Tyson Foods to require COVID-19 vaccines for all US employees

[exchemist]

Ideally it would protect people if we knew who had the virus (asymptomatic or symptomatic). For now, we just don't know. An illusion of protection. If it were a potential bomb threat, then yeah. Everyone duck for cover regardless where they are, who they are, and such... but this, no.

In this case, "potential" does not say anything about the person's health, vaccination status, even his political opinions (if that matters). All we have is "he is not vaccinated=he's a bomb waiting to go off." Potential is a fear word and the risk of catching the virus is dependent on how much vaccinated people put emotion and concern over whether that potential warrants segregation.

I mean, it's alright to an extent to be afraid of the unknown, but the unvaccinated (exempted for medical reasons and not) are not bombs. The issue is with the vaccinated not the unvaccinated.

How do you know which unvaccinated person is at a higher risk of catching the virus?

Are there other factors that determine whether you're (and others) are in danger or is it only that one is unvaccinated alone?

It's like drink-driving. A given individual may be able to drive fairly safely when over the limit, but we can't test everyone to find out.

So society makes a rule, that infringes on the individual's right to drink what he or she likes, for the sake of controlling the risk they could present to others when behind the wheel. As a society, we have managed to get our heads round that, perhaps because one can see gruesome pictures linking cause and effect in an obvious way. We all accept the logic.

With an unvaccinated person, they are 2-3 times more likely to spread the virus if infected (which they can be without even knowing it). The 2-3 people they spread it to may be fine, but they in turn will spread it and eventually someone will end up in hospital, will die or will suffer long-term debilitation, as a direct result of that original infection. It's less visible but it is nevertheless the direct result.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

That splits people to where they are forced to comply or be called selfish and such if they don't.

It's totally based on what Could happen if unvaccinated caught the virus not what Will happen. People are so afraid and you can see it by how they treat people because of something they don't know.

I don't see it's selfishness. It's selfish if one knows they have covid and still interact with people vaccinated or not.

But not being vaccinated in and of itself tells me nothing about that person's health. It doesn't tell me if I'm and others are "in danger" or not. It doesn't tell me Why the person's unvaccinated.

I don't call people selfish, actually, but if I did I rather know first the facts before accusing people cause of my opinions.

The "unselfish" unvaccinated people stay home. They wouldn't be trying to get into a night club, gym or restaurant. Requiring proof of vaccination status to enter these establishments would only catch out the selfish unvaccinated people.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

The "unselfish" unvaccinated people stay home. They wouldn't be trying to get into a night club, gym or restaurant. Requiring proof of vaccination status to enter these establishments would only catch out the selfish unvaccinated people.

For how long?

You're making it as if unvaccinated has a death warrant out for the vaccinated.

What other factors are you basing this on (in this 'specific' situation)?

You can say quote general statistics but statistics doesn't assess whether the unvaccinated actually has the virus, what their health is, whether they are at higher risk, and so forth. They generalize.

How can I know that what you say is based on facts and not fear or personal opinion (keeping in mind my comment above)?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

For how long?

So you agree that the measure is reasonable, but you want to discuss the details?

You're making it as if unvaccinated has a death warrant out for the vaccinated.

No, I'm saying that they're being reckless with their own lives and the lives of others. And they are.

What other factors are you basing this on (in this 'specific' situation)?

I'm not sure what you're asking.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

So you agree that the measure is reasonable, but you want to discuss the details?

No. I actually don't agree that the selfish unvaccinated should stay home.

Even if it were moral to segregate they should at least have other factors to consider if someone is in danger to the vaccinated other than a verification.

No, I'm saying that they're being reckless with their own lives and the lives of others. And they are.

I don't see that. I only see it if I knew for a fact they had the virus, but since I don't I have no reason to call them reckless. I don't know their individual situations.

Let me ask, does this apply to all unvaccinated or only those who choose not to vaccinate?

I'm not sure what you're asking.

