Coronavirus COVID-19

[SDHornet]

My company mandated it. That said, only one of fifteen hasn't taken it. They never told us what the consequence is for not taking it though, just that we have to. Deadline is September 1 for the first shot, so we'll see if the holdout does it.

My company probably won't mandate it. It's hard enough finding new hires now at the plant operator level, I think they would have more problems filling those spots if they mandated it. There is a business decision to be made and I respect that. With that said, they're going to remove any and all restrictions on people who have been vaccinated and provide proof of that. For the others, they'll likely have to wear masks and get some kind of regular testing for the foreseeable future. I doubt they'll go with an additional fee on the health care for the unvaccinated, at least right away, but that's something I'm sure they'll add eventually, especially if it becomes that much more common to add a policy like that.

Make sure you tell your un-vaxxed employees and coworkers to stay away from public places.

[GannonFan]

I haven't moved anything. I've been consistent from the start. Go check my posts. I was advocating in April of 2020 that everything should be open and operating with the right precautions in place (masks, social distance, and hand sanatizing). And once the vaccines entered the fray, mandate those and go back to normal (no restrictions for the vaccinated). Still my goalposts today. And I'm not advocating a police state, no one's forced to get the vaccine. Make your own choice.

Except the opposite is happening in society and you are still advocating for it. This was you from just a few posts ago, no?

And sure, I have no problem with you deciding for your kid not to have them vaccinated. You're the parent and you get to make that decision for your child. Keep them at home, homeschool them, and keep them out of youth sports and other youth activities, and stay away from public spaces that require vaccinations. It's entirely your choice and you're welcome to take that option.

Nope, it's not. You can pretty much drive anywhere in this country right now and no one's going to stop you. Want to go camping out in the wilderness? Go right ahead. That's not a police state, and if you think it is then I don't think you know what a police state is. We've mandated vaccines for school attendance for decades now, and if places of business want to protect themselves and their employees with vaccine mandates there too then I have no problem with it. You decide what you want to have access to and what you don't. If this was a police state you wouldn't have that option.

[GannonFan]

How is you pulling a number out of thin air of 8 years (with the nebulous modifier of "clean run" - what does that even mean?) any better than a scientific community saying 8 months is good enough? How is yours any less arbitrary than their's?

Because it's my kids health and I can use whatever timeframe is needed to feel that the vax is safe. 8 years is based on the "safe for 12 and older" narrative on the current vax. Would be 6 years if my kid was 6. And yes my health is of lesser meaning/value than my kids'.

Get it yet?

I've never said you can't make that decision. It's not based on anything other than your personal, arbitrary timeframe, but you can make that decision.

[GannonFan]

My company probably won't mandate it. It's hard enough finding new hires now at the plant operator level, I think they would have more problems filling those spots if they mandated it. There is a business decision to be made and I respect that. With that said, they're going to remove any and all restrictions on people who have been vaccinated and provide proof of that. For the others, they'll likely have to wear masks and get some kind of regular testing for the foreseeable future. I doubt they'll go with an additional fee on the health care for the unvaccinated, at least right away, but that's something I'm sure they'll add eventually, especially if it becomes that much more common to add a policy like that.

Make sure you tell your un-vaxxed employees and coworkers to stay away from public places.

I don't have to tell them that at all, it's their choice. They make the decision if they want to skip the vaccine or if they want to attend the NFL game in town. They make the choice if they want their kids to attend public school if they're content skipping the vaccine and moving to homeschooling. It's not a police state, no one's forcing a decision one way or the other.

[SDHornet]

Except the opposite is happening in society and you are still advocating for it. This was you from just a few posts ago, no?

Nope, it's not. You can pretty much drive anywhere in this country right now and no one's going to stop you. Want to go camping out in the wilderness? Go right ahead. That's not a police state, and if you think it is then I don't think you know what a police state is. We've mandated vaccines for school attendance for decades now, and if places of business want to protect themselves and their employees with vaccine mandates there too then I have no problem with it. You decide what you want to have access to and what you don't. If this was a police state you wouldn't have that option.

Agreed we're not a police state. But your mentality of keeping those that aren't vaxxed out of public places will certainly lead to one if the DNC had their way. Of course you'd have no problem with it as you previously stated.

And more conflation with existing vaccination which is a different situation that the novel coronavirus we've been dealing with for the past 18 months.

