Vaccine mandates

Even If Requiring People Who Have Recovered From COVID-19 To Be Vaccinated Is Legal, That Doesn't Mean It Makes Sense

The failure of legal challenges obscures an ongoing scientific debate.


A federal judge on Friday rejected a Michigan State University (MSU) employee's motion for a preliminary injunction against the school's requirement that staff members be vaccinated against COVID-19. Jeanna Norris, an administrator at the school, argued that her "naturally acquired immunity" made the mandate "unlawful" as applied to her and other staffers who have recovered from the disease. U.S. District Judge Paul Maloney concluded that, notwithstanding the scientific evidence that Norris cited to support her position, the public university's policy easily satisfied the "rational basis" test.

That standard of review is highly deferential, so it is not surprising that Norris, who is represented by the New Civil Liberties Coalition, did not get the injunction she wanted. Maloney notes that the Supreme Court applied what was essentially a rational basis test (although that term had not been invented yet) in the 1905 case Jacobson v. Massachusetts, which involved a state-authorized requirement that Cambridge residents be inoculated against smallpox or pay a $5 fine (equivalent to about $155 today).

Maloney rejected Norris' argument that the vaccination requirement violates her fundamental rights to privacy and bodily integrity, which would have triggered strict scrutiny under the 14th Amendment, a much more demanding standard of review. "Plaintiff is absolutely correct that she possesses those rights, but there is no fundamental right to decline a vaccination," he writes. "She also does not have a constitutionally protected interest in her job at MSU, which Plaintiff's counsel conceded. The MSU vaccine policy does not force Plaintiff to forgo her rights to privacy and bodily autonomy, but if she chooses not to be vaccinated, she does not have the right to work at MSU at the same time."

That analysis suggests why similar legal challenges by people with naturally acquired COVID-19 immunity are unlikely to succeed in court. But it does not settle the question of whether mandates like MSU's, even if "rational" in the legal sense, are fair or reasonable in light of the scientific evidence.

Norris "has already contracted and fully recovered from COVID-19," her complaint says. "As a result, she has naturally acquired immunity, confirmed unequivocally by two recent SARS-CoV-2 antibody tests. Her immunologist, Dr. Hooman Noorchashm, has advised her that it is medically unnecessary to undergo a vaccination procedure at this point."

Maloney heard from dueling scientific experts on the question of how much protection prior infection confers. "There is ongoing scientific debate about the effectiveness of naturally acquired immunity versus vaccine immunity," he writes. But he adds that "even if there is vigorous ongoing discussion about the effectiveness of natural immunity, it is rational for MSU to rely on present federal and state guidance in creating its vaccine mandate."

That legal conclusion is distinct from the policy question of whether it makes sense as a workplace safety measure to impose a vaccine mandate with no exception for people like Norris—an issue that could be important in evaluating the legality of the Biden administration's pending regulation demanding that companies with 100 or more employees require them to be inoculated or undergo regular coronavirus testing. That rule, which the White House announced a month ago, still has not been published. But it is not expected to include an exception for employees who have recovered from COVID-19.

The administration is relying on the authority that Congress gave the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to issue an "emergency temporary standard" when it is "necessary" to protect employees from "grave danger." The issue of whether unvaccinated people with natural immunity pose such a danger is therefore legally relevant. It is also relevant for employers who are deciding the details of their own policies.

A widely cited Israeli preprint study posted in August suggested that natural immunity is more effective than vaccination at preventing infection by the delta variant. The researchers studied the records of patients enrolled in Maccabi Healthcare Services, which covers 2.5 million Israelis, a quarter of the population. Compared to unvaccinated patients who had recovered from COVID-19 in January or February 2021, they found, vaccinated patients with no history of infection were 13 times as likely to be infected between June 1 and August 14, 2021, "when the Delta variant was dominant in Israel."

When the researchers included patients who had been infected at any point from March 2020 to February 2021, the difference in risk was smaller, suggesting that the protection from natural immunity wanes over time. But the "SARS-CoV-2-naïve vaccinees" were still six times as likely to be infected. "This study demonstrated that natural immunity confers longer lasting and stronger protection against infection, symptomatic disease and hospitalization caused by the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2, compared to the BNT162b2 two-dose vaccine-induced immunity," the authors concluded.

Critics have pushed back against that conclusion, citing potential problems with the study's retrospective design. James Lawler, an infectious disease specialist at the University of Nebraska College of Medicine, has noted that the vaccinated patients were more likely than the unvaccinated patients to be elderly and to have preexisting health conditions that made them especially vulnerable to COVID-19. The researchers tried to take that selection bias into account, but Lawler argued in an August 31 briefing that their adjustments may not have been adequate. He added that unvaccinated patients who died from COVID-19 were not included in the study, which also might have skewed the results.

One point on which the Israeli researchers and U.S. public health officials agree is that vaccination is beneficial even for people with natural immunity. The authors of the Israeli study noted that "individuals who were both previously infected with SARS-CoV-2 and given a single dose of the vaccine gained additional protection against the Delta variant." A study that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention published in August looked at Kentucky residents who had recovered from COVID-19, some of whom were subsequently vaccinated. The researchers found that unvaccinated people were more than twice as likely to be reinfected as fully vaccinated people.

But when it comes to vaccine mandates, the relevant question is whether an unvaccinated person with natural immunity is substantially more likely to catch and transmit the coronavirus than a vaccinated person without natural immunity. On that point, medical experts disagree.

Peter McCullough, a Dallas internist and cardiologist with a public health degree who testified in support of psychiatrist Aaron Kheriaty's unsuccessful challenge to the University of California's vaccine mandate, argued that the coronavirus "causes an infection in humans that results in robust, complete, and durable immunity"—a protective effect that is "superior to vaccination-induced immunity." McCullough emphasized that antibody tests reflect only part of the immune response to a COVID-19 infection, which includes "antibodies to the nucleocapsid and to the spike protein, as well as T-helper cells, natural killer cells, B-cells, and innate immunity."

By contrast, the Berkeley epidemiologist Arthur Reingold argued in the same case that the university's blanket vaccine requirement was justified because the strength and longevity of natural immunity are unclear. "While individuals who have had a documented case of COVID-19 typically have antibodies to the SARS-CoV-2 virus detectable in their blood and are believed to have a reduced risk of getting COVID-19 again in the months that follow," he said, "neither the completeness nor the durability of protection against a second case of COVID-19 has been established. The extent to which any such immunity resulting from having had COVID-19 provides protection against new variants of SARS-CoV-2 is also unknown."

The British Society for Immunology (BSI) offers a similar gloss. "It's likely that for most people vaccination against COVID-19 will induce more effective and longer lasting immunity than that induced by natural infection with the virus," it says. But the rest of its summary paints a more complicated picture.

The BSI says the immune response to a COVID-19 infection "varies hugely between people." Yet it also says the immune response to COVID-19 vaccine "varies," although "most" vaccinations "produce a strong immune response," even in "older people." The BSI thinks vaccination "may produce a more robust immune response."

The "length of protection" from natural immunity is "variable" and "not fully known," the BSI says. But "protection tends to be lower in people who were mildly ill," and it "reduces over time." The length of protection from vaccination likewise is "still to be learnt," although two-dose vaccines have "produce[d] long-term protection so far." Assuming that protection wanes (the issue at the center of the debate about who should receive boosters and when), "booster vaccines could maintain a strong immune response."

What about protection against variants? In people who have recovered from COVID-19, the BSI says, "reinfection [is] possible but uncommon." Since "response to natural infection is variable," the immune system "may not be able to recognize a viral variant." Two-dose vaccines "provide strong protection against many currently identified variants," which is more likely when "high antibody levels [are] produced."

In both cases, then, immune responses vary from one person to another, may fade over time, and provide some protection against variants. Overall, the advantages of vaccination compared to waiting for an infection are clear, especially since people who catch the virus can transmit it to others and may suffer severe symptoms. But that does not mean unvaccinated people who already have recovered from COVID-19 pose a significantly higher risk than vaccinated people with no prior infections.

