Global Protests Against Social Distancing, Lockdown, Vaccine Mandate

  • Thread starter Dotini
  • 594 comments
  • 22,698 views
7,677
Denmark
Denmark
You said prior to the pandemic it wasn't illegal for people to simply exist. I provided you with an example of where it was. That's all my post was getting at.
And I clarified. I thought it was obvious going by Austria’s example being at the centre of the discussion.
I'm not in favor of forced vaccinations either. I am, however, in favor of things like termination of employment, unable to enter a venue, and being denied healthcare based on your vaccination status if a company or organization chooses to do so. Despite what you may think, I am pro-choice when it comes to vaccines, but on the same token, I'm also pro-accepting the consequences of your actions.
I do not agree that rejection of the vaccines should make it impossible to live at least a decent life. Otherwise you put pressure on people that amounts to force. Again, too many people treat the vaccines as this ultimate solution, when in fact improper behavior is the biggest culprit in spreading the disease regardless of vaccine status.
Ideally, there wouldn't be anti-vaxxers though, but there are too many ignorant people out there that buy into misinformation to make that a reality. It's almost like schools stopped teaching the scientific method somewhere along the way.
The strong emphasis on vaccines is partially responsible for misinformation. There’s too much focus on them and too little on other areas that can prevent further spread. For example, it’s hypocritical to promote vaccines but at the same time approve of nightclubs and bars opening their doors to alchohol consumption. Luxuries that make it very hard to take the need for mass vaccinations seriously.
 
Last edited:
22,505
United States
Here to Eternity
TexRex72
5wa2or.jpg
 

Joey D

Premium
44,276
United States
Holladay, UT
GTP_Joey
GTP Joey
I do not agree that rejection of the vaccines should make it impossible to live at least a decent life. Otherwise you put pressure on people that amounts to force.
You're not being forced to be vaccinated though, you're making a choice and so is someone like your employer. Employers should be able to do that. I also support an employer's right to terminate someone for being vaccinated. Freedom of choice does not mean freedom from consequences.

Here in Salt Lake, we had a store that had a sign out front that sad masks weren't allowed in the store. As foolish as I think that is, I agree that they have the right to do that, just as I had the right to spend my money elsewhere since I'm not going to support a practice like that. Apparently, several other people had the same idea and as of last week, that store is out of business.
Again, too many people treat the vaccines as this ultimate solution, when in fact improper behavior is the biggest culprit in spreading the disease regardless of vaccine status.
I don't disagree with that. However, vaccines are the best solution we have currently, but there are shortcomings with them, just like every vaccine on the market. Vaccines only work when enough of the population is vaccinated and vaccinated prior to the immunity waning. Unfortunately, that didn't happen so the COVID vaccines are less effective. We're not sure of exactly what percentage needs to be hit, but it's probably around 75-80% of the population. If that had happened within the first six months of the vaccine being available, it would've worked splendidly. But we've missed that window. The only way to combat that now would be for mass vaccination of people all at once with an updated formula and the likelihood of that happening is somewhere between slim to none. Thankfully, there are pills that are coming out that should help, but it's anyone's guess how good those are going to be and they all rely on tight timelines.

I'm vaccinated with a booster shot. I still wear a mask, I still practice physical distancing, and I still take all the same precautions I did prior to being vaccinated. I know I'm more protected now than I was this time last year, but I still understand the shortcomings of the vaccine and that I can infect others. My son isn't old enough to be vaccinated and I'm doing what I can to protect him.
The strong emphasis on vaccines is partially responsible for misinformation. There’s too much focus on them and too little on other areas that can prevent further spread. For example, it’s hypocritical to promote vaccines but at the same time approve of nightclubs and bars opening their doors to alchohol consumption. Luxuries that make it very hard to take the need for mass vaccinations seriously.
I agree to an extent and yes, several media outlets and government officials don't understand vaccines so they treated it like a "free pass" when really it isn't. However, you can't keep things shut down for long and we're seeing the effect of what happens when you shut down the global economy for too long. Ideally, governments and media outlets shouldn't have overhyped the vaccine but rather explained that it only works when enough people get it in a given time frame. When actual medical experts tried to explain this, it was drowned out by all the noise and people ignore it. Now you have people running around spouting off BS like the vaccine contains microchips or that it will make you infertile.
 
