COVID: 100% Vaccination Is NOT the Goal

 

Or at least shouldn’t be.

Reducing the spread and/or seriousness of the disease is the goal. Vaccines appear to be a tool that helps toward that goal. Yet the rhetoric about Covid vaccine mandates now treats vaccination itself as the goal. So confusing the goal and a tool intended to help achieve that goal keeps people and organizations from seeing other tools that might be useful to achieve the real goal, and causes people and organizations to pursue the tool regardless of whether it continues to contribute toward the goal.

I have often seen in the corporate world employees and departments get so focused on a particular tactic used to achieve a company goal that the employees come to think of the tactic as the goal, and lose track of what the real goal is. Besides becoming blind to possible alternatives to achieve the real goal, they get so wedded to the tactic that they fail to consider whether the tactic is still contributing to the goal, and run the risk of continuing the tactic even if it no longer contributes to the goal.

With respect to Covid, I fear that so many have become wedded to the tactic of 100% vaccination that they have lost sight of whether other tactics might be useful, and they are not considering whether the tactic is really accomplishing the goal of reducing the spread or seriousness of Covid. Natural immunity is being almost completely ignored. Treatments of the disease are being almost completely ignored. Health issues that suggest the vaccine could be high risk for some people are ignored by many of the vaccine demands. Employers and schools with populations at extremely low apparent risk of serious Covid consequences (the young and healthy) fail to consider whether vaccination will really reduce the spread or seriousness of the disease within their populations, and refuse to consider any balancing of the very low apparent risk of the vaccine with the very low apparent risk of the disease itself. 100% vaccination has become the goal.

If we could keep our eye on the goal of reducing the spread and seriousness of Covid and treat vaccination as A tool that seems to contribute to that goal, rather than treating vaccination as the end goal itself, we could have much more useful public discussions about how to achieve the real goal. Unfortunately, too many people and organizations in government, media, and corporate businesses have become wedded to vaccination as the only tool they will consider, and thus 100% vaccination has become the goal, instead of reducing the spread and seriousness of the disease itself. Thus, such useful public discussion of the goal of reducing the spread and seriousness of Covid no longer seems possible.

Published in Healthcare
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

There are 149 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Annefy Member
    Annefy
    @Annefy

    I know many people who got Covid in those halcyon pre-vax days, and I didn’t witness any of them receive decent care. Sick people were sent home to healthy people to infect the entire household. Sick people were refused therapeutics until they were sick enough to be admitted to the hospital.

    Frankly, I determined long ago that the vax itself was the goal; why else demand that so many who don’t need it, get it? Why else downplay or deride every single treatment that looks promising?

    There’s something else going on here, and it hasn’t got a dang thing to do with a virus.

    • #1
  2. Spin Coolidge
    Spin
    @Spin

    It’s the goal for people who think we can make COVID go away.  We can’t.  An very contagious upper respiratory disease that spreads through our breathing and sneezing on each other, with which you can be infected and get other people infected before you ever know it is never going away.

    We should have two goals:

    Immunity.  By this we shouldn’t mean “you can’t get COVID-19” nor “your immune system will kill the virus upon contact.”  By immunity we mean, as Merriam-Webster puts it:  you will not be affected by the virus.  Immunity should be that you might have the virus living in you, but you won’t get sick with it.  We know we can get immunity by natural infection, by being vaccinated, and it seems that some people simply have an immunity that comes from something else.

    Therapeutic treatments.  That is, courses of action that prevent long term serious illness and death for anyone who do end up with the disease.    There should be an all of the above approach here with common sense.  I don’t want to open the ivermectin conversation again, but let’s say a double blind randomized study showed that the drug eliminated serious infection in 20% of the cases, it should be considered a viable treatment option.

    It seems to me that both goals have been met.  Nearly 70% (178M) of Americans 18 or older are fully vaccinated.  Depending on which seroprevalence study you trust, there are something like 6-7 times the number of people who’ve been infected as who’ve actually tested positive.  In the US we have 45M cases total.  That means roughly 315M people have some form of natural immunity.  There is some overlap between those vaccinated and those infected.  Let’s say just 20% of the vaccinated have never been infected.  That’s another 35M people.  So 350M people with some form of immunity, using off the cuff calculations.

    And we have at least two therapeutic treatments that we know are effective, plus at least one or two that might be effective.