[SDHornet]

Because it's my kids health and I can use whatever timeframe is needed to feel that the vax is safe. 8 years is based on the "safe for 12 and older" narrative on the current vax. Would be 6 years if my kid was 6. And yes my health is of lesser meaning/value than my kids'.

Get it yet?

I've never said you can't make that decision. It's not based on anything other than your personal, arbitrary timeframe, but you can make that decision.

[Gil Dobie]

Yes, because vaccines that have been around for 30, 40, 50 years are exactly like ones that were rushed to market, untested, in 8 months.

Covid Vax has been tested with out the money and bureaucracy of previous vaccines, due to the pandemic aspect of Covid.

U of M Link
The vaccines for the novel coronavirus went through the same layers of review and testing as other vaccines. Due to the dire nature of the pandemic, certain barriers to development, related to funding and manufacturing, were removed.

To understand how this is possible, it is important to know how the vaccine development process typically works and how the COVID vaccine was created.

[GannonFan]

Nope, it's not. You can pretty much drive anywhere in this country right now and no one's going to stop you. Want to go camping out in the wilderness? Go right ahead. That's not a police state, and if you think it is then I don't think you know what a police state is. We've mandated vaccines for school attendance for decades now, and if places of business want to protect themselves and their employees with vaccine mandates there too then I have no problem with it. You decide what you want to have access to and what you don't. If this was a police state you wouldn't have that option.

Agreed we're not a police state. But your mentality of keeping those that aren't vaxxed out of public places will certainly lead to one if the DNC had their way. Of course you'd have no problem with it as you previously stated.

And more conflation with existing vaccination which is a different situation that the novel coronavirus we've been dealing with for the past 18 months.

I don't care what the DNC thinks. I will never agree to vaccine mandates for everyone. But I have no problem with places like schools and hospitals and public transportation and international travel and restaurants and gyms and other locations requiring vaccinations to use those facilities. You make a choice if you want to use those places or if you want to stay unvaccinated. Your call.

And just because you have a magical 8 year window before you deem a vaccination to be safe doesn't mean that others have to abide by your 8 year window. We didn't do that before with other vaccines so I don't see why this one needs such special protection.

[SeattleGriz]

I actually like the policy that Delta just came out with - don't want the vaccine? Sure, no problem, we don't want to mandate it and force you to get it. At the same time, you're also a much bigger actuarial risk for us as a company so we're going to charge you $200 a month extra on your health care to take that into account. Again, it's a choice and you get to make that choice individually for you and for your children under 18. Heck, I think they should make people get on a scale and do the same to the vastly obese folks. It's a choice to be incredibly out of shape, everyone's welcome to make that choice, but it'll cost ya.

Not trying to be argumentative, but how will having a vaccine card prove you can't catch it and spread it as we are starting to see with the increases in breakthrough cases. Or are you advocating boosters every six months to combat the waning?

I will say I'm not in agreement, as I believe that puts an awful lot of pressure on the virus to escape the vaccine induced antibodies and push it to specifically mutate. It's why I keep pushing natural immunity. How about let the vaccine do its job and when you get reduced symptoms from eventually catching it, we call it good.

[Gil Dobie]

I actually like the policy that Delta just came out with - don't want the vaccine? Sure, no problem, we don't want to mandate it and force you to get it. At the same time, you're also a much bigger actuarial risk for us as a company so we're going to charge you $200 a month extra on your health care to take that into account. Again, it's a choice and you get to make that choice individually for you and for your children under 18. Heck, I think they should make people get on a scale and do the same to the vastly obese folks. It's a choice to be incredibly out of shape, everyone's welcome to make that choice, but it'll cost ya.

Not trying to be argumentative, but how will having a vaccine card prove you can't catch it and spread it as we are starting to see with the increases in breakthrough cases. Or are you advocating boosters every six months to combat the waning?

I will say I'm not in agreement, as I believe that puts an awful lot of pressure on the virus to escape the vaccine induced antibodies and push it to specifically mutate.

As far as mutation goes, the more numbers of virus there are out there, per number of cases, the better odds of a mutation.

[SeattleGriz]

Not trying to be argumentative, but how will having a vaccine card prove you can't catch it and spread it as we are starting to see with the increases in breakthrough cases. Or are you advocating boosters every six months to combat the waning?