If unvaccinated people can't go to big parties, for example, what other factors are you basing this decision on in addition to their vaccination status?

When people decide if someone else and/or themselves are in danger of a non-immediate threat they tend to assess the facts and risks before determining if what we perceive is the actual truth.

For example, an unvaccinated person who has limited to no people contact would be at less risk of catching COVID than someone unvaccinated who traveled and associated with other unvaccinated people. Since we don't know their individual situation, it's hard to judge them really.

I can only judge people from what I know is a threat not what I perceive as a potential threat.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

If unvaccinated people can't go to big parties, for example, what other factors are you basing this decision on in addition to their vaccination status?

Consider this:
Tobacco kills tons fewer than covid. We don't allow smoking in public buildings.
Drunk driving kills fewer than covid. Wanna do some shots and hit the road?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Consider this:
Tobacco kills tons fewer than covid. We don't allow smoking in public buildings.
Drunk driving kills fewer than covid. Wanna do some shots and hit the road?

Say, for example, you don't know who smokes tobacco. You can still make a sign to not smoke in public buildings but that doesn't take into consideration if people actually do smoke. It's a generalization, a "just in case" precaution. In this case, people can just throw away their tobacco and enter the building. There's no health risk involved regardless how rare because people are not forced to smoke tobacco therefore they can throw it away if they want to go into a public building.

I actually wouldn't know if drunk driving does but I assume that is false insofar there are more people on the road more than people who have COVID-I wouldn't be surprised if you're totally wrong about-though I get your point.

Plus, driving drunk is a choice. We're not forced or coerced to drive drunk therefore we're not putting ourselves at risk or others (in This scenario) because we have control over whether we want to drive drunk or not.

In the vaccine case, though, we just don't know if unvaccinated are putting people in danger. We can assume because the facts say "it's possible" but how much you put your trust in facts without assessing the level of risk?

For example, if someone smokes once a month and another everyday the latter would have a higher chance of catching lung cancer (lets say) than their counterpart. Likewise, someone who smokes would probably get it faster than someone who is around second hand smoke.

It's true they both can catch lung cancer--the risk is there. The level of risk depends.

In this case, many unvaccinated take their level of risk into account while many vaccinated do not.

As for segregating vaccinated and unvaccinated that sounds more than a health "safety" issue.

Why are the vaccinated concerned about others getting sick when the news say that those getting sick are unvaccinated people? If anything, segregation will just kill us off (and, according to many people on these threads, they just don't care).

Who are we protecting?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Say, for example, you don't know who smokes tobacco. You can still make a sign to not smoke in public buildings but that doesn't take into consideration if people actually do smoke. It's a generalization, a "just in case" precaution. In this case, people can just throw away their tobacco and enter the building. There's no health risk involved regardless how rare because people are not forced to smoke tobacco therefore they can throw it away if they want to go into a public building.

It's not a just in case. Second hand smoke is detrimental to the health of others.
And, yes, you can tell who smokes generally by the stench.
And the point was covid is deadlier, but only a total fool and idiot would downplay the risks of smoking. Tobacco kills more people than all other drugs (prescription, OTC, recreational, and alcohol) combined.
Covid is up there with cancer and heart disease in terms of how many it killed. But people downplay it, act like it's no biggie, and don't think the general public should be expected to conform to the existence of covid. Even though they are compliant with restrictions against things far less deadly.
So, wanna light up?

In the vaccine case, though, we just don't know if unvaccinated are putting people in danger. We can assume because the facts say "it's possible" but how much you put your trust in facts without assessing the level of risk?

I don't think there's any getting this across to you if you still have this mentality a year later. The unvaccinated are massively and majorly and predominately the ones going to the hospital and dying. They get covid easier. They have higher viral loads. They are giving covid more chances to mutate. The jeopardizes us all. Just as someone who drunk and getting behind the wheel.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

It's not a just in case. Second hand smoke is detrimental to the health of others.

And, yes, you can tell who smokes generally by the stench.