A private employer might conclude that a blanket vaccine requirement is easier to administer than one that makes an exception for previously infected people. The latter approach presumably would require documentation of prior infections. It might also require evidence, similar to the tests cited by Norris, of a robust immune response—although vaccinated people don't have to produce such evidence, even though their immune responses also vary.

As a matter of public policy, however, that added complication does not seem unreasonably burdensome. The OSHA order described by the Biden administration already includes an exception for employees who agree to be tested at least once a week, which is more expensive and harder to arrange than a one-time requirement that employees document their COVID-19 histories.

Jeffrey Klausner, a clinical professor of population and public health sciences at the University of Southern California, co-authored a systematic review in the journal Evaluation & the Health Professions last month that found "the protective effect of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection on re-infection is high and similar to the protective effect of vaccination," although "more research is needed to characterize the duration of protection and the impact of different SARS-CoV-2 variants." While the existing evidence is incomplete, Klausner thinks it is strong enough to justify an exception to vaccine requirements. "From the public health perspective," he told Kaiser Health News, "denying jobs and access and travel to people who have recovered from infection doesn't make sense."

NEXT: The New York Times Spreads Misinformation About COVID-19

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Making an OSHA rule to make vaccines mandatory for workers doesn’t make sense either — the people at highest risk are too old or too ill to be working anyway.

    And it makes even less sense to mandate it for school age children.

    People should get vaccinated if they are at-risk, or if they interact with at-risk people regularly. We don’t need to put millions of more people out of work when supply chains are already backed up.

      1. Seriously I don’t know why more people haven’t tried this, I work two shifts, 2 hours in the day and 2 in the evening…Fh And i get surly a check of $12600 what’s awesome is I m working from home so I get more time with my kids.

        Try it, you won’t regret it!……< VISIT HERE

        1. These are 2 pay checks $78367 and $87367. that i received in last 2 months. I am very happy that i can make thousands in my part time and now i am enjoying my life. Everybody can do this and earn lots of dollars from home in very short time period. Just visit this website now. Open this web…… WorkJoin1

          1. I am making a good salary online from home .I’ve made 97,999 dollar’s so for the last 5 months working online and I’m a full time student .DEc I’m using an online business opportunity. I’m just so happy that I found out about it.

            For more detail … READ MORE

        1. Hey Guys, I know you read many news comments and posts to earn money online jobs. Some people don’t know how to earn money and are saying to fake it. You trust me. I just started this 4 weeks ago. I’ve got my FIRST check total of $850, pretty cool. I hope you tried it.YFs You don’t need to invest anything. Just click and open the page to click the first statement and check jobs .. ..

          Here what I do………. VISIT HERE

    1. ” the people at highest risk are too old or too ill to be working anyway.”

      There are plenty of people working and at risk. I have talked to several employers frustrated that they frequently have staff out for 1 to 2 weeks with the disease and that the understaffing is stressing out their operations.

      1. They are out 1 to 2 weeks because the company makes them quarantine before coming back. How many are really at risk of a severe health outcome?

        1. They are out 1 to 2 weeks


          1. I have little doubt there is some of that going on.

            1. Seriously paycheck of $19632 and all i was doing is to copy and paste work online. this home work makes me AS able to generate more cash daily easily.jji simple to do work and regular income from this are just superb. Here what i am doing.

              Try now……… Go to this link

        2. And sometimes it is because people are sick for a week or two. I have a friend who runs some resort properties and early on in 2020 he did have some problems because a lot of his staff got sick (as well as him and his family). But after that it wasn’t a problem anymore.
          Still seems to me that we have made all of this worse by enacting policies that can only make the pandemic phase of the virus last longer.


        3. My foreman and his whole family went down for 3wks late last Autumn (infection lag between members, about 1-2wks each). He and his wife felt miserable until given steroid pills (iirc?), then he was only short of breath and lost partial taste for a while. His wife and cousin had it easier and the kids (who tested positive) never showed any symptoms.
          Neighboring business lost a worker’s wife, about 50s and heavy. I have no fucking clue how my mother-in-law still is around.

