3 ms·
> Yep, that's definitely how we handled smallpox, polio, mumps, measles and more, diseases that use to kill or cripple huge numbers of people, and whose general
by aakresearch 5y ago
> Yep, that's definitely how we handled smallpox, polio, mumps, measles and more, diseases that use to kill or cripple huge numbers of people, and whose general eradication has come at little to no cost in terms of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
Yet the exceptions to the above (non)-"mandates" were and are pretty generous. Even in the dark empire of ex-USSR, if someone didn't very clearly fit into a "safe" statistical bucket due to some sickness, or other conditions - they were put on a reduced vax protocol, or spared injections completely. How do I know this - first-hand experience by me and my family. And nobody ever was threatened to lose their job or right to enter a grocery store, or refused to be seen by doctor due to missing inoculation. Granted, some occupations - meat industry, for example - did require "sanitary passport", but it was an utter lunacy to demand such from teachers, or truckers, or software developers.
- PaulDavisThe1st 5y agoMost the diseases we have eradicated with vaccines were already not in a position to cause pandemics. We also vaccinated against them mostly in childhood, which 20 years later gave us (the beginning of) an adult population that didn't need to be cajoled into doing the right thing. By contrast, COVID19 is in almost every sense a brand new disease to which very few humans anywhere on the planet had any natural immunity, and is contagious enough (even in the less-highly contagious variant cases) to cause pandemics that are public (not personal) health emergencies. It's hardly surprising that the approaches would differ somewhat.