There is something very wrong about forcing people to put anything into their body against their will. A very large number of people (about half of the country?) have a different opinion from another large group of people, yet one side feels so sure that it is the universally correct thing to do in everyone's circumstance that one side gets to forcefully inject something into the body of everyone else? Is that the level of coercion we want to have as a country?
There are two ways of looking at it...you can look at it as if people are being strapped down on a gurney screaming whilst evil government agents inflict experimental compounds into their body. Or you can look at the fact that (many) vaccines have been required for a long time for travel, etc. Many colleges (perhaps not enough) require meningitis B vaccine particularly for living in a dorm, where there used to be many outbreaks and frequent horrible deaths, sometimes only hours after onset of symptoms. I don't advocate mandatory HPV vaccines but if most would get vaccinated we could wipe out cervical cancer in women and also eliminate the billions of dollars we spend detecting and treating HPV. Kids have been required for years to be "up to date on their shots" before attending school...barring religious or medical exemptions. Diptheria, Whooping Cough, Tetanus, Polio all but wiped out by vaccines. Not to mention Smallpox. Measles was doing quite well until the antivax movement became popular. And now we have Shingles vaccines (optional, as it should be.) Pneumococcal vaccines can save babies lives as well as adults. The CDC now recommends vaccinations in children for 14 diseases. What I am saying is that you don't strap people down...but for the sake of others during an outbreak if there are a large number of unvaccinated individuals, I have no problem with having more severe travel restrictions, mask requirements, whatever for those who haven't received the shot. The biggest argument in my mind for now against any kind of mandated vaccine is that it is still under "emergency" approval. With millions having now been vaccinated I suspect that it will be properly and fully approved soon. But the biggest thing we need to do is fight the propaganda...educate...make folks understand that it is beneficial for everybody. So what if you are young and invincible? If there is another huge outbreak that once again gets everybody into a panic and shuts everything down, crushes our economy, closes businesses, wipes out jobs, requires government spending that our heirs will be paying for generations...you somehow think that doesn't affect YOU?
Is there a significant difference between this and telling people they must either get this vaccine or lose their employment? Delete the adjective "experimental" in your statement. It doesn't matter what is being injected into your body by mandate: if you don't want something in your body, do we as the majority of the population get to decide for every individual that their personal rights don't exist because we, the majority, have a different opinion? I don't disagree that a large majority of the population would be better off if they got vaccinated. I also agree that the data appears to indicate that it is very safe and effective. But MANDATING that chemical be placed into a free citizen's body is disgusting. This is NOT meningitis. This is NOT polio. This is NOT smallpox. And equating this disease to those is not an argument of equivalent stature.
It's not those diseases, but 600K+ deaths in the US alone and 4.1M+ deaths worldwide. Those numbers far exceed meningitis deaths which worldwide are around 300K annually. Choices, people have choices. People can choose not to get the standard immunizations required by almost all schools, but they have to accept that their child won't be allowed to enroll in a public school in the state of Texas. I'm sure there are more than a few anti-vaxers who think that this is horrible and that their child is being unfairly punished for personal health decisions.
I respect your opinion, Kes, but in my opinion if I own a business, particularly if it's in health care or elder care but other areas as well, then I would be well within my rights to require my employees to be vaccinated. If they wish not to have some "chemical" placed into their body they will have to find something else to do. Agree with Terry...no this isn't meningitis or polio but it is much more transmissible killing lots of folks and it is a scourge to the economic well being of the entire world. I think that the shutdowns were over-reacting on some level (based on the fact that shut down areas didn't do that much better than more free and open ones) but looking at the numbers, it's coming back...and vaccination is NOT 100% so vaccinated folks ARE still at some risk from the non-vaccinated. But it does work both in terms of decreasing fatality and decreasing transmission and the data would support that a higher vaccination rate would keep suppressing it. So we can keep fighting each other and making it almost a political thing while people die and the economy is wrecked...or we can go ahead and get a higher vaccination rate, and get on with our lives. There are many parts to this that are very debatable...such as should all school kids or unvaccinated school kids be required to mask or not (my opinion would be no). But why SO many folks are reluctant to get the vaccine is a bit surprising to me.
