United Airlines to Require All U.S. Employees Be Vaccinated Against Covid-19

Please tell me you aren't one of those ill informed individuals who conflates "medicine" or "the medical industries" with "science" in the "natural sciences" sense.

 

yes, just like people can't smoke on a plane anymore, so maybe.. but freedom!

 

I believe a business has the right to apply their own saftey rules... just like the ones that refused to serve people that wore a mask or got the vaccine

you and I have the freedom not to do business with them

 

No it's not like that; there were decades of studies to show smoking in an enclosed space could harm others. So they prohibited the action that caused the harm. Here, you want to mandate an action to prevent harm, but you aren't even sure if your mandates will prevent the harm. Totally different.

 

That's normally how I look at it. But when I see my government whipping up hysteria and pushing disinformation in order to coerce businesses' decisions, I have a problem with it

 

was Trump wrong to declare this a national emergency? to declare himself a wartime President against an invisible enemy? to issue guidelines to the States to shut down?

do you have issues with States making laws against Businesses having mask mandates, or against enforcing their own TOS

 

It is an emergency, but I have different ideas on what humanity is capable of in confronting it. And I do have a problem with turning children especially into a faceless, emotionless collective for years on end, and possibly forever.

I believe the mandates are based on disinformation. For example, to simply state: "Masks are effective" with no additional context is disinformation.

 

the oldest person to have ever lived was a smoker, a title anti-smokers wish they held and could brag about

the fumes from the airlines fuel has been shown to cause harm too, but, change is expensive, so when will it happen

"Fume events: The toxic gases that may be harming aircrew and passengers'

https://www.bbc.com/news/stories-51633897


that said, I support the airline deciding for themselves, if they want a flight to be smoking or not, people can decide to take that fight or not

 

Not sure, but we apparently are willing to accept the risk for convenience.

Biden isn't declaring a nationwide ground stop and accusing governors, who are trying to open their airports, of killing people.

 

I would too, but during a pandemic, exceptions can be made, the Pandemic wont last forever

masks are effective at two things

1. slowing spread
2. reducing fear in some

I would only recommend them where cases are high, hospitalization levels at risk and vaccine levels low

 

I am of the opinion that simply stating "Masks are effective" is disinformation, and I would guess that it has contributed to the spread.

 

you could have a point there, they are effective at reducing spread, but if everyone thinks they can just ignore social distancing, ect.... then it could cause the reverse to happen due to more going out and spreading the disease

but what is the alternative, say people no longer need to wear masks, that may also cause more spread

kinda like a person that has tons of sex with prostitutes cause they believe a Condom protects them, but due to having so much sex with so many more high risk people, may actually increase the risks due to the increased risk taking

 

People are completely ignoring duration of exposure as a factor in catching Covid. They just say masks are effective. If you say a surgical mask is 40% effective at preventing Covid, what does that mean? It's always 40% under all circumstances? If I put you in a cruise ship cabin for 10 years, and I ensured that a Covid positive person was constantly rotated in the bunk across, would the prevention effectiveness level remain at 40%? I think not. I think that it's best to think of a timer starting when you are in the vicinity of a Covid contagious person, and as time goes on, the chances that your mask prevents Covid drops from 40% to, after enough time has passed, zero. Even though the cruise ship cabin hypothetical illustrates how my point must be correct after extreme lengths of time, I suspect that you don't need years to reduce prevention effectiveness to 0%. Most likely it's hours. Such as sitting in a classroom for 8 hours, day after day, or unloading a semi with someone else, or standing with someone else behind the counter in a store.

In other words, I don't think the mandates are doing diddly to check the spread, and they very well may be doing the opposite by giving the masker a false sense of security.

 

I would agree, it's helps somewhat, but it's not a license to increase risky behavior

but like I said, it also make some feel safer, which can also prevent mass panic too

I take a mask with me still in my pocket, but don't wear unless the store requires or I see the employees\customers wearing

doesn't matter to me either way, I got the vax, and it costs me nothing to put it on - pick ones fights and this just isn't one worth picking

 

But I have participated in this risky behavior in order to ship innocuous items. These companies are using the mask mandates to justify putting people together for hours. Which I believe nullifies any prevention they offer. So not only are they making us do something that is pointless, there is a collective American effort to shame us for speaking against it! Instead of just acknowledging that the masks are pointless, and our business operations themselves contribute to the spread of Covid, and there is no way around it unless Americans are willing to give up a lot of luxuries and conveniences.

So after almost 2 years of what I perceive to be this mask hypocrisy, my sense of urgency concerning our ability to contain Covid is nil. It's a big reason I oppose these mandates.

 

as long as one is in a high spreed area, would not do those things

the sad thing is, the people that do risk behavior can affect so many others

 

Yes, like corporations. I will no longer be shamed for behavior that is no more risky than what corporations are doing.

 

not sure what that means, as a society, we have to do some things risky to keep society going, maybe the gov should have required hazard pay

someone working at a grocery store ever day to proved food for people is not the same as someone going to bars every night, ect...

one is a necessary risk, the other is not (both are risky)

but I agree, everyone has to do their part or it doesn't really matter

 

You aren't going to convince me that society needed the majority of stuff I've shipped since day one (even when nothing about Covid was known). No, society wanted their conveniences, and they didn't give a flip about the Covid risk required to get them. Now I don't give a flip about the Covid risk it says I represent.

 

never said that, some people will abuse the things government allows them to do

I remember early on, I knew someone that said she was board and said she spent the entire day shopping at all the different grocery stores

she actually thought she was being good, following the rules....

 

There simply is a lack of urgency to know exactly where it comes from, since it doesn't solve the issue of people dying. Wearing a mask simply does reduce the risk. We've been using masks to do exactly that for centuries. No surgeon goes without one. How on earth could you miss that hint, and instead think you got this so called "urgency detector"? You're acting like a person claims to know how to fix a new electric car while you've been plumbing all your life, because of crap you read on FB. "trust me.. I got this detector, I saw youtube vids. I can do this". As if....

 

Took me just 1 minute. It's about 20%. I don't think such a thing qualifies as rare.

https://www.contagionlive.com/view/denmark-study-covid-19-patients-80-percent-protected-reinfection

The findings would indicate that persons under the age of 65 years old have an approximate 80% likelihood of protection against COVID-19 reinfection—while among older patients, protection was just 47%.

 

Are you sure those Covid reinfections were confirmed by science? Or does the data represent people who tested positive twice? What was the percentage of false positives generally, and what was it by test kit producer, at the time of their first test AND at the time of the 2nd test? Were these numbers factored into your 20%?

 

I'm not in the back of this semi trailer all night with an N95. If I were, I believe that my prevention effectiveness would start around 90%, with the probability of it preventing Covid tapering off as I spent more time in the vicinity of an infected coworker. But it would decrease at a slower rate than the mask I'm wearing. I'm of the belief that if you sit next to a Covid infected all day in the classroom, anything other than an N95 has probably little impact on the probability you catch Covid.

 

Also, the CDC website is describing it as rare. I'm starting to believe it's extremely rare.