          1. Because even fat old diabetics only have a 10-15% chance of dying?

            1. She’s a land whale.

        4. It may be a quarantine and if that the case so be it. Do you really want a person coming back who can spread an illness? We have all had the experience of having a co-worker come in coughing and sneezing, being little help and wondering why they are at work in the first place. They didn’t want to talk the day off so they thought you would enjoy they company and their cold.

          It may also be that the person is sick. We talk about Covid19 in binary terms. A person is either asymptotic or in the hospital on a ventilator. There is a middle ground, people who are ill, feel rotten for a while and then recover.

          1. You show up here to spread idiocy.
            Fuck off and die.

              1. I would like to think no one is that idiotic.

          2. “We talk about Covid19 in binary terms. A person is either asymptotic or in the hospital on a ventilator.”

            Who is the “we” in this statement? Oh, right, stupid lefties like you.

            1. “We” is everybody. No one seems to talk about this disease as a spectrum or talk about people who are genuinely ill, but no they did not get carted off to the hospital. All the discussion is about those who are asymptomatic or those in the hospital. Everyone trying to make their case based on the extremes of the illness.

        5. and how many of them hapened to draw one of the 95% of false positive PCR tests and are out because of a case of the nothings?

          1. I’m going to have to ask for a cite for that data. Everything I have seen says it’s about 5% false positive at most; exactly the opposite of what you are claiming.

            1. It is highly specific so has a low false positive rate. However the odds that a given test is a false positive depends on the population tested. If the prevalence is low then the chance of a result being a false positive increases.

              The other factor is human error. A false positive can be due to contamination. A false negative can be due to inadequate sampling or problems with the reagents.

              Also timing of the test is important.

              “Over the 4 days of infection before the typical time of symptom onset (day 5), the probability of a false-negative result in an infected person decreases from 100% (95% CI, 100% to 100%) on day 1 to 67% (CI, 27% to 94%) on day 4. On the day of symptom onset, the median false-negative rate was 38% (CI, 18% to 65%). This decreased to 20% (CI, 12% to 30%) on day 8 (3 days after symptom onset) then began to increase again, from 21% (CI, 13% to 31%) on day 9 to 66% (CI, 54% to 77%) on day 21.”

              From what I have seen as well the false negative rate is higher than false positive for PCR.

              1. So, tionico was probably referring to the false-negative rate on its worst day, but messing up and calling it “false positive”.

              2. Oh, and thanks.

    2. It almost sounds like it’s not about making sense…

    3. “the people at highest risk are too old or too ill to be working anyway.”

      Now just a second kiddo.

      Ya know what, I am not scared of a vaccine, a pill, a disease, any of that. I am not scared of needles.

      If you think you can put me out to pasture this year think again. I ain’t retired. I’m in my prime.

      My plan is the last dollar should go to the undertaker. I plan to spend my well earned retirement at the beach bar. Oh I’ll leave an extra $20 for the bartender. She has a pretty smile. Is that what you were going?

      1. For the good of society, we’re gonna need you to isolate. You’re old and susceptible to this horrible disease, and we cannot have one more death!
        If we can only isolate all the vulnerable in a box, they’ll never get infected!

        1. For the good of society…

          …everyone should register for the draft.
          …everyone should work any job out there regardless of pay.
          …everyone should never drive their cars to save the planet.
          …everyone should weigh the statistical average of what people weighed during WWII.
          …everyone should never commit a crime.
          …every politician should serve one term.
          …everyone should live in an apartment <600 square foot.
          …everyone should use less than 5 kilowatt hours of energy per year.
          …everyone should eat no meat.
          …everyone should just get in the box cars.

    4. People should run their own lives, exercise their rights, but it’s optional, their choice. They can self-enslave, praying to be protected, but they have no right to force others to do the same.
      They irrationally worship being ruled by force and force their politics on all. That is not wise or humane.

  2. Doesn’t make it moral either. Maybe we should be talking about that.

    1. hardly anyone is talking about the FAT that every one of the injectioins availble in the US have human cells inside them that are derived from aborted babies. For many that’s a non-issue, but for many others it is a deal breaker. Moral issues MUST be considered.. First Article of Ammendment guarantes government can NEVER in any way limit my RIGHT oo faithfully practice my chosen religion. I know many who have chosen to lose their jobs over that issue alone. And I say THAT is a travesty.

