3 ms·

> And no one is being held down and coerced to receive a shot. This is absolutely garbage reasoning. They're having their livelihoods ripped away. Simply not

• darwinwhy 5y ago
  Funny choice of words when talking about healthcare workers.
• panda-giddiness 5y ago
  Healthcare workers have a duty to their patients. Those patients include the willfully unvaccinated, but they also include immunocompromised individuals who can't mount a robust vaccine response. While that latter class of people might sound like an edge case not worthy of consideration in larger society, it is exactly the sort of edge case that's relevant in a healthcare setting. If a healthcare worker isn't willing to receive a jab that could literally save someone else's life, they're in the wrong field. If they don't believe that vaccines are effective or safe or whatever, they can choose not to vaccinate; but they shouldn't be allowed to force that risk on their patients, especially since a "vaccine-hesistant" position is overwhelming at odds with the medical consensus.
  • TacticalCoder 5y ago
    But that doesn't explain firing all those among those 1400 who tested positive in the past and whom, according to recent studies, are not just a bit but way less likely to spread the Delta variants than those who, like me, got the Pfizer vaccine but never tested positive. I'm vaccinated but this entire witch hunt against unvaccinated people makes me very uneasy.
    • panda-giddiness 5y ago
      > But that doesn't explain firing all those among those 1400 who tested positive in the past Sure, I think that's a valid concern, but it's also shifting the goal posts. You can advocate for that specific subset without advocating for the entire group.