Where is the mandate?

No, they are mutations of a weakened strain, hence weakened themselves

 

Mutations in vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals are the same. They are caused by uncorrected errors that naturally occur at a relatively fixed rate in RNA viral replication. Being vaccinated only decreases the odds of a mutation occurring and being passed on because in some vaccinated individuals replication duration is shortened and suppressed.

So yes, vaccination decreases the odds of a mutation of concern, but in no way makes the mutation less likely to be “bad” or “detrimental”. A mutation that allows the virus to be more contagious or more lethal or both can come from the vaccinated or unvaccinated. It’s just less likely to come from the vaccinated. A vaccine resistant mutation can occur in either a vaccinated or unvaccinated individual. It’s just statistically more likely to occur in an unvaccinated individual because on average there will be less replication cycles in an infected vaccinated individual.

 

And whether you get a resistant strain is then majorly a numbers game, is it not?

Eventually, yes, we will get some resistant strains, and we will have to make better vaccines, like we do with flu, but the more people we have vaccinated the longer the vaccinations will be effective.

Which is why we HAVE to get EVERYBODY vaccinated, and this ******* Trumphumping crapolaha has to bloody CEASE. I'm as much for freedom as the next guy but to have people, especially INNOCENT people whose only offense was that they CAN'T get vaccinated, being the ones DYING over it, especially when you don't have to and it serves NO purpose, is ****** SILLY

 

Where did you get that?

 

These two positions are condradictory.

Vaccine resistant mutation can ONLY occur in the vaccinated...

Thats how normal vaccines work- by introducing an attenuated (weakenned) virus into your system so it can learn to kill the virus with less risk of the virus causing damage while you learn to kill it.
The covid vaccines arent normal vaccines. They are mRNA vaccines. The covid vaccine reprograms your own RNA to manufacture the spike protein that covid uses to infect your cells. Your system learns to attack the synthesized spike protein while its not a part of a harmful virus, then when you come into contact with the virus, your system knows to attack it because it knows to attack the spike protein on the virus.

 

Who are the people dying that can’t be vaccinated? Kids under age 12? People allergic to the vaccines? There are about 4 reported allergic reactions to PEG annually in the US. Only people with known allergy can’t get vaccinated. The number of people who can’t be vaccinated and are at risk from Covid is so minuscule as to be completely statistically insignificant. Deaths in the vaccinated are orders of magnitude higher than deaths in people who can’t be vaccinated.

Just a heads up. Continuing to call people unvaccinated trumphumpers is counter productive. The more you do it the less people will be vaccinated. There is a large number of progressives and minorities who loathe Trump who are not vaccinated. Insinuating they are trumphumpers will not encourage them to be vaccinated.

One of the most influential anti vaxxers and ivermectin pushers today is a Bernie Sanders supporting progressive by the name of Bret Weinstein. Don’t believe me? Read up on him. You probably won’t hear about him from your sources of information.
https://www.wweek.com/news/2021/09/...the-nations-leading-advocates-for-ivermectin/

You are aware Trump has been pimping the vaccines since last spring, right?
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.po...21/03/16/trump-americans-covid-vaccine-476479

 

The media has been on a campaign indoctrinating people that any and all resistance to establishment agenda originates with Trump, probably in an effort to bolster the idea that we common folk arent capable of forming our own opinions and we need leaders to tell us what we want and believe.

 

Yes. There are threads criticizing Joe Rogan, but nobody knows most of his hesitancy on vaccination and his ideas on ivermectin come from Weinstein, a dyed in the wool raging progressive. People only know what they are told by the authorities they appeal to. Few are interested in comprehensive knowledge. It’s a sad state of affairs.

 

From the beginning, when announced, it was said that the rule would take a couple of months to be developed and to be enforced, so, nothing is different. You're just being impatient. The rule will be issued by OSHA; mark my words.

Then it will be challenged in court. Long court battles will ensue. If the rule survives the court, I don't expect to see it in effect before 2022.

