22 ms·

I find it ironic that there are plenty comments that paint the picture of how mandatory vaccinations divide the country. Hello? Have you been awake for the las

I find it ironic that there are plenty comments that paint the picture of how mandatory vaccinations divide the country. Hello? Have you been awake for the last month? How much more divided can a country already be when the absolute democratic majority has made their decision months ago to take the shot but 30% are holding everyone back. Anyone in my family or from my friends that has taken one for the team (and got vaccinated) could receive worse-than-usual ICU treatment because of some egoistic anti-vaxxers. Hell, even anti-vaxxers benefit from better ICU treatment if vaccination numbers are higher. Yes, this is a democracy and so it can also be deemed legitimate and representative to govern according to the majority decision. Besides, it's in everyone's best interest to get vaccinated.

throwaway12409 5y ago
> it's in everyone's best interest to get vaccinated. Except the few who die from it. About ~20 per million will die after having the vaccine (although there are not exact numbers on whether vaccine was the cause). There are lots of well-documented cases.
worik 5y ago
I agree that everybody should get vaccinated. Let's make this virus extinct. But what you describe is majoritarianism. It is a form of democracy but a very weak form. For a lot of people, who are from minority groups, it is indistinguishable from totalitarianism. Why do 30% of people refuse to get vaccinated? (here in Aotearoa it is 5%). Something is happening, people are getting left behind, in vast numbers. Forcing them to comply is probably a cure worse than the disease - even a disease like COVID
- prohobo 5y ago
  You cannot make this virus extinct. These vaccines do not accomplish this goal, the end.
  - Swenrekcah 5y ago
    The goal is to keep serious cases to a minimum so they don’t clog the healthcare system thus making people die of all sorts of other things because they couldn’t be treated. Vaccines do help with that, tremendously.
    - prohobo 5y ago
      Do they? Can you prove that, or are you just saying random shit everyone else says? This was not the narrative at the beginning of the vaccine rollout, by the way. The narrative changed every month towards what you're currently saying. From what I've heard, thousands of people have been losing out on proper healthcare because of governments blocking their access; I'm talking people who should have had cancer screenings not getting them and dying because they were coerced into "lowering the strain on healthcare services". I also heard that thousands of healthcare workers have been getting fired, and ICU beds removed because of governments deciding they weren't heroic enough, and not fit for treating patients. Who are you trying to protect exactly?
      - Swenrekcah 5y ago
        You can look up all the statistics on vaccine effectiveness against serious cases. They work really well for that. They don’t work as well as first hoped against infection but data on third booster suggests better results on that front. Look it up instead of asking me for proof, while you yourself are restating hearsay originating from who knows where.
        prohobo 5y ago
        I asked if you can prove that they stop hospitals from being overwhelmed, not whether they were effective. So far it's not looking very good, is that why you support the decision to mandate the shots?
        Swenrekcah 5y ago
        I'm not sure I support a vaccine mandate. I'm just saying that the vaccines work and it's foolish to claim otherwise. I can understand hesitation to get vaccinated, but I'd like to ask those same people if they take any other medicine at all and if they have read the pamphlet that comes with those. Also I'd like to ask if they are fine with getting a completely alien and known harmful substance into their body, the substance we call Coronavirus.
- timdaub 5y ago
  No, it's not totalitarian. In Germany we have a constitution that protects all human's right equally. If there's good reasons why you can't receive a vaccination, I'm pretty sure nobody can force you. Not even the state. Go to your doctor to get an attest that exempts you from the mandatory vaccination. Nothing easier than that in Germany. And again: You are just speculating. Nobody knows if a vaccine mandate leaves people behind it tropes. You cannot know it, because it hasn't happened. I'd rather make decisions based on facts than just speculating about hypotheticals.
  - dane-pgp 5y ago
    > In Germany we have a constitution that protects all human's right equally. If Germany's constitution allows vaccine mandates, then your insistence that it protects all human's rights will be of little comfort to the people who are forced to take the vaccination without their consent and in violation of their conscience. At best you are saying "Having control over what medical treatments are done to you is not a human right", and at worst you are saying "Antivaxers aren't human". Either way, you are putting too much trust in a system that claims to protect human rights, and totalitarians generally manage to find a way to twist the law to justify what they are doing, whether the excuse is "military necessity", "medical necessity", or something else.
    - Pyramus 5y ago
      > the people who are forced to take the vaccination without their consent and in violation of their conscience. Your imagination got the better of you here - nobody will be forced to vaccinate, especially not without their consent. Similar to how nobody comes to your car and forces you to wear a seatbelt. Germany's constitution is quite clear about this, for apparent, historic reasons.
      - baggy_trough 5y ago
        You won't be physically forced to, but you also won't be allowed to do most of the things we normally consider that people have a right to do unless you comply. That's really a non physical way of forcing compliance (like saying I'll fire you from your job unless you agree).
- Pyramus 5y ago
  > Why do 30% of people refuse to get vaccinated? (here in Aotearoa it is 5%). Something is happening, people are getting left behind, in vast numbers. It's an interesting question and there is lots of debate in Germany at the moment as to why. Some factors are: * Germany did very well during the pandemic so people didn't experience a Bergamo or Madrid moment * Germany has a strong esoteric / anthroposophical movement (Steiner, Waldorf et al.) * Federalism: Vaccination rates vary a lot by state
  - native_samples 5y ago
    None of those are the right answer. These are the answers people come up with having never talked to anyone who disagrees. The right answers are: 1. They don't trust the medical authorities to be honest about the risks. 2. They don't feel a need for it because they're at low risk of COVID and know it. 3. They don't believe it will change anything.
    - Pyramus 5y ago
      > The right answers The right answers, but for the wrong question ;) Not disagreeing with you, but parent was asking why is Germany so bad relative to their European peers.
      - worik 5y ago
        Pacific peers actually!-)
    - jseban 5y ago
      And 1. The recommendation to take the vaccine goes exactly against anything the doctors said pre-covid. Before covid, nobody would recommend you to take a vaccine against something you are not in a risk group for, and double doses and boosters were unheard of. This makes me suspicious, and I don't think that is unreasonable. 2. You get really sick from the second dose of the vaccine, which also is not normal, you are not supposed to get sick from vaccines, you are supposed to take them to avoid getting sick So the whole vaccination situation is something that's new and confusing, why do what my doctor always said to not do? Why get sick from vaccines, aren't they supposed to stop you from getting sick? Why double and triple vaccines?
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- gojomo 5y ago
  Vaccinations are too leaky to "make this virus extinct". Within a few months of vaccination, half or more of people can get mild, but still transmissable, cases of Delta. (Omicron is likely worse; there are already multiple reports of mild cases among those with recent 3rd booster shots.) Honest epidemiologists have been warning about this risk since 2020, and more forcefully when confirmed by early vax results in 2021. But many people are still on the warpath against the unvaxed, as if that can make a difference. Well, it can for the unvaxed themselves – winning them a less-severe case. But every vaxed person is going to be exposed to, and have mild cases of, COVID – via waning immunity & multiplying variants. There is no net increase in protection from harassing the last ~15% (a more honest count of hardcore holdouts) into a vax they don't want. (Most of them have probably had COVID already, or soon will, giving them an immunity just as good as vaccination.)
  - omegaworks 5y ago
    >Most of them have probably had COVID already, or soon will, giving them an immunity just as good as vaccination. Immunity from prior-infection was worse than vaccination at protecting people from Delta.[1] 1. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-briefs/vaccine-induced-immunity.html#anchor_1635546906501 https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-br...
    - switch007 5y ago
      By how much? It's really disingenuous to say "more" or "less" or "better" or "worse" without qualification.
    - s1artibartfast 5y ago
      Source? The papers I have seen show the exact opposite!
      - bovid19 5y ago
        Would you mind sharing which papers you are talking about?
      - 5y ago
- throwawaysea 5y ago
  It's a tyranny of the majority: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority I simply don't understand why one person needs to undergo a medical procedure to enable someone else to experience the safe conditions they want. These vaccines don't even grant immunity in the traditional sense (see CDC's revision of definitions here) - all the vaccines do is move things from one nonzero probability of risk to another nonzero probability of risk. If people are SO worried about their health, they need to behave honestly and either quarantine themselves or wear a full body protective hazmat suit everywhere. But requiring others to get a vaccine to attain some arbitrary risk ratio just doesn't make sense.
  - jseban 5y ago
    > I simply don't understand why one person needs to undergo a medical procedure to enable someone else to experience the safe conditions they want. Me neither, I think it's completely unreasonable.
    - rbanffy 5y ago
      I think it’s completely unreasonable that people complain about an explosives factory next to a school. The risk of explosion is very low and the economic impact on the company would be devastating. Why do people think their right to be a little more safer trumps the right to manufacture high explosives?
      - jseban 5y ago
        I don't see how that's an accurate comparison at all. It doesn't require people to undergo medical procedures, doesn't violate their right to their own bodies or their basic freedom
        rbanffy 5y ago
        It’s about the right to expose others to a risk without their consent. You don’t have the right to expose others to a deadly disease. If you undergo the “medical procedure” (an injection, not surgery, brain transplant or anything complicated, expensive or risky) you reduce risks for you and others, as well as you avoid the risk of using my taxes to pay for additional medical care you wouldn’t need if you just had the very minor inconvenience of two injections.
- dhosek 5y ago
  In the US, it's because a bunch of demagogues have decided that they will make a lot of money (or retain political power) by saying that vaccines don't work and/or are harmful. Fox News regularly spews this kind of nonsense in its programming and a number of Republican politicians are happy to go along with it.
  - rbanffy 5y ago
    We should remember that the freedom of the press exists because a well informed population is necessary for a functioning democracy. The moment the press starts spreading disinformation, it starts to be detrimental to democracy and should be treated as that.
    - Eelongate 5y ago
      > We should remember that the freedom of the press exists because a well informed population is necessary for a functioning democracy. The text of the First Amendment does not contain this or any other justification for itself. And rightfully so I think; such a right does not require utilitarian justification. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
- EricE 5y ago
  > Let's make this virus extinct. Here's the core problem - unrealistic expectations. Even the CDC has backed off from the whole "make the virus extinct" mantra; they haven't spouted it for over a year now. Which is a good thing - it was utterly ridiculous from day one. This virus isn't going away. It is carried by animals. You going to vaccinate every animal that we all come in contact with? Ha! You are not going to shelter in place or vaccinate away this virus. We had better figure out how to coexist with it in a rational and reasonable manner. The good news with the Omicron variant there are no reported hospitalizations in South Africa. So it's more virulent, but less bad. Here is the perfect path to herd immunity - a variant that people can get a mild infection from and have stronger natural immunity to than the vax would give, as well as broader protection to variants. Actually any protection to variants would be an improvement over the current vax - there has be zero confirmation from the CDC or vax makers that the vax provides any protection against Delta, let alone Omicron. All they make are vague promises about it reducing the reaction. Big deal! If the reporting by South African doctors is correct and Omicron is as mild as they have seen then what exactly is the vax doing? Nothing - except exposing you needlessly to potential side effects. BTW that Omicron is more virulent but less bad is totally unsurprising to anyone familiar with viruses and who wasn't politically motivated or shamed to pushing the ridiculous narratives around COVID right now; this is totally expected behavior as viruses mature in the wild and was predicted by many virologists last year. Virologists who were then quickly derided as quacks, truthers and worse since they dared to challenge the widely accepted groupthink. Same crap that happened with the lab leak, changing stances on masks, ignoring of massive spike in reports in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) and more - hot takes that turned out to be VERY wrong later but amazingly the corrections never get the same amount of publicity as the initial propaganda.