I will say I'm not in agreement, as I believe that puts an awful lot of pressure on the virus to escape the vaccine induced antibodies and push it to specifically mutate.

As far as mutation goes, the more numbers of virus there are out there, per number of cases, the better odds of a mutation.

Agreed, but I'm talking about specific pressure to escape. Vaccine immunity is very narrow.

[Ibanez]

After the first week of school, district numbers have gone up among children (mostly elementary schools). My kids school has remain constant but the less affluent schools have already had to quarantine several classes and or gone virtual. Monday the district got more strict on masks and have began preparing the kids for virtual learning. I hope it doesn't happen but I bet they go full virtual in Sept.

[Ibanez]

My school district requires at least 9 different vaccinations prior to entering kindergarten - Tetanus, Diphtheria, Acellular Pertussis, Polio, Measles, Mumps, Rubella, Hepatitis B, and Varicella. Then by 7th grade they require another dose of tetanus, diphtheria, and the pertussis, and then for 12th grade they need the MCV vaccination. Seriously, if I inserted the COVID vaccine in there, what's the big deal, it's actually one of the easier vaccinations. Mandate the vaccine and move on.

Yes, because vaccines that have been around for 30, 40, 50 years are exactly like ones that were rushed to market, untested, in 8 months.

Rushed to market doesn't mean that a safety check or something critical was missed or ignored. Coronaviruses aren't new the development of vaccines against them were already underway. Furthermore, the massive investment helped get things done quickly. It's also important to point out that the mRNA vaccines are traditionally quicker to develop.

One of the main reasons why it takes long for vaccines to become improved has more to do with funding. The usual 3 trials are done one at a time, each time trying to acquire more funding for the next round. Those delays between trials can be years due to funding The actual science of vaccine development, while important to the vaccine timeline, isn't the main driver of the schedule.

Plenty of money, international support and critical need along with the science which was already there, is the short and simple reason as to why the vaccine was quick to market.

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articl ... onaviruses

That's a good article outlining how the vaccine came to be available so quickly.

TL/DR - the research, science and development along with investment already existed.

[∞∞∞]

Also what was the alternative to speeding up the process? Millions were dying and the approval process is famously slow.

Instead we used larger trials and overlapped them so that when one trial was done, we already had people in the next trial. We were also building the manufacturing processes simultaneously. Normally each step is done one after the other.

The vaccine wasn't really rushed. Instead it was scientists, volunteer subjects, the FDA, manufacturers, suppliers, and everyone in between who moved Heaven and Earth to get things done.

Hell on my end we built an entire makeshift hospital with hundreds of beds (which were thankfully never used) in four weeks because it was that important. Humans can get shit done quick with enough resources and urgency.

We should be proud of the accomplishment, especially since it was lead by America.

[UNI88]

I wonder how this conversation (and this thread) would be different if Trump had won the election?

[BDKJMU]

I wonder how this conversation (and this thread) would be different if Trump had won the election?

Well you wouldn’t be responding to Trip and DBack, because they would have spent a good chunk of this yr in mourning, like they did in 2017.

[SeattleGriz]

I wonder how this conversation (and this thread) would be different if Trump had won the election?

It would have been a perfect conversation.

[89Hen]

I wonder how this conversation (and this thread) would be different if Trump had won the election?

It would have been a perfect conversation.

A really, really good conversation. One of the best conversations in the history of conversations. Lots of really good conversation.

[AZGrizFan]

Yes, because vaccines that have been around for 30, 40, 50 years are exactly like ones that were rushed to market, untested, in 8 months.

Rushed to market doesn't mean that a safety check or something critical was missed or ignored. Coronaviruses aren't new the development of vaccines against them were already underway. Furthermore, the massive investment helped get things done quickly. It's also important to point out that the mRNA vaccines are traditionally quicker to develop.

One of the main reasons why it takes long for vaccines to become improved has more to do with funding. The usual 3 trials are done one at a time, each time trying to acquire more funding for the next round. Those delays between trials can be years due to funding The actual science of vaccine development, while important to the vaccine timeline, isn't the main driver of the schedule.

Plenty of money, international support and critical need along with the science which was already there, is the short and simple reason as to why the vaccine was quick to market.