    I say the goals have been met.

    • #2
  3. Jim McConnell Member
    Jim McConnell
    @JimMcConnell

    Annefy (View Comment):

    I know many people who got Covid in those halcyon pre-vax days, and I didn’t witness any of them receive decent care. Sick people were sent home to healthy people to infect the entire household. Sick people were refused therapeutics until they were sick enough to be admitted to the hospital.

    Frankly, I determined long ago that the vax itself was the goal; why else demand that so many who don’t need it, get it? Why else downplay or deride every single treatment that looks promising?

    There’s something else going on here, and it hasn’t got a dang thing to do with a virus.

    Have you ever watched a young child who has been given a hammer as a toy? He occupies himself by going around looking for a nail or something else to hammer. I think we have a lot of that type of thinking going on right now, except that the vaccine is the hammer.

    • #3
  4. kedavis Member
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Jim McConnell (View Comment):

    Annefy (View Comment):

    I know many people who got Covid in those halcyon pre-vax days, and I didn’t witness any of them receive decent care. Sick people were sent home to healthy people to infect the entire household. Sick people were refused therapeutics until they were sick enough to be admitted to the hospital.

    Frankly, I determined long ago that the vax itself was the goal; why else demand that so many who don’t need it, get it? Why else downplay or deride every single treatment that looks promising?

    There’s something else going on here, and it hasn’t got a dang thing to do with a virus.

    Have you ever watched a young child who has been given a hammer as a toy? He occupies himself by going around looking for a nail or something else to hammer. I think we have a lot of that type of thinking going on right now, except that the vaccine is the hammer.

    And governments/bureaucrats may do the hammer thing even more than children.

    • #4
  5. Mark Camp Member
    Mark Camp
    @MarkCamp

    Full Size Tabby: Reducing the spread and/or seriousness of the disease is the goal.

    Whose goal?  The citizens’?  Or that of the ruling class?

    • #5
  6. Manny Member
    Manny
    @Manny

    Full Size Tabby: With respect to Covid, I fear that so many have become wedded to the tactic of 100% vaccination that they have lost sight of whether other tactics might be useful, and they are not considering whether the tactic is really accomplishing the goal of reducing the spread or seriousness of Covid. Natural immunity is being almost completely ignored. Treatments of the disease are being almost completely ignored. Health issues that suggest the vaccine could be high risk for some people are ignored by many of the vaccine demands. Employers and schools with populations at extremely low apparent risk of serious Covid consequences (the young and healthy) fail to consider whether vaccination will really reduce the spread or seriousness of the disease within their populations, and refuse to consider any balancing of the very low apparent risk of the vaccine with the very low apparent risk of the disease itself. 100% vaccination has become the goal.

    You keep using the word “ignored” in there.  There’s a difference between the media and the politicians ignoring these things and the medical and research communities ignoring these things.  You say “treatments of the disease are being almost completely ignored.”  I find that hard to believe.  There are still hundreds of cases per day of Covid (5 to 1 of unvaxxed to vax, by the way) and people are not dying at anywhere near the rate of a year and half ago.  Just because it doesn’t make the news feed doesn’t mean it’s not being worked on, just as, I may add, how the vaccine development didn’t make the news feed until they were out and surprised everyone.  

    As to 100% vaccination, sometimes in project management there is a subtask that is so critical in accomplishing the goal that you pour resources and attention on it.  You said, “Reducing the spread and/or seriousness of the disease is the goal.”  Vaccination is probably such a a subtask here.  If you want the economy and life to get back to normal, there is no faster and efficient method of reducing the spread.  It takes minutes.  As to natural immunity, what do you suggest, people intentionally get the disease?  If that’s what they want to do, but I think that’s kind of silly. Does it have to be 100% vaccination?  Probably not.  But it irks me that I did my part for society while others refuse.  

    And yes the vaccine is safe.  We are now in the billions of people who have received it and no major issues for those that are healthy.  That’s probably the largest test sample in the history of vaccines.  At this point you are fighting reason.  

    • #6
  7. Connie the Cat Member
    Connie the Cat
    @ConnietheCat

    Manny (View Comment):

    “Does it have to be 100% vaccination? Probably not. But it irks me that I did my part for society while others refuse.”

    So everyone must submit because it “irks” you?  Does it “irk” you that not everyone draws the same conclusions?  Why should anyone violate their conscious so that you won’t be irk’d?