1,509
Netherlands
Netherlands
You're not being forced to be vaccinated though, you're making a choice and so is someone like your employer.
Yes, get vaccinated or lose your job is technically but come on...
Employers should be able to do that. I also support an employer's right to terminate someone for being vaccinated. Freedom of choice does not mean freedom from consequences.
But an employer won't have a right to terminate someone for being vaccinated. An employer won't have a right employ an unvaccinated person. That's where the problem is. The current mandates don't give employer's the choices you are talking about. The mandates people are protesting are the kind of mandates That forces employer's to terminate someone for being unvaccinated.

It might be a suprise to you, but I do support an employers right not to employ someone who is not vaccinated. An unvaccinated person could work at a place where they do employ someone who is not vaccinated. But that is not the situation that is presented at the moment.

Same for restaurant owners. It's not that the restaurant owner wants to keep unvaccinated people out, it's that the government makes them keep unvaccinated people out.

It's the business owner that doesn't have a choice.
 
858
United States
Madison, WI
FerrariF1GT
FerrariFan24
Is this cancel culture?
I bet that the owner(s), who presumably supports the Free Market™, is now wishing that the government do something to keep the shop running but is conflicted on whether it means supporting big government or not.
 
22,505
United States
Here to Eternity
TexRex72
I bet that the owner(s), who presumably supports the Free Market™, is now wishing that the government do something to keep the shop running but is conflicted on whether it means supporting big government or not.
I think that's probably generous of you. I don't expect any internal strife.
 

Joey D

Premium
44,276
United States
Holladay, UT
GTP_Joey
GTP Joey
Yes, get vaccinated or lose your job is technically but come on...
Many places that require vaccines to work there have always required vaccines. In healthcare, you literally sign a document before being hired that states you'll be up to date on all vaccines. Most other places have a document that says you agree to the company policy and that you're aware that policy can change. If a company's policy is to have vaccinated workers, then that's its policy.
But an employer won't have a right to terminate someone for being vaccinated. An employer won't have a right employ an unvaccinated person. That's where the problem is. The current mandates don't give employer's the choices you are talking about. The mandates people are protesting are the kind of mandates That forces employer's to terminate someone for being unvaccinated.
I don't know enough about European law to say if that's what's happening or not. In the US though, even the mandate says you have an option to do weekly testing instead of being vaccinated. So employers have a choice here, but many of the employers simply don't want to deal with unvaccinated people and I don't blame them. The more susceptible you are to disease, the greater the likelihood you'll miss work. With COVID being as infectious as it is, one person getting it could take down an entire department which could grind the business to a halt for a week or more. This is why in healthcare you're required to get the flu shot every year. Hospitals don't want entire nursing units to go down all at once. They also don't want a patient to get a hospital acquired infection, which costs them money.

What people are protesting in America is that they want freedom of choice while being free from consequences. If they were simply protesting saying they wanted the freedom of choice while accepting the consequences, I'd probably be more sympathetic to their cause. As it is right now, they're just a bunch of idiots yelling loudly about stuff they don't understand. Also, a shockingly high number of people who are protesting the vaccine mandates are doing it because they're so deep in QAnon that they can't see past their own ignorance. They genuinely think Bill Gates and other wealthy people are trying to put microchips in you so that they can track your movements. Never mind that virtually everyone carries a mobile phone that tracks everything anyway.
 
12,305
Australia
Adelaide
GTP_Imari
Who are the fittest? Those willing to let authorities control their lives, or those trying to protect their rights?
I hear the authorities want you to eat food every day. The fittest are those who protect their right to not eat food! We will not kowtow to these authoritarians who dictate that we absorb nutrition from "food"! Breathairianism forever!
Excuse the huuuge (and dumb and silly)mistake on my part. Less than zero would be minus which is silly. What I ment is that it's in the less than 1% range. When comparing the under 60 numbers from the Netherlands to America, then you would be way better of in the Netherlands. Almost 10 times. Deaths under 60 are at 0,0234% in the Netherlands.
So 2 in 10,000 people under 60 die of COVID in the Netherlands? That sounds... bad. If I'm at work and someone tells me to do a job that has a 1 in 5,000 chance of me dying, I'm not doing it. No way. Not even once. Figure out something safer, because I've seen people die on the job and I know how statistics work.