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articl ... onaviruses

That's a good article outlining how the vaccine came to be available so quickly.

TL/DR - the research, science and development along with investment already existed.

Then why the liability removal? Why the dual approach now that Pfizer has been “approved”?

[SeattleGriz]

Rushed to market doesn't mean that a safety check or something critical was missed or ignored. Coronaviruses aren't new the development of vaccines against them were already underway. Furthermore, the massive investment helped get things done quickly. It's also important to point out that the mRNA vaccines are traditionally quicker to develop.

One of the main reasons why it takes long for vaccines to become improved has more to do with funding. The usual 3 trials are done one at a time, each time trying to acquire more funding for the next round. Those delays between trials can be years due to funding The actual science of vaccine development, while important to the vaccine timeline, isn't the main driver of the schedule.

Plenty of money, international support and critical need along with the science which was already there, is the short and simple reason as to why the vaccine was quick to market.

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articl ... onaviruses

That's a good article outlining how the vaccine came to be available so quickly.

TL/DR - the research, science and development along with investment already existed.

Then why the liability removal? Why the dual approach now that Pfizer has been “approved”?

Not to mention they pretty much ruined the control group. Offered them the vaccine and now have so few left unvaccinated, it's going to be very difficult to draw statistically valid comparisons.

[Ibanez]

Rushed to market doesn't mean that a safety check or something critical was missed or ignored. Coronaviruses aren't new the development of vaccines against them were already underway. Furthermore, the massive investment helped get things done quickly. It's also important to point out that the mRNA vaccines are traditionally quicker to develop.

One of the main reasons why it takes long for vaccines to become improved has more to do with funding. The usual 3 trials are done one at a time, each time trying to acquire more funding for the next round. Those delays between trials can be years due to funding The actual science of vaccine development, while important to the vaccine timeline, isn't the main driver of the schedule.

Plenty of money, international support and critical need along with the science which was already there, is the short and simple reason as to why the vaccine was quick to market.

https://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articl ... onaviruses

That's a good article outlining how the vaccine came to be available so quickly.

TL/DR - the research, science and development along with investment already existed.

Then why the liability removal? Why the dual approach now that Pfizer has been “approved”?

I don't know. But to say it was rushed just because it came to market in less than 1 year is ignoring some pretty important facts about the vaccine development process.


Why is approved in ""? Do you doubt it received approval this week? I'm not sure i'm following your implication.

[Ibanez]

Then why the liability removal? Why the dual approach now that Pfizer has been “approved”?

Not to mention they pretty much ruined the control group. Offered them the vaccine and now have so few left unvaccinated, it's going to be very difficult to draw statistically valid comparisons.

Let me get this right...your criticism is that TOO many people are vaccinated?


Since December we've had billions of people vaccinated and it's been successful. When problems have come up, like the blood clotting issues, the vaccine and data were reviewed before continuing administration. From my perspective, the data and statistics seem to confirm the vaccines are a success and safe.

[UNI88]

It would have been a perfect conversation.

A really, really good conversation. One of the best conversations in the history of conversations. Lots of really good conversation.

It would have been YUGE, the best conversation ever!

[SeattleGriz]

Not to mention they pretty much ruined the control group. Offered them the vaccine and now have so few left unvaccinated, it's going to be very difficult to draw statistically valid comparisons.

Let me get this right...your criticism is that TOO many people are vaccinated?


Since December we've had billions of people vaccinated and it's been successful. When problems have come up, like the blood clotting issues, the vaccine and data were reviewed before continuing administration. From my perspective, the data and statistics seem to confirm the vaccines are a success and safe.

No. The control group of the original vaccine trials has been severely reduced. Many were offered, and given, the vaccine when the EUA was approved. Now when the trials are over, they don't have very many people that remained unvaccinated to compare to the vaccinated group. It's make the task of saying, "compared to the unvaccinated control group, the vaccine offers..."

[UNI88]

Then why the liability removal? Why the dual approach now that Pfizer has been “approved”?

Not to mention they pretty much ruined the control group. Offered them the vaccine and now have so few left unvaccinated, it's going to be very difficult to draw statistically valid comparisons.

What was the incentive for those in the control group to not get vaccinated? If it was me and I had comorbidities, the incentive would have to be significant - generational wealth, 7-8+ figures - to get me to put my life at risk for the sake of science.