4 ms·

1. Vaccine mandates ignore the science by not recognizing people with naturally acquired immunity to Covid. 2. They ignore the science by not recognizing that

1. Vaccine mandates ignore the science by not recognizing people with naturally acquired immunity to Covid. 2. They ignore the science by not recognizing that the vaccinated also transmit Covid. 3. They are unjust because they do not recognize some people declined the second Covid shot after a bad reaction to the first and are therefore considered unvaccinated.

spaceisballer 5y ago
The jury is still out on natural immunity to COVID and how well it protects individuals. There’s lots of variability (same with vaccine immunity). The data are showing that if you had COVID and also got the vaccine you have robust protection. As to point two, the mandates aren’t about not spreading it, it’s about reducing severity and death. I guess because vaccinated or unvaccinated can spread it we throw up our arms? The mandates are that it makes us all safer (including mostly yourself). As to point three medical exemptions exist so not sure what you are going on about especially when you are talking about a very small number of adverse reactions.
Latty 5y ago
1) Why does that ignore the science? The evidence I see is that studies are ongoing but generally show no harm from vaccinating those people, and increased protection. If studies show otherwise, then policy makers should change the mandates, not an inherent issue with the core concept. 2) This point makes no sense. Yes, of course they can, but at hugely reduced rates. Something not being perfect doesn't mean it isn't valuable or necessary. Seatbelts are not perfect, but they are mandatory because they save lives. 3) If someone has a medical issue with the vaccine, they are exempt from every mandate I have ever seen. If that is not the case, then change the mandate. It's not an inherent issue with the concept. They are the very people who most need mandates, as the people who cannot have it themselves need as many others to be vaccinated as possible.
- pbaka 5y ago
  1) Mostly agree, except the risk reward balance is slightly reversed the other way, even though both are small values. As such, it's true that it's more a question of principle than of medicine. 2) Not that reduced. Effectiveness is down to around 40-55% after a couple of months, as you can read in the latest peer-reviewed studies from last week in Nature [1], The Lancet[2] and by the ongoing statistic report of the Imperial College in London [3] on request of the UK govt. There are plenty others publications older by a month or three who show the same from the UK, France, China and Israel. 3) Whether you are in the UK, US, Israel, France, and a lot of other places, 93-97% of >50y.o. are already fully vaccinated. They are the most at risk. As for the current state of mandates, YMMV depending on where you live. To change them ?? You might have not noticed, but people requesting changes in the mandate are considered just shy of domestic terrorist plague rats of late... [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02689-y https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02689-y and the linked publication [2] https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02183-8 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02183-8 [3] https://spiral.imperial.ac.uk/handle/10044/1/90800 https://spiral.imperial.ac.uk/handle/10044/1/90800
m-p-3 5y ago
1. Not true, my mother-in-law, who works in healthcare, caught COVID early during the pandemic, and received a positive test. The vaccine mandate recognizes that and her vaccine passport consider her adequately vaccinated with a single dose. https://www.quebec.ca/en/health/health-issues/a-z/2019-coronavirus/progress-of-the-covid-19-vaccination/covid-19-vaccination-passport#c110886 https://www.quebec.ca/en/health/health-issues/a-z/2019-coron... "you received a first dose of a COVID-19 vaccine (Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, or Covishield) at least 21 days after contracting COVID-19 (confirmed by a nucleic acid amplification test) and it has been at least 7 days since you received this dose;" 2. The jury is still arguing this one, but another aspect is that the more people who gets vaccinated, the lesser they risk going into the ICU and overloading the healthcare system. 3. There's a reason why they ask you to stay after getting the vaccine, to take you in charge of a medical emergency in case of an adverse reaction. That applies with any other vaccine, and if the first reaction is severe enough (according to a professional), they'll receive a proper exemption.

spaceisballer 5y ago

The jury is still out on natural immunity to COVID and how well it protects individuals. There’s lots of variability (same with vaccine immunity). The data are showing that if you had COVID and also got the vaccine you have robust protection. As to point two, the mandates aren’t about not spreading it, it’s about reducing severity and death. I guess because vaccinated or unvaccinated can spread it we throw up our arms? The mandates are that it makes us all safer (including mostly yourself). As to point three medical exemptions exist so not sure what you are going on about especially when you are talking about a very small number of adverse reactions.

Latty 5y ago

1) Why does that ignore the science? The evidence I see is that studies are ongoing but generally show no harm from vaccinating those people, and increased protection. If studies show otherwise, then policy makers should change the mandates, not an inherent issue with the core concept. 2) This point makes no sense. Yes, of course they can, but at hugely reduced rates. Something not being perfect doesn't mean it isn't valuable or necessary. Seatbelts are not perfect, but they are mandatory because they save lives. 3) If someone has a medical issue with the vaccine, they are exempt from every mandate I have ever seen. If that is not the case, then change the mandate. It's not an inherent issue with the concept. They are the very people who most need mandates, as the people who cannot have it themselves need as many others to be vaccinated as possible.

pbaka 5y ago
1) Mostly agree, except the risk reward balance is slightly reversed the other way, even though both are small values. As such, it's true that it's more a question of principle than of medicine. 2) Not that reduced. Effectiveness is down to around 40-55% after a couple of months, as you can read in the latest peer-reviewed studies from last week in Nature [1], The Lancet[2] and by the ongoing statistic report of the Imperial College in London [3] on request of the UK govt. There are plenty others publications older by a month or three who show the same from the UK, France, China and Israel. 3) Whether you are in the UK, US, Israel, France, and a lot of other places, 93-97% of >50y.o. are already fully vaccinated. They are the most at risk. As for the current state of mandates, YMMV depending on where you live. To change them ?? You might have not noticed, but people requesting changes in the mandate are considered just shy of domestic terrorist plague rats of late... [1] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02689-y https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02689-y and the linked publication [2] https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02183-8 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(21)02183-8 [3] https://spiral.imperial.ac.uk/handle/10044/1/90800 https://spiral.imperial.ac.uk/handle/10044/1/90800

m-p-3 5y ago

1. Not true, my mother-in-law, who works in healthcare, caught COVID early during the pandemic, and received a positive test. The vaccine mandate recognizes that and her vaccine passport consider her adequately vaccinated with a single dose. https://www.quebec.ca/en/health/health-issues/a-z/2019-coronavirus/progress-of-the-covid-19-vaccination/covid-19-vaccination-passport#c110886 https://www.quebec.ca/en/health/health-issues/a-z/2019-coron... "you received a first dose of a COVID-19 vaccine (Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, or Covishield) at least 21 days after contracting COVID-19 (confirmed by a nucleic acid amplification test) and it has been at least 7 days since you received this dose;" 2. The jury is still arguing this one, but another aspect is that the more people who gets vaccinated, the lesser they risk going into the ICU and overloading the healthcare system. 3. There's a reason why they ask you to stay after getting the vaccine, to take you in charge of a medical emergency in case of an adverse reaction. That applies with any other vaccine, and if the first reaction is severe enough (according to a professional), they'll receive a proper exemption.