• Shake747@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    If the government mandates something, it has the same weight as a law.

    Those orgs that don’t require it anymore, didn’t drop it because “most people aren’t this type of moron and just got the fucking vaccine”

    It was because we had more data, and you have to weigh the risks.

    It’s still hard to say what the long term effects of either vaxxed or un-vaxxed will be

    • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      35
      ·
      1 year ago

      If the government mandates something, it has the same weight as a law.

      No it doesn’t. I don’t think this happened at all except with govt as an employer. You morons could just get a new job.

      it’s hard to say

      It’s actually very easy to say. The vaccine complication rate is near zero and not a single harebrained theory you idiots had has panned out. Try again

      • Shake747@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Lol, you need time to know long term effects, there still hasn’t been enough of that yet.

        And yes, a mandate has as much weight as a law, it just depends who issued it. The only really difference in mandate vs law is how it’s initiated, but here, they hold the same weight.

        I won’t be deleting lemmy :)

        • TrickDacy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          24
          ·
          1 year ago

          You ignore that not a single person was mandated to get a vaccine in a scenario where they had no choice.

          Also you idiot, we know the long term effects of death but that didn’t stop you from pretending a hypothetical issue born of a bullshit theory should take precedence.

          Thanks for the block request btw

          • Shake747@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            The choice was lose your income, travel no where, and gather with zero loved ones - or take this vaccine we just came out with, but havent finished testing lol.

            It’s kind of funny that I’ve been pretty civil despite all the name calling, and you’re the one blocking me.

            • edric@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              15
              ·
              1 year ago

              Assuming you’re in the US, no one was banning you from traveling or gathering with loved ones. There was nothing close to an actual lockdown that was implemented in the US. Losing income is a different story. Coming in to work and endangering other people’s health without their consent is not acceptable. Not to mention that most antivaxxers are antimaskers as well, which made it worse. If you purposely do not take the necessary precautions to keep other people around you safe, then you shouldn’t be working there. That applies to anything, not just Covid.

              • Shake747@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                I’m not in the US - but also thank you for responding without malice.

                Losing income is a big deal, especially with dependants, but that aside - you’re right about your point of possibly endangering others.

                However If the vaccine fully protected you (as it was advertised at first) this wouldn’t be the case - anyone who was vaxxed would’ve been immune. Also having natural immunity is just as good, if not better - but instead of doing any sort of antibody testing, we stuck with “be vaccinated or lose your job”. Wouldn’t anti body testing instead of mandates be the pinnacle of making sure those around you are safe? Especially at a time when we didn’t know the risks or effectiveness of the vaccine.

                • BeardedGingerWonder@feddit.uk
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  No company or government agency claimed the vaccine fully protected anyone, the efficacy results were published long before the vaccines were made available to the public. Natural immunity isn’t better at all, it’s as good in some cases, but less consistently so across the board and hybrid immunity was better than either. No, antibody testing would be unnecessary overkill vs just vaccinating everyone for this reason.

        • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          Lol, you need time to know long term effects, there still hasn’t been enough of that yet.

          How long after a pandemic starts should a vaccine be released? Give me a number please.

          • Shake747@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            For a pandemic with a really high survival rate? Like a 99% survival rate?

            5-10 years makes sense to me

            If the survival rate was different, my answers here would be different

            • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              So death is the only metric? Long COVID isn’t a metric? Just missing two weeks of work isn’t a metric? Because we don’t get flu vaccines because we’re worried about dying from the flu, we get them because we want to avoid getting the flu and avoid the worst symptoms if we do. And that’s even true of other vaccines. The polio vaccine wasn’t about stopping death, it was about stopping the crippling effects of polio. Sort of similar to the crippling effects of COVID.

              • Shake747@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                The worst symptoms are death. I see your point about extending the metrics, and maybe I should consider more than just dying, but I think it’s a strong factor in why this whole thing seems over blown in the way mandates and restrictions came.

                For polio, it was about stopping death, paralysis is a death sentence in most places in the world.

    • Catoblepas
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 year ago

      It is stupid as fuck to worry about the “long term effects” of a vaccine but not the disease it’s vaccinating against.

      • Shake747@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes, I’ve heard of long covid. But it might as well be named “mid term COVID” as it applies typically applies to anyone who continues to see symptoms past the 3-8 month mark (this varies from study to study).

        The vaccine doesn’t prevent this either though, but does seem reduce the likelihood, slightly.

        We still don’t know what’s going to happen in the next 5+ years to come (with covid or the vax). These things can take a while to manifest sometimes, which is partly why vaccine testing is usually so extensively long, like 5-10 years (just not in this case for some reason).

        • KillAllPoorPeople@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          If you knew anything, you’d know this isn’t the reason why getting vaccine approval takes so long. It takes so long because there’s a mountain of bureaucrats, lawyers, researchers, and money required to get stuff moving along. Vaccines are pretty low the totem pole for companies and the government to give a shit about, since they’re usually about prevention and not treatment. Companies and the government can’t throw everything at a vaccine to approve. The only reason the covid vaccine was streamlined was because, you guessed it, we were and are in a global pandemic. Nothing about the approval of vaccines was abnormal, it still took nearly 2.5 years.

          • Shake747@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I wouldn’t say they’re “low on the totem pole”, they’re supposed to be one of the most strictly regulated medical products. In part because vaccine producers can’t be held liable for anything - so extensive testing and review is needed.

            That industry isn’t just peanuts either, it’s one of the largest industries in the world.

            2.5 years is abnormal (and testing hadn’t finished when everything started becoming mandated). The global population was the test lol.

            Google how long all the other vaccines we have took to get approval, ~10 years seems pretty normal, maybe not in your country though. Hopefully it never comes to this again

            • KillAllPoorPeople@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              It’s so funny how you guys operate. Even when confronted, you just cherry-pick what’s being said and strip away the context to push the exact same anti-science and anti-truth positions that were just given retorts. I don’t know if it’s ignorance or wilful deceit, but either way, people like you are a net negative to humanity.

        • seitanic@lemmy.sdf.orgOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          The vaccine doesn’t hang out in your body, so there’s no way that there’s going to be effects 5+ years later. Or even 5 months later. I forget the exact amount of time, but it’s out of your body in a very short time…like 24-48 hours.