    • #7
  8. Spin Coolidge
    Spin
    @Spin

    Connie the Cat (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    “Does it have to be 100% vaccination? Probably not. But it irks me that I did my part for society while others refuse.”

    So everyone must submit because it “irks” you? Does it “irk” you that not everyone draws the same conclusions? Why should anyone violate their conscious so that you won’t be irk’d?

    He’s not saying you should get vaxxed to please him.  He’s saying you should get vaxxed because it is, generally, the smart thing to do.  And he is right.  Most of the arguments people use today against it are nonsense.  Most, but not all.  I know a few people with legitimate medical reasons not to get vaccinated.

    That said, I’m 100% opposed to the mandates.  So don’t throw at me “What, so because you think I should, I have to do it?!?”  No.  If you don’t get vaxxed, it’s your problem, not mine.  

    • #8
  9. Spin Coolidge
    Spin
    @Spin

    Manny (View Comment):
    You say “treatments of the disease are being almost completely ignored.”  I find that hard to believe. 

    You are correct, therapeutic treatments aren’t ignored.  If you bring it up, you are generally excoriated and made to look like a member of the foil hat club.  Generally speaking, any conversation about treating the disease after infection has been met with resistance.  Which is nonsense.  If COVID is to become an endemic cold (and it will) and we are to go back to normal (and we all want to) then we need therapeutic treatments.  We have a few now, and will have more in the future.  If we are allowed to talk openly about them.  

    • #9
  10. Old Bathos Moderator
    Old Bathos
    @OldBathos

    The goal is not to end COVID but to always have designated enemies for as long as people can be made afraid of it.

    • #10
  11. OmegaPaladin Moderator
    OmegaPaladin
    @OmegaPaladin

    @manny

    I think @fullsizetabby has the right of it, even though I agree with the promotion of the vaccine, and have received the full series of shots.  In any population, there are people who cannot get the vaccine for medical reasons.  This is one of the reasons people press for mass vaccination as a disease control method – if enough people are vaccinated, then we will have herd immunity and protect the people who cannot receive the vaccination.

    There are cases of people with documented medical conditions who were denied an accommodation for the vaccine.  People were fired for not taking a vaccine that was likely to make them sick.  As someone who has read up on mass vaccination campaigns, this points to a clear case of focusing on 100% vaccination over the goal of reducing the risk from the virus.   After all, even if people get the vaccine, they still have the potential of transmitting the coronavirus, according to some studies.  Vaccinating people with contraindications would not only be cruel, it would also not have much benefit.

    Also, natural immunity is as good as (if not better) the immunity from the vaccine.  Asking someone who had the Wuhan Coronavirus to get vaccinated is a waste of the vaccine, and likely only produces side effects.

    These are a few valid reasons not to receive the vaccine, even if you think it works and is safe for most people.  But public health authorities are ignoring them i nthe quest to vaccinate everyone.

    • #11
  12. Full Size Tabby Member
    Full Size Tabby
    @FullSizeTabby

    Most vaccine mandates do not accommodate people who have natural immunity, such as from having had Covid. Hence, natural immunity is being ignored.

    Most vaccine mandates do not accommodate the possibility that a population may be at very low risk of serious consequences from the disease, and for whom treatment should they get sick may be a reasonable response. Hence, treatment is being ignored.

    Forcing 100% vaccination is more than just pouring resources and attention into a task. If the task is so critical that it is legitimate to use force to impose that task, then the goal must be so serious coercion and force are justified (and for most people, being deprived of the ability to earn a living or to go to school or to patronize a business is de facto coercion and force). Covid does not even come close, especially for large swaths of the population. Again, treatments and other options for reducing the seriousness of the effects of the disease are being ignored. 

    • #12
  13. Spin Coolidge
    Spin
    @Spin

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    @ manny

    I think @ fullsizetabby has the right of it, even though I agree with the promotion of the vaccine, and have received the full series of shots. In any population, there are people who cannot get the vaccine for medical reasons. This is one of the reasons people press for mass vaccination as a disease control method – if enough people are vaccinated, then we will have herd immunity and protect the people who cannot receive the vaccination.