But you think that this chance of death is no big deal, and not even a big deal in America where it's even worse? That feels like a pretty low value to put on your own life. I think most laymen substantially underestimate the risk from deadly situations. A 1% risk of death is a situation that no professional would ever put themselves in willingly, so I don't understand why the public should accept such a thing let alone anything anywhere near it.
 
1,509
Netherlands
Netherlands
Many places that require vaccines to work there have always required vaccines. In healthcare, you literally sign a document before being hired that states you'll be up to date on all vaccines. Most other places have a document that says you agree to the company policy and that you're aware that policy can change. If a company's policy is to have vaccinated workers, then that's its policy.
Again, fine. But thats not the issue here. You make it seem like the company has a choice. The mandate's won't give them a choice. Nobody here is protesting the places that have had a vaccine requirement. People know about the requirement before they start working there. Many company's don't have a vaccine requirement and are not in a rush to put one in place. What is happening in Europe right now is that the regimes in power are forcing company's to change their policy. That's a big difference from signing a document or the company changing its policy.
I don't know enough about European law to say if that's what's happening or not. In the US though, even the mandate says you have an option to do weekly testing instead of being vaccinated. So employers have a choice here, but many of the employers simply don't want to deal with unvaccinated people and I don't blame them. The more susceptible you are to disease, the greater the likelihood you'll miss work. With COVID being as infectious as it is, one person getting it could take down an entire department which could grind the business to a halt for a week or more. This is why in healthcare you're required to get the flu shot every year. Hospitals don't want entire nursing units to go down all at once. They also don't want a patient to get a hospital acquired infection, which costs them money.
The option of doing testing is the option they want to get rid of. The only option to keep your job is get vaccinated or get COVID and sit it out for 10 days to get your pass. People that don't want to get vaccinated are now trying to get infected so that they can get a COVID pass.
What people are protesting in America is that they want freedom of choice while being free from consequences. If they were simply protesting saying they wanted the freedom of choice while accepting the consequences, I'd probably be more sympathetic to their cause. As it is right now, they're just a bunch of idiots yelling loudly about stuff they don't understand. Also, a shockingly high number of people who are protesting the vaccine mandates are doing it because they're so deep in QAnon that they can't see past their own ignorance. They genuinely think Bill Gates and other wealthy people are trying to put microchips in you so that they can track your movements. Never mind that virtually everyone carries a mobile phone that tracks everything anyway.
Having to pick between an outcome that is bad for you is not a real choice. And it really is only a tiny number of people that believe Bill Gates is trying to track you with microchips..
I hear the authorities want you to eat food every day. The fittest are those who protect their right to not eat food! We will not kowtow to these authoritarians who dictate that we absorb nutrition from "food"! Breathairianism forever!
You eat food so that you won't starve to death...
So 2 in 10,000 people under 60 die of COVID in the Netherlands? That sounds... bad. If I'm at work and someone tells me to do a job that has a 1 in 5,000 chance of me dying, I'm not doing it. No way. Not even once. Figure out something safer, because I've seen people die on the job and I know how statistics work.
Yes horrible, I agree. But there are more factors that contribute to these people dying than just COVID. And I'm with you on not doing a job with a 1 in 5000 chance of dying. But what if those 1 in 5000 dying on the job can be explained by the behaviour of 1 in 5000 people doing that job? Do we now correct the behaviour of everybody at the job?
But you think that this chance of death is no big deal, and not even a big deal in America where it's even worse? That feels like a pretty low value to put on your own life. I think most laymen substantially underestimate the risk from deadly situations. A 1% risk of death is a situation that no professional would ever put themselves in willingly, so I don't understand why the public should accept such a thing let alone anything anywhere near it.
Not my words, never said that, this is your interpretation. What is a big deal to me is putting restrictions on 99.8% of the people because the regime only has one solution and that is vaccines.
 