      If they had some pig products in them would FedGov be forcing them on moslems by way of mandates? I knida think not……. just a hunch.

      1. Was going to ask you for a cite on this “fact”, too. But remembering now that you must be a parody.

        1. Mike. You don’t even read your own links. You sure as hell don’t read others links.

      2. So which religions object to these synthetic vaccines?

    2. Morality is nothing to talk about. You have one opinion or another, and neither can prove the other wrong. There’s no evidence to present, it’s an exercise in futility.

  3. “But it does not settle the question of whether mandates like MSU’s, even if “rational” in the legal sense, are fair or reasonable in light of the scientific evidence.”

    That’s because Scientific Evidence cannot answer what is Fair or Reasonable. Some people believe that it is perfectly fine to force others to donate to charity, to house the homeless, to decorate their house in a neighbor-hood conforming way, or to deter the spread of a natural pathogen by sticking needles in their arms. No science will ever convince these people one way or the other. They have thrown away moral certainty for nothing more than pragmatism- which is a far too benign term for what really happens- rule by a hysterical mob.

    Individuals should absolutely make data-driven decisions. But the larger number of people you get to, the less likely you are able to integrate all the data for every person to come up with a decision that works for every one. And so you end up choosing winners and losers. So that means as you get larger populations, your decisions must be guided less by data and more by moral frameworks. The fact that our nation has largely substituted these moral frameworks to instead decide based on whichever Study gets the most play is a national tragedy, tbh.

    1. The scientific evidence isn’t conclusive at this point so it’s not terribly helpful a guide for what “fair” or “reasonable” might look like.

      If “acquired immunity” is terrible at preventing the spread of the disease, then the cost/benefit will weigh towards mandates. If acquired immunity is effective, the cost/benefit may point to lifting mandates.

      As long as the evidence is insufficient to generate a consensus of experts, it’s “fair and reasonable” to err on the side of caution and assume acquired immunity is unreliable.

  4. That standard of review is highly deferential, so it is not surprising that Norris, who is represented by the New Civil Liberties Coalition

    Good. We need a New Civil Liberties Coalition, because the Old One has completely failed us and is peopled entirely by dickheads.

  5. Fuck Joe Biden

    1. Fuck Joe Biden

    2. Lets go Brandon!

      1. Lets go Brandon!

    3. Let’s go fuck Joe Biden, Brandon.

      1. Necrophilia isn’t cool.

    4. Indeed, Joe Biden is fucked!

  6. The real issue is that it is none of your employer’s goddam business what medical treatments you choose or reject. Accepted international standards and federal law are both crystal clear that coerced medical treatment and coerced participation in medical experiments are prohibited.

    1. But you do not have a right to decline vaccination, apparantly.

      1. A government’s failure to respect a right does not indicate the right does not exist.

        1. I’m quoting the judge’s ruling. He said that while she had a right to phsyical autonomy, she did not have a right to refuse injection. Per the article which we both read…?

          1. I’m pointing out that a judge can be full of shit.

            1. Absolutely, which is why it was so appalling.

    2. Yeah, the GOP fought that and won. Your employer can deny you certain medical coverage if it violates your job’s religion.

      Federal law is clear that coerced medical treatment is prohibited but also that employment is *voluntary.* Don’t like it? You don’t have a right to that job. Hit the road.

      Note: military members have been required to get vaccines since George Washington’s day so you’re going to have to refine your understanding of what is considered federally “prohibited.”

      1. Fuck off and die, slimy piece of lefty shit.

  7. That analysis suggests why similar legal challenges by people with naturally acquired COVID-19 immunity are unlikely to succeed in court. But it does not settle the question of whether mandates like MSU’s, even if “rational” in the legal sense, are fair or reasonable in light of the scientific evidence.

    So I started skimming the rest of the article here, and while I’m sure it does decent service to the questions surrounding the science of how dangerous COVID is to the general population, I see we’re once again taking Libertarian arguments into the purely utilitarian realm.