And the point was covid is deadlier, but only a total fool and idiot would downplay the risks of smoking. Tobacco kills more people than all other drugs (prescription, OTC, recreational, and alcohol) combined.

Covid is up there with cancer and heart disease in terms of how many it killed. But people downplay it, act like it's no biggie, and don't think the general public should be expected to conform to the existence of covid. Even though they are compliant with restrictions against things far less deadly.

So, wanna light up

Yes, that fact is true. However, the public business does not know who puts people at risk and who does not, so they have to generalize.

But in unvaccinated case, you can't tell unless they tell you. Then, on top of that, you don't know their health condition, why they unvaccinated, whether they are at a high level of risk, and so forth. So, it makes the tobacco scenario not useful because unlike the stench, we just don't know.

COVID is deadly, yes.

Lots of illnesses and viruses are deadly. But my point is " I " rather judge these things at a level of risk not being at a risk. That way I don't judge the entire population since I don't know them based on whether or not they vaccinated (rather).

I don't think there's any getting this across to you if you still have this mentality a year later. The unvaccinated are massively and majorly and predominately the ones going to the hospital and dying. They get covid easier. They have higher viral loads. They are giving covid more chances to mutate. The jeopardizes us all. Just as someone who drunk and getting behind the wheel.

Yes.

I know this.

I do not agree with unvaccinated putting people in danger because we do not know their health situation to judge. In other words, it is a perception of danger not an actual danger.

I mean it's alright to think you're in danger when a deadly disease is rooming around.

Your situation may warrant that belief.

Just others just don't think that way. Nothing wrong with that.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

It's not a just in case. Second hand smoke is detrimental to the health of others.
And, yes, you can tell who smokes generally by the stench.
And the point was covid is deadlier, but only a total fool and idiot would downplay the risks of smoking. Tobacco kills more people than all other drugs (prescription, OTC, recreational, and alcohol) combined.
Covid is up there with cancer and heart disease in terms of how many it killed. But people downplay it, act like it's no biggie, and don't think the general public should be expected to conform to the existence of covid. Even though they are compliant with restrictions against things far less deadly.
So, wanna light up?

I don't think there's any getting this across to you if you still have this mentality a year later. The unvaccinated are massively and majorly and predominately the ones going to the hospital and dying. They get covid easier. They have higher viral loads. They are giving covid more chances to mutate. The jeopardizes us all. Just as someone who drunk and getting behind the wheel.

Shadow, I'm honestly asking you... are you telling me this to change my views that health related choices depend on level of risk?

I don't get how an unvaccinated person in and of itself determines the intelligence and even political views of that person. I don't call people names like idiots, ignorant, and things like that so when others do I'm quite curious especially when its based on generalizations with no specific connection.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Lots of illnesses and viruses are deadly. But my point is " I " rather judge these things at a level of risk not being at a risk. That way I don't judge the entire population since I don't know them based on whether or not they vaccinated (rather).

People keep trying to do that. Clearly it is failing.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

People keep trying to do that. Clearly it is failing.

You know how many illnesses there are in the world?

It's not meant to discredit the severity of COVID-viral illnesses are serious. I just don't highlight it, that's the difference.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

You know how many illnesses there are in the world?

How many of them caused a pandemic?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

How many of them caused a pandemic?

I'm talking about the severity. Some illnesses do not have survivors. Many people even on RF have survived COVID symptoms and others loved ones in the hospital. This means the severity of COVID is factor dependant. Things like lung cancer is not.

In other words, all in perspective. That's how I treat vaccines (meds, treatments, etc) all in perspective.

I actually don't have new "arguments" because all my health care decisions are based on level of severity of illness, circumstance, type of illness, and whether there are alternatives.

My level of risk isn't high enough to warrant if I'm in potential danger to others and myself. You guys can think so way on the other side of the world but at the end being unvaccinated says nothing in itself. So,I can't judge based on that. I would hope others wouldn't likewise.