12,305
Australia
Adelaide
GTP_Imari
You eat food so that you won't starve to death...
Now there's a thought, doing something to avoid death. Hmm. You sure it's not an authoritarian plot? They do tell me that I'll die if I don't eat, but I'm just not sure I believe the mainstream media.
Yes horrible, I agree. But there are more factors that contribute to these people dying than just COVID. And I'm with you on not doing a job with a 1 in 5000 chance of dying. But what if those 1 in 5000 dying on the job can be explained by the behaviour of 1 in 5000 people doing that job? Do we now correct the behaviour of everybody at the job?
You're saying that everyone under 60 that dies of COVID it's their own fault? Everyone? All of them? Wut?

And yeah, actually the way that it works is that when there's a fatal accident even if it was the person's own fault there will usually be changes made so that the job is performed in a way that people can't mess up in that way any more. Electricians might be required to wear insulating gloves, even though the person who made that policy necessary did so by personally messing up and accidentally touching live. It's how we make sure that when someone finds a new and novel way of injuring or killing themselves that they at least serve as warning for the next people.

You apparently haven't learned a thing from the people that died before you. Which is a bit of a shame, because it seems like you were one of the fortunate ones who didn't get particularly hammered by the virus yet you can't comprehend that the experience isn't necessarily the same for everyone.
Not my words, never said that, this is your interpretation. What is a big deal to me is putting restrictions on 99.8% of the people because the regime only has one solution and that is vaccines.
Seems like a pretty valid interpretation to me given all the things you've said in this thread, and I don't see you denying it. I see you specifically moving the topic to what you think is a big deal instead of correcting me. Congratulations on your apathy.

Most people don't see taking a vaccine as a restriction. So really, there's a small proportion of people who are actually being restricted in a way that is problem for them.

But no matter how many people are being meaningfully inconvenienced, you see those restrictions as overbearing compared to a relatively high risk of death. A risk that's high enough that you wouldn't accept doing a job with the same risk. I feel like if you would refuse something totally based on risk, then restrictions to mitigate a similar level of risk are totally appropriate. Because the "refuse" option with COVID is lockdown, and we all know that's not really a viable long term plan. I'm in Australia, we've had plenty of lockdown. People have to come out of their houses eventually, and so given the known risk some alterations of behaviour are appropriate unless you're a psychopath with absolutely no care for anyone else's wellbeing.
 
9,771
Sweden
Sweden
eran0004
Really don't get what you are saying here?? COVID may not be like the Flu, but the problems we had with ICU capacity in the years before COVID were the same. The only difference is that the people that did not work in health care did not care about the capacity problems. Again, ICU capacity decreased by 2/3 in a span of 10 years with an growing and aging population. Nothing was done about the problems in health care a the people responsible are shifting the blame to people who are not vaccination.
Sure, cutting ICU capacity didn't help, but the old capacity wouldn't be anywhere near enough.
I also wonder where that 10% of everyone infected needing ICU care is based on? The Netherlands has had about 2.6 million people infected with COVID and 35.000 hospitalisations total (that includes ICU admission but is not all ICU admissions). That is no where near 10% of the infected needing ICU care. It's about 1.4% total for hospitalisation of which 0,6% is for ICU care. so based on a population of 17,4 million people (Netherlands) we would need about 10.000 ICU beds if 10% of the population get's in infected at the same time. Something I don't think is likely to happen.
1638440557607.png


1638440598812.png


Comparing the ICU bed occupancy to the number of new cases for each wave:

Spring 2020November 2020Christmas 2020Spring 2021Summer 2021Current wave
Peak daily confirmed cases (7 day avg)1,12010,34311,7298,28910,08122,470
Peak number of occupied ICU beds1,424612731841224595
%127%5.92%6.23%10.1%2.22%2.65%

So 10% of everyone infected is perhaps not super accurate (it was based on a South Korean study from 2020 which stated 10-20% of everyone infected needed ICU care), but with this data from the Netherlands it seems like the number of occupied beds is somewhere between 6% and 10% of the daily confirmed number of cases during a wave. Now that people are vaccinated that figure appears to have dropped to between 2% and 3%. So then the question is: how big would a wave be if no restrictions were put in place?