  - somewhereoutth 5y ago
    > no reported hospitalisations There are lots of hospitalisations, they are ramping up drastically. See SA regional hospital data. > totally unsurprising to anyone familiar with viruses Actually no human virus has ever evolved through selection pressure to become less virulent. This is just a (convenient to the deniers) myth. Lab leak is just as fanciful as it has ever been, masking advice was updated as soon as we knew better, vaccines have been proven very safe. I am going to accept that you are commenting in good faith. I would ask you to consider your sources, your influences, and the ever rising toll of sickness and death caused not least by the kind of misinformation you are propagating.
- lb0 5y ago
  > Why do 30% of people refuse to get vaccinated? (here in Aotearoa it is 5%). Something is happening, people are getting left behind, in vast numbers. Forcing them to comply is probably a cure worse than the disease - even a disease like COVID Yeah, please please come here and find a way to "unloose" these people, I'm out of clue. We have a lot of failures here in Germany that surface, everything is too slow, from bad organization to corruption (like most western democracies), behind in digitalization, behind in taking the right measures, slow decisions even after 2 years into this pandemic situation.. true, a big chance to clear up and maybe hopefully do better in the future. But those people (the last 10-20% radical idiotic percent that drives the rest forward)? I really start hating my country and fellow citizens, so many spoiled brats living in prosperity, complaining about everything, believing in total bullshit, it is unbelievable. If you attempt your best in an open and honest discussion, you are called a liar with the first word that comes out of your mouth.... > Want a war? That’s what you’re going to get if you persist with this paranoid hypochondriac fascism. That's a perfect description for those people, not the vaccination, phew..if we get a war it will be by further catering to the far right. And btw, most of these people who go demoing right now (except the few violent far right ones that are under them), I bet most have never been to a real demonstration in their lives - now standing up for their personal party freedom while limiting the freedom of everyone else - again and again. And btw please.. everyone who gets triggered by the word "lockdown" get your facts right first - there are lockdowns and there are lockdowns. We had very strict lockdowns over the last year in most our neighbors (e.g. France, Italy, Spain) - fines when you went out on the street at the wrong times .. we in Germany were up to that once close, though I believe noone here ever got fined for anything. What we discuss and have as "lockdown" right now in Germany is actually just the "lockdown of the unvaccinated" - means 2G in shops that are not essential - oh yeah, poor unvaccinated crowd cannot go Christmas shopping, while health personal is crying for help, ERs and intensive cares are filling up, and a newspaper already appealed to stop driving unless totally necessary, because of injury risk. Yeah sorry, I'm totally fed up :( Read too much on twitter and also here again, and I feel also a little bad and dizzy. Have been waiting 1h in the cold and another hour inside today to get my booster shot - bad organized Germany, again, but not complaining today! I'm happy to see so many people still trying to do their littlest part to relieve the health care workers and try to help get the hospitals some space for people that really need it for reasons that couldn't be avoided. And a little proud to be part of it - In that sense, the dizzyness is appreciated and better than a Feierabendbeer, the injected chip is working, the 5G in my brain is getting activated and well welcomed. gn8
- ivan_gammel 5y ago
  In a democracy nobody has absolute freedom and minorities do not enjoy protections of the rights to threaten others. If 30% of the people do not get vaccinated without valid reason, they violate the right of others to live and stay healthy. It is scientifically established fact that vaccination reduces health risks for the public, so vaccination mandate will be based on the same constitutional grounds as speed limits and other limitations of personal freedoms. Noteworthy is that it cannot be enforced for the people who just stay at home. Anti-vaxxers can lock themselves up for a few years and be free from vaccine if they want.
  - EricE 5y ago
    How do unvaccinated people violate vaccinated people's rights? If you have so little faith that the vaccine can protect you, then why did you take it and why are you advocating others should be forced to? Also even if 100% of all humans were to take it you do realize that vaccinated people can carry and spread it (asymptomatically, no less) and that animals can carry and spread it too? Thinking that unvaccinated people violate anyone's rights is utterly ridiculous; it's far more selfish than what your ilk love to accuse those who don't want to take the vaccine of. This virus is NOT going away. So people might as well get that pipe dream out of their heads right now. It's time to stop letting emotion drive these conversations and get rational as well as realistic.
    - ivan_gammel 5y ago
      >If you have so little faith that the vaccine can protect you, then why did you take it and why are you advocating others should be forced to? This question has a really simple and well-known answer, so if you are unaware of the basics, maybe you should educate yourself first? Vaccine does not offer 100% protection to the individual who takes it, but, according to the scientific research, it significantly reduces: a) the risk to get infected, b) the risk of infecting others, c) the risk of complications or death. Only first of those risks is related to the freedom of personal choice, other two impact public health and public is in their right to restrict personal freedom for those, who do not comply - because chances that people may die are increasing. Yes, vaccine is not the ultimate protection. More lockdowns will be necessary and we will have to wear masks for few years more. Virus will not go away. But 5-10 million people are already dead and we must take all chances to prevent as many deaths as possible, until it mutates to the point where it is no more dangerous than a flu. If this means that some libertarians and anti-vaxxers will be pissed off, well, majority of people in many countries apparently does not care.
- jansan 5y ago
  It's 30% of the whole population, including small children who cannot get vaccinated at all. My younger son (14 years old) is not vaccinated. He will be banned from entering shops, probably from playing tennis, and our family will not be allowed to meet other families this winter. The reason why he is not vaccinated is that in Germany he would get the same amount of vaccine as a 150kg person. In the UK and Sweden they only give one dose to minors, not so in Germany. He is healthy, and does a lot of sports, so for him I see a higher risk from the vaccine (myocarditis) than from COVID-19. Also, the federal vaccination commission (Stiko) has explicitly demanded that there should be no social discrimination for minors based on their vaccination status as a condition for recommending the vaccines for 12 to 17 year olds. We trusted this recommendation.
fhany 5y ago
If 70% of people have a tattoo of a cross the remaining 30% have to get it because of the "democratic process"? In Florida the summer outbreak stopped by itself and the hospital capacity did not break down completely. The outbreak will stop by itself in Germany, too. But of course Germans need to dramatize everything ...
- timdaub 5y ago
  Of course not. Why would that be? Nobody is clogging up ICU beds over getting tattoos. smh.
throwaway47292 5y ago
Do you think the % of unvaccinated would stay the same next year? My gut feeling is that it will increase, every 6 months when the new booster is needed we will get more and more people not wanting it. How long until the unvaccinated are more than the vaccinated? 18 months? What happens when they are the majority and ban all vaccines?
- igorkraw 5y ago
  In that fantasy world they'd still need to provide evidence that the ban us justified, otherwise people can challenge it in court. The vaccine people have the "benefit" of a collapsing medical system and am absence of a similar load and collapse in countries with high vaccination rate.
  - throwaway47292 5y ago
    Well if they are 30% now, they must have the 'evidence' that convinces them they are right, when they are 60% they would have even more 'evidence'. Why wouldn't they blame it on, the eastern europeans or something?
    - igorkraw 5y ago
      No,they do no need to have evidence. People don't always act rationally, and if you spend any time talking to a person with anti-vax beliefs you'll notice their belief isn't founded on evidence but on narrative, distrust and emotions. Which does not make them stupid, but it does make them wrong. If they had evidence, they could present it and we'd act on it, as was seen in Germany when there were concerns about a vaccine slightly increasing heart muscle inflammation risk, it was almost immediately halted and they stopped recommending it. And I'm assuming we still have the same rule of law as now and they don't just make shit up, because I'm modeling my fellow humans as having a different (in this case, empirically and from a risk calculus wrong) perspective, not as evil. So they can't abandon democratic principles. Vaccine mandates are coming as a last resort now due to exactly those principles
  - native_samples 5y ago
cblconfederate 5y ago
> the absolute democratic majority has made their decision months ago to take the shot but 30% are holding everyone back Were people really asked to cast their vote by vaccinating themselves?
- timdaub 5y ago
  no. That was a rethorical device I used in my comment.
  - cblconfederate 5y ago
    it 's rhetoric based on false equivalence though. I vaccinated myself for purely selfish reasons, to save my ass since the vaccine was the only available preventative pharmaceutical, and at the time i did, it was already becoming clear that herd immunity was not possible. I couldnt care less if others want to save themselves nor do i think everyone should do it.
- jeofken 5y ago
  No, they were rather locked out of participating is all life outside of the home or forest unless they accept the injection
belter 5y ago
You have a strange understanding of democracy...But if we are at it, would like to propose a public citizen petition: Requesting by democratic mandate that we remove the only immunity to come out of this process, the one from vaccine producers....
whiddershins 5y ago
One of the most salient thing about rights is that the majority isn't permitted take them away whenever it suits them.
- rrrrrrrrrrrryan 5y ago
  Access to healthcare is considered a right in Germany. They're mandating vaccines so that they can continue to provide all their citizens with this human right. Sometimes rights clash, which is why you can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater despite having the right to freedom of speech. An individual's right to do X on principle can absolutely be overruled by the right for a larger group of people to continue living on this earth.
  - floren 5y ago
    > Sometimes rights clash, which is why you can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater despite having the right to freedom of speech. The decision about yelling fire in a crowded theater originates from Schenck v. United States, in which the Supreme Court decided it's OK for the US Government to suppress anti-draft protests; consider if you wish to build arguments on this foundation.
  - ghoward 5y ago
    > Access to healthcare is considered a right in Germany. > They're mandating vaccines so that they can continue to provide all their citizens with this human right. This is exactly why those people are wrong. True rights never clash.
    - rbanffy 5y ago
      True rights never clash. People need to be forced to be vaccinated because nobody has a right to spread a deadly disease, so, even if they think they won’t, vaccines will help preventing people from killing others by not being vaccinated.
      - ghoward 5y ago
black_puppydog 5y ago
I think it's worth to point out here that since "it's in everyone's best interest to get vaccinated" you can't really call it taking "one for the team". People getting vaccinated are taking "one for the team" and at the same time "looking out for number one". That's the beauty of it, really: aligned incentives.
- zizee 5y ago
  Perhaps this is true for covid19, as the vaccines do not seem to stop the vaccinated from getting infected and spreading the virus. But for vaccines that actually stop the majority of vaccinated from becoming infectious the risk reward calculation changes. All vaccinations have some level of risk. If you are surrounded by unvaccinated, your risk of not getting the vaccine outweighs the risk of catching the disease from the herd. In this instance you have aligned incentives. However, if you are in a entirely vaccinated population, your risk profile changes, and it is now possible for your incentives to become unaligned with "the team", or at least more blurry. Unfortunately the average antivaxer's mental model is probably not so well defined that they realise is what they have been doing. I would not be surprised if the majority of them don't realise/agree that they've been selfishly coasting on the coat-tails of the crowd with other vaccines/diseases, and therefore they have trouble realising their currently "successful" strategy is not going to work so well this time round.
  - ajsnigrutin 5y ago
