a social determinist myself, so i agree with you anyway.
  - brigandish 5y ago
    I'm glad we agree, Devil away! :) Actually, I am one of those personal responsibility types and would advocate for some kind of insurance based system that took into account lifestyle (I don't support either the UK system nor the crazy implementation in the US). I know that's usually painted as every man for themselves but I advocate for it because I think general health would increase as would availability of care. Regardless, whichever system we pick, my ideal or any of the current ones, denying people care based on this ill-considered and heavily politicised public "good" is an anathema to all of them. I don't think these people are biological nor social determinists, they seem more religious, like a puritanical temperance movement or something just as sinister.
nradov 5y ago
For US hospitals with emergency rooms, the EMTALA requires them to care for such patients. Denying them care would require a change in federal law. Also note that there's no completely reliable way for a hospital to determine whether a particular patient has been vaccinated. Most states have immunization registries but those aren't updated in real time and data entry errors are common.

Pxtl 5y ago

Clinicians have a moral obligation not to judge their patients' decisions as a standard of the profession, and I respect that. I am not a clinician. Anti-vaxxers can suck it.

dang 5y ago
Please stop posting flamewar comments to HN, regardless of how wrong other people are or you feel they are. It's not what this site is for. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

proggy 5y ago

While I understand the purpose of neutrality when administering health care — surgeons must operate on wounded saints and murderers alike — I believe the author fails to make an important distinction. There are choices that have an impact on individuals (or relatively small groups of people), and choices that exponentially affect public health. The one-two punch of choosing to abstain from vaccination and going about daily life unmasked is a terribly irresponsible combination, one that has the potential to kill innocent bystanders by proxy. Perhaps it’s most comparable to driving under the influence or arson, even though the worst case casualty counts of those are still only in the hundreds, while a “Typhoid Mary or Mark” could bring about the demise of untold numbers of vulnerable folks over the full course of time. So yes, if you forgo vaccination and get sick it’s your own fault (consequence of a personal decision), but it also means that you bear some responsibility for every person you have now caused to be infected down the line. Perhaps it isn’t right to judge people for self-inflicted wounds, but I believe it is quite appropriate to judge people for the fire they’ve perpetuated. So while it’s simpler for physicians to just treat everyone and not get bogged down in who caused what — my goodness, how the rest of us should judge and scorn those who made choices that risk the well being of us all.

brigandish 5y ago
> Perhaps it’s most comparable to driving under the influence or arson > you bear some responsibility for every person you have now caused to be infected Unless you actively inject virus into someone's bloodstream or something of that ilk, no one is causing - sticking with the tone of mens rea you gave earlier - anyone to be infected. People who show symptoms who interact with others and don't take precautions like wearing a mask are no doubt being irresponsible and worthy of opprobrium but that's it. If you wish to compare it to driving under the influence, it's more like being drunk and those around you deciding to continue in whatever escapade you're engaged in together. If I'm with someone and they start coughing and refuse a mask, I'm going to tell them to put it on and isolate or I'm going to leave. They're not a criminal nor anything like it. > if you forgo vaccination and get sick it’s your own fault Would you say that of the huge numbers of people with comorbidity factors caused by their lifestyle? If just 4/5ths were more disciplined in their daily consumption of calories then we'd highly likely be looking at a very different outcome. They outnumber non-vaccinated by 2 to 1 (though there will no doubt be overlap), does that make them more culpable in your eyes? Edit: removed a rogue asterisk

nradov 5y ago

Shaming people for making unhealthy choices isn't an effective public health measure. It didn't work for the HIV/AIDS pandemic. It won't work now. Let's focus on education instead.

sgammon 5y ago

"I don’t ask “Why?” when a patient with Covid-19 tells me they are unvaccinated for the same reason I don’t ask why someone whose alcohol level is four times the legal limit decided to drive" -- I am judging them but just doing it silently instead of vocally like the rest of you Distinction looking for a difference

sgammon 5y ago
To be clear, I am saying he should simply be vocal because social pressure in this case is good and right and healthy