Businesses Requiring Vaccine Passports

[Audie]

Almost. Plus they are putting their fellows at risk. Even if they agree they still do not get to put others at risk.

This disease is like smallpox, but not as deadly. When I was young there was no question about getting the vaccination. And guess what happened? A disease that had been around for all known history was eliminated. Made extinct. You and others like you would keep it alive waiting for the next successful mutation and corresponding outbreak. If you want to put everyone else at risk then there will be a price to pay.

The flu of 1919 lasted for two years then it
vanished, found now only in the bodies of
a couple of sailors frozen on Spitzbrrgen island
these 100 years.

 

[Polymath257]

Is that one of the main purposes, to do it for other people??

Yes. If you want 'herd immunity', the number of vaccinated people has to be above a certain threshold. YOU can catch and transmit this virus with no symptoms, putting *other* more vulnerable people (like me) at risk.

 

[Polymath257]

That's a huge generalization. It's perceived and based on fear. Unless you can prove for a fact people who are unvaccinated "will" spread the virus, the risk factor is based on population, general health of the person, age, and other-not-because they didn't take the vaccine.

The vast majority of transmission is from asymptomatic people. That is well known. A person who is not vaccinated can get this virus and even if they are symptom free can still transmit it.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

The sarcasm isn't needed Shadow.

The problem with that, you aren't in those groups but it's basically a virus Russian Roulette what it will do to you. And the fatigue is super nasty, I hear.

Safe than sorry is not a bad thing to have. It's no reason to generalize the population because in your circumstances you choose to be safe than sorry. This sounds like it has to do with fear. Which is fine to an extent.

Being reasonable is not fear. Its no more fear than keeping some extra water, non perishables, candles, batteries, and FM radio for emergencies.

It's fear, believe me. People were afraid to go to the ER (in the news) because of all this. People are literally jumping out of their chairs to make sure someone who goes pass them for a second won't breathe on them. Judging other people and really being upset that others aren't as concerned as they are (as if we dont' care somehow) is really fear-driven. The problem is, people either don't know they are afraid and/or don't accept it. Which is fine as long as no one is making a political statement over it.

Fear doesn't mean you have to be irrational, though.

Believe me, this entire past year we've been able to tell.

Even if I did, it won't change my opinion. I can be a doctor for all I care that doesn't mean I'll take any medication other doctors tell me to take unless its appropriate to my situation and well-being.

The sarcasm isn't needed. I only keep up with what our governor says and things like that. Watching numbers go up and down, yelling at trump, and figuring out how many strands are multiplied in this virus is totally not going to keep me alive and definitely don't add keeping me safe. Now, understanding what the virus is, how it spreads, and things like that-of course I looked that up.. Better to know what people are talking about. But other than that: knowing about the virus and governor's laws etc... I choose not to involve myself in it.

You don't even know how I live, where, and what's going on around here to know who is putting people in danger and who isn't. It's a total generalization. Of course it's good to be safe than sorry-if the circumstance cause for it. If it does not, we shouldn't be judged for it. If I moved to say NY or something where there is a higher population, that may be different. But mandating vaccines (which is the core of the discussion) is something I totally disagree with.

I can careless if people choose to take it but I do care when people judge me and telling me I don't care about others and putting people at risk for not.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Yes. If you want 'herd immunity', the number of vaccinated people has to be above a certain threshold. YOU can catch and transmit this virus with no symptoms, putting *other* more vulnerable people (like me) at risk.

I was referring to your statement I quoted of yours.

I never mentioned herd immunity.

Sounds like fear. Depends on where one lives (heavy population or five people in a town), circumstance (work at a hospital or sitting at home near 24 hours a day), age and general wellbeing.

Of course every person is at risk of catching any virus. You ONLY put people at risk if you actually DO have the virus.

It's a perceived risk based on fear. You have to prove I have symptoms in order for you to have a point. So far, just no taking the vaccine doesn't put anyone at risk anymore than what that person perceives as a risk.

You're only at risk if I have symptoms. What you "think" I have or could have is relevant for your safety.... we do tend to avoid things we feel are threatened by. The fact, though, is if you don't have symptoms, you can't spread it. Safe than sorry is fine but not all people are in circumstances that would put people at a perceived risk unless they think they are walking around asymptomatic. Wake up one day and say "oh my gosh, I may have the illness!" On one hand, I get it. On the other, it puzzles me.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

The vast majority of transmission is from asymptomatic people. That is well known. A person who is not vaccinated can get this virus and even if they are symptom free can still transmit it.

They could... safe than sorry isn't a bad idea... I just think it's appropriate to situation a person is in. I'm not saying don't take it and people shouldn't take it and all of that. Person X who lives by herself and person Y who lives in a populated area would be at different levels of risk of catching the virus. So, both parties taking the vaccine because they "could" spread the virus doesn't mean its appropriate given one person's situation compared to the other.

