Listen, it is pretty simple. UCLA is a public institution with an obligation to serve the public interest that has every right to compel its staff and students to get vaccinated. He is a matriculated student who can easily just add an in-person class if he wanted to, and who has almost certainly already provided documentation for other vaccinations. If he doesn't like it, he can transfer and go to another school. Or do something else with his life. Simple as that. They have their rights, and he does too.
But people need to understand that no one anywhere is being forced to get vaccinated. It just sounds so feeble and weak. If people feel that strongly about it, they need to stop crying like a bunch of little babies, put on their big boy pants, take charge of their own lives, and quit the damn school or job like a goddamn grown-up would.
Anyone not adult enough for that has far more problems than a vaccine. But rest assured none of the rest of us give a **** about all this whimpering about how people don't have enough of a spine to take responsibility for their own lives and choices.
Listen, it is pretty simple. UCLA is a public institution with an obligation to serve the public interest that has every right to compel its staff and students to get vaccinated. He is a matriculated student who can easily just add an in-person class if he wanted to, and who has almost certainly already provided documentation for other vaccinations. If he doesn't like it, he can transfer and go to another school. Or do something else with his life. Simple as that. They have their rights, and he does too.
But people need to understand that no one anywhere is being forced to get vaccinated. It just sounds so feeble and weak. If people feel that strongly about it, they need to stop crying like a bunch of little babies, put on their big boy pants, take charge of their own lives, and quit the damn school or job like a goddamn grown-up would.
Anyone not adult enough for that has far more problems than a vaccine. But rest assured none of the rest of us give a **** about all this whimpering about how people don't have enough of a spine to take responsibility for their own lives and choices.
Nothing you said makes sense for this particular situation. He has already paid for his schooling and ALL of his classes are online. This clearly has NOTHING to do about health, considering, you know, he's in his home by himself on zoom. He is being forced to do something that should have no relevance whatsoever to the situation. It would be like me asking you to put a condom on to have phone sex. That is how much sense this makes. None.
Your stance is basically, "if you don't like it, quit the school". Fair enough. My only point was how nonsensical and absolutely stupid this is and how it makes no sense whatsoever. It just goes to show this isn't about "protecting others". That doesn't apply here at all. It's always been about control and power and money. They don't give a single f*** about your health.. But yeah, I agree with one thing. We should all stop being little babies and crying about the choices others make with their lives. Keep that same energy when the shoe is on the other foot though.
Also, "nobody is being forced to be vaccinated" is pretty disingenuous. Sure, nobody is being held down at gun point being forced.. But when your choice is, "do what we say or lose your job"... Yeah, that's about as close to forced as you can get without actually being held down and someone jabbing you.
Listen, it is pretty simple. UCLA is a public institution with an obligation to serve the public interest that has every right to compel its staff and students to get vaccinated. He is a matriculated student who can easily just add an in-person class if he wanted to, and who has almost certainly already provided documentation for other vaccinations. If he doesn't like it, he can transfer and go to another school. Or do something else with his life. Simple as that. They have their rights, and he does too.
But people need to understand that no one anywhere is being forced to get vaccinated. It just sounds so feeble and weak. If people feel that strongly about it, they need to stop crying like a bunch of little babies, put on their big boy pants, take charge of their own lives, and quit the damn school or job like a goddamn grown-up would.
Anyone not adult enough for that has far more problems than a vaccine. But rest assured none of the rest of us give a **** about all this whimpering about how people don't have enough of a spine to take responsibility for their own lives and choices.
Many minorities aren’t vaccinated so it could be looked at as discrimination. Doesn’t matter if they are a public institution….
Listen, it is pretty simple. UCLA is a public institution with an obligation to serve the public interest that has every right to compel its staff and students to get vaccinated. He is a matriculated student who can easily just add an in-person class if he wanted to, and who has almost certainly already provided documentation for other vaccinations. If he doesn't like it, he can transfer and go to another school. Or do something else with his life. Simple as that. They have their rights, and he does too.