    Well yeah, but what you said is exactly the problem here... Vaccines were promised to be safe and effective against infections... then astrazeneca killed a few people, Jansenn killed a few people, moderna was stopped in finland, sweden, denmark etc., and of course people lose trust. In slovenia, for girls under 25, we currently have 1 death due to the vaccine (jansenn) and zero deaths due to covid (with a bit over 50% of the population getting covid - around 1mio). Also the changing the definition, from "preventing infection" to "preveting hospitalizations" doesn't help. I got vaccinated to protect myself. I am aware that even with 100% vaccination rates, sooner or later i will get in contact with covid (and/or i probably already have), and the vaccine is protecting only me. I am not afraid of the unvaccinated, and I don't care if they choose a greater risk, it's their life, and their choice.
newacc9 5y ago
How many footballers have to drop dead on the pitch before you remove the scales from your eyes?
chippy 5y ago
Its worth remembering that division is due to the other side always. This is an absolute statement as division is literally caused by dividing between "sides". You get a divided country when the people within it divides each other into sides. Its never been the case when people have said "our side has caused the division". never. That is the irony you should be finding! If you do finally see this irony you might find more nuance, but maybe more frustration and more uncertainty and confusion but less anger and possibly more empathy to the other. That's why its so easy for people to divide, as its less painful. Dividing and categorizing is how we make sense of the world, but it can be a curse too.
- timdaub 5y ago
  And how exactly does this statement now help to address the situation?
  - prohobo 5y ago
    I suppose by helping people become open to other, possibly more reasonable, options.
  - __blockcipher__ 5y ago
    Well it seems to follow pretty naturally that if you think that division is a problem, then being aware of how your attitude is the definition of division seems pretty important.
  - chippy 5y ago
    I would hope it might help you with your observation about the division of the country, and with your feeling of irony on another subject, and using both of these skills towards understanding. So for the situation in general: if enough people are less divisive, perhaps a less divided country can occur.
- op00to 5y ago
  No, vaccinations are how we get out and people who are medically able to get them and don’t are hurting each and every human on this planet due to their own hubris.
ericd 5y ago
Well, there's always civil war. That'd be a bit more divided. We should probably try going in the opposite direction, which usually involves less trying to impose our wills on each other.
- timdaub 5y ago
  "War" is a pretty strong terminology for the civil discourse currently happening.
elvis10ten 5y ago
Not everybody who hasn’t taken the vaccine is an antivaxxer. I think a distinction needs to be made between anti vaxxers and people who are just naive/“dumb”. I have seen more of the later group. Which is why I’m surprised when someone here or in mainstream media says this has anything to do with a political side. This distinction is useful IMO in creating sound policies.
- timdaub 5y ago
  Dunno if I agree. It's like being in the stock market. Talk is cheap and so actions carry way more signal. It's a stronger statement to be vacccinated than to argue online for vaccinations. And it's a stronger statement to not be vaccinated than to argue online against vaccinations.
- op00to 5y ago
  Literally people who are eligible and do not get the vaccine are anti-vaccination.
- hfj6gghgf 5y ago
  Finally someone who doesn't abuse the word antivaxer. An enourmous majority of people who choose to not take this particular vaccine are not antivaxers. Or maybe the meaning of the word has evolved and I'm out of the loop. In my vocabulary it is someone who doesn't believe in/take any vaccines.
  - op00to 5y ago
    So if someone takes ONE vaccine but shuns all others they can’t be anti-vaccine? That makes no logical sense.
xafnuaetrf8764 5y ago
You're just a piece of a fucking fascist, cunt.
TacticalCoder 5y ago
> ... but 30% are holding everyone back. Not at all and I can turn that argument back: I know non-vaccinated people who stay at home and "evil" fully vaccinated people who go out. It is a fact that vaccinated people can still carry and transmit the virus. It is also a fact that in the EU 40 to 60% of all ICU beds are filled with fully vaccinated people (40% in Spain atm but the number is going up, 50% in Belgium, 60% in the Netherlands, for example). So evil, fully vaccinated (like me btw), people going out, spreading the virus, then falling ill and ending up on an ICU bed. Do you really want to shame people like that? Because if we play that game, then I'll shame the vaccinated people who still have a social life: they do spread the virus. How did these evil fully vaccinated people who are on ICU bed get the virus? Who did they give it too? Why didn't they stay at home / live less of a social life? They're putting an unnecessary burden on the healthcare system... Countries like Gibraltar with 100% vaccination rate still just experienced a wave. Same in Israel, one of the most vaccinated country on earth. > Besides, it's in everyone's best interest to get vaccinated. That is not clear at all. Why not lock down hard, very hard, the old and those known at risk why letting the virus circulate among the healthy population: this, and that is a known fact, creates a much better immunity than the one conferred by the "vaccine". The studies published showed 12x less risk to catch the Delta variant if you had had Covid before compared to someone who just had the shots. If anything: maybe that that "vaccine" which still let people carry and spread the virus is part of the problem. The problem is the old and those at risk have been sold a lie by politicians and big pharma: that by getting the vaccine they'd be safe. So they let their guards down and now they're fully vaccinated... on ICU beds.
- glfharris 5y ago
  There are more vaccinated people than not, and people with prior health conditions are more likely to be vaccinated so it's not surprising they would be represented in the ITU population.
  - native_samples 5y ago
    You'd think so but it's actually the other way around: the people most likely to die are not given vaccines (because there's no point). This can be seen in the UK data where increasing vaccinations causes an increase in deaths in unvaccinated people from non-COVID causes. Clearly that's not a biological link - rather, what's happening is that as the vaccinated population grows, the really sick and dying people get concentrated in the unvaccinated cohort, which then experiences higher death rates. Data is tricky, especially with something like this.
forgotmyoldname 5y ago
Last weekend I was at a Japanese history museum, and part of the exhibit was on 1600s-1800s medical technology. In the 1870s, Japan had vaccine passports and kept logs of unvaccinated people in order to track them down. It was deemed a huge step forward in developing the country. It’s interesting how some people today think mandatory vaccination is some massive, unprecedented destruction of freedom, when it’s historically nothing new and something that was essential to helping your country stay strong.
- cbozeman 5y ago
  Given Japan was a nation where a certain class could execute summarily anyone below them, for something as germaine as insulting them, and given what Japan did to Chinese civilians during World War II, you'll forgive me if I don't look to their 1870s ideals as inspiration for living in 2021.
  - forgotmyoldname 5y ago
    Neither of those were happening in that era. They’re also as irrelevant as bringing up European colonial horrors or ongoing American foreign intervention.
    - areyousure 5y ago
      It's actually directly relevant in this context, because Japan does NOT in fact have vaccine passports today (as opposed to the 1870s as you allege). Furthermore, the reason is causally due to the behavior of Japanese authorities during World War II. See eg https://items.ssrc.org/covid-19-and-the-social-sciences/covid-19-in-east-asia/japans-covid-19-strategy/ https://items.ssrc.org/covid-19-and-the-social-sciences/covi... > Unlike in Western countries, it is not possible to carry out lockdowns or forcibly isolate patients. Due to unchecked enforcement measures during World War II, there has been a tendency in Japan to strongly discourage the government from having strong coercive power, especially from interfering in ordinary people’s lives, so as not to repeat what happened during that period. The power of the Japanese government to intervene in individuals’ lives, even during an emergency, is constitutionally and legally limited. The Infectious Diseases Control Law, for example, was enacted with the utmost consideration for individuals’ human rights and it limits the public sector’s power to intervene in a person’s life, even for the purpose of infectious disease control. Besides, tracking infected people has many privacy considerations, and it is legally difficult in Japan to use GPS tracking or credit card histories to track activities, as it is being done in other Asian countries. The government’s ability to access individual citizens’ data is minimal, making infectious disease control difficult.
helge9210 5y ago
> Besides, it's in everyone's best interest to get vaccinated. No. Some are OK with the risk. > this is a democracy If all the possible choices for the vote are supported by all the parties. If there are unacceptable choices, this is just a dictatorship of the majority.
- throwaway675309 5y ago
  What about compulsory seatbelts?
  - xdennis 5y ago
    No one is forced to drive.
  - EricE 5y ago
    Wearing a seatbelt doesn't expose you to potential life long side affects to your health for the rest of your life. Just one example of one kid screwed up for life now: https://imgur.com/SNMhlBg https://imgur.com/SNMhlBg There was ZERO reason for an otherwise healthy 14 year old to get the vaccine. Too bad this mom found out the hard way.
- mdp2021 5y ago
  > If all the possible choices for the vote are supported by all the parties. If there are unacceptable choices, this is just a dictatorship of the majority I noticed that some have an interpretation of democracy as "the majority shall dominate you". They seem to be forgetful of the principle of "costitutionalism": all powers shall be preliminary limited through a social contract.
MarcoZavala 5y ago
pohl 5y ago
30% are holding everyone back Are you still talking about Germany, because that's exactly the situation we have in the U.S., too. Same ratio, even.
paul7986 5y ago
I just became fully vaccinated and each day since I am dealing with dizziness / lightheaded-ness spells. Everyone should take one for the team you say but do you know what the future holds for the team? You just trust emphatically what the early science says vs. waiting over time to see all of it's effects on a huge population? That and time is the true bellweather but we are forced guinea pigs to join the experiment or lose our livelihoods. Can you tell me Why is the FDA want 55 years to process and release all the vaccine data they have.... shouldn't they be getting that out ASAP ... from Reuters (non-biased or sided media) https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/wait-what-fda-wants-55-years-process-foia-request-over-vaccine-data-2021-11-18/ https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/wait-what-fda-wants... You either believe everything your govt says and the very early science says (time is the bellweather and the large population data that comes with it) or you live life on the fence questioning things before making the best decision for yourself or you go completely agaisnt the ones who just buy, soak up and believe everything their side says.
- swader999 5y ago
  Try ivermectin. It helps with vaccine injury too.
  - paul7986 5y ago
    Not sure if your comment is sarcastic or not but I sit in the middle ...on the fence and there's no better bellweather then time ...long periods of time and it's data to make the best decision for me!
    - EricE 5y ago
      He's being serious. There is so much medical information being suppressed because it doesn't fit certain political narratives - that's the real crime right now. Luckily there are at least a few doctors who remain dedicated to science and the Hippocratic Oath and who are unbowed by political and social pressure. Some great resources here: https://aapsonline.org/covidpatientguide/ https://aapsonline.org/covidpatientguide/ And if you can't find a rational doctor locally, they can arrange for telemedicine visits from doctors who aren't pretending the vax is the end all be all one size fits all solution to the exclusion of anything else.
cbozeman 5y ago
LOL, "my body, my choice" right up until it's something that the political left want, then it's, "Fuck you, get in line or die." Either we have autonomy over our medical choices or we don't, period. This is the problem with having principles. You either live by them and have integrity or you abandon them and you don't.
jpcfl 5y ago
> this is a democracy and so it can also be deemed legitimate and representative to govern according to the majority decision Not if the decision violates the constitution.
VoodooJuJu 5y ago
>30% are holding everyone back. What do you mean by this?
xdennis 5y ago
Your logic is insane. There are countries were a majority agrees with female/male circumcision. I guess you'd be the first to go slashing at people's genitals because the minority is holding everyone back.
- kingcharles 5y ago
  I hadn't thought about this, but I bet a majority of the people in the USA refusing vaccinations are totally fine about mutilating their male babies by slicing off chunks of their penis.
  - TheRealNGenius 5y ago
    classic symptom of doublethink - holding contradictory beliefs whenever they suit you without regard for self-consistency
- timdaub 5y ago
  You way of arguing is exaggerated. Of course, I'd strongly oppose such decision. It's an entirely separate issue that has nothing to do with ICU beds, vaccines and a pandemic.
stormking 5y ago