    There are cases of people with documented medical conditions who were denied an accommodation for the vaccine. People were fired for not taking a vaccine that was likely to make them sick. As someone who has read up on mass vaccination campaigns, this points to a clear case of focusing on 100% vaccination over the goal of reducing the risk from the virus. After all, even if people get the vaccine, they still have the potential of transmitting the coronavirus, according to some studies. Vaccinating people with contraindications would not only be cruel, it would also not have much benefit.

    Also, natural immunity is as good as (if not better) the immunity from the vaccine. Asking someone who had the Wuhan Coronavirus to get vaccinated is a waste of the vaccine, and likely only produces side effects.

    These are a few valid reasons not to receive the vaccine, even if you think it works and is safe for most people. But public health authorities are ignoring them i nthe quest to vaccinate everyone.

    #WhatIBeenSayin!

    • #13
  14. philo Member
    philo
    @philo

    I keep seeing these “Common Sense Mandate Rationalizations” that come across like similar attacks on other liberties. I just read them using the Chuck Schumer voice in my head and it helps properly frame the discussion. But that’s just me….

    • #14
  15. Spin Coolidge
    Spin
    @Spin

    philo (View Comment):

    I keep seeing these “Common Sense Mandate Rationalizations” that come across like similar attacks on other liberties. I just read them using the Chuck Schumer voice in my head and it helps properly frame the discussion. But that’s just me….

    You poor soul.  Who wants Chuck’s voice in their head?

    • #15
  16. Manny Member
    Manny
    @Manny

    Connie the Cat (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    “Does it have to be 100% vaccination? Probably not. But it irks me that I did my part for society while others refuse.”

    So everyone must submit because it “irks” you? Does it “irk” you that not everyone draws the same conclusions? Why should anyone violate their conscious so that you won’t be irk’d?

    I’m not mandating vaccination.  Let it irk me.  For this level of death rate, it’s not warranted, but if this were the Bubonic Plague of the middle ages where 1/2 people were dying from it, then certainly it would be warranted.  What irks me are all the people who claim some sort of ridiculous pseudo-scientific reason for it not being safe or lack of testing.  Now if you have a conscientious objection, I’m sympathetic, but I would like to know what it is.  The only valid one I have heard is that the vaccines used abortion products for testing.  Well, probably every medicine you are proscribed was tested with fetal products.  I wish they didn’t test this way, but they do.  But tested is not the same as actual use of aborted baby parts as part of the constituents.    For that you can Google a list of such products and realize half the supermarket would be off limits.  If you are that disciplined a conscientious objector and avoid everything that came in contact with fetal by-products, then I would give you a conscientious waiver.  Anything less, then you are just being selective in your objections.

    • #16
  17. Manny Member
    Manny
    @Manny

    OmegaPaladin (View Comment):

    @ manny

    I think @ fullsizetabby has the right of it, even though I agree with the promotion of the vaccine, and have received the full series of shots. In any population, there are people who cannot get the vaccine for medical reasons. This is one of the reasons people press for mass vaccination as a disease control method – if enough people are vaccinated, then we will have herd immunity and protect the people who cannot receive the vaccination.

    There are cases of people with documented medical conditions who were denied an accommodation for the vaccine. People were fired for not taking a vaccine that was likely to make them sick. As someone who has read up on mass vaccination campaigns, this points to a clear case of focusing on 100% vaccination over the goal of reducing the risk from the virus. After all, even if people get the vaccine, they still have the potential of transmitting the coronavirus, according to some studies. Vaccinating people with contraindications would not only be cruel, it would also not have much benefit.

    Also, natural immunity is as good as (if not better) the immunity from the vaccine. Asking someone who had the Wuhan Coronavirus to get vaccinated is a waste of the vaccine, and likely only produces side effects.

    These are a few valid reasons not to receive the vaccine, even if you think it works and is safe for most people. But public health authorities are ignoring them i nthe quest to vaccinate everyone.

    I put in bold what I want to address.  Absolutely if there is a medical reason not to get the vaccine, then you shouldn’t.  But how many people is that, 1% of the population, if that much?  Most people who have medical issues should get the vaccine.  Ask your doctor, but I bet most would be in the camp of needing it.

    • #17
  18. kedavis Member
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Manny (View Comment):

    Connie the Cat (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    “Does it have to be 100% vaccination? Probably not. But it irks me that I did my part for society while others refuse.”

