Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

The problem is, there are other possible outcomes for a COVID case besides death, hospitalization, and recovery. There is absolutely no reason to think that we understand 100% of what this bug can do. For every uncertainty one might perceive about the "unapproved," "experimental," "insufficiently-tested," or "novel" vaccine, that goes double for the virus itself.

Allowing the virus to propagate freely is asking for trouble in the form of mutations as well. If it had been possible to inoculate the majority of the population in India, for example, we probably wouldn't be dealing with the delta variant right now.

Edit: if a single assertion above is wrong, please reply with citations, and we'll all be that much better-informed for it. Downvoting something that's objectively correct just because it disagrees with your political agenda is the weakest of weak sauce.



> There is absolutely no reason to think that we understand 100% of what this bug can do.

If that's true, there's no reason to think that we understand 100% of the long term effects of the novel vaccines for this bug.


Well, I (literally) can't argue with that, having just failed spectacularly at attempting to do so.


But you did make a great case for banning unhealthy food and enforcing mandatory exercise. Fewer shorter work days - we have viruses to fight!


And if the effects of poor diet and exercise were contagious, maybe you'd have a point.


The eco system is really one giant life form. In a way we are all part of the same organism.


I saw that Star Trek episode too. Seemed like kind of a bummer to be assimilated, although I suppose it wasn't so bad once you got used to the idea.


You’re being downvoted for flagrant abuse of the precautionary principle.


Interesting... some good food for thought there, because I'm usually vehemently opposed to the precautionary principle. It's good to see HN'ers agreeing with me on that for once.

When it costs us virtually nothing to do the right thing, though, I don't see how the precautionary principle applies. Usually we see that principle come up in arguments over nuclear power, large-scale environmental projects, major technological paradigm shifts, or medical therapies with a real potential for harm. It just doesn't seem to be in play here. Wear a mask in public, exercise reasonable social distancing practices when possible, and get vaccinated with something that has already been used successfully over a billion times. Is that really asking so much?


Yes. The harm is mostly psychological, but it is an existential threat to society. You might not agree, but that is my take, and I would bet it is shared by the others who are downvoting you.


Yes. The harm is mostly psychological, but it is an existential threat to society. You might not agree, but that is my take.

OK, understood. It's good to see where people are coming from on this subject, even when disagreeing.


Thanks for taking the time to read and reply sincerely.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: