4 ms·

How so?

chitowneats 5y ago
I'm prepared for the deluge of down votes. https://www.aclu.org/news/civil-liberties/civil-liberties-and-vaccine-mandates-heres-our-take/ https://www.aclu.org/news/civil-liberties/civil-liberties-an... There is no world in which a mandate for all citizens 12 and older to have a particular medical treatment, otherwise be barred from public life, is about "civil liberties". It's such a contortion.
brandmeyer 5y ago
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/06/us/aclu-free-speech.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/06/us/aclu-free-speech.html HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27414920 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27414920 There are numerous articles that discuss this article in turn. The short version: Many current members of the ACLU are advocating to take up progressively-aligned cases specifically instead of civil liberties causes generally.
- q1w2 5y ago
  It's pretty iconic of the modern far-left movement. They really do earn the term "regressive".
yunohn 5y ago
In response to the flagged comment below yours: > a particular medical treatment What a /contortion/ to avoid saying “vaccine”. In the context of this thread and your comment about medical treatments - immigrants from developing countries to the USA and various other Western countries, need to prove that they’ve gotten a litany of vaccinations. This COVID mandate is actually quite mild compared to this historical policy.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- chitowneats 5y ago
  The real contortion is describing mRNA gene therapy, that is non-sterilizing, and requires frequent boosters, as a "vaccine". Can you think of any other vaccine you have taken that works like this? Of course, this is novel tech. So perhaps we should expect a few differences. But typically HN is more appropriately skeptical of such innovations and would not cheer on government mandates that require them for 12 year olds immediately after FDA emergency authorization ends.
  - skuhn 5y ago
    You are spreading misinformation. mRNA vaccines are not gene therapy. They do not alter DNA. https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-covid-mrna-gene/fact-check-mrna-vaccines-are-distinct-from-gene-therapy-which-alters-recipients-genes-idUSL1N2PH16N https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-covid-mrna-gene/fa... https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20210719/covid-19-vaccines-not-gene-therapy https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20210719/covid-19-vaccines-n... https://www.genomicseducation.hee.nhs.uk/blog/why-mrna-vaccines-arent-gene-therapies/ https://www.genomicseducation.hee.nhs.uk/blog/why-mrna-vacci...
  - danShumway 5y ago
    The characterization of mRNA as "gene therapy" is really a master-stroke of propaganda from the anti-vax movement considering that mRNA vaccines never enter the cell nucleus and that they replace the traditional vaccine technique of literally inserting viruses into your body -- you know, the things that specialize in attacking and rewiring your cells. mRNA technology isn't new, but even if it was, it's still wild to claim that a delivery mechanism that's less invasive than traditional vaccine techniques is somehow magically more dangerous. Also, tons of existing vaccines require boosters, and not all vaccines produce sterilizing immunity -- the COVID vaccines are not unique in that regard.
    - chitowneats 5y ago
      Asserting that "mRNA technology isn't new" is a master-stroke of propaganda from Pfizer lobbyists who know damn well we have no idea what the effects of this will be, long-term, on the general population, and particularly on 12 year old children. We are implementing this at scale without a placebo group, consequences be damned. The placebo group from the trials was vaccinated long ago, in early winter 2020, well before the usual schedule that is typically deemed acceptable. Studies looking into well-documented severe side effects, such as myocarditis and pericarditis (that we did not know about when we started vaccinating in winter 2020), as well as a litany of menstrual issues for women, have been given 5+ year runways while we all act as test subjects. For individuals who are at-risk for COVID-19 (a small minority of the population), these vaccines make a lot of sense. For the rest of us the jury is still out and it's extremely dispiriting to see intelligent people neglect the (frankly terrifying) history of overzealous American pharmaceutical intervention and experimentation. On the subject of boosters, it's quite disingenuous to compare the tetanus booster shot that you need once a decade, to a treatment you need 2-3 times per year, as is currently case with the available mRNA covid vaccines. Then again, tetanus is not a viral infection. I'm having trouble finding a single instance of viral vaccine that requires regular boosters. I certainly have never received any. And have never had any recommended by my doctor, nor was I required to have any to work, participate in public life, fly on an airplane, etc, in my adult life. Edit: heading to bed soon and rate limited so responding to yunohn below: 1) Clearly you have not looked at the statistics for age-stratified IFR. We have had restrictions that some think have protected them from infection but that is largely irrelevant. 30% of the population was never able to lock down because they were providing medical care, keeping the electricity running, etc, and we know from these individuals that people under 65, without complications like severe obesity or diabetes, are extremely unlikely to have severe or life threatening covid cases. 2) Yes I have heard of the flu shot. Every year they come up with a new formulation that targets the viral mutation that they predict has happened over the past year. Are you under the false impression that covid boosters have been modified for the delta or mu variants? They have not. Israel is re-vaccinating its entire population with the exact same Pfizer vaccine it started with last winter. This is an apples to oranges comparison you're making. One that does not bode well for the long term effectiveness of the shots we all received in April.