This is a very broad brush with which to paint the entire public's risk factors equally and is a poor application of statistics. Is every group at equal risk to the virus? Is every group at equal risk to the vaccine? Is every group's risk equally improved by getting the vaccine? What information can be gleaned from those statistics as relates to the current state of the virus? If a free citizen doesn't want a chemical in their body, do we as the majority of the population get to decide for them that their personal rights don't exist because we, the majority, have a different opinion as to what is good for them? Everyone should be allowed to make an informed, risk-based decision based on their own personal profile. Whether you think someone is making a bad decision or not, where do you draw the line and say the majority of the people now get to make the decisions for them with regard to their body?
I love you too, Stu! Don't interpret strong opinions on a matter for any lack of respect for either of you. I fully understand and think no less of you for yours.
I'm pretty much a free citizen kind of guy...but living in a society always has it's requirements. Sure if you don't wanna be vaccinated you shouldn't have to be...but if you pose an actual risk to others for whatever reason then society has always placed rules for things which you can participate in and things which you can't. It's frustrating...if just a few more people would get voluntarily vaccinated we could (probably) suppress this thing enough that nobody would even be discussing mandatory vaccination, vaccine passports, etc.
Is this supported by the increasing trends of positivity rate and hospitalization in places like LA and NY? Aren't those in the top tier of fully vaccinated individuals?
I can't speak for LA or NY but hospitalizations in Houston/Harris County are nearly 100% unvaccinated. The quote below about LA doesn't give that information in terms of % of hospitalizations that are due to unvaccinated _________________ The health department noted last week that unvaccinated people are becoming infected at five times the rate of transmission from just one month ago. Public Health Director Barbara Ferrer released figures Thursday showing that fully vaccinated people are also not immune from contracting the virus -- representing 20% of all infections during June. But she stressed that thanks to the vaccines, the vast majority of those people are not becoming severely ill or hospitalized. And she said without the vaccines, the situation would be much worse. “If we didn't have 5.3 million people fully vaccinated in L.A. County, we would probably be seeing almost double the number of cases today,” Ferrer said Friday. “As cases continue to rise, many of us are trying to figure out what steps to take to minimize exposure to the virus. For those eligible and not yet vaccinated, now would be an important time to get your vaccine because our three vaccines all offer a lot of protection to the vaccinated person and also slow down the spread.” The health department noted last week that unvaccinated people are becoming infected at five times the rate of transmission from just one month ago. Public Health Director Barbara Ferrer released figures Thursday showing that fully vaccinated people are also not immune from contracting the virus -- representing 20% of all infections during June. But she stressed that thanks to the vaccines, the vast majority of those people are not becoming severely ill or hospitalized. And she said without the vaccines, the situation would be much worse. “If we didn't have 5.3 million people fully vaccinated in L.A. County, we would probably be seeing almost double the number of cases today,” Ferrer said Friday. “As cases continue to rise, many of us are trying to figure out what steps to take to minimize exposure to the virus. For those eligible and not yet vaccinated, now would be an important time to get your vaccine because our three vaccines all offer a lot of protection to the vaccinated person and also slow down the spread.” Los Angeles County Sees Rising COVID-19 Hospitalizations
I'd say that it is supported. California and NY are 18th and 11th respectively...and they are doing a heck of a lot better than Missouri or Arkansas...or even Florida at this point. And NY isn't there yet...still only at 56% fully vaccinated. CA is at 52%.