This is from the UK report mentioned above:

1638442092666.png

With minimum restrictions (case isolation and household quarantine) we're looking at around 190 ICU beds per 100,000 people, which for the Netherlands would amount to around 33,000 ICU beds.
 

Attachments

  • 1638442045874.png
    1638442045874.png
    23.7 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:

Danoff

Who is John Galt?
Premium
30,500
United States
Mile High City
The mandate's won't give them a choice.
Smallpox.

Nobody here is protesting the places that have had a vaccine requirement.
They are here.
People know about the requirement before they start working there.
Lots of companies in the US developed a vaccination requirement prior to the Biden admin's vaccinate or test mandate, for existing employees.

The option of doing testing is the option they want to get rid of. The only option to keep your job is get vaccinated or get COVID and sit it out for 10 days to get your pass.
Smallpox requirements (especially in the US) went well past what you're describing.

People that don't want to get vaccinated are now trying to get infected so that they can get a COVID pass.
what-the-hell.jpg
 
Last edited:

Pako

Staff Emeritus
16,369
United States
NW Montana
GTP-Pako
GTP Pako
I still have a hard time wrapping my head around the vax mandates. I’m all for people who want added layers of protection and get vaccinated with multiple boosters. I think that’s great people have that choice now because of vaccine availability. I’m also for people who choose not to get vaccinated although some of their reasonings out a bit out in left field. I’ve had sinus infections that were worse that my Covid symptoms yet I had a close friend of mine die a couple weeks ago which was brought on from Covid. It certainly effects people differently. I’m not vaccinated, I don’t feel I have a medical need to do so.

My problem with the mandates, is people are getting vaccinated not for medical reasons, but for access to public spaces, transportation, and maintaining their job and livelihood.

Because of the very low mortality rate of Covid, it sets it apart from the other diseases that we have all been vaccinated for when we were children to attend public schools here in the US.

Personally, I think the Vaccine would have much more widely accepted by the masses if it had never become a required mandate from the government to begin with. People are stubborn creatures and want to be able to make their own choices without big brother telling them what they have to do.

Stay safe, get your boosters if that’s going to help, respect each other’s decisions.
 

Joey D

Premium
44,276
United States
Holladay, UT
GTP_Joey
GTP Joey
My problem with the mandates, is people are getting vaccinated not for medical reasons, but for access to public spaces, transportation, and maintaining their job and livelihood.
That's a consequence of your freedom of choice. I'm not sure about the mandates, but I support any place that bars unvaccinated people from entering or any place of employment that fires someone for refusing to comply.
Because of the very low mortality rate of Covid, it sets it apart from the other diseases that we have all been vaccinated for when we were children to attend public schools here in the US.
Mortality has never and will never be the main issue with COVID.
 

Danoff

Who is John Galt?
Premium
30,500
United States
Mile High City
Because of the very low mortality rate of Covid

Not really no. 777,000 Americans have died from covid-19 as of today (according to NYT just now).

it sets it apart from the other diseases that we have all been vaccinated for when we were children to attend public schools here in the US.

Exactly which diseases are you thinking of. Because that looks completely wrong to me.

Edit:

I’ve had sinus infections that were worse that my Covid symptoms yet I had a close friend of mine die a couple weeks ago which was brought on from Covid. It certainly effects people differently.

You might want to look into the pneumovax 23 vaccine, which I just got for sinus infections. I don't know yet whether it's going to work, but if it helps, it sure beats surgery.
 
Last edited:

Pako

Staff Emeritus
16,369
United States
NW Montana
GTP-Pako
GTP Pako
Not really no. 777,000 Americans have died from covid-19 as of today (according to NYT just now).



Exactly which diseases are you thinking of. Because that looks completely wrong to me.

Edit:



You might want to look into the pneumovax 23 vaccine, which I just got for sinus infections. I don't know yet whether it's going to work, but if it helps, it sure beats surgery.
Yes, this is a high number of deaths, but given the total number of positive case, the mortality rate is still very low. Haven't checked recently, but it was as low as .04-.06%?