But people need to understand that no one anywhere is being forced to get vaccinated. It just sounds so feeble and weak. If people feel that strongly about it, they need to stop crying like a bunch of little babies, put on their big boy pants, take charge of their own lives, and quit the damn school or job like a goddamn grown-up would.
Anyone not adult enough for that has far more problems than a vaccine. But rest assured none of the rest of us give a **** about all this whimpering about how people don't have enough of a spine to take responsibility for their own lives and choices.
Nothing you said makes sense for this particular situation. He has already paid for his schooling and ALL of his classes are online. This clearly has NOTHING to do about health, considering, you know, he's in his home by himself on zoom. He is being forced to do something that should have no relevance whatsoever to the situation. It would be like me asking you to put a condom on to have phone sex. That is how much sense this makes. None.
Your stance is basically, "if you don't like it, quit the school". Fair enough. My only point was how nonsensical and absolutely stupid this is and how it makes no sense whatsoever. It just goes to show this isn't about "protecting others". That doesn't apply here at all. It's always been about control and power and money. They don't give a single f*** about your health.. But yeah, I agree with one thing. We should all stop being little babies and crying about the choices others make with their lives. Keep that same energy when the shoe is on the other foot though.
Also, "nobody is being forced to be vaccinated" is pretty disingenuous. Sure, nobody is being held down at gun point being forced.. But when your choice is, "do what we say or lose your job"... Yeah, that's about as close to forced as you can get without actually being held down and someone jabbing you.
NOPE!
As a matriculated student, he is free to use their facilities, gyms, libraries, student services, etc whether he is taking online classes or not. And again, he can just as easily add an in-person class. There is not a different system simply because he is choosing to take online classes, and he does not get to set their policies for them. P-E-R-I-O-D.
They are also on a quarterly system, and the idea that he would be out $70k a month into the fall quarter is a complete fallacy. That is not how it works at all. I would also bet absolutely anything that he was fully aware of their vaccination policy before he enrolled and began attending classes in this fall quarter, but decided for himself in his mind that this mandate did not or should not apply to him if he only took classes online. He is currently finding out otherwise.
Like everyone else, he is being provided with a choice. For many, the choice it to get vaccinated or lose your employment or student status as a public institution, health care facility, or any other employer or school that has the legal authority to compel a vaccination.
Listen, it is pretty simple. UCLA is a public institution with an obligation to serve the public interest that has every right to compel its staff and students to get vaccinated. He is a matriculated student who can easily just add an in-person class if he wanted to, and who has almost certainly already provided documentation for other vaccinations. If he doesn't like it, he can transfer and go to another school. Or do something else with his life. Simple as that. They have their rights, and he does too.
But people need to understand that no one anywhere is being forced to get vaccinated. It just sounds so feeble and weak. If people feel that strongly about it, they need to stop crying like a bunch of little babies, put on their big boy pants, take charge of their own lives, and quit the damn school or job like a goddamn grown-up would.
Anyone not adult enough for that has far more problems than a vaccine. But rest assured none of the rest of us give a **** about all this whimpering about how people don't have enough of a spine to take responsibility for their own lives and choices.
Many minorities aren’t vaccinated so it could be looked at as discrimination. Doesn’t matter if they are a public institution….
It is actually the opposite of discrimination when you dictate that everyone must be vaccinated, and not just certain groups.
Anyone not clear on that probably doesn't need to worry about going to UCLA in the first place.
Captain_Caveman wrote: Listen, it is pretty simple. UCLA is a public institution with an obligation to serve the public interest that has every right to compel its staff and students to get vaccinated. He is a matriculated student who can easily just add an in-person class if he wanted to, and who has almost certainly already provided documentation for other vaccinations. If he doesn't like it, he can transfer and go to another school. Or do something else with his life. Simple as that. They have their rights, and he does too.
But people need to understand that no one anywhere is being forced to get vaccinated. It just sounds so feeble and weak. If people feel that strongly about it, they need to stop crying like a bunch of little babies, put on their big boy pants, take charge of their own lives, and quit the damn school or job like a goddamn grown-up would.