I don't understand this line of thinking. Voluntarily taking the shot yourself is completely different from making a "majority decision". Off course I got vaccinated, but I'm totally opposed to forcing it on people. It is absolutely crazy how easy it was for our incompetent politicians to blame people WHO ARE NOT EVEN BREAKING ANY LAWS for their own disastrous communication (just remember those "mask are actually bad for you" talking points when there weren't any) and overall pandemic management. They constantly lied to us on every step of the way and now they're surprised that some people don't trust them?
- 9dev 5y ago
  > They constantly lied to us on every step of the way and now they're surprised that some people don't trust them? I’m sorry to say this but that is just plain populist. I do agree that pandemic management surely wasn’t optimal, but insinuating malice is simply misplaced. The situation was chaotic because a pandemic is chaotic. Lots of federal offices that are known for being low-intensity workplaces - such as public health offices - suddenly had more work due than in the last 40 years combined. Politicians without any experience in managing world-scale catastrophes had to perform, often 80+ hours per week. International supply chains collapsed, decades of ridiculous IT politics started showing. Due to Germany‘s federalism, states had way too much sovereignty for way too long into the crisis. Public health institutions, healthcare professionals, Pharma companies - all had different opinions on what might be the best next step. Masks were not going to be deliverable in the quantities required to provide for the entire population. At some point, a decision had to be made to reserve contingencies for hospitals. Solutions to all these problems may be obvious in hindsight, but I ask for a little respect to all the people that had to find them in a dynamic, completely unknown environment. Lots of things went smooth as fuck, you just didn’t notice because you took them for granted. We’re talking about humans after all.
  - stormking 5y ago
    > I’m sorry to say this but that is just plain populist. No, it's a fact. I understand why they were lying about things, e.g. the usefulness of masks, but that doesn't make it less dishonest or patronizing. You simply can't say one thing today, the opposite tomorrow and still expect people to just believe you the day after that. And please don't buy into that "it's all new to us" narrative. Not knowing how to handle things is not a license to just make stuff up. And if you still think you have to, at least remain consistent about it. And if you can't do that either, at least don't complain when people don't trust you, anymore. And if you have to complain about people not trusting you, anymore, at least don't blame them for the consequences OF YOUR OWN CLUSTERFUCK.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
TurkishPoptart 5y ago
1. There's little concern about those with natural immunity who have recovered from COVID. It makes zero sense to induce extra risk of side effects from a "vaccine" if the patient already has natural immunity. 2. Research is indicating that in breakthrough infections to fully vaccinated people, the viral load is the same. [1] 3. The vaccines don't _prevent infection_ unlike the "classic" childhood vaccines. They are merely prophylactics that are incorrectly called vaccines to encourage people to get them and reduce hospitalization rate. 4. Everyone has their own individual level of risk. Healthy, young people have an infinitesimal rate of death from this virus compared to the old and infirm. [1]: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00648-4/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3...
jokethrowaway 5y ago
Honestly, I think it's time we start splitting countries. I don't want to live in the same country as people like you who have no concern about human rights, freedom and individualism. I don't want a majority controlled with biased media and internet to decide for my life.
- codr7 5y ago
  The polarization has been accelerating like mad lately, pretty soon we won't be able to live together in peace. And I suspect that's the problem they're aiming for to get an excuse to implement the police state solution.
seoulmetro 5y ago
You're confusing majority of one statistic for majority of another statistic. As far as I know, the majority didn't "vote" for mandatory vaccines, even if the majority have received vaccines.
Bantros 5y ago
It's just I'm not gonna take it is all
- op00to 5y ago
  So brave
snidane 5y ago
I think you are confusing a vaccine and an experimental 6-month cycle therapy that just happened to get 'vaccine' in its name. Don't get confused by names. Democratic People's Republic of Korea is democratic in name only as well.
cm2187 5y ago
You are equating not taking the vaccine to being anti-vax. That makes a nice slogan but that is not true. For instance it makes zero sense for people who already got covid to get vaccinated. By now that must be 20-30% of the population in most western countries. The benefits for a healthy 20-something are also spurious. This is not the population that will flood ICUs. So you can perfectly decline to take that vaccine without being anti-vax in any way. There are many people who decline to be vaccinated who are irrational (and I think anyone over 60 who does is just not looking at their risks right). But you won’t convince them by forcing their hand or making obviously untrue statements.
- camgunz 5y ago
  > The benefits for a healthy 20-something are also spurious. They can get it and spread it to others who are more vulnerable. Unbelievable that you and others still don't know the most basic facts about diseases, even two years into a pandemic. Please get educated and stop spreading misinformation.
  - cm2187 5y ago
    I will pass on the derogatory comments. Except that it doesn’t look like the vaccine is doing much to prevent transmissions. The UK has been near 90% vaccinated since this summer, and despite that it experiences a high number of cases, of the same order of magnitude than pre-vaccination. And it seems to be the same in other high vaccination countries. Also if you are vulnerable and unvaccinated, you own the risk. The only thing vaccines seem to be efficient at is reducing hospitalisations, which at the end of the day is what matters.
cedivad 5y ago
> but 30% are holding everyone back If you truly believe squashing the number of unvaccinated people will result in any significant benefit for the rest of us you are undeserving of the first place in this comment thread. You could wait a few months for those vaccine laws to go into effect in Europe for proof. Or you could just look at the existing body of data that's staring at you in the face and are deciding to ignore because faulting someone else is one of the most primitive endorphins kicks you can get. Signed: a fully vaccinated (and disgusted) user.
snidane 5y ago
Thay's why constitutions exist. So that any 1% cannot be abused by the 99%. Pure democracy means 51% can wipe out the 49%, Rwanda style.
- Thiez 5y ago
  In most countries a 99% majority is very much sufficient to amend the constitution.
ekianjo 5y ago
Talking about majority ruling what happens to the bodies of a smaller minority... sounds like a good fascist principle. No matter your good intentions.
bnlpaer 5y ago
So your argument is that people have to undergo a medical procedure so others have a greater chance of survival. While I don't fully believe this premise, let's assume it is true. I then demand that abortion be made entirely illegal, since it is a civic duty to "take one for the team".
tomrod 5y ago
Well said. It's a civic duty to be vaccinated. It's the rational, sane, and most personally and socially beneficial policy. Were this a game theory context we would be saying that getting the vaccine strictly dominates not getting the vaccine.
gautamdivgi 5y ago
I’m pro-vax. I’ve taken the shots and the booster. But I fail to see the point of this lockdown. If you are 70% vaccinated as a country and the remainder of the 30% is possibly low risk why lockdown? You’ll never get to 100% vaccinated or even 90%. If the 70% vaccinated isn’t reducing the load on the hospitals we have an issue with vaccinations.
- cruelty 5y ago
  They need to reach 100% to eliminate the control group before everyone starts getting sick from them
rglullis 5y ago
- You can be against mandatory vaccinations and not be an anti-vaxxer. - "Herd immunity" is only a secondary desired trait for the vaccine. The primary one should be that the individual that gets the vaccine will have a stronger immune system and less likely to be severely sick. I got it for my own benefit, not because I want to be nice to others. - The vaccine was sold as a one-shot thing. I think that the vaccine is safe enough for its risks to outweighs the benefits if it was only once. If periodic boosters start getting required, the calculus changes. - Where does it stop? Let's not forget that the whole thing with lockdowns was to flatten the curve and to avoid the health care system to collapse. These should've been seen as temporary measures so that we could improve the healthcare system so that it could respond properly. Instead, it has become a perma-threat with no end in sight.
lend000 5y ago
While I offer no opinion about whether vaccinations should be compulsory, it must be stated that if they should, it certainly isn't because of your argument about pure democracy. In a pure democracy, 90% of the population can choose to oppress the other 10%, and they have, many, many times throughout history. If vaccinations should be made mandatory in a free society, it is solely due to the externality imposed by the unvaccinated on others (like you mentioned with ICU capacity, as well as general pathogen propagation), and avoiding that violation of the broader public's freedoms.
- timdaub 5y ago
  Sure, but the two qualities: - 70% of population vaccinated - and ICU beds clogging up because of unvaccinated don't have to be considered separately. Instead, they are nice facts for making an informed decision about what to do next.
TrispusAttucks 5y ago
Disclaimer: I am fully vaccinated and have had the booster shot. From US perspective... What I find ironic is: President Biden, Anthony Fauci, White House Press Secretary all said they would "never mandate vaccinations" and it's "not the place of the federal government to mandate vaccinations" and that they believe "it doesn't have the authority to do so anyway"... And since when do we not care about the minority? Also when it comes to medical decisions about my body the government shouldn't have a say in it. On top of all that the effectiveness of the vaccine and it's longevity leave a lot to be desired. This ain't no polio silver bullet and the virus continues to mutate and break through even the most vaccinated populations.
cqadt 5y ago
Everyone uses the propaganda numbers. Here are the official ones: https://impfdashboard.de/en/ https://impfdashboard.de/en/ Fully vaccinated: 60+: 86.1% 18+: 79.3% 12–17: 46.6% Your only argument is not clogging up the ICUs. The only age group that has a significant risk is 60+, so isolate them or vax them or both. Forceful vaccination of 12-17 years olds will do exactly nothing for ICUs. I also do not understand the focus on ICUs. Put up military field hospitals, intubation is questionable anyhow, just give oxygen. Most facilities in ICUs are not required for Covid (as I understand it, happy to be corrected if someone here actually has first hand experience).
62951413 5y ago
It's terrifying how many things I used to be told in my youth about the "free world" have turned out to be blatant lies in the last few years. It's one thing to be forced by ruthless government but ordinary people demanding to be left without a choice is a sight to behold. I'm ashamed to admit that for a couple of months early last year I actually believed in the "pandemic". I was really confused because so many countries acted along the same lines. And then I had. It was a basically a flu though my sense of smell has been degraded since then. My parent (70+) had it this last fall, my father ended up in hospital (no ICU or anything drastic). Still, my mother had had a much closer call with a flu a few years ago. Now the company I work for forces me between undertaking experimental medical procedures and getting much better at leetcode. You know what's funny? They require we get pricked and go back to the office in Jan. But even though everyone will be fully "vaccinated" they still demand masks in the office. You know what's really funny? Of all our offices across the globe (including China of all places) only American ones require "vaccination". Most others at worst recommend masks. Speaking of "pandemics". You know what you'd see if there were one (aside from bodies lying in the streets)? How about hermetically sealed borders? Including our southern one. With the border patrol shooting anything approaching it with no warning. Last time I checked the news, they were not even demanding "vaccination" papers. Also I kind of remember "masks are necessary for medical professionals only", "2 weeks to not overload the ICU", "it's just a pinch", ".. or two", " .. and probably a second booster", <you are here>, ".. possibly every 6 months?". Also, do you recognize that the government peddling all this "pandemic" propaganda is the same we have seen in action for the last couple of years? They have spectacularly failed at their core business of maintaining rule of law and fighting wars. Well, at least not losing one more humiliatingly than the Soviets. Why would you trust your health to them? My body my rules, anyone?
frzj 5y ago
The only argument that is viable against vaccination is that one might already have natural immunity. I get that some will try to get infected on purpose, but those will be the minority of the minority. Maybe there is also the argument that higher vaccination rates will not help. I heard that 90% UK's population has antibodies. People say that Spain has low rates now b/c they have a high vaccination rate, but they also had a high number of cases previously, and they were probably underreported. Personally, I gladly increased the average antibodies count of the population by getting vaccinated despite already having some immunity, but people are frightened, and we can't really change their minds. Force will only make them more stubborn.