(Looking at Montana State Immunization Schedule) Compare that to Meningococcal ACWY for example which children are required to get vaccinated for. The overall case-fatality ratio in the U.S. is 15%, and 10%–20% of survivors have long-term sequelae such as neurologic disability, limb or digit loss, and hearing loss.

I might have to look into Pneumovax 23. I had deviated septum surgery a few years back that was supposed to help. Miserable recovery by the way. I have to say, it might have helped for a little bit, but a couple years later and things seem to be back to where they were. :cheers:

That's a consequence of your freedom of choice. I'm not sure about the mandates, but I support any place that bars unvaccinated people from entering or any place of employment that fires someone for refusing to comply.

Mortality has never and will never be the main issue with COVID.
A mandate doesn't leave much room for choice. We have nurses that were working tirelessly pre-vaccine availability. Wasn't an issue for them to work other than being over worked and underpaid. Fast forward a year, they are now facing being fired if they don't get the vaccine. Many are refusing to get vaccinated and will loose their jobs. There is an active lawsuit against our local hospital because of this issue.

If it's not mortality, what is the main issue with COVID?
 
Last edited:

Danoff

Who is John Galt?
Premium
30,500
United States
Mile High City
Yes, this is a high number of deaths, but given the total number of positive case, the mortality rate is still very low. Haven't checked recently, but it was as low as .04-.06%?

Total number of cases is 48.1M puts the mortality rate for the US at 1.6% across the course of the pandemic. It differs by time, by state, and of course by demographic - and even across variants. But I don't think COVID-19 can be fairly described as having low mortality.

(Looking at Montana State Immunization Schedule) Compare that to Meningococcal ACWY for example which children are required to get vaccinated for. The overall case-fatality ratio in the U.S. is 15%, and 10%–20% of survivors have long-term sequelae such as neurologic disability, limb or digit loss, and hearing loss.

If we're talking long term consequences, we need to get away from morality rate. If we're talking mortality rate, 15% is absolutely huge.

In Colorado, chickenpox vaccination is required for school. Chickenpox has a 0.02% fatality rate in adults (lower for kids). HepB is also required, and is lower than chickenpox. There are more, but I think 2 examples of a much lower mortality rate should be sufficient to garner a retraction here.
 
Last edited:

Pako

Staff Emeritus
16,369
United States
NW Montana
GTP-Pako
GTP Pako
Total number of cases is 48.1M puts the mortality rate for the US at 1.6% across the course of the pandemic. It differs by time, by state, and of course by demographic - and even across variants. But I don't think COVID-19 can be fairly described as having low mortality.



If we're talking long term consequences, we need to get away from morality rate. If we're talking mortality rate, 15% is absolutely huge.

In Colorado, chickenpox vaccination is required for school. Chickenpox has a 0.02% fatality rate in adults (lower for kids). HepB is also required, and is lower than chickenpox. There are more, but I think 2 examples of a much lower mortality rate should be sufficient to garner a retraction here.
I can see your point. On a side note, Chickenpox vaccine for me as a kid was being sent over to the neighbors house to play with Sam when he got chickenpox.

So it comes back to the effectiveness of the vaccine. We know it doesn't work in the sense that it will irradiate the virus, it will only make the symptoms less severe when you get Covid. So what is the point of total societal vaccination? I can understand and get behind these mandates if it would irradiate the virus like we have done with other diseases and vaccine protocols but this isn't the case. Therefore, it should be my choice if I feel the need for the vaccine or not. Me getting the vaccine doesn't help you.
 
Last edited:

Joey D

Premium
44,276
United States
Holladay, UT
GTP_Joey
GTP Joey
A mandate doesn't leave much room for choice. We have nurses that were working tirelessly pre-vaccine availability. Wasn't an issue for them to work other than being over worked and underpaid. Fast forward a year, they are now facing being fired if they don't get the vaccine. Many are refusing to get vaccinated and will loose their jobs. There is an active lawsuit against our local hospital because of this issue.
With nurses, I can almost guarantee you that they signed someone before they were hired that says that they will be required to be up to date on all vaccines. I can also almost guarantee you that they're required to get a yearly flu shot too.
If it's not mortality, what is the main issue with COVID?
Hospital overcrowding and long-term effects by a wide margin. Mortality is just under 2% globally, but hospital overcrowding, while sporadic, is certainly an issue in various areas at various times. Where I work the ICU is currently running at 97% capacity which is significantly higher than it should and has been that way for months now. Long-term effects are somewhere between 10-30% but could be as high as 50% of cases. Unfortunately, more time needs to pass before we know for certain.
 

Danoff

Who is John Galt?
Premium
30,500
United States
Mile High City
On a side note, Chickenpox vaccine for me as a kid was being sent over to the neighbors house to play with Sam when he got chickenpox.
Me as well. I got it twice. Mortality is lower in kids than adults though, which is why that was a thing. I quoted the adult mortality.
So it comes back to the effectiveness of the vaccine. We know it doesn't work in the sense that it will irradiate the virus, it will only make the symptoms less severe when you get Covid.
It very much cuts down rate of infection, and rate of transmission, and also drastically cuts down hospitalization.
So what is the point of total societal vaccination?
To cut down the rate of infection and transmission (which produces variants), and also drastically cut down on hospitalization.
I can understand and get behind these mandates if it would irradiate the virus like we have done with other diseases and vaccine protocols but this isn't the case. Therefore, it should be my choice if I feel the need for the vaccine or not. Me getting the vaccine doesn't help you.
It does, because it helps prevent the spread, keeps me from getting it, keeps my kids from getting it, and reduces the chances of variants. It also helps keep you out of the ER, which is of huge importance. Beyond that though, at some point it becomes negligent for you to refuse to take the smallest precautions to help keep the people around you safe. We have lots of statues for negligence. I'd love to prosecute people from criminal negligence, especially as the vaccines (from multiple companies and countries) become widely available. But that's not the route we've taken as a society. Instead, we're headed down the mandate route.

From a principled perspective, I'd rather see people jailed for refusing vaccination and then subsequently infecting people and killing them, especially if they did so knowingly, or with reckless disregard for the variety of safety precautions we have to prevent that. But for lots of reasons, this is impractical. I think it would potentially be more effective than mandates - because people really do not want to go to jail.

The OSHA mandate in the US right now is vaccination or regular testing for employers with 100+ employees. If your employer doesn't offer regular testing as an option, you can take it up with them.
Not mandatory where I live.
Yea, me neither, because it has been eradicated. But it used to be.
What the hell indeed. There are 2 was to get a COVID pass. One is getting vaccinated, the other is having had a previous infection. I guess rona parties are not a thing in the land of the free.
So far we have very few exemptions for having a previous infection of COVID. I had previously thought that was a mistake, I'm re-thinking that position.


Edit:

Aside from negligence, 1st and 2nd degree reckless endangerment should absolutely apply to some cases of covid spread. Especially if that person disregarded, for example, signs that said mask wearing was required, refused vaccination, and especially in cases where the person has tested positive ahead of time. The trouble with bringing a 1st degree reckless endangerment case against someone who did this (for example Donald Trump in the 2020 presidential debate, where he tested positive ahead of time and refused reasonable precautions), is that it's very difficult to prove the exact risk or even damages to the people around. For example, how do you prove in court that your covid actually came from this particular person? How do you prove that the people around were at a particular risk - do you take into account demographics?

Certainly, some legal statutes could ease the burden for proving this in court, but it remains a difficult problem. Finding the offender, proving what they knew, it's much easier, and probably more cost effective, to issue blanket mandates. It's also less in line with principle.
 
Last edited:

McLaren

Premium
41,789
United States
Texas
I guess rona parties are not a thing in the land of the free.
One of the stupidest things ever. Worked out well for this chap.
An Austrian man who went to an Italian "coronavirus party" in an apparent bid to build immunity against COVID-19 has died from the virus, according to local media reports.

The 55-year-old died in Austria last week after contracting the virus. Similar parties are now prevalent in the Italian city of Bolzano and elsewhere across the province of South Tyrol, Rai Alto Adige reported, citing Patrick Franzoni, deputy co-ordinator of a COVID unit in the city.

Franzoni said he and colleagues are aware that some young people are deliberately attempting to catch COVID-19, with the ultimate goal of obtaining a "green pass" without being vaccinated against COVID-19.