Anyone not adult enough for that has far more problems than a vaccine. But rest assured none of the rest of us give a **** about all this whimpering about how people don't have enough of a spine to take responsibility for their own lives and choices.
Many minorities aren’t vaccinated so it could be looked at as discrimination. Doesn’t matter if they are a public institution….
It is actually the opposite of discrimination when you dictate that everyone must be vaccinated, and not just certain groups.
If that's not clear, you probably don't need to worry about going to UCLA in the first place.
Minorities are affected more by it. I’m not the first to bring this up, actually the mayor of Boston brought it up. She said that requiring vaccine proof to go indoors was the like asking for “slavery-era freedom papers.”
Why can't people understand facts? Oh, look at me. I found an article on Yahoo, so I know everything. I feel like some of my HS students are posting here. And not the smart ones.
Scarletfire81 wrote: Many minorities aren’t vaccinated so it could be looked at as discrimination. Doesn’t matter if they are a public institution….
It is actually the opposite of discrimination when you dictate that everyone must be vaccinated, and not just certain groups.
If that's not clear, you probably don't need to worry about going to UCLA in the first place.
Minorities are affected more by it. I’m not the first to bring this up, actually the mayor of Boston brought it up. She said that requiring vaccine proof to go indoors was the like asking for “slavery-era freedom papers.”
That has nothing to do with the University of California system's legal authority to mandate one additional vaccination to the others that are already required. If a UC student or employee wanted to bring a discrimination lawsuit for a mandate that applies to everyone, they are perfectly welcome to. Or perhaps they can apply for a religious/health exemption if that is applicable in their case.
canman1971 wrote:Why can't people understand facts? Oh, look at me. I found an article on Yahoo, so I know everything. I feel like some of my HS students are posting here. And not the smart ones.
Oh please, I'M the one acting like I know everything? The irony in that statement is beyond hilarious. I simply shared something I found about the topic at hand and found it ridiculous. Since it doesn't fit the narrative you're trying to push though you have to attack me for it. I haven't personally attacked a single person here. Yet, every time someone with an opposing view says something or posts a link to something interesting they found they are instantly attacked and called names. I'm not the one with the HS attitude here buddy.
Captain_Caveman wrote: It is actually the opposite of discrimination when you dictate that everyone must be vaccinated, and not just certain groups.
If that's not clear, you probably don't need to worry about going to UCLA in the first place.
Minorities are affected more by it. I’m not the first to bring this up, actually the mayor of Boston brought it up. She said that requiring vaccine proof to go indoors was the like asking for “slavery-era freedom papers.”
That has nothing to do with the University of California system's legal authority to mandate one additional vaccination to the others that are already required. If a UC student or employee wanted to bring a discrimination lawsuit for a mandate that applies to everyone, they are perfectly welcome to. Or perhaps they can apply for a religious/health exemption if that is applicable in their case.
What Cave said, other than most probably don't have the knowledge or financial resources to follow through. That said, sign me up in the camp that wants more people like this guy:
67. The hunt for re-infections has been a nationwide effort and out of the estimated 120.2 million individuals in the United States who have been infected with SARS-CoV-2 as of May 2021,27 there is not a single documented case of an individual being re-infected with the virus and transmitting it to another person.
68. A five-month study looking at reinfection rates in employees of the Cleveland Clinic Health System previously infected with the COVID-19 virus found that not one of the 1,359 previously infected subjects who remained unvaccinated was reinfected with the virus despite a high background rate of COVID-19 in the hospital. Irish researchers recently published a review of eleven cohort studies with over 600,000 total recovered COVID-19 patients, not all of whom were well defined and may have had suspected COVID-19 with positive serologies later on who were followed up with over ten months. They found the reinfection rate to be 0.27% “with no study reporting an increase in the risk of reinfection over time.” Based on this data, the researchers were able to assert that “naturally acquired SARS-CoV-2 immunity does not wane for at least 10 months post-infection.” Moreover, this study also did not document a single case of reinfection that then resulted in transmission to another person.