Its circumstantial.

A blanketed statement "everyone" should take the virus is not taking into consideration a lot of factors involved.

 

[Polymath257]

It's a perceived risk based on fear. You have to prove I have symptoms in order for you to have a point. So far, just no taking the vaccine doesn't put anyone at risk anymore than what that person perceives as a risk.

You're only at risk if I have symptoms.

THIS IS FALSE.

You can be infected, be able to transmit the virus to others and still bot have symptoms. I am at risk if you are *infected*. That is NOT the same as showing symptoms.

What you "think" I have or could have is relevant for your safety.... we do tend to avoid things we feel are threatened by. The fact, though, is if you don't have symptoms, you can't spread it.

Again, this is FALSE. One of the really bad things about this virus is that it can be transmitted *before* symptoms show up. Even those that show no or very mild symptoms can transmit this virus to others.

Safe than sorry is fine but not all people are in circumstances that would put people at a perceived risk unless they think they are walking around asymptomatic.

And THIS is precisely the problem with this virus. Unlike most viruses, this one *can* be transmitted by asymptomatic people. In fact, *most* transmission is from asymptomatic people.

Wake up one day and say "oh my gosh, I may have the illness!" On one hand, I get it. On the other, it puzzles me.

For this virus, unless you have socially isolated yourself from *anyone* that could potentially have the virus, you are at risk of getting it. It is easily transmitted, even from those without symptoms.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

THIS IS FALSE.

You can be infected, be able to transmit the virus to others and still bot have symptoms. I am at risk if you are *infected*. That is NOT the same as showing symptoms.

I "can" be that does not mean I "am."

You "could" be at risk if I had the virus. Until then, it's just what you perceive as a risk but it is not based on fact. Unless you know I have symptoms (out of the blue?) and/or you know I actually have the virus, it's just an assumption that I could or can have it, but it is not a fact until until you demonstrate that I do.

Again, this is FALSE. One of the really bad things about this virus is that it can be transmitted *before* symptoms show up. Even those that show no or very mild symptoms can transmit this virus to others.

Of course not. If you're threatened by something, you tend to react (rationally or instinctively) to preserve your safety. That's basic evolutional trait.

I said if you don't have symptoms (mild or not), you can't spread it. How is that false?

And THIS is precisely the problem with this virus. Unlike most viruses, this one *can* be transmitted by asymptomatic people. In fact, *most* transmission is from asymptomatic people.

It can, that doesn't mean all people are somehow affected for you to feel you're at a real risk of catching it.

No one is doubting how it transmits, why, and when.

For this virus, unless you have socially isolated yourself from *anyone* that could potentially have the virus, you are at risk of getting it. It is easily transmitted, even from those without symptoms.

Social distancing is probably the number one "defender" against the virus.

Potientially...at risk...but its circumstantial. Viruses in themselves are easily transmitted.

You may be at higher risk than someone else. Generalizing everyone with the same level of risk is very unrealistic. Concern, if one likes, would be appropriate to one's situation.

 

[Revoltingest]

I guess it depends on the business?

Common sense suggests that it's common sense
to apply common sense to each situation.

I wouldn't expect it in a large warehouse where people rarely come in contact with each other other than maybe the work room, meetings, or at lunch. But I understand it (not agree, but I understand it) if it's a close area, a medical facility, or you have to work close to people or whatever the case may be. I can see the workers being vaccinated (err... I hate that word...) but not customers.

To be "vaccinated" is better than to be "shot".

 

[McBell]

Telling everyone that they NEED to get the vaccine just in case is no different from Christians saying you have to believe in Jesus or you won't be saved.

Not even close to being the same thing.

 

[McBell]

And since when have we shut down society for those who couldn't be vaccinated for medical reasons before? I assume it's around the same number of people.

The shut down in the USA was to prevent the US Medical System from being overwhelmed.
The fact of the matter is that the US Medical System damn near collapsed completely last year.

You ever wonder why there are so many COVID variants?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I was referring to your statement I quoted of yours.

I never mentioned herd immunity.

Sounds like fear. Depends on where one lives (heavy population or five people in a town), circumstance (work at a hospital or sitting at home near 24 hours a day), age and general wellbeing.

Of course every person is at risk of catching any virus. You ONLY put people at risk if you actually DO have the virus.

It's a perceived risk based on fear. You have to prove I have symptoms in order for you to have a point. So far, just no taking the vaccine doesn't put anyone at risk anymore than what that person perceives as a risk.

You're only at risk if I have symptoms. What you "think" I have or could have is relevant for your safety.... we do tend to avoid things we feel are threatened by. The fact, though, is if you don't have symptoms, you can't spread it. Safe than sorry is fine but not all people are in circumstances that would put people at a perceived risk unless they think they are walking around asymptomatic. Wake up one day and say "oh my gosh, I may have the illness!" On one hand, I get it. On the other, it puzzles me.