    In other words, poor women shouldn’t be forced to have abortions because there’s a human rights violation tucked away in there vis-a-vis body autonomy, it’s because it won’t achieve the societal goals we think it will.

    1. Yep! Once we admit acquired immunity is better than jab immunity, we can now force everybody to go contract the bug!

    2. What can possibly be argued about that’s not utilitarian? “That’s a right.” “No, it’s not.” “Yes it is.” “No, it’s not.” “Yes, it is, no backsies.”

      1. No, it’s not—INFINITY!!!!!

  8. It is an extreme violation of the Constitution of the United States for the government to try to force anyone to take ANY vaccine, or submit to any medical treatment whatsoever. FULL STOP

    1. It’s also a violation of the Nuremberg Code, codified United Nations human rights standards, and several US federal laws.

      1. For several decades small pox vaccines were mandated.

        1. For several decades returning runaway slaves was mandated.

        2. Does a small pox vaccine stop working after a couple of months? Asking for a friend.

      2. But those were devised by some people. They can be revised by others. Or they can simply be not recognized by those who didn’t agree to them personally. Or they can have been determined to have implicitly expired by now, whenever now is.

    2. No it isn’t. This has been repeatedly adjudicated. You’re wrong.

      1. Because the Supreme Court always gets everything right. That’s why none of their precedents has ever been overturned.

        1. Dread scott was super precedent!!!

          1. And protesting war is legally equivalent to yelling fire in a crowded theater.
            2 generations of imbeciles is definitely the supreme moral law of the land too.

    3. Who is applying force? Please be specific.

      1. The government, asshole.

  9. A vaccine may very well end one’s life – this is tyranny at its core.

    1. “very well” == very tiny probability. Got it.

      1. Over 16k dead and climbing, hundreds of thousands of other adverse effects…

        Risk quotient for a young man is appearing higher from the vaccine than the Wuhan Flu.

      2. I am a very healthy under 40 year old. What is my risk of dying of COVID? And please remove all the obese asthmatic diabetics from the under 40 deaths before you throw a general statistic at me.

        I very well could be more likely to die from the vaccine than the disease.

        1. It depends. If you get the disease and require an ICU and they’re already full of “obese asthmatic diabetics” and there’s no room for you, a bad case you might survive could become terminal. Or maybe you get a hospital bed but you’ve helped fill the hospital and some dude with a heart attack dies due to lack of the facilities you’re consuming. Or you survive the disease but get “long COVID” with lingering symptoms and end up losing your job and on social welfare programs.

          There are many other ways a younger person catching covid could end up worse off than they started. Just the medical co-pays for a week in the hospital are going to hurt.

          1. Fuck off and die, slimy piece of left shit.

  10. I was sicker from my vaccination shot (which I got in April) than I was from actually having Covid (in December last year). Absolutely wiped out for 2 days, while Covid was more like a lingering sense of malaise (much like the Jimmy Carter era)

    1. Me too.
      The vaccination. not covid.

      In my family two brothers, a sister, a brother-in-law, two sisters-in-law and all their kids had covid and it basically amounted to several days of sniffles. The worst case was my sister couldn’t taste much for a month.

      The jab however, knocked my parents and cousins on their asses for days.

    2. You know who else reminds me of Jimmy Carter?

    3. Why did you get vaccinated in April if you already had the infection in December? Was anybody talking mandate in April already?

      It’s not surprising you’d react strongly to an injection of something that produces spike protein, 4 months after having been infected by the live virus.

      My first injection of the Pfizer-BioNtech…no rxn. Second dose 7weeks later, noticeable (though mild) local and systemic Arthus reaction. I’m afraid if I got a booster within a few months, I’d get a stronger reaction.

      1. The reaction is your immune system responding to the vaccine. It’s a good thing–means it worked. Even flu shots can occasionally create reactions like this. It’s nothing new.

        Some of the studies on this topic are showing that lesser symptoms from catching COVID correlated with a weaker acquired immune response. Getting the post-COVID booster was smart.