69. Given that the current number of confirmed cases worldwide is approximately 200 million,28 if reinfection was possible in even one percent of individuals, the world would have observed 2 million second and third cases with many requiring hospitalizations and coming to clinical attention. No such large volume of reinfection cases has come to clinical attention in any region of the world.
You gotta make it sexy! Hips and nips, otherwise I'm not eating.
canman1971 wrote:Why can't people understand facts? Oh, look at me. I found an article on Yahoo, so I know everything. I feel like some of my HS students are posting here. And not the smart ones.
Oh please, I'M the one acting like I know everything? The irony in that statement is beyond hilarious. I simply shared something I found about the topic at hand and found it ridiculous. Since it doesn't fit the narrative you're trying to push though you have to attack me for it. I haven't personally attacked a single person here. Yet, every time someone with an opposing view says something or posts a link to something interesting they found they are instantly attacked and called names. I'm not the one with the HS attitude here buddy.
If I "attacked" you, it would have been much, much worse. I was just using your post as an example of the many that have been posted by others.
canman1971 wrote:Why can't people understand facts? Oh, look at me. I found an article on Yahoo, so I know everything. I feel like some of my HS students are posting here. And not the smart ones.
Oh please, I'M the one acting like I know everything? The irony in that statement is beyond hilarious. I simply shared something I found about the topic at hand and found it ridiculous. Since it doesn't fit the narrative you're trying to push though you have to attack me for it. I haven't personally attacked a single person here. Yet, every time someone with an opposing view says something or posts a link to something interesting they found they are instantly attacked and called names. I'm not the one with the HS attitude here buddy.
If I "attacked" you, it would have been much, much worse. I was just using your post as an example of the many that have been posted by others.
You implied I was a dumb high school student but okay. I guess that's not an attack. It's fine. I said my piece. I'm out. I'll let you all continue your bickering amongst yourselves.
Scarletfire81 wrote: Minorities are affected more by it. I’m not the first to bring this up, actually the mayor of Boston brought it up. She said that requiring vaccine proof to go indoors was the like asking for “slavery-era freedom papers.”
That has nothing to do with the University of California system's legal authority to mandate one additional vaccination to the others that are already required. If a UC student or employee wanted to bring a discrimination lawsuit for a mandate that applies to everyone, they are perfectly welcome to. Or perhaps they can apply for a religious/health exemption if that is applicable in their case.
What Cave said, other than most probably don't have the knowledge or financial resources to follow through. That said, sign me up in the camp that wants more people like this guy:
67. The hunt for re-infections has been a nationwide effort and out of the estimated 120.2 million individuals in the United States who have been infected with SARS-CoV-2 as of May 2021,27 there is not a single documented case of an individual being re-infected with the virus and transmitting it to another person.
68. A five-month study looking at reinfection rates in employees of the Cleveland Clinic Health System previously infected with the COVID-19 virus found that not one of the 1,359 previously infected subjects who remained unvaccinated was reinfected with the virus despite a high background rate of COVID-19 in the hospital. Irish researchers recently published a review of eleven cohort studies with over 600,000 total recovered COVID-19 patients, not all of whom were well defined and may have had suspected COVID-19 with positive serologies later on who were followed up with over ten months. They found the reinfection rate to be 0.27% “with no study reporting an increase in the risk of reinfection over time.” Based on this data, the researchers were able to assert that “naturally acquired SARS-CoV-2 immunity does not wane for at least 10 months post-infection.” Moreover, this study also did not document a single case of reinfection that then resulted in transmission to another person.
69. Given that the current number of confirmed cases worldwide is approximately 200 million,28 if reinfection was possible in even one percent of individuals, the world would have observed 2 million second and third cases with many requiring hospitalizations and coming to clinical attention. No such large volume of reinfection cases has come to clinical attention in any region of the world.