No! So wrong. A person does not have to be symptomatic to spread the disease. That is one of the big threats of this disease. One can be asymptomatic for two or three days and be spreading it all of that time.

That is why people have to wear a.mask in public, even if they feel fine. Do you need links on this?

People who are not vaccinated could "feel fine" and still spread the disease.

 

[Revoltingest]

Hmm. I have issues with that too...

Plague I mean you catch it, you die. It's not a death sentence. Some people on RF had COVID and they got better. It's just a virus-not from an alien planet or so have you.

Plagues have never been 100% fatal.
There's enuf genetic variation in humans to prevent that.
But this plague is dangerous. And even the survivors
who are "long haulers" have lingering disabilities.
Long haulers: Why some people experience long-term coronavirus symptoms
Long haulers: Why some people experience long-term coronavirus symptoms

 

[Polymath257]

I "can" be that does not mean I "am."

You "could" be at risk if I had the virus. Until then, it's just what you perceive as a risk but it is not based on fact. Unless you know I have symptoms (out of the blue?) and/or you know I actually have the virus, it's just an assumption that I could or can have it, but it is not a fact until until you demonstrate that I do.

WRONG. It is a *fact* that you can spread this virus even if you have no symptoms. You can be infected, which means you can spread it and *still* not show symptoms.

That means that if you have *potentially* been exposed, then *I* have a risk interacting with you. YOU MAY NOT KNOW YOU HAVE THE VIRUS BUT CAN STILL INFECT OTHERS.

Of course not. If you're threatened by something, you tend to react (rationally or instinctively) to preserve your safety. That's basic evolutional trait.

I said if you don't have symptoms (mild or not), you can't spread it. How is that false?

Because you can have the virus and not show symptoms. And if you have it, you can still spread it even if you do not have symptoms.

Why is this so difficult to understand?

It can, that doesn't mean all people are somehow affected for you to feel you're at a real risk of catching it.

No one is doubting how it transmits, why, and when.

Yes, you are. The virus can be spread by someone who shows no symptoms.

Social distancing is probably the number one "defender" against the virus.

And use of masks.

Potientially...at risk...but its circumstantial. Viruses in themselves are easily transmitted.

THIS virus is easily transmitted. Many other types of virus are not. It depends on the virus.

You may be at higher risk than someone else. Generalizing everyone with the same level of risk is very unrealistic. Concern, if one likes, would be appropriate to one's situation.

This virus spreads primarily by asymptomatic transmission. You may not know you have the virus. You may not be showing symptoms. You may not show symptoms at all. But you can still have it and spread it.

 

[Revoltingest]

The shut down in the USA was to prevent the US Medical System from being overwhelmed.
The fact of the matter is that the US Medical System damn near collapsed completely last year.

I don't think "collapse" was an issue. To be overwhelmed
would mean that some people wouldn't be served.
But the system would still be there & working...just
not for some.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

It's fear, believe me

It seems to me you are the one projecting your views and your position onto others. And it seems common, those here who don't want to the vaccine throwing out things like fear, following the crowd, and ignorance. That is, believe me, a reflection of the cultures anti-intellectual and anti-authorith. How can I tell? People would rather take chances with a deadly virus that can also seriously mess their body up, such as causing lung scaring.

You don't even know how I live,

I know that in multiple occasions you've said things like questioning if masks work and saying we need more research, despite the research having been done enough in some cases (like masks) its conclusive, it's cased closed. And now you bring these arguments to the vaccine.
No surprises there.

 

[McBell]

I don't think "collapse" was an issue. To be overwhelmed
would mean that some people wouldn't be served.
But the system would still be there & working...just
not for some.

https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20200504.8791/full/​

 

[Revoltingest]

https://www.healthaffairs.org/do/10.1377/hblog20200504.8791/full/​

The article asks the titular question,
but it doesn't make the case.

You made me say "titular".

 

[Kenny]

Lovely pics! Nice to see your wife. You always speak so highly of her.

She really is amazing.

She grew up in the poor section of Caracas, Venezuela and her mom had to rent out rooms in the home to make ends meet. When it rained, it rained in some rooms too.

Renting meant she saw murder, pimps with their women, witchcraft and husbands beating wives while dozens of mice roaming around.

But she knew there was a God and prayed often and maintained her innocence.

She also prayed for a blue eyed American to take her to the States. How I got there is nothing short of a miracle. We came to the conclusion that it was God orchestrating everything.

 

[Trailblazer]

You have not given any reasonable reasons that you should be exempt. An unreasonable fear is never reasonable.

You have not given any reasonable reasons why I should be FORCED to take the vaccine against my will.
An unreasonable fear is never reasonable.