throwaway12409 5y ago

> it's in everyone's best interest to get vaccinated. Except the few who die from it. About ~20 per million will die after having the vaccine (although there are not exact numbers on whether vaccine was the cause). There are lots of well-documented cases.

worik 5y ago

I agree that everybody should get vaccinated. Let's make this virus extinct. But what you describe is majoritarianism. It is a form of democracy but a very weak form. For a lot of people, who are from minority groups, it is indistinguishable from totalitarianism. Why do 30% of people refuse to get vaccinated? (here in Aotearoa it is 5%). Something is happening, people are getting left behind, in vast numbers. Forcing them to comply is probably a cure worse than the disease - even a disease like COVID

prohobo 5y ago
You cannot make this virus extinct. These vaccines do not accomplish this goal, the end.
- Swenrekcah 5y ago
  The goal is to keep serious cases to a minimum so they don’t clog the healthcare system thus making people die of all sorts of other things because they couldn’t be treated. Vaccines do help with that, tremendously.
  - prohobo 5y ago
    Do they? Can you prove that, or are you just saying random shit everyone else says? This was not the narrative at the beginning of the vaccine rollout, by the way. The narrative changed every month towards what you're currently saying. From what I've heard, thousands of people have been losing out on proper healthcare because of governments blocking their access; I'm talking people who should have had cancer screenings not getting them and dying because they were coerced into "lowering the strain on healthcare services". I also heard that thousands of healthcare workers have been getting fired, and ICU beds removed because of governments deciding they weren't heroic enough, and not fit for treating patients. Who are you trying to protect exactly?
    - Swenrekcah 5y ago
      You can look up all the statistics on vaccine effectiveness against serious cases. They work really well for that. They don’t work as well as first hoped against infection but data on third booster suggests better results on that front. Look it up instead of asking me for proof, while you yourself are restating hearsay originating from who knows where.
      - prohobo 5y ago
        I asked if you can prove that they stop hospitals from being overwhelmed, not whether they were effective. So far it's not looking very good, is that why you support the decision to mandate the shots?
        Swenrekcah 5y ago
        I'm not sure I support a vaccine mandate. I'm just saying that the vaccines work and it's foolish to claim otherwise. I can understand hesitation to get vaccinated, but I'd like to ask those same people if they take any other medicine at all and if they have read the pamphlet that comes with those. Also I'd like to ask if they are fine with getting a completely alien and known harmful substance into their body, the substance we call Coronavirus.
timdaub 5y ago
No, it's not totalitarian. In Germany we have a constitution that protects all human's right equally. If there's good reasons why you can't receive a vaccination, I'm pretty sure nobody can force you. Not even the state. Go to your doctor to get an attest that exempts you from the mandatory vaccination. Nothing easier than that in Germany. And again: You are just speculating. Nobody knows if a vaccine mandate leaves people behind it tropes. You cannot know it, because it hasn't happened. I'd rather make decisions based on facts than just speculating about hypotheticals.
- dane-pgp 5y ago
  > In Germany we have a constitution that protects all human's right equally. If Germany's constitution allows vaccine mandates, then your insistence that it protects all human's rights will be of little comfort to the people who are forced to take the vaccination without their consent and in violation of their conscience. At best you are saying "Having control over what medical treatments are done to you is not a human right", and at worst you are saying "Antivaxers aren't human". Either way, you are putting too much trust in a system that claims to protect human rights, and totalitarians generally manage to find a way to twist the law to justify what they are doing, whether the excuse is "military necessity", "medical necessity", or something else.
  - Pyramus 5y ago
    > the people who are forced to take the vaccination without their consent and in violation of their conscience. Your imagination got the better of you here - nobody will be forced to vaccinate, especially not without their consent. Similar to how nobody comes to your car and forces you to wear a seatbelt. Germany's constitution is quite clear about this, for apparent, historic reasons.
    - baggy_trough 5y ago
      You won't be physically forced to, but you also won't be allowed to do most of the things we normally consider that people have a right to do unless you comply. That's really a non physical way of forcing compliance (like saying I'll fire you from your job unless you agree).
Pyramus 5y ago
> Why do 30% of people refuse to get vaccinated? (here in Aotearoa it is 5%). Something is happening, people are getting left behind, in vast numbers. It's an interesting question and there is lots of debate in Germany at the moment as to why. Some factors are: * Germany did very well during the pandemic so people didn't experience a Bergamo or Madrid moment * Germany has a strong esoteric / anthroposophical movement (Steiner, Waldorf et al.) * Federalism: Vaccination rates vary a lot by state
- native_samples 5y ago
  None of those are the right answer. These are the answers people come up with having never talked to anyone who disagrees. The right answers are: 1. They don't trust the medical authorities to be honest about the risks. 2. They don't feel a need for it because they're at low risk of COVID and know it. 3. They don't believe it will change anything.
  - Pyramus 5y ago
    > The right answers The right answers, but for the wrong question ;) Not disagreeing with you, but parent was asking why is Germany so bad relative to their European peers.
    - worik 5y ago
      Pacific peers actually!-)
  - jseban 5y ago
    And 1. The recommendation to take the vaccine goes exactly against anything the doctors said pre-covid. Before covid, nobody would recommend you to take a vaccine against something you are not in a risk group for, and double doses and boosters were unheard of. This makes me suspicious, and I don't think that is unreasonable. 2. You get really sick from the second dose of the vaccine, which also is not normal, you are not supposed to get sick from vaccines, you are supposed to take them to avoid getting sick So the whole vaccination situation is something that's new and confusing, why do what my doctor always said to not do? Why get sick from vaccines, aren't they supposed to stop you from getting sick? Why double and triple vaccines?
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
gojomo 5y ago
Vaccinations are too leaky to "make this virus extinct". Within a few months of vaccination, half or more of people can get mild, but still transmissable, cases of Delta. (Omicron is likely worse; there are already multiple reports of mild cases among those with recent 3rd booster shots.) Honest epidemiologists have been warning about this risk since 2020, and more forcefully when confirmed by early vax results in 2021. But many people are still on the warpath against the unvaxed, as if that can make a difference. Well, it can for the unvaxed themselves – winning them a less-severe case. But every vaxed person is going to be exposed to, and have mild cases of, COVID – via waning immunity & multiplying variants. There is no net increase in protection from harassing the last ~15% (a more honest count of hardcore holdouts) into a vax they don't want. (Most of them have probably had COVID already, or soon will, giving them an immunity just as good as vaccination.)
- omegaworks 5y ago
  >Most of them have probably had COVID already, or soon will, giving them an immunity just as good as vaccination. Immunity from prior-infection was worse than vaccination at protecting people from Delta.[1] 1. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-briefs/vaccine-induced-immunity.html#anchor_1635546906501 https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-br...
  - switch007 5y ago
    By how much? It's really disingenuous to say "more" or "less" or "better" or "worse" without qualification.
  - s1artibartfast 5y ago
    Source? The papers I have seen show the exact opposite!
    - bovid19 5y ago
      Would you mind sharing which papers you are talking about?
    - 5y ago
throwawaysea 5y ago
It's a tyranny of the majority: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyranny_of_the_majority I simply don't understand why one person needs to undergo a medical procedure to enable someone else to experience the safe conditions they want. These vaccines don't even grant immunity in the traditional sense (see CDC's revision of definitions here) - all the vaccines do is move things from one nonzero probability of risk to another nonzero probability of risk. If people are SO worried about their health, they need to behave honestly and either quarantine themselves or wear a full body protective hazmat suit everywhere. But requiring others to get a vaccine to attain some arbitrary risk ratio just doesn't make sense.
- jseban 5y ago
  > I simply don't understand why one person needs to undergo a medical procedure to enable someone else to experience the safe conditions they want. Me neither, I think it's completely unreasonable.
  - rbanffy 5y ago
    I think it’s completely unreasonable that people complain about an explosives factory next to a school. The risk of explosion is very low and the economic impact on the company would be devastating. Why do people think their right to be a little more safer trumps the right to manufacture high explosives?
    - jseban 5y ago
      I don't see how that's an accurate comparison at all. It doesn't require people to undergo medical procedures, doesn't violate their right to their own bodies or their basic freedom
      - rbanffy 5y ago
        It’s about the right to expose others to a risk without their consent. You don’t have the right to expose others to a deadly disease. If you undergo the “medical procedure” (an injection, not surgery, brain transplant or anything complicated, expensive or risky) you reduce risks for you and others, as well as you avoid the risk of using my taxes to pay for additional medical care you wouldn’t need if you just had the very minor inconvenience of two injections.
dhosek 5y ago
In the US, it's because a bunch of demagogues have decided that they will make a lot of money (or retain political power) by saying that vaccines don't work and/or are harmful. Fox News regularly spews this kind of nonsense in its programming and a number of Republican politicians are happy to go along with it.
- rbanffy 5y ago
  We should remember that the freedom of the press exists because a well informed population is necessary for a functioning democracy. The moment the press starts spreading disinformation, it starts to be detrimental to democracy and should be treated as that.
  - Eelongate 5y ago
    > We should remember that the freedom of the press exists because a well informed population is necessary for a functioning democracy. The text of the First Amendment does not contain this or any other justification for itself. And rightfully so I think; such a right does not require utilitarian justification. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
EricE 5y ago
> Let's make this virus extinct. Here's the core problem - unrealistic expectations. Even the CDC has backed off from the whole "make the virus extinct" mantra; they haven't spouted it for over a year now. Which is a good thing - it was utterly ridiculous from day one. This virus isn't going away. It is carried by animals. You going to vaccinate every animal that we all come in contact with? Ha! You are not going to shelter in place or vaccinate away this virus. We had better figure out how to coexist with it in a rational and reasonable manner. The good news with the Omicron variant there are no reported hospitalizations in South Africa. So it's more virulent, but less bad. Here is the perfect path to herd immunity - a variant that people can get a mild infection from and have stronger natural immunity to than the vax would give, as well as broader protection to variants. Actually any protection to variants would be an improvement over the current vax - there has be zero confirmation from the CDC or vax makers that the vax provides any protection against Delta, let alone Omicron. All they make are vague promises about it reducing the reaction. Big deal! If the reporting by South African doctors is correct and Omicron is as mild as they have seen then what exactly is the vax doing? Nothing - except exposing you needlessly to potential side effects. BTW that Omicron is more virulent but less bad is totally unsurprising to anyone familiar with viruses and who wasn't politically motivated or shamed to pushing the ridiculous narratives around COVID right now; this is totally expected behavior as viruses mature in the wild and was predicted by many virologists last year. Virologists who were then quickly derided as quacks, truthers and worse since they dared to challenge the widely accepted groupthink. Same crap that happened with the lab leak, changing stances on masks, ignoring of massive spike in reports in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) and more - hot takes that turned out to be VERY wrong later but amazingly the corrections never get the same amount of publicity as the initial propaganda.
- somewhereoutth 5y ago
  > no reported hospitalisations There are lots of hospitalisations, they are ramping up drastically. See SA regional hospital data. > totally unsurprising to anyone familiar with viruses Actually no human virus has ever evolved through selection pressure to become less virulent. This is just a (convenient to the deniers) myth. Lab leak is just as fanciful as it has ever been, masking advice was updated as soon as we knew better, vaccines have been proven very safe. I am going to accept that you are commenting in good faith. I would ask you to consider your sources, your influences, and the ever rising toll of sickness and death caused not least by the kind of misinformation you are propagating.
lb0 5y ago
> Why do 30% of people refuse to get vaccinated? (here in Aotearoa it is 5%). Something is happening, people are getting left behind, in vast numbers. Forcing them to comply is probably a cure worse than the disease - even a disease like COVID Yeah, please please come here and find a way to "unloose" these people, I'm out of clue. We have a lot of failures here in Germany that surface, everything is too slow, from bad organization to corruption (like most western democracies), behind in digitalization, behind in taking the right measures, slow decisions even after 2 years into this pandemic situation.. true, a big chance to clear up and maybe hopefully do better in the future. But those people (the last 10-20% radical idiotic percent that drives the rest forward)? I really start hating my country and fellow citizens, so many spoiled brats living in prosperity, complaining about everything, believing in total bullshit, it is unbelievable. If you attempt your best in an open and honest discussion, you are called a liar with the first word that comes out of your mouth.... > Want a war? That’s what you’re going to get if you persist with this paranoid hypochondriac fascism. That's a perfect description for those people, not the vaccination, phew..if we get a war it will be by further catering to the far right. And btw, most of these people who go demoing right now (except the few violent far right ones that are under them), I bet most have never been to a real demonstration in their lives - now standing up for their personal party freedom while limiting the freedom of everyone else - again and again. And btw please.. everyone who gets triggered by the word "lockdown" get your facts right first - there are lockdowns and there are lockdowns. We had very strict lockdowns over the last year in most our neighbors (e.g. France, Italy, Spain) - fines when you went out on the street at the wrong times .. we in Germany were up to that once close, though I believe noone here ever got fined for anything. What we discuss and have as "lockdown" right now in Germany is actually just the "lockdown of the unvaccinated" - means 2G in shops that are not essential - oh yeah, poor unvaccinated crowd cannot go Christmas shopping, while health personal is crying for help, ERs and intensive cares are filling up, and a newspaper already appealed to stop driving unless totally necessary, because of injury risk. Yeah sorry, I'm totally fed up :( Read too much on twitter and also here again, and I feel also a little bad and dizzy. Have been waiting 1h in the cold and another hour inside today to get my booster shot - bad organized Germany, again, but not complaining today! I'm happy to see so many people still trying to do their littlest part to relieve the health care workers and try to help get the hospitals some space for people that really need it for reasons that couldn't be avoided. And a little proud to be part of it - In that sense, the dizzyness is appreciated and better than a Feierabendbeer, the injected chip is working, the 5G in my brain is getting activated and well welcomed. gn8
ivan_gammel 5y ago
In a democracy nobody has absolute freedom and minorities do not enjoy protections of the rights to threaten others. If 30% of the people do not get vaccinated without valid reason, they violate the right of others to live and stay healthy. It is scientifically established fact that vaccination reduces health risks for the public, so vaccination mandate will be based on the same constitutional grounds as speed limits and other limitations of personal freedoms. Noteworthy is that it cannot be enforced for the people who just stay at home. Anti-vaxxers can lock themselves up for a few years and be free from vaccine if they want.
- EricE 5y ago
  How do unvaccinated people violate vaccinated people's rights? If you have so little faith that the vaccine can protect you, then why did you take it and why are you advocating others should be forced to? Also even if 100% of all humans were to take it you do realize that vaccinated people can carry and spread it (asymptomatically, no less) and that animals can carry and spread it too? Thinking that unvaccinated people violate anyone's rights is utterly ridiculous; it's far more selfish than what your ilk love to accuse those who don't want to take the vaccine of. This virus is NOT going away. So people might as well get that pipe dream out of their heads right now. It's time to stop letting emotion drive these conversations and get rational as well as realistic.
  - ivan_gammel 5y ago
    >If you have so little faith that the vaccine can protect you, then why did you take it and why are you advocating others should be forced to? This question has a really simple and well-known answer, so if you are unaware of the basics, maybe you should educate yourself first? Vaccine does not offer 100% protection to the individual who takes it, but, according to the scientific research, it significantly reduces: a) the risk to get infected, b) the risk of infecting others, c) the risk of complications or death. Only first of those risks is related to the freedom of personal choice, other two impact public health and public is in their right to restrict personal freedom for those, who do not comply - because chances that people may die are increasing. Yes, vaccine is not the ultimate protection. More lockdowns will be necessary and we will have to wear masks for few years more. Virus will not go away. But 5-10 million people are already dead and we must take all chances to prevent as many deaths as possible, until it mutates to the point where it is no more dangerous than a flu. If this means that some libertarians and anti-vaxxers will be pissed off, well, majority of people in many countries apparently does not care.
jansan 5y ago
It's 30% of the whole population, including small children who cannot get vaccinated at all. My younger son (14 years old) is not vaccinated. He will be banned from entering shops, probably from playing tennis, and our family will not be allowed to meet other families this winter. The reason why he is not vaccinated is that in Germany he would get the same amount of vaccine as a 150kg person. In the UK and Sweden they only give one dose to minors, not so in Germany. He is healthy, and does a lot of sports, so for him I see a higher risk from the vaccine (myocarditis) than from COVID-19. Also, the federal vaccination commission (Stiko) has explicitly demanded that there should be no social discrimination for minors based on their vaccination status as a condition for recommending the vaccines for 12 to 17 year olds. We trusted this recommendation.