    So everyone must submit because it “irks” you? Does it “irk” you that not everyone draws the same conclusions? Why should anyone violate their conscious so that you won’t be irk’d?

    I’m not mandating vaccination. Let it irk me. For this level of death rate, it’s not warranted, but if this were the Bubonic Plague of the middle ages where 1/2 people were dying from it, then certainly it would be warranted. What irks me are all the people who claim some sort of ridiculous pseudo-scientific reason for it not being safe or lack of testing. Now if you have a conscientious objection, I’m sympathetic, but I would like to know what it is. The only valid one I have heard is that the vaccines used abortion products for testing. Well, probably every medicine you are proscribed was tested with fetal products. I wish they didn’t test this way, but they do. But tested is not the same as actual use of aborted baby parts as part of the constituents. For that you can Google a list of such products and realize half the supermarket would be off limits. If you are that disciplined a conscientious objector and avoid everything that came in contact with fetal by-products, then I would give you a conscientious waiver. Anything less, then you are just being selective in your objections.

    I’m not sure if you’re the only one who does this, but I’ll point out again that “proscribe” and “prescribe” are opposites.

    • #18
  19. Manny Member
    Manny
    @Manny

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    Most vaccine mandates do not accommodate people who have natural immunity, such as from having had Covid. Hence, natural immunity is being ignored.

    Most vaccine mandates do not accommodate the possibility that a population may be at very low risk of serious consequences from the disease, and for whom treatment should they get sick may be a reasonable response. Hence, treatment is being ignored.

    Forcing 100% vaccination is more than just pouring resources and attention into a task. If the task is so critical that it is legitimate to use force to impose that task, then the goal must be so serious coercion and force are justified (and for most people, being deprived of the ability to earn a living or to go to school or to patronize a business is de facto coercion and force). Covid does not even come close, especially for large swaths of the population. Again, treatments and other options for reducing the seriousness of the effects of the disease are being ignored.

    So if you have natural immunity it just takes an easy test.  I already addressed the small number of people who cannot get vaccinated.  Understood.  It’s a small number.

    What force?  Who is grabbing people, binding them, and injecting them?  Employers have an obligation to protect their employees and the consumers who who enter their establishments.  No one wants to get Covid and risk a hospital stay, even if the treatment has greatly improved.  You are free not to get vaccinated, but business are free  to have requirements to the nature of their employment and who enters and who does not enter their establishment. Freedom works both ways.

    • #19
  20. Manny Member
    Manny
    @Manny

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    Connie the Cat (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    “Does it have to be 100% vaccination? Probably not. But it irks me that I did my part for society while others refuse.”

    So everyone must submit because it “irks” you? Does it “irk” you that not everyone draws the same conclusions? Why should anyone violate their conscious so that you won’t be irk’d?

    I’m not mandating vaccination. Let it irk me. For this level of death rate, it’s not warranted, but if this were the Bubonic Plague of the middle ages where 1/2 people were dying from it, then certainly it would be warranted. What irks me are all the people who claim some sort of ridiculous pseudo-scientific reason for it not being safe or lack of testing. Now if you have a conscientious objection, I’m sympathetic, but I would like to know what it is. The only valid one I have heard is that the vaccines used abortion products for testing. Well, probably every medicine you are proscribed was tested with fetal products. I wish they didn’t test this way, but they do. But tested is not the same as actual use of aborted baby parts as part of the constituents. For that you can Google a list of such products and realize half the supermarket would be off limits. If you are that disciplined a conscientious objector and avoid everything that came in contact with fetal by-products, then I would give you a conscientious waiver. Anything less, then you are just being selective in your objections.

    I’m not sure if you’re the only one who does this, but I’ll point out again that “proscribe” and “prescribe” are opposites.

    I’m typing fast and not really checking.  Thanks.

    • #20
  21. Annefy Member
    Annefy
    @Annefy

    Just a few thoughts and questions. Yes, there’s been requirements for some people to be vaccinated for other diseases in the past. Was it a requirement to fly? To go to the store? To pick your kids up from school? To volunteer at your kid’s school? To attend an all online college?

    Was there ever a vaccine that was developed and then mandated within months?

    Those vaccines that have been required for some in the past, were they to prevent a disease that had possibly fatal consequences for the person receiving the vaccine?

    Have we ever required vaccines for children who were under no threat from what they were being vaxxed for?