How so?

I'm prepared for the deluge of down votes. https://www.aclu.org/news/civil-liberties/civil-liberties-and-vaccine-mandates-heres-our-take/ https://www.aclu.org/news/civil-liberties/civil-liberties-an... There is no world in which a mandate for all citizens 12 and older to have a particular medical treatment, otherwise be barred from public life, is about "civil liberties". It's such a contortion.

brandmeyer 5y ago

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/06/us/aclu-free-speech.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/06/us/aclu-free-speech.html HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27414920 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27414920 There are numerous articles that discuss this article in turn. The short version: Many current members of the ACLU are advocating to take up progressively-aligned cases specifically instead of civil liberties causes generally.

q1w2 5y ago
It's pretty iconic of the modern far-left movement. They really do earn the term "regressive".

yunohn 5y ago

In response to the flagged comment below yours: > a particular medical treatment What a /contortion/ to avoid saying “vaccine”. In the context of this thread and your comment about medical treatments - immigrants from developing countries to the USA and various other Western countries, need to prove that they’ve gotten a litany of vaccinations. This COVID mandate is actually quite mild compared to this historical policy.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
chitowneats 5y ago
The real contortion is describing mRNA gene therapy, that is non-sterilizing, and requires frequent boosters, as a "vaccine". Can you think of any other vaccine you have taken that works like this? Of course, this is novel tech. So perhaps we should expect a few differences. But typically HN is more appropriately skeptical of such innovations and would not cheer on government mandates that require them for 12 year olds immediately after FDA emergency authorization ends.
- skuhn 5y ago
  You are spreading misinformation. mRNA vaccines are not gene therapy. They do not alter DNA. https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-covid-mrna-gene/fact-check-mrna-vaccines-are-distinct-from-gene-therapy-which-alters-recipients-genes-idUSL1N2PH16N https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-covid-mrna-gene/fa... https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20210719/covid-19-vaccines-not-gene-therapy https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20210719/covid-19-vaccines-n... https://www.genomicseducation.hee.nhs.uk/blog/why-mrna-vaccines-arent-gene-therapies/ https://www.genomicseducation.hee.nhs.uk/blog/why-mrna-vacci...
- danShumway 5y ago
  The characterization of mRNA as "gene therapy" is really a master-stroke of propaganda from the anti-vax movement considering that mRNA vaccines never enter the cell nucleus and that they replace the traditional vaccine technique of literally inserting viruses into your body -- you know, the things that specialize in attacking and rewiring your cells. mRNA technology isn't new, but even if it was, it's still wild to claim that a delivery mechanism that's less invasive than traditional vaccine techniques is somehow magically more dangerous. Also, tons of existing vaccines require boosters, and not all vaccines produce sterilizing immunity -- the COVID vaccines are not unique in that regard.
  - chitowneats 5y ago
    Asserting that "mRNA technology isn't new" is a master-stroke of propaganda from Pfizer lobbyists who know damn well we have no idea what the effects of this will be, long-term, on the general population, and particularly on 12 year old children. We are implementing this at scale without a placebo group, consequences be damned. The placebo group from the trials was vaccinated long ago, in early winter 2020, well before the usual schedule that is typically deemed acceptable. Studies looking into well-documented severe side effects, such as myocarditis and pericarditis (that we did not know about when we started vaccinating in winter 2020), as well as a litany of menstrual issues for women, have been given 5+ year runways while we all act as test subjects. For individuals who are at-risk for COVID-19 (a small minority of the population), these vaccines make a lot of sense. For the rest of us the jury is still out and it's extremely dispiriting to see intelligent people neglect the (frankly terrifying) history of overzealous American pharmaceutical intervention and experimentation. On the subject of boosters, it's quite disingenuous to compare the tetanus booster shot that you need once a decade, to a treatment you need 2-3 times per year, as is currently case with the available mRNA covid vaccines. Then again, tetanus is not a viral infection. I'm having trouble finding a single instance of viral vaccine that requires regular boosters. I certainly have never received any. And have never had any recommended by my doctor, nor was I required to have any to work, participate in public life, fly on an airplane, etc, in my adult life. Edit: heading to bed soon and rate limited so responding to yunohn below: 1) Clearly you have not looked at the statistics for age-stratified IFR. We have had restrictions that some think have protected them from infection but that is largely irrelevant. 30% of the population was never able to lock down because they were providing medical care, keeping the electricity running, etc, and we know from these individuals that people under 65, without complications like severe obesity or diabetes, are extremely unlikely to have severe or life threatening covid cases. 2) Yes I have heard of the flu shot. Every year they come up with a new formulation that targets the viral mutation that they predict has happened over the past year. Are you under the false impression that covid boosters have been modified for the delta or mu variants? They have not. Israel is re-vaccinating its entire population with the exact same Pfizer vaccine it started with last winter. This is an apples to oranges comparison you're making. One that does not bode well for the long term effectiveness of the shots we all received in April.