I don't expect anyone to read any link I post, but, from the Federal Workers Union lawsuit, since it might hit home for some MASS folks:
75. Natural immunity confers an additional benefit over vaccine immunity. Natural immunity will prevent a virus from being able to replicate and shed in the naturally immune individual. In contrast, COVID-19 vaccines appear to reduce symptoms in some but still permit the vaccinees to become infected with and transmit the virus.33
76. Viral carriage by the vaccinated is reflected in the recent outbreak in Barnstable County, Massachusetts, which has a 69% vaccination coverage rate among its eligible residents.34A recent CDC investigation found that 74% of those infected in the outbreak were fully vaccinated for COVID-19 and, even more alarming, the vaccinated had on average more virus in their nose than the unvaccinated that were infected. The study reported zero cases of infection among those that previously had COVID-19.
77. This forced the Director of the CDC, Rochelle Walensky, to admit that individuals vaccinated for COVID-19, while having less symptoms, can still become infected with and transmit the virus.35 Dr. Walensky admitted that “what [the COVID- 19 vaccines] can’t do anymore is prevent transmission.”36 After this admission, Wolf Blitzer asks Dr. Walensky if “you get covid, you’re fully vaccinated, but you are totally asymptomatic, you can still pass on the virus to someone else, is that right?” and Dr. Walensky answers “that is exactly right.”37
78. Despite this, Defendants arbitrarily allow Plaintiffs and other service members, federal employees, and federal contractors are permitted to serve or work without limitation, so long as they are “fully vaccinated” – a status incontrovertibly has been statistically and medically proven to be irrelevant as to the prevention of COVID-19 infection and subsequent transmission. On the other hand, Plaintiffs and other service members, federal employees, and federal contractors who have natural immunity have faced and continue to face adverse employment action, including without limitation, reprimand, termination, and dishonorable discharge.
Again, to me, 50+ with comorbidities and you haven't had COVID-19, seems like a swell idea to get vaccinated, but I'm not going to rally the neighbors with torches and pitchforks to pressure you into getting vaccinated if you don't want. Ditto for the alarming percent of americans who are under 50 and with multiple comorbidities. Now, where we're at October 8, 2021 with a robust number of people who have been infected with COVID, people who have been vaccinated, and an ongoing opportunity for anyone who wants to be vaccinated who has been holding out to get one, I don't see the logical/statistical sense behind the mass mandates.
In my state, MN, we reportedly had a budget crisis in fall of 2020, which resulted in a considerable number of State employees being laid off. Secondary to the Vaccine mandates, which do not address antibody testing but do allow for weekly COVID screening testing, we are now spending one million dollars per month on testing given there remain a substantial number of employees who are refusing to get vaccinated (again - I got vaccinated in March)... I do not believe that is one million dollars well spent each month, and that is without giving any consideration to how disappointing our country's response to the development/endorsement of proper testing procedures has been.
You gotta make it sexy! Hips and nips, otherwise I'm not eating.
Scarletfire81 wrote: Minorities are affected more by it. I’m not the first to bring this up, actually the mayor of Boston brought it up. She said that requiring vaccine proof to go indoors was the like asking for “slavery-era freedom papers.”
That has nothing to do with the University of California system's legal authority to mandate one additional vaccination to the others that are already required. If a UC student or employee wanted to bring a discrimination lawsuit for a mandate that applies to everyone, they are perfectly welcome to. Or perhaps they can apply for a religious/health exemption if that is applicable in their case.
What Cave said, other than most probably don't have the knowledge or financial resources to follow through. That said, sign me up in the camp that wants more people like this guy:
67. The hunt for re-infections has been a nationwide effort and out of the estimated 120.2 million individuals in the United States who have been infected with SARS-CoV-2 as of May 2021,27 there is not a single documented case of an individual being re-infected with the virus and transmitting it to another person.
68. A five-month study looking at reinfection rates in employees of the Cleveland Clinic Health System previously infected with the COVID-19 virus found that not one of the 1,359 previously infected subjects who remained unvaccinated was reinfected with the virus despite a high background rate of COVID-19 in the hospital. Irish researchers recently published a review of eleven cohort studies with over 600,000 total recovered COVID-19 patients, not all of whom were well defined and may have had suspected COVID-19 with positive serologies later on who were followed up with over ten months. They found the reinfection rate to be 0.27% “with no study reporting an increase in the risk of reinfection over time.” Based on this data, the researchers were able to assert that “naturally acquired SARS-CoV-2 immunity does not wane for at least 10 months post-infection.” Moreover, this study also did not document a single case of reinfection that then resulted in transmission to another person.