        1. Fuck off and die, slimy piece of lefty shit.

  11. If it actually worked as advertised, everyone would want it.

    1. Speaking of legality, I think we’d be seeing quite a bit of a different type of court action if it wasn’t for the PREP act:

      “Under the PREP Act, companies like Pfizer and Moderna have total immunity from liability if something unintentionally goes wrong with their vaccines.”

      1. Pfizer and Moderna have total immunity from liability if something unintentionally goes wrong with their vaccines

        Total immunity means they have protection if something intentionally goes wrong with their vaccines.

    2. Probably not. But that is a good point: if other vaccines worked the way the wuflu vaccine did, everyone would just deal with the risk of tetanus until a vaccine that actually worked and worked for more than four weeks was available.

      1. I mean, that tetanus shot needs boosters too, but at least they last 10 years.

      2. I don’t think you understand how vaccines work.

        1. Fuck off and die, slimy piece of lefty shit.

  12. What a great way to evict all freedom fighters from the Indoctrination Camps. Gotta love those Nazi Camps. /s

    Ya; maybe this vaccination push for immune people has a lot bigger purpose than most give it credit for.

    Because that’s what Nazi’s Do.

  13. >>notwithstanding the scientific evidence … the public university’s policy easily satisfied the “rational basis” test.

    because the rational basis test is an avenue for government agents to hand the W to the government.

  14. I think this is a issue where a measure of compromise might help. The reality is that the unvaccinated person should be the prime target of interest. I would be willing to allow people who can demonstrate that they have had Covid19 to forgo the vaccination. The demonstration would have to include either verification a positive test or verification of treatment for the illness. I would not accept a mere statement that I think I had it in March or when ever. I think getting the vaccination would be best but I think some leeway is allowable.

    As the article noted for many employers a vaccination record may be simpler than trying to get proof of the infection.

    1. Fuck off, slaver.

    2. Well, isn’t that generous of you.

      People need to mind their own fucking business and not expect a say in people’s personal medical decisions.

    3. I would be willing to allow

      Something no libertarian said ever.


      1. It represents a state of superposition. If you don’t observe it’s comments, they don’t exist.

      2. To lie about being a moderate and not a lefty.

      3. Really isn’t the libertarian position that you can do what you want if it doesn’t affect others. The “I will allow you to swing your arm so long as it is not striking my chin.” I am suggesting a compromise and if you don’t like it you can just accept that vaccine mandate.

        1. What part of, “fuck off, slaver,” is escaping your fascist peabrain?

        2. No one guarantees anyone a risk-free existence.
          Fuck off and die.

        3. You’re offering a compromise as much as you’re a moderate, lefty fascist.

        4. isn’t the libertarian position that you can do what you want if it doesn’t affect others


          1. Then what is the libertarian position?

            1. The libertarian position is that you may do as you wish as long as you do not use force or fraud to harm anyone else or their property. “Doesn’t affect others” would be a ludicrous standard. Everything we do affects others.

              1. So intentionally, or through gross negligence, giving someone COVID is A-okay under libertarianism?

                Sir Jeffery Amherst, vindicated at last!

                1. No, moron. Learn to read. Then work on thinking.

                2. Fuck off and die, slimy piece of lefty shit.

            2. “Then what is the libertarian position?”
              Fuck off and die, slimy piece of lefty shit.

    4. But then people would be able to decide if they wanted to get the bug or the jab.

      That’s not acceptable because the goal isn’t about health.

      1. Of course the goal is public health. Just because you don’t agree with the mandate (I don’t either) doesn’t mean those you disagree with have anything but good intentions.

        1. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, but I think these intentions are more plutocratic.

        2. It appears to be more about giving the public a false sense of “the government is doing something to help!”, rather than actually trying to improve pubic health.

          Otherwise mask mandates and lockdowns wouldn’t exist.

          1. As long as you don’t believe what the experts are telling you, yes, “mask mandates and lockdowns wouldn’t exist.”

            700K dead in the US alone, and rising.

            1. Yes, the government wants only what is best for everyone. We can trust them completely.

            2. Fuck off and die, slimy piece of lefty shit.

    5. “I think…”

      Not possible; fuck off and die.