fhany 5y ago

If 70% of people have a tattoo of a cross the remaining 30% have to get it because of the "democratic process"? In Florida the summer outbreak stopped by itself and the hospital capacity did not break down completely. The outbreak will stop by itself in Germany, too. But of course Germans need to dramatize everything ...

timdaub 5y ago
Of course not. Why would that be? Nobody is clogging up ICU beds over getting tattoos. smh.

throwaway47292 5y ago

Do you think the % of unvaccinated would stay the same next year? My gut feeling is that it will increase, every 6 months when the new booster is needed we will get more and more people not wanting it. How long until the unvaccinated are more than the vaccinated? 18 months? What happens when they are the majority and ban all vaccines?

igorkraw 5y ago
In that fantasy world they'd still need to provide evidence that the ban us justified, otherwise people can challenge it in court. The vaccine people have the "benefit" of a collapsing medical system and am absence of a similar load and collapse in countries with high vaccination rate.
- throwaway47292 5y ago
  Well if they are 30% now, they must have the 'evidence' that convinces them they are right, when they are 60% they would have even more 'evidence'. Why wouldn't they blame it on, the eastern europeans or something?
  - igorkraw 5y ago
    No,they do no need to have evidence. People don't always act rationally, and if you spend any time talking to a person with anti-vax beliefs you'll notice their belief isn't founded on evidence but on narrative, distrust and emotions. Which does not make them stupid, but it does make them wrong. If they had evidence, they could present it and we'd act on it, as was seen in Germany when there were concerns about a vaccine slightly increasing heart muscle inflammation risk, it was almost immediately halted and they stopped recommending it. And I'm assuming we still have the same rule of law as now and they don't just make shit up, because I'm modeling my fellow humans as having a different (in this case, empirically and from a risk calculus wrong) perspective, not as evil. So they can't abandon democratic principles. Vaccine mandates are coming as a last resort now due to exactly those principles
- native_samples 5y ago

cblconfederate 5y ago

> the absolute democratic majority has made their decision months ago to take the shot but 30% are holding everyone back Were people really asked to cast their vote by vaccinating themselves?

timdaub 5y ago
no. That was a rethorical device I used in my comment.
- cblconfederate 5y ago
  it 's rhetoric based on false equivalence though. I vaccinated myself for purely selfish reasons, to save my ass since the vaccine was the only available preventative pharmaceutical, and at the time i did, it was already becoming clear that herd immunity was not possible. I couldnt care less if others want to save themselves nor do i think everyone should do it.
jeofken 5y ago
No, they were rather locked out of participating is all life outside of the home or forest unless they accept the injection

belter 5y ago

You have a strange understanding of democracy...But if we are at it, would like to propose a public citizen petition: Requesting by democratic mandate that we remove the only immunity to come out of this process, the one from vaccine producers....

whiddershins 5y ago

One of the most salient thing about rights is that the majority isn't permitted take them away whenever it suits them.

rrrrrrrrrrrryan 5y ago
Access to healthcare is considered a right in Germany. They're mandating vaccines so that they can continue to provide all their citizens with this human right. Sometimes rights clash, which is why you can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater despite having the right to freedom of speech. An individual's right to do X on principle can absolutely be overruled by the right for a larger group of people to continue living on this earth.
- floren 5y ago
  > Sometimes rights clash, which is why you can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater despite having the right to freedom of speech. The decision about yelling fire in a crowded theater originates from Schenck v. United States, in which the Supreme Court decided it's OK for the US Government to suppress anti-draft protests; consider if you wish to build arguments on this foundation.
- ghoward 5y ago
  > Access to healthcare is considered a right in Germany. > They're mandating vaccines so that they can continue to provide all their citizens with this human right. This is exactly why those people are wrong. True rights never clash.
  - rbanffy 5y ago
    True rights never clash. People need to be forced to be vaccinated because nobody has a right to spread a deadly disease, so, even if they think they won’t, vaccines will help preventing people from killing others by not being vaccinated.
    - ghoward 5y ago

black_puppydog 5y ago

I think it's worth to point out here that since "it's in everyone's best interest to get vaccinated" you can't really call it taking "one for the team". People getting vaccinated are taking "one for the team" and at the same time "looking out for number one". That's the beauty of it, really: aligned incentives.

zizee 5y ago
Perhaps this is true for covid19, as the vaccines do not seem to stop the vaccinated from getting infected and spreading the virus. But for vaccines that actually stop the majority of vaccinated from becoming infectious the risk reward calculation changes. All vaccinations have some level of risk. If you are surrounded by unvaccinated, your risk of not getting the vaccine outweighs the risk of catching the disease from the herd. In this instance you have aligned incentives. However, if you are in a entirely vaccinated population, your risk profile changes, and it is now possible for your incentives to become unaligned with "the team", or at least more blurry. Unfortunately the average antivaxer's mental model is probably not so well defined that they realise is what they have been doing. I would not be surprised if the majority of them don't realise/agree that they've been selfishly coasting on the coat-tails of the crowd with other vaccines/diseases, and therefore they have trouble realising their currently "successful" strategy is not going to work so well this time round.
- ajsnigrutin 5y ago
  Well yeah, but what you said is exactly the problem here... Vaccines were promised to be safe and effective against infections... then astrazeneca killed a few people, Jansenn killed a few people, moderna was stopped in finland, sweden, denmark etc., and of course people lose trust. In slovenia, for girls under 25, we currently have 1 death due to the vaccine (jansenn) and zero deaths due to covid (with a bit over 50% of the population getting covid - around 1mio). Also the changing the definition, from "preventing infection" to "preveting hospitalizations" doesn't help. I got vaccinated to protect myself. I am aware that even with 100% vaccination rates, sooner or later i will get in contact with covid (and/or i probably already have), and the vaccine is protecting only me. I am not afraid of the unvaccinated, and I don't care if they choose a greater risk, it's their life, and their choice.