69. Given that the current number of confirmed cases worldwide is approximately 200 million,28 if reinfection was possible in even one percent of individuals, the world would have observed 2 million second and third cases with many requiring hospitalizations and coming to clinical attention. No such large volume of reinfection cases has come to clinical attention in any region of the world.
See, there you go. Worth noting that is a different scenario in a different state with different laws, and that the natural immunity argument is shaky at best, especially over time.
Back to the UCLA kid, the "$70,000" figure implies that he is an out-of-state student who receives no scholarships or financial aid, and that he lives on campus in a residence hall. To the surprise of no one, that's not exactly true at all. He is the son of Herschel Walker, lives in West Hollywood, and is an aspiring conservative pundit and TikTok star who sells his own right-wing merchandise. Shocker! It is almost as if he is lying about the facts surrounding a vaccine mandate that he was perfectly aware of all along in order to create a fake scandal that he is using to promote himself and his father's Senate campaign.
Captain_Caveman wrote: That has nothing to do with the University of California system's legal authority to mandate one additional vaccination to the others that are already required. If a UC student or employee wanted to bring a discrimination lawsuit for a mandate that applies to everyone, they are perfectly welcome to. Or perhaps they can apply for a religious/health exemption if that is applicable in their case.
What Cave said, other than most probably don't have the knowledge or financial resources to follow through. That said, sign me up in the camp that wants more people like this guy:
67. The hunt for re-infections has been a nationwide effort and out of the estimated 120.2 million individuals in the United States who have been infected with SARS-CoV-2 as of May 2021,27 there is not a single documented case of an individual being re-infected with the virus and transmitting it to another person.
68. A five-month study looking at reinfection rates in employees of the Cleveland Clinic Health System previously infected with the COVID-19 virus found that not one of the 1,359 previously infected subjects who remained unvaccinated was reinfected with the virus despite a high background rate of COVID-19 in the hospital. Irish researchers recently published a review of eleven cohort studies with over 600,000 total recovered COVID-19 patients, not all of whom were well defined and may have had suspected COVID-19 with positive serologies later on who were followed up with over ten months. They found the reinfection rate to be 0.27% “with no study reporting an increase in the risk of reinfection over time.” Based on this data, the researchers were able to assert that “naturally acquired SARS-CoV-2 immunity does not wane for at least 10 months post-infection.” Moreover, this study also did not document a single case of reinfection that then resulted in transmission to another person.
69. Given that the current number of confirmed cases worldwide is approximately 200 million,28 if reinfection was possible in even one percent of individuals, the world would have observed 2 million second and third cases with many requiring hospitalizations and coming to clinical attention. No such large volume of reinfection cases has come to clinical attention in any region of the world.
I don't expect anyone to read any link I post, but, from the Federal Workers Union lawsuit, since it might hit home for some MASS folks:
75. Natural immunity confers an additional benefit over vaccine immunity. Natural immunity will prevent a virus from being able to replicate and shed in the naturally immune individual. In contrast, COVID-19 vaccines appear to reduce symptoms in some but still permit the vaccinees to become infected with and transmit the virus.33
76. Viral carriage by the vaccinated is reflected in the recent outbreak in Barnstable County, Massachusetts, which has a 69% vaccination coverage rate among its eligible residents.34A recent CDC investigation found that 74% of those infected in the outbreak were fully vaccinated for COVID-19 and, even more alarming, the vaccinated had on average more virus in their nose than the unvaccinated that were infected. The study reported zero cases of infection among those that previously had COVID-19.