    6. [a vaccination record may be simpler than trying to get proof of the infection]
      False. I had Covid in December.
      Monday I called my doctor’s practice. Wednesday (I was busy Tuesday) I picked up the order for a blood test from the doctor’s office, took it to the lab, and had blood drawn. Friday I got a text that I was positive for antibodies. Saturday I logged on to my medical portal and printed out confirmation.
      Getting and recovering from the first vaccination often takes longer, then you wait 30 days to get and recover from the second shot.

      1. Anecdotal evidence at best.
        – Most people who get COVID probably don’t get tested at all.
        – A large number of people had COVID before the tests were widely available.
        – Your antibody test likely didn’t measure the strength of your antibody response and, as such, doesn’t provide the same assurance of immunity as a vaccine would.

  15. Look people, the fascists decided to use this virus as the excuse to break cover, and take over.
    There is no point in discussing right or wrong, or legal .vs moral.
    Either resist or submit; you cannot negotiate with your executioner.

    1. Sadly, you’re right. We’ve already lost this fight, and this time there is no Allied Army coming to save us. Welcome to the Fourth Reich.

      1. That’s the really scary part. If the fascists win this time, barring an alien invasion or the second coming, we’re screwed for good.

    2. Your executioner is Donald J. Trump who wants you to get COVID. Occam’s Razor leads one inevitably to that conclusion.

      1. Occam’s Razor leads one inevitably to the conclusion that Covid-19 is a bad cold and nothing more.

      2. Please use that razor to cut your throat.

      3. Trump got the vaccine, dumbass. And he’s not been president for months now. But keep your delusion as you appear to like it.

      4. I don’t think you understand what Occam’s Razor means dumbfuck.

        1. He thought the term simplest explanation meant the retarded one.

      5. Whose sock is this then?

      6. “Your executioner is Donald J. Trump…”

        Yet one more TDS-addles pile of lefty shit.
        Fuck off and die.

      7. More deaths under Biden than Trump, and still counting.

    3. What’s important is to be overly dramatic about things.

      1. No, you’re right, we should totally ignore the fascism that’s been oozing out of the left for the last 100 years and is now coalescing around the response to a virus that poses minimal risks to anyone under the age of 70.

      2. Things like fire extinguishers, or like gun shot victims in Oklahoma not getting treated at the hospital?

  16. She also does not have a constitutionally protected interest in her job”

    I’m not so sure about that line of thought

    1. The constitution doesn’t enumerate access to air. I think these judges are just pieces of shit. The judges don’t know the constitution, just court doctrine interpretation of the constitution.

      1. They know the Constitution. They reject it.

    2. I think the plaintiff conceded that her job was not protected.

  17. People get break-through infections when vaccinated, and that strongly suggests that they can get reinfected if they have had the disease. Those who get the disease can spread it to others; they can serve as incubators for new and more lethal variants; the expenses to treat them are borne by society. Therefore, however marginal, requiring ALL potential virus vectors to be vaccinated is a net benefit to society. As vaccines are free, safe and effective, there is no reason to decline them or to discourage them in others, other than that one craves the taste of more of Donald Trump’s semen in their mouth and is convinced that fomenting anti-vaxx hysteria is the way to get it.

    1. Well you got one part right. Those who still believe in having a land of the free instead of a tyrannical dictatorship lean towards Trump.

      The fact you think that’s a curse instead of a blessing says more about you than anyone else. Worship your Gov-God-Guns… Power over ‘those’ people. etc, etc, etc…

      You lefties sure do love your GUN force over others.

    2. What size is your brown shirt? The biggest lesson of this whole covid business is how many fellow citizens are willing to join the Karenwaffe.

      If the vaccines were effective, there would be no breakthrough cases. If they were safe, there would not be myriad stories about side effects. If they were free, well, nothing is free.

    3. If the vaccines actually stopped transmission you’d be right.

      If you look at the data, you see you’re wrong. Reinfection is VERY rare compared to infection after jab, and the VE numbers are cratering in real-time.

      Now since we know acquired immunity is the ‘gold standard’, when can we force people to go get covid to protect their neighbors?