T - the comment you quoted was in response to a comment that a few more voluntary vaccinations would (probably) suppress things sufficiently to prevent mandated vaccines. The trends in LA and NY seem to directly contradict this hope. The data from LA and NY seem to indicate that sufficient public immunity isn't reached at 60%-70% as regards the Delta variant to prevent R0 > 1. Yes, this is likely due to the rise of Delta, and July looks even worse. Notice there is no context given for those that had been previously ill, nor for the rate of rise for vaccinated individuals, nor sufficient breakouts for age / risk factors. There is no context, and that makes this statement meaningless. I've tried to find data to provide that context, and I've been unable to find it. All we get are people talking about their ideas of what the data means, but what data I come across isn't as clearcut as the experts want it to be. If a free citizen doesn't want a chemical in their body, do we as the majority of the population get to decide for them that their personal rights don't exist because we, the majority, have a different opinion as to what is good for them? I think, this question is the only part of this whole thing in which you and I disagree.
I think public health people are nearly unanimous in their opinion that without the vaccinations (at whatever the local % is in various area's) that we would be in a much worse situation as the Delta variant spreads. it seems to me it's clear that the highest risk group for hospitalization and/or death is the unvaccinated population. We need to do whatever we can to get people vaccinated. Education is primary, of course and elimination of any barriers. We'll never get to 100% and that shouldn't be the goal, but we can do much better and the higher we get that number the more protected we all are from hospitalization and/or death from this virus.
Your comment was that a few more voluntary vaccinations would (probably) suppress things sufficiently to prevent mandated vaccines. We are currently at about 50% nationwide. LA is at 60%-70% and are not controlling the positivity and hospitalization rates. This would seem to indicate that we are at least 20% away from your hope, or about 65 million more fully vaccinated individuals nationwide at the low end. Your follow-on statement that those two are doing better than others I agree with, which indicates the vaccinations have a positive affect. My comment, though, wasn't comparing those, it was directly addressing you contention that a few more (5%?) would do it, and LA and NY show that isn't the case.
I don't disagree with any of that and I don't think I've said anything that would indicate otherwise.
As I said in my previous post we need to educate, remover barriers, there is a tremendous amount of misinformation out there and many are ignoring the science that shows that the vaccine is safe and effective. I support schools requiring immunizations, anti-vaxers should not be forced to immunize their children with "chemicals", but they also have to accept the consequences. Choices. Choices are sometimes very hard. I feel sad though that so many have not made a rational choice and that they are essentially saying that world wide scientists, doctors, etc are all wrong and they aren't putting that poison in their body...they don't say it but they are essentially saying that they'd rather die. From a frontline MD in Houston “Most people are shocked when I tell them they have COVID,” Blocker said. “I’ve had a handful of people beg me for the vaccine — now they want the vaccine. The time of diagnosis is not when we administer the vaccine.” 'Now they want the vaccine': Houston ER docs speak from front line of latest COVID surge
Terry... I hope you see what's wrong with this statement. And again, I would dearly LOVE to see some stats on how many of the folks currently being hospitalized are second time infected. If that number is as low as I suspect, the folks pushing all this data need to amend the number of unvaccinated down to not include those who have natural immunity...
I think they are working on it, but it's not necessarily that easy to determine. A lot of people claim they had it (and maybe they did) but never got tested. Others may have had a false antigen test and didn't really have it. Others may have had it and never known and there is no way of finding out now. My understanding of the preliminary findings are that the vaccine seems to give a little higher antibody level than having a previous infection. But the way the immune system works that doesn't necessarily translate into better protection...just as Pfizer's studies showing a third "booster" shot gives 5X the antibody levels doesn't necessarily mean better protection.
I really don't Scott. The vaccines work, not 100% and were never advertised as such. They have few side effects that is clear, not zero as there are no medications that exist that don't have some side effects. They will be fully approved shortly by the FDA. As far as the natural immunity of those unvaccinated who have previously had Covid I'm not sure what your point is, it's a fact nobody is denying that. While the recommendation is for those people to be vaccinated in spite of surviving Covid, those who choose not to are not the ones I'm worried about. It's those who have not been vaccinated and make all sorts of claims that have no basis in science. The effort to "Warp Speed" a vaccine that is effective at an incredibly high level in such a short time is just amazing. I can't even imagine what the death toll would be by now if we didn't have the vaccine.