    And just a few thoughts. I wrote a post nearly a year ago, Panic we might get the virus, indifference if we do. Wherein I described we were ruining the economy and destroying the lives of children because there’s such a panic that you might get a disease. But when you got it, you were met with total indifference.

    Of all the people I know who got Covid, I know one person who was hospitalized and given treatment. Every one else got an email with instructions on how long to quarantine for. I know “of” one person (with multiple health problems) who passed from Covid. JY and I spent a grim hour last night counting how many deaths we’ve experienced since the pandemic started. Eight. None from Covid, but at least four because of it. We’ve had a suicide, a friend who was diagnosed with cancer on Monday and passed by Sunday, a senior citizen who died in a rest home, having not seen her family for over a year and weighing about 80 lbs.

    The response to this virus has been destructive to the point of psychopathy. I have no reason to believe that those who developed the vaccine, and those in charge of rolling it out and making demands that people get it, are suddenly using logic, intelligence, or ability.

    • #21
  22. Annefy Member
    Annefy
    @Annefy

    Manny (View Comment):

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    Most vaccine mandates do not accommodate people who have natural immunity, such as from having had Covid. Hence, natural immunity is being ignored.

    Most vaccine mandates do not accommodate the possibility that a population may be at very low risk of serious consequences from the disease, and for whom treatment should they get sick may be a reasonable response. Hence, treatment is being ignored.

    Forcing 100% vaccination is more than just pouring resources and attention into a task. If the task is so critical that it is legitimate to use force to impose that task, then the goal must be so serious coercion and force are justified (and for most people, being deprived of the ability to earn a living or to go to school or to patronize a business is de facto coercion and force). Covid does not even come close, especially for large swaths of the population. Again, treatments and other options for reducing the seriousness of the effects of the disease are being ignored.

    So if you have natural immunity it just takes an easy test. I already addressed the small number of people who cannot get vaccinated. Understood. It’s a small number.

    What force? Who is grabbing people, binding them, and injecting them? Employers have an obligation to protect their employees and the consumers who who enter their establishments. No one wants to get Covid and risk a hospital stay, even if the treatment has greatly improved. You are free not to get vaccinated, but business are free to have requirements to the nature of their employment and who enters and who does not enter their establishment. Freedom works both ways.

    There are millions of people who have natural immunity. Ain’t no way that’s a small number. And no one cares. Ridiculous that those with natural immunity are still being pressured to get the vaccine.

    These conversations are absolutely shocking to me. They make no sense. When you say that “employers have an obligation to protect their employees and customers” you should have added: from Covid. If that’s what you believe, why is Covid so special? I worked side by side with AIDS patients in the 80s, even in the early days when no one was sure how people were getting it.

    I was in my mid 20s; if I had a problem with those AIDS patients and was afraid of getting sick, I felt it was my responsibility to shoulder that burden. As in: if I was so afraid, it was on me to get the hell out of San Francisco and get a new job. 

    I especially love the bolded comment, by the way. The libertarian streak in me has felt similarly for years. So I should be free to rent or not rent my back house depending on age/race/gender/sexual orientation. And all business owners should be free to do the same.

     

    • #22
  23. kedavis Member
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Manny (View Comment):

    Full Size Tabby (View Comment):

    Most vaccine mandates do not accommodate people who have natural immunity, such as from having had Covid. Hence, natural immunity is being ignored.

    Most vaccine mandates do not accommodate the possibility that a population may be at very low risk of serious consequences from the disease, and for whom treatment should they get sick may be a reasonable response. Hence, treatment is being ignored.

    Forcing 100% vaccination is more than just pouring resources and attention into a task. If the task is so critical that it is legitimate to use force to impose that task, then the goal must be so serious coercion and force are justified (and for most people, being deprived of the ability to earn a living or to go to school or to patronize a business is de facto coercion and force). Covid does not even come close, especially for large swaths of the population. Again, treatments and other options for reducing the seriousness of the effects of the disease are being ignored.

    So if you have natural immunity it just takes an easy test. I already addressed the small number of people who cannot get vaccinated. Understood. It’s a small number.

    What force? Who is grabbing people, binding them, and injecting them? Employers have an obligation to protect their employees and the consumers who who enter their establishments. No one wants to get Covid and risk a hospital stay, even if the treatment has greatly improved. You are free not to get vaccinated, but business are free to have requirements to the nature of their employment and who enters and who does not enter their establishment. Freedom works both ways.