77. This forced the Director of the CDC, Rochelle Walensky, to admit that individuals vaccinated for COVID-19, while having less symptoms, can still become infected with and transmit the virus.35 Dr. Walensky admitted that “what [the COVID- 19 vaccines] can’t do anymore is prevent transmission.”36 After this admission, Wolf Blitzer asks Dr. Walensky if “you get covid, you’re fully vaccinated, but you are totally asymptomatic, you can still pass on the virus to someone else, is that right?” and Dr. Walensky answers “that is exactly right.”37
78. Despite this, Defendants arbitrarily allow Plaintiffs and other service members, federal employees, and federal contractors are permitted to serve or work without limitation, so long as they are “fully vaccinated” – a status incontrovertibly has been statistically and medically proven to be irrelevant as to the prevention of COVID-19 infection and subsequent transmission. On the other hand, Plaintiffs and other service members, federal employees, and federal contractors who have natural immunity have faced and continue to face adverse employment action, including without limitation, reprimand, termination, and dishonorable discharge.
Again, to me, 50+ with comorbidities and you haven't had COVID-19, seems like a swell idea to get vaccinated, but I'm not going to rally the neighbors with torches and pitchforks to pressure you into getting vaccinated if you don't want. Ditto for the alarming percent of americans who are under 50 and with multiple comorbidities. Now, where we're at October 8, 2021 with a robust number of people who have been infected with COVID, people who have been vaccinated, and an ongoing opportunity for anyone who wants to be vaccinated who has been holding out to get one, I don't see the logical/statistical sense behind the mass mandates.
In my state, MN, we reportedly had a budget crisis in fall of 2020, which resulted in a considerable number of State employees being laid off. Secondary to the Vaccine mandates, which do not address antibody testing but do allow for weekly COVID screening testing, we are now spending one million dollars per month on testing given there remain a substantial number of employees who are refusing to get vaccinated (again - I got vaccinated in March)... I do not believe that is one million dollars well spent each month, and that is without giving any consideration to how disappointing our country's response to the development/endorsement of proper testing procedures has been.
If you've had covid already and don't wanna get vaccinated for the extra protection, that's not a battle I necessarily need to fight. If you can do a test and prove you have antibodies and get an exception, cool. But, that's a small fraction of the unvaccinated population.
To me, the costs (literal and figurative) of caring for people with covid outweigh all of this. Hospitals are literally full, rationing care and cancelling elective surgeries. Health care workers are overwhelmed and stressed out. People with covid are in ICU beds for extended periods of time, which costs tons of money. And govt / health insurers are covering this - which means we are ultimately all paying for it via taxes or inflated premiums.
It all boils down to the "personal" choice to not get vaccinated doesn't just affect that person. For many reasons (spread, health care capacity and $) it affects the community at large.
Tyakack wrote: Oh please, I'M the one acting like I know everything? The irony in that statement is beyond hilarious. I simply shared something I found about the topic at hand and found it ridiculous. Since it doesn't fit the narrative you're trying to push though you have to attack me for it. I haven't personally attacked a single person here. Yet, every time someone with an opposing view says something or posts a link to something interesting they found they are instantly attacked and called names. I'm not the one with the HS attitude here buddy.
If I "attacked" you, it would have been much, much worse. I was just using your post as an example of the many that have been posted by others.
You implied I was a dumb high school student but okay. I guess that's not an attack. It's fine. I said my piece. I'm out. I'll let you all continue your bickering amongst yourselves.
The resistance to a vaccination that takes five minutes or less, costs nothing or almost nothing, has no serious side effects and no known long-term adverse effects, is staggering. It's like no one ever had a penicillin shot or a flu shot.
"Numbers lie alot. Wins and losses don't lie." - Jerry West
"You are what your record says you are."- Bill Parcells
"Offense sells tickets. Defense wins games. Rebounding wins championships." Pat Summit
Captain_Caveman wrote: That has nothing to do with the University of California system's legal authority to mandate one additional vaccination to the others that are already required. If a UC student or employee wanted to bring a discrimination lawsuit for a mandate that applies to everyone, they are perfectly welcome to. Or perhaps they can apply for a religious/health exemption if that is applicable in their case.