I am generally against mandates, with the exception of healthcare workers, whom I believe to have no business being around vulnerable patients if they stubbornly refuse to vaccinate and won't listen to science, in a science-driven sector of human activity. Every single healthcare worker being fired for refusing to vaccinate, in my opinion is good riddance.

Otherwise, mandates will increase vaccination in some sectors but will decrease it in some others, with outraged people digging their heels and being even less likely to be gently persuaded.

Recently we saw in the news what happened when a very committed vaccine refuser met a doctor in a bar. They chatted for 3 hours. The doctor gently and respectfully dispelled all the conspiracy theories and misinformation the guy believed in. At the end of the conversation, the guy was convinced, and the next day he went to the doctor's hospital and allowed that same doctor to administer the vaccine to him.

That's how it's done. Sure, we don't have 3 hours to spend with every patient... but we could assign a nurse or PA armed with good information, to go to a business and individually speak with every vaccine-hesitant person there. I'm thoroughly convinced that this would result in a bigger vaccination rate than the mandates. Sure, it's a long and difficult effort so people instead, cut corners and try to impose mandates. Sad.

In the absence of any information campaign by the federal government to counter misinformation, I see the mandates as a short-circuit route.

If they had engaged in a comprehensive educational campaign and it failed, they'd be more justified in going for mandates. But the sheer and stunning absence of any effort to educate the vaccine-hesitant makes me think that they burned a necessary step. I watch foreign TV on satellite and routinely see such campaigns.

In Brazil, for example, the president is against vaccines. Still, I do watch Brazilian TV to keep my Portuguese sharp, and they have fabulous educational campaigns. It resulted in 93% of the Brazilian population saying they want the vaccines. Again, that's how it's done. And that's in a country with politics as divisive as ours, with the supporters of the right-wing president in a wicked fight with the supporters of the Worker's Party leftist candidate. The right wing guys are vaccine hesitant, but the information campaign got to them anyway and most changed their minds. It's possible.

 

Well, Psaki said 'a few weeks', not months. Either way, people are still getting fired before the mandate has actually mandated anything. So far, it seems employers are just using the impending mandate as an excuse to fire people. Which I'm not saying should be legally prevented, but seems really shady.

 

A couple of months is 8 weeks. A few weeks.

Employers have all the right in the world to establish conditions of employment. They don't need any "excuse" and it's not "shady." For businesses, sick employees drag down their bottom line, not only because they have to call in sick but also because they may survive the virus but acquire long-term sequelae that will impact on productivity. I posted a study today by Penn State University that looked into more than 250,000 Covid-19 survivors, and the data showed more than 50% of them showing up with long-term symptoms. Companies invest in training and they want employees they trained to do their jobs well, and to be productive for several years. So if there's an illness that affects productivity, and there are safe and efficacious vaccines but the employee doesn't want them, the business is entirely justified in getting rid of that person in order to hire another one they will be able to count on for 100% productivity, for many years. So, it's basically "you want to work for us, we require the vaccine as a condition of employment; you don't want the vaccine, feel free to go work elsewhere; we are at no obligation to offer you employment or keep you employed."

I thought you conservatives understood this principle of private businesses' autonomy to set their own rules.

 

Here, a hospital CEO saying that implementing the mandate was the best decision he ever made:

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/vaccine-mandates-stoked-fears-labor-134106597.html

"More than 150 employees were fired. There were legal battles and protests. But President and CEO Marc Boom has no regrets: 98% of staff have been vaccinated, and they and patients are safer as a result, he said."

The spokesperson of another hospital said:

"Without a vaccine mandate for team members, we faced the strong possibility of having a third of our staff unable to work due to contracting, or exposure to, COVID-19," she said. "This possibility only increases heading into a fall season with the more contagious and deadly Delta variant."

Hospitals have their operation particularly damaged by employees contracting the illness. It is entirely justified for them to have mandates, both to preserve their workforce, and to avoid passing the virus on to unsuspecting vulnerable patients (which could result in liability).