    We already know for sure that being vaccinated doesn’t stop someone from spreading the virus, so the idea that workers need to be vaccinated to keep them from spreading the virus to customers is nonsense.  It won’t stop them from spreading the virus to other workers, either.

    And this vaccine doesn’t stop someone from getting the virus, and just reducing symptoms or even likelihood of death doesn’t justify forcing someone to get vaccinated against their will, even if it’s for reasons that “irk” you.

    • #23
  24. kedavis Member
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Annefy (View Comment):
    I especially love the bolded comment, by the way. The libertarian streak in me has felt similarly for years. So I should be free to rent or not rent my back house depending on age/race/gender/sexual orientation. And all business owners should be free to do the same.

    Of course that’s an easy out for them.  You can’t change your age/race/gender/etc.  Your vaccine status is totally within your control.

    • #24
  25. Spin Coolidge
    Spin
    @Spin

    Annefy (View Comment):
    Yes, there’s been requirements for some people to be vaccinated for other diseases in the past. Was it a requirement to fly? To go to the store? To pick your kids up from school? To volunteer at your kid’s school? To attend an all online college?

    Ask yourself this question:  when was the last time someone you knew was fired because they didn’t get a vaccine?  

    I am a huge supporter of these vaccines as I’ve said.  But I’m not a supporter of the mandates.  The argument about requiring vaccines for school comes up all the time but we’ve never seen anyone fired for it, never seen mass layoffs from government agencies.  This is different.  And it needn’t be this way.  

    • #25
  26. Spin Coolidge
    Spin
    @Spin

    Annefy (View Comment):
    Ain’t no way that’s a small number.

    The small number to which Manny refers is the number of people really oughtn’t get the vaccine due to medical issues.  It really is small, comparatively.

    • #26
  27. Spin Coolidge
    Spin
    @Spin

    Manny (View Comment):
    What force?  Who is grabbing people, binding them, and injecting them?

    What do you think is going to happen when you say “No, you can’t force me, and I’m coming to work…”  Force.  

    But anyway, if I tell you that you have to get vaccinated or get fired, I’m forcing you to do it.  I’m taking away your choice in the matter.  One can say that you have the choice to lose your job, but that really isn’t a choice for a lot of people is it?  People gotta eat.  And the mandates are so broad, that you aren’t going to find a job somewhere else…

    • #27
  28. Connie the Cat Member
    Connie the Cat
    @ConnietheCat

    Spin (View Comment):

    Connie the Cat (View Comment):

    Manny (View Comment):

    “Does it have to be 100% vaccination? Probably not. But it irks me that I did my part for society while others refuse.”

    So everyone must submit because it “irks” you? Does it “irk” you that not everyone draws the same conclusions? Why should anyone violate their conscious so that you won’t be irk’d?

    He’s not saying you should get vaxxed to please him. He’s saying you should get vaxxed because it is, generally, the smart thing to do. And he is right. Most of the arguments people use today against it are nonsense. Most, but not all. I know a few people with legitimate medical reasons not to get vaccinated.

    That said, I’m 100% opposed to the mandates. So don’t throw at me “What, so because you think I should, I have to do it?!?” No. If you don’t get vaxxed, it’s your problem, not mine.

    I wasn’t going to throw that at you.  The thought never actually crossed my mind and I agree with you that not getting vaccinated is indeed the non-vaccinated’s problem.  But Manny did say he was irked because he did his part and now it’s everyone else’s turn to do their part for society.  That isn’t an argument that you should get vaccinated to protect yourself, it’s being mad because he did something and other people haven’t.

    • #28
  29. kedavis Member
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Spin (View Comment):

    Annefy (View Comment):
    Ain’t no way that’s a small number.

    The small number to which Manny refers is the number of people really oughtn’t get the vaccine due to medical issues. It really is small, comparatively.

    The issue there, as in so many other situations, is, “who gets to decide?”

    • #29
  30. Annefy Member
    Annefy
    @Annefy

    Life is funny. One of the last arguments I had with my mother was about Obamacare. I explained that my two best friends were obese; it was none of my business and I didn’t want it to become my business. 

    I’ve become the person I didn’t want to. Whenever I hear about someone dying of Covid, my first question is: how much did they weigh? 

     

    • #30