That's not the only reasons people wouldn't want to take the vaccine. For instance lots of people already had covid (particularly in NYC), and developed a natural immunity, which from the low reinfection rate, seems to be rock solid. It doesn't make a lot of sense to require that population to take a vaccine.
As for the vaccine being more or less dangerous than the virus, I think for any population over 40 or in poor health, the trade off is clearly in favour of the vaccine. But if you are 20 and in good health, I am not sure it is that obvious.
I am not overly concerned about the vaccine myself, and I got vaccinated even though I had covid (mostly to be able to travel), but I have some sympathy for people who decline to be vaccinated, particularly when all the population at risk had a chance to get vaccinated. At this point this is them managing their own risk. Their life, their decision.
I agree that you can make the case that proof of antibodies should be treated like proof of vaccination. I can't see the harm in that and think it's a point worth bringing up.
I am more open to this than getting a vaccine, as my wife and I were infected before the COVID mania had set in (doctors couldn't tell us what it was). If I get a vaccine with a variant, how well will I fare as I'm in stage 3 heart failure? Check me for antibodies. That seems fair.
> As for the vaccine being more or less dangerous than the virus, I think for any population over 40 or in poor health, the trade off is clearly in favour of the vaccine. But if you are 20 and in good health, I am not sure it is that obvious.
The risks of complications from the virus are many orders of magnitude higher than risks of complications from the vaccine, even for people in their 20s.
> The risks of complications from the virus are many orders of magnitude higher than risks of complications from the vaccine, even for people in their 20s.
For those who already had the virus and developed an immune response the risks are different.
Can you find a reliable number to share on what the complication rate actually is? The best I can find is that the death rate in CA for 18-34 year olds is quite low - something like 0.07% [1].
> For instance lots of people already had covid (particularly in NYC)
According to NYC.gov[1], there have been about 980k cases of COVID in a city with a population of over 8 million. About 12% of the population has had COVID.
Seroprevalence has been measured at 74% for Ultra-Orthodox Jewish populations in the UK.
Its not a surprise that ethnic and religious minorities are anti-vaxx - many of them already had COVID.
I'm anti-mandatory vaccinations for the same reason, as a COVID survivor. All the evidence is showing that this natural immunity is superior to vaccines, but I'm treated like a second-class citizen.
I concur, the available evidence indicates that naturally acquired immunity works at least as well as vaccination [1][2].
There are biological reasons & theories why naturally acquired immunity may be more robust to variants (immune system learns to target a variety of markers/proteins of the virus, compared to the highly targeted immune response to the spike protein based mRNA vaccines). However to my knowledge there is no conclusive evidence of this yet in the literature on SARS-CoV-2.
Yeah. Hardly any testing as in even with every single covid symptom you could not get a test depending on your age and prior conditions. Now, you can walk in to clinics with no wait and get a rapid test ASAP. It's very different.
Yes, it is probably higher. The 980k figure also counts over 200k probable cases and probable deaths, so some of the untested are baked into the total figure.
How is this any different than requiring people to wear shoes in specific locations? Some people prefer not to wear shoes, but for the legal liability and the risk of injury many locations require shoes. Don't go to those places if you feel strongly about not getting the vaccine or wearing shoes
You can't honestly see the difference between an easily visible piece of clothing versus medical data that many people consider private between them and their physician(s)? There is zero chance this is a good faith argument.
Obviously I can see shoes on people's feet easier than I can see antibodies inside someone. But the point isn't how I find out if you are wearing shoes or not. The point is that someone is telling you that you have to do something to your body. Putting on shoes and getting a vaccine are both actions that you may want to decide to do on your own and not have someone else tell you that you have to do.
True, And people are not calling businesses that require shoes socialist. Social media is making all these idiots act like the world is ending if someone requires a vaccine or refuses to get the vaccine.
There's also a difference when a business decides on it's own to mandate shoes, versus a government mandate for all businesses.
I would be just as against a government mandate that all private establishments must have a no shirt/no shoes policy.
I don't even think a vaccine mandate for private businesses would be constitutional under the first amendment, the courts have recognized multiple times that freedom of association is protected even if it is not explicit in the constitution.
OK so we are on the same page. If every private business requires a vaccine, the people who don't want to get vaccinated can just do something else other than go to businesses.
I don't think it's that simple for "every private business" to collectively all of a sudden decide that vaccines will be mandatory, "businesses" are not a hive mind and it will be inevitable that "no vaccine required" businesses will prop up to fill the void.
I Agree, I wish people would try to find a compromise. Unfortunately the people who choose to not vaccinate will die out and have no voice in the matter.
What is the damage? Telling people that the vaccine may help them not die is damage? Just look at the data, unvaccinated people are dying much more frequently than vaccinated people.
Opening the door to force citizens to carry medical history (and a potential scarlet letter) is not damage?
Do you recognize that SS - when it started - was on the pretext that is was just for retirement? Look as us today. People are even ending up in court...or in debt, because their SS is stolen.
This policy is not just about telling people to take the vaccine. This policy is forcing it and also creating a new system of peeking, stealing, hacking into PHI
I got sick like a dog for a day after my first dose, and had a pain in the arm for a week after my second dose. You can't compare injecting a pathogen in someone's body to wearing clothes.
> You can't compare injecting a pathogen in someone's body to wearing clothes.
A vaccine is not a pathogen, a pathogen is a disease-causing agent, vaccines are not causing disease, they cause an immune response to prevent future disease.
As for the vaccine being more or less dangerous than the virus, I think for any population over 40 or in poor health, the trade off is clearly in favour of the vaccine. But if you are 20 and in good health, I am not sure it is that obvious.
I am not overly concerned about the vaccine myself, and I got vaccinated even though I had covid (mostly to be able to travel), but I have some sympathy for people who decline to be vaccinated, particularly when all the population at risk had a chance to get vaccinated. At this point this is them managing their own risk. Their life, their decision.