newacc9 5y ago

How many footballers have to drop dead on the pitch before you remove the scales from your eyes?

chippy 5y ago

Its worth remembering that division is due to the other side always. This is an absolute statement as division is literally caused by dividing between "sides". You get a divided country when the people within it divides each other into sides. Its never been the case when people have said "our side has caused the division". never. That is the irony you should be finding! If you do finally see this irony you might find more nuance, but maybe more frustration and more uncertainty and confusion but less anger and possibly more empathy to the other. That's why its so easy for people to divide, as its less painful. Dividing and categorizing is how we make sense of the world, but it can be a curse too.

timdaub 5y ago
And how exactly does this statement now help to address the situation?
- prohobo 5y ago
  I suppose by helping people become open to other, possibly more reasonable, options.
- __blockcipher__ 5y ago
  Well it seems to follow pretty naturally that if you think that division is a problem, then being aware of how your attitude is the definition of division seems pretty important.
- chippy 5y ago
  I would hope it might help you with your observation about the division of the country, and with your feeling of irony on another subject, and using both of these skills towards understanding. So for the situation in general: if enough people are less divisive, perhaps a less divided country can occur.
op00to 5y ago
No, vaccinations are how we get out and people who are medically able to get them and don’t are hurting each and every human on this planet due to their own hubris.

ericd 5y ago

Well, there's always civil war. That'd be a bit more divided. We should probably try going in the opposite direction, which usually involves less trying to impose our wills on each other.

timdaub 5y ago
"War" is a pretty strong terminology for the civil discourse currently happening.

elvis10ten 5y ago

Not everybody who hasn’t taken the vaccine is an antivaxxer. I think a distinction needs to be made between anti vaxxers and people who are just naive/“dumb”. I have seen more of the later group. Which is why I’m surprised when someone here or in mainstream media says this has anything to do with a political side. This distinction is useful IMO in creating sound policies.

timdaub 5y ago
Dunno if I agree. It's like being in the stock market. Talk is cheap and so actions carry way more signal. It's a stronger statement to be vacccinated than to argue online for vaccinations. And it's a stronger statement to not be vaccinated than to argue online against vaccinations.
op00to 5y ago
Literally people who are eligible and do not get the vaccine are anti-vaccination.
hfj6gghgf 5y ago
Finally someone who doesn't abuse the word antivaxer. An enourmous majority of people who choose to not take this particular vaccine are not antivaxers. Or maybe the meaning of the word has evolved and I'm out of the loop. In my vocabulary it is someone who doesn't believe in/take any vaccines.
- op00to 5y ago
  So if someone takes ONE vaccine but shuns all others they can’t be anti-vaccine? That makes no logical sense.

xafnuaetrf8764 5y ago

You're just a piece of a fucking fascist, cunt.

TacticalCoder 5y ago

> ... but 30% are holding everyone back. Not at all and I can turn that argument back: I know non-vaccinated people who stay at home and "evil" fully vaccinated people who go out. It is a fact that vaccinated people can still carry and transmit the virus. It is also a fact that in the EU 40 to 60% of all ICU beds are filled with fully vaccinated people (40% in Spain atm but the number is going up, 50% in Belgium, 60% in the Netherlands, for example). So evil, fully vaccinated (like me btw), people going out, spreading the virus, then falling ill and ending up on an ICU bed. Do you really want to shame people like that? Because if we play that game, then I'll shame the vaccinated people who still have a social life: they do spread the virus. How did these evil fully vaccinated people who are on ICU bed get the virus? Who did they give it too? Why didn't they stay at home / live less of a social life? They're putting an unnecessary burden on the healthcare system... Countries like Gibraltar with 100% vaccination rate still just experienced a wave. Same in Israel, one of the most vaccinated country on earth. > Besides, it's in everyone's best interest to get vaccinated. That is not clear at all. Why not lock down hard, very hard, the old and those known at risk why letting the virus circulate among the healthy population: this, and that is a known fact, creates a much better immunity than the one conferred by the "vaccine". The studies published showed 12x less risk to catch the Delta variant if you had had Covid before compared to someone who just had the shots. If anything: maybe that that "vaccine" which still let people carry and spread the virus is part of the problem. The problem is the old and those at risk have been sold a lie by politicians and big pharma: that by getting the vaccine they'd be safe. So they let their guards down and now they're fully vaccinated... on ICU beds.

glfharris 5y ago
There are more vaccinated people than not, and people with prior health conditions are more likely to be vaccinated so it's not surprising they would be represented in the ITU population.
- native_samples 5y ago
  You'd think so but it's actually the other way around: the people most likely to die are not given vaccines (because there's no point). This can be seen in the UK data where increasing vaccinations causes an increase in deaths in unvaccinated people from non-COVID causes. Clearly that's not a biological link - rather, what's happening is that as the vaccinated population grows, the really sick and dying people get concentrated in the unvaccinated cohort, which then experiences higher death rates. Data is tricky, especially with something like this.

forgotmyoldname 5y ago

Last weekend I was at a Japanese history museum, and part of the exhibit was on 1600s-1800s medical technology. In the 1870s, Japan had vaccine passports and kept logs of unvaccinated people in order to track them down. It was deemed a huge step forward in developing the country. It’s interesting how some people today think mandatory vaccination is some massive, unprecedented destruction of freedom, when it’s historically nothing new and something that was essential to helping your country stay strong.

cbozeman 5y ago
Given Japan was a nation where a certain class could execute summarily anyone below them, for something as germaine as insulting them, and given what Japan did to Chinese civilians during World War II, you'll forgive me if I don't look to their 1870s ideals as inspiration for living in 2021.
- forgotmyoldname 5y ago
  Neither of those were happening in that era. They’re also as irrelevant as bringing up European colonial horrors or ongoing American foreign intervention.
  - areyousure 5y ago
    It's actually directly relevant in this context, because Japan does NOT in fact have vaccine passports today (as opposed to the 1870s as you allege). Furthermore, the reason is causally due to the behavior of Japanese authorities during World War II. See eg https://items.ssrc.org/covid-19-and-the-social-sciences/covid-19-in-east-asia/japans-covid-19-strategy/ https://items.ssrc.org/covid-19-and-the-social-sciences/covi... > Unlike in Western countries, it is not possible to carry out lockdowns or forcibly isolate patients. Due to unchecked enforcement measures during World War II, there has been a tendency in Japan to strongly discourage the government from having strong coercive power, especially from interfering in ordinary people’s lives, so as not to repeat what happened during that period. The power of the Japanese government to intervene in individuals’ lives, even during an emergency, is constitutionally and legally limited. The Infectious Diseases Control Law, for example, was enacted with the utmost consideration for individuals’ human rights and it limits the public sector’s power to intervene in a person’s life, even for the purpose of infectious disease control. Besides, tracking infected people has many privacy considerations, and it is legally difficult in Japan to use GPS tracking or credit card histories to track activities, as it is being done in other Asian countries. The government’s ability to access individual citizens’ data is minimal, making infectious disease control difficult.

helge9210 5y ago

> Besides, it's in everyone's best interest to get vaccinated. No. Some are OK with the risk. > this is a democracy If all the possible choices for the vote are supported by all the parties. If there are unacceptable choices, this is just a dictatorship of the majority.

throwaway675309 5y ago
What about compulsory seatbelts?
- xdennis 5y ago
  No one is forced to drive.
- EricE 5y ago
  Wearing a seatbelt doesn't expose you to potential life long side affects to your health for the rest of your life. Just one example of one kid screwed up for life now: https://imgur.com/SNMhlBg https://imgur.com/SNMhlBg There was ZERO reason for an otherwise healthy 14 year old to get the vaccine. Too bad this mom found out the hard way.
mdp2021 5y ago
> If all the possible choices for the vote are supported by all the parties. If there are unacceptable choices, this is just a dictatorship of the majority I noticed that some have an interpretation of democracy as "the majority shall dominate you". They seem to be forgetful of the principle of "costitutionalism": all powers shall be preliminary limited through a social contract.

MarcoZavala 5y ago

pohl 5y ago

30% are holding everyone back Are you still talking about Germany, because that's exactly the situation we have in the U.S., too. Same ratio, even.

paul7986 5y ago

I just became fully vaccinated and each day since I am dealing with dizziness / lightheaded-ness spells. Everyone should take one for the team you say but do you know what the future holds for the team? You just trust emphatically what the early science says vs. waiting over time to see all of it's effects on a huge population? That and time is the true bellweather but we are forced guinea pigs to join the experiment or lose our livelihoods. Can you tell me Why is the FDA want 55 years to process and release all the vaccine data they have.... shouldn't they be getting that out ASAP ... from Reuters (non-biased or sided media) https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/wait-what-fda-wants-55-years-process-foia-request-over-vaccine-data-2021-11-18/ https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/wait-what-fda-wants... You either believe everything your govt says and the very early science says (time is the bellweather and the large population data that comes with it) or you live life on the fence questioning things before making the best decision for yourself or you go completely agaisnt the ones who just buy, soak up and believe everything their side says.

swader999 5y ago
Try ivermectin. It helps with vaccine injury too.
- paul7986 5y ago
  Not sure if your comment is sarcastic or not but I sit in the middle ...on the fence and there's no better bellweather then time ...long periods of time and it's data to make the best decision for me!
  - EricE 5y ago
    He's being serious. There is so much medical information being suppressed because it doesn't fit certain political narratives - that's the real crime right now. Luckily there are at least a few doctors who remain dedicated to science and the Hippocratic Oath and who are unbowed by political and social pressure. Some great resources here: https://aapsonline.org/covidpatientguide/ https://aapsonline.org/covidpatientguide/ And if you can't find a rational doctor locally, they can arrange for telemedicine visits from doctors who aren't pretending the vax is the end all be all one size fits all solution to the exclusion of anything else.

cbozeman 5y ago

LOL, "my body, my choice" right up until it's something that the political left want, then it's, "Fuck you, get in line or die." Either we have autonomy over our medical choices or we don't, period. This is the problem with having principles. You either live by them and have integrity or you abandon them and you don't.

jpcfl 5y ago

> this is a democracy and so it can also be deemed legitimate and representative to govern according to the majority decision Not if the decision violates the constitution.

VoodooJuJu 5y ago

>30% are holding everyone back. What do you mean by this?

xdennis 5y ago

Your logic is insane. There are countries were a majority agrees with female/male circumcision. I guess you'd be the first to go slashing at people's genitals because the minority is holding everyone back.

kingcharles 5y ago
I hadn't thought about this, but I bet a majority of the people in the USA refusing vaccinations are totally fine about mutilating their male babies by slicing off chunks of their penis.
- TheRealNGenius 5y ago
  classic symptom of doublethink - holding contradictory beliefs whenever they suit you without regard for self-consistency
timdaub 5y ago
You way of arguing is exaggerated. Of course, I'd strongly oppose such decision. It's an entirely separate issue that has nothing to do with ICU beds, vaccines and a pandemic.

stormking 5y ago

I don't understand this line of thinking. Voluntarily taking the shot yourself is completely different from making a "majority decision". Off course I got vaccinated, but I'm totally opposed to forcing it on people. It is absolutely crazy how easy it was for our incompetent politicians to blame people WHO ARE NOT EVEN BREAKING ANY LAWS for their own disastrous communication (just remember those "mask are actually bad for you" talking points when there weren't any) and overall pandemic management. They constantly lied to us on every step of the way and now they're surprised that some people don't trust them?