And by the way, many hospitals already have vaccine mandates (such as, in my hospital, the yearly flu shot and the hep B shots - except if immunity is proven for the latter - are mandatory as a condition of employment) and there was no bruhaha about it. It's only because it is ultra-politicized Covid-19 that we're seeing all this fuss.

In the past, it was understood, by a person applying for a healthcare position, that vaccination or proof thereof would be asked of the person. People rolled up their shirtsleeves without a peep. Now, because it's Covid-19, OH MY GOD THE SKY IS FALLING MY EMPLOYER IS SO MEAN!!!

I frankly find it all utterly ridiculous. "You work in healthcare. You get in contact with vulnerable patients. You can't work if you're a carrier of a deadly virus. So, roll up your shirtsleeve." This was understood and came with the territory, and now it became this hot potato.

 

Covid has been with us a long time and most of those fired workers had already been working at the same jobs unvaccinated. We were all happy to have them, called them heroic and they were so why this sudden loss of respect for them?

 

You must've missed the part where I said it "should not be legally prevented", as in I agree employers have the right to fire people for refusing a vaccine... Its shady because they waited until the govt announced a mandate, but not for the mandate to actually happen. Why didn't they fire vaccine refusers before the announcement? Makes it look like they needed an excuse... And Im not talking about hospitals. Im talking about the mandate for federal contractors and businesses with over 100 people. Like, why did the airlines wait to start firing people? They didn't need a mandate to do that, as evidensed by the fact that there still isn't a mandate.

 

Yes, it should not be legally prevented. But no, it's not shady. The timeline of the decision is utterly irrelevant. The federal mandate is not even in force now. Either you think businesses have the right to set their conditions of employment, or you don't. If you think they do, then the timeline for when they choose to implement it is irrelevant.

The federal proposed future mandate is not even a mandate. It doesn't talk of firing anyone. It establishes an alternative, a weekly test, so it's not even a true mandate for vaccination if there is a clear opt-out clause.

These companies firing people are not even allowing them to have an opt-out clause. It's the companies' decision, given that no federal law is in effect for that, right now, and when it comes into effect, it is actually milder than what the companies are doing.

Sure, OK, you weren't talking about healthcare. I was just trying to explain my position. I'm definitely for mandates in healthcare. But although I understand the rationale for other business to be free to set their conditions of employment, I don't really support mandates outside of healthcare. And this is not a contradiction. It's like when we say, "I do not agree with what you are protesting about, but I uphold your First Amendment right to protest."

So I'm not for mandates outside of healthcare, but I support the right of business to implement one if they so choose.

 

I question why, for example, the airlines were perfectly happy to have unvaccinated pilots until the mandate was announced, but then they had to go. Why wait? And why not wait for the mandate to actually become official?

It kinda seems like they either arent actually concerned about the virus OR they felt like there was a need to wait for something to blame it on (like a govt mandate).

 

I know that companies use these situations to clean out older workers and people it would be hard to straight out layoff. This gives them cover for a reorganization they have planned for for some time.

 

Then why isn't he pushing it more?

 

How are those positions contradictory?

Mutation can occur in any reservoir and why can't they be vaccine resistant in any reservoir?

So?

 

Don’t know. Why aren’t Carter, Bush, Clinton, and Obama pushing it more?

 

There is a new President, his name is Joe.

 

Because none of them are planning to run for President again in 2024 and have a credibility problem

 

I don't believe Trump has committed to running again either. He's expected to but has not said so.

 

They all have credibility problems. And none of them will ever be President again. Former Presidents are expected to be seen and not heard.

Say Trump did campaign every day on vaccination and got elected. He managed to get some Republicans and a bunch of minorities and progressives like Bret Weinstein vaccinated but ended up being your president for another four years. Would it be worth it for getting people vaccinated?

 

More contradiction from the Feds:
CDC Says Fully Vaccinated People Can Drop Their Masks (aarp.org)
En español | If you are fully vaccinated against COVID-19, you may stop wearing a mask and social distancing in most settings, including at crowded indoor and outdoor events, according to new guidance issued Thursday by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).