What Cave said, other than most probably don't have the knowledge or financial resources to follow through. That said, sign me up in the camp that wants more people like this guy:
67. The hunt for re-infections has been a nationwide effort and out of the estimated 120.2 million individuals in the United States who have been infected with SARS-CoV-2 as of May 2021,27 there is not a single documented case of an individual being re-infected with the virus and transmitting it to another person.
68. A five-month study looking at reinfection rates in employees of the Cleveland Clinic Health System previously infected with the COVID-19 virus found that not one of the 1,359 previously infected subjects who remained unvaccinated was reinfected with the virus despite a high background rate of COVID-19 in the hospital. Irish researchers recently published a review of eleven cohort studies with over 600,000 total recovered COVID-19 patients, not all of whom were well defined and may have had suspected COVID-19 with positive serologies later on who were followed up with over ten months. They found the reinfection rate to be 0.27% “with no study reporting an increase in the risk of reinfection over time.” Based on this data, the researchers were able to assert that “naturally acquired SARS-CoV-2 immunity does not wane for at least 10 months post-infection.” Moreover, this study also did not document a single case of reinfection that then resulted in transmission to another person.
69. Given that the current number of confirmed cases worldwide is approximately 200 million,28 if reinfection was possible in even one percent of individuals, the world would have observed 2 million second and third cases with many requiring hospitalizations and coming to clinical attention. No such large volume of reinfection cases has come to clinical attention in any region of the world.
See, there you go. Worth noting that is a different scenario in a different state with different laws, and that the natural immunity argument is shaky at best, especially over time.
Back to the UCLA kid, the "$70,000" figure implies that he is an out-of-state student who receives no scholarships or financial aid, and that he lives on campus in a residence hall. To the surprise of no one, that's not exactly true at all. He is the son of Herschel Walker, lives in West Hollywood, and is an aspiring conservative pundit and TikTok star who sells his own right-wing merchandise. Shocker! It is almost as if he is lying about the facts surrounding a vaccine mandate that he was perfectly aware of all along in order to create a fake scandal that he is using to promote himself and his father's Senate campaign.
This was saying immunity lasted at least 10 months in all cases. A recent Stanford study I posted the other day found 50% of those tested had no antibodies 6 months after the Pfizer vaccine. 100% of immunity lasting at least 10 months sounds better than 50% disappearing in 6 months.
Marley2Hendrix wrote: What Cave said, other than most probably don't have the knowledge or financial resources to follow through. That said, sign me up in the camp that wants more people like this guy:
See, there you go. Worth noting that is a different scenario in a different state with different laws, and that the natural immunity argument is shaky at best, especially over time.
Back to the UCLA kid, the "$70,000" figure implies that he is an out-of-state student who receives no scholarships or financial aid, and that he lives on campus in a residence hall. To the surprise of no one, that's not exactly true at all. He is the son of Herschel Walker, lives in West Hollywood, and is an aspiring conservative pundit and TikTok star who sells his own right-wing merchandise. Shocker! It is almost as if he is lying about the facts surrounding a vaccine mandate that he was perfectly aware of all along in order to create a fake scandal that he is using to promote himself and his father's Senate campaign.
This was saying immunity lasted at least 10 months in all cases. A recent Stanford study I posted the other day found 50% of those tested had no antibodies 6 months after the Pfizer vaccine. 100% of immunity lasting at least 10 months sounds better than 50% disappearing in 6 months.
To the extent any of this is known, the bulk of the studies are showing some degree of lasting natural immunity of an unknown duration developing mostly within people who had significant prior illness from COVID. For starters, at least 730k of those people already died in the US, which is likely an undercount. Second, that is very likely not anywhere near as true for an large majority of the people who tested positive but were asymptomatic or only marginally ill. Third, vaccines in any of those people would only serve to augment and enhance whatever level of natural immunity they did or did not develop.
A lot of folks who lack any medical or scientific knowledge, training, or experience are fancying themselves as more knowledgeable than the overwhelming majority of public health experts based on cherrypicked data points, which is not only extremely arrogant and painful to read, it is wildly and dangerously misinformed.
People don't need to get vaxxed if they don't want to. But anytime they are at the point of trying to say science says you don't need to, they need to get struck down with fire IMO.