9dev 5y ago
> They constantly lied to us on every step of the way and now they're surprised that some people don't trust them? I’m sorry to say this but that is just plain populist. I do agree that pandemic management surely wasn’t optimal, but insinuating malice is simply misplaced. The situation was chaotic because a pandemic is chaotic. Lots of federal offices that are known for being low-intensity workplaces - such as public health offices - suddenly had more work due than in the last 40 years combined. Politicians without any experience in managing world-scale catastrophes had to perform, often 80+ hours per week. International supply chains collapsed, decades of ridiculous IT politics started showing. Due to Germany‘s federalism, states had way too much sovereignty for way too long into the crisis. Public health institutions, healthcare professionals, Pharma companies - all had different opinions on what might be the best next step. Masks were not going to be deliverable in the quantities required to provide for the entire population. At some point, a decision had to be made to reserve contingencies for hospitals. Solutions to all these problems may be obvious in hindsight, but I ask for a little respect to all the people that had to find them in a dynamic, completely unknown environment. Lots of things went smooth as fuck, you just didn’t notice because you took them for granted. We’re talking about humans after all.
- stormking 5y ago
  > I’m sorry to say this but that is just plain populist. No, it's a fact. I understand why they were lying about things, e.g. the usefulness of masks, but that doesn't make it less dishonest or patronizing. You simply can't say one thing today, the opposite tomorrow and still expect people to just believe you the day after that. And please don't buy into that "it's all new to us" narrative. Not knowing how to handle things is not a license to just make stuff up. And if you still think you have to, at least remain consistent about it. And if you can't do that either, at least don't complain when people don't trust you, anymore. And if you have to complain about people not trusting you, anymore, at least don't blame them for the consequences OF YOUR OWN CLUSTERFUCK.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

TurkishPoptart 5y ago

1. There's little concern about those with natural immunity who have recovered from COVID. It makes zero sense to induce extra risk of side effects from a "vaccine" if the patient already has natural immunity. 2. Research is indicating that in breakthrough infections to fully vaccinated people, the viral load is the same. [1] 3. The vaccines don't _prevent infection_ unlike the "classic" childhood vaccines. They are merely prophylactics that are incorrectly called vaccines to encourage people to get them and reduce hospitalization rate. 4. Everyone has their own individual level of risk. Healthy, young people have an infinitesimal rate of death from this virus compared to the old and infirm. [1]: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00648-4/fulltext https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3...

jokethrowaway 5y ago

Honestly, I think it's time we start splitting countries. I don't want to live in the same country as people like you who have no concern about human rights, freedom and individualism. I don't want a majority controlled with biased media and internet to decide for my life.

codr7 5y ago
The polarization has been accelerating like mad lately, pretty soon we won't be able to live together in peace. And I suspect that's the problem they're aiming for to get an excuse to implement the police state solution.

seoulmetro 5y ago

You're confusing majority of one statistic for majority of another statistic. As far as I know, the majority didn't "vote" for mandatory vaccines, even if the majority have received vaccines.

Bantros 5y ago

It's just I'm not gonna take it is all

op00to 5y ago
So brave

snidane 5y ago

I think you are confusing a vaccine and an experimental 6-month cycle therapy that just happened to get 'vaccine' in its name. Don't get confused by names. Democratic People's Republic of Korea is democratic in name only as well.

cm2187 5y ago

You are equating not taking the vaccine to being anti-vax. That makes a nice slogan but that is not true. For instance it makes zero sense for people who already got covid to get vaccinated. By now that must be 20-30% of the population in most western countries. The benefits for a healthy 20-something are also spurious. This is not the population that will flood ICUs. So you can perfectly decline to take that vaccine without being anti-vax in any way. There are many people who decline to be vaccinated who are irrational (and I think anyone over 60 who does is just not looking at their risks right). But you won’t convince them by forcing their hand or making obviously untrue statements.

camgunz 5y ago
> The benefits for a healthy 20-something are also spurious. They can get it and spread it to others who are more vulnerable. Unbelievable that you and others still don't know the most basic facts about diseases, even two years into a pandemic. Please get educated and stop spreading misinformation.
- cm2187 5y ago
  I will pass on the derogatory comments. Except that it doesn’t look like the vaccine is doing much to prevent transmissions. The UK has been near 90% vaccinated since this summer, and despite that it experiences a high number of cases, of the same order of magnitude than pre-vaccination. And it seems to be the same in other high vaccination countries. Also if you are vulnerable and unvaccinated, you own the risk. The only thing vaccines seem to be efficient at is reducing hospitalisations, which at the end of the day is what matters.

cedivad 5y ago

> but 30% are holding everyone back If you truly believe squashing the number of unvaccinated people will result in any significant benefit for the rest of us you are undeserving of the first place in this comment thread. You could wait a few months for those vaccine laws to go into effect in Europe for proof. Or you could just look at the existing body of data that's staring at you in the face and are deciding to ignore because faulting someone else is one of the most primitive endorphins kicks you can get. Signed: a fully vaccinated (and disgusted) user.

snidane 5y ago

Thay's why constitutions exist. So that any 1% cannot be abused by the 99%. Pure democracy means 51% can wipe out the 49%, Rwanda style.

Thiez 5y ago
In most countries a 99% majority is very much sufficient to amend the constitution.

ekianjo 5y ago

Talking about majority ruling what happens to the bodies of a smaller minority... sounds like a good fascist principle. No matter your good intentions.

bnlpaer 5y ago

So your argument is that people have to undergo a medical procedure so others have a greater chance of survival. While I don't fully believe this premise, let's assume it is true. I then demand that abortion be made entirely illegal, since it is a civic duty to "take one for the team".

tomrod 5y ago

Well said. It's a civic duty to be vaccinated. It's the rational, sane, and most personally and socially beneficial policy. Were this a game theory context we would be saying that getting the vaccine strictly dominates not getting the vaccine.

gautamdivgi 5y ago

I’m pro-vax. I’ve taken the shots and the booster. But I fail to see the point of this lockdown. If you are 70% vaccinated as a country and the remainder of the 30% is possibly low risk why lockdown? You’ll never get to 100% vaccinated or even 90%. If the 70% vaccinated isn’t reducing the load on the hospitals we have an issue with vaccinations.

cruelty 5y ago
They need to reach 100% to eliminate the control group before everyone starts getting sick from them

rglullis 5y ago

- You can be against mandatory vaccinations and not be an anti-vaxxer. - "Herd immunity" is only a secondary desired trait for the vaccine. The primary one should be that the individual that gets the vaccine will have a stronger immune system and less likely to be severely sick. I got it for my own benefit, not because I want to be nice to others. - The vaccine was sold as a one-shot thing. I think that the vaccine is safe enough for its risks to outweighs the benefits if it was only once. If periodic boosters start getting required, the calculus changes. - Where does it stop? Let's not forget that the whole thing with lockdowns was to flatten the curve and to avoid the health care system to collapse. These should've been seen as temporary measures so that we could improve the healthcare system so that it could respond properly. Instead, it has become a perma-threat with no end in sight.

lend000 5y ago

While I offer no opinion about whether vaccinations should be compulsory, it must be stated that if they should, it certainly isn't because of your argument about pure democracy. In a pure democracy, 90% of the population can choose to oppress the other 10%, and they have, many, many times throughout history. If vaccinations should be made mandatory in a free society, it is solely due to the externality imposed by the unvaccinated on others (like you mentioned with ICU capacity, as well as general pathogen propagation), and avoiding that violation of the broader public's freedoms.

timdaub 5y ago
Sure, but the two qualities: - 70% of population vaccinated - and ICU beds clogging up because of unvaccinated don't have to be considered separately. Instead, they are nice facts for making an informed decision about what to do next.

TrispusAttucks 5y ago

Disclaimer: I am fully vaccinated and have had the booster shot. From US perspective... What I find ironic is: President Biden, Anthony Fauci, White House Press Secretary all said they would "never mandate vaccinations" and it's "not the place of the federal government to mandate vaccinations" and that they believe "it doesn't have the authority to do so anyway"... And since when do we not care about the minority? Also when it comes to medical decisions about my body the government shouldn't have a say in it. On top of all that the effectiveness of the vaccine and it's longevity leave a lot to be desired. This ain't no polio silver bullet and the virus continues to mutate and break through even the most vaccinated populations.

cqadt 5y ago

Everyone uses the propaganda numbers. Here are the official ones: https://impfdashboard.de/en/ https://impfdashboard.de/en/ Fully vaccinated: 60+: 86.1% 18+: 79.3% 12–17: 46.6% Your only argument is not clogging up the ICUs. The only age group that has a significant risk is 60+, so isolate them or vax them or both. Forceful vaccination of 12-17 years olds will do exactly nothing for ICUs. I also do not understand the focus on ICUs. Put up military field hospitals, intubation is questionable anyhow, just give oxygen. Most facilities in ICUs are not required for Covid (as I understand it, happy to be corrected if someone here actually has first hand experience).

62951413 5y ago

It's terrifying how many things I used to be told in my youth about the "free world" have turned out to be blatant lies in the last few years. It's one thing to be forced by ruthless government but ordinary people demanding to be left without a choice is a sight to behold. I'm ashamed to admit that for a couple of months early last year I actually believed in the "pandemic". I was really confused because so many countries acted along the same lines. And then I had. It was a basically a flu though my sense of smell has been degraded since then. My parent (70+) had it this last fall, my father ended up in hospital (no ICU or anything drastic). Still, my mother had had a much closer call with a flu a few years ago. Now the company I work for forces me between undertaking experimental medical procedures and getting much better at leetcode. You know what's funny? They require we get pricked and go back to the office in Jan. But even though everyone will be fully "vaccinated" they still demand masks in the office. You know what's really funny? Of all our offices across the globe (including China of all places) only American ones require "vaccination". Most others at worst recommend masks. Speaking of "pandemics". You know what you'd see if there were one (aside from bodies lying in the streets)? How about hermetically sealed borders? Including our southern one. With the border patrol shooting anything approaching it with no warning. Last time I checked the news, they were not even demanding "vaccination" papers. Also I kind of remember "masks are necessary for medical professionals only", "2 weeks to not overload the ICU", "it's just a pinch", ".. or two", " .. and probably a second booster", <you are here>, ".. possibly every 6 months?". Also, do you recognize that the government peddling all this "pandemic" propaganda is the same we have seen in action for the last couple of years? They have spectacularly failed at their core business of maintaining rule of law and fighting wars. Well, at least not losing one more humiliatingly than the Soviets. Why would you trust your health to them? My body my rules, anyone?

frzj 5y ago

The only argument that is viable against vaccination is that one might already have natural immunity. I get that some will try to get infected on purpose, but those will be the minority of the minority. Maybe there is also the argument that higher vaccination rates will not help. I heard that 90% UK's population has antibodies. People say that Spain has low rates now b/c they have a high vaccination rate, but they also had a high number of cases previously, and they were probably underreported. Personally, I gladly increased the average antibodies count of the population by getting vaccinated despite already having some immunity, but people are frightened, and we can't really change their minds. Force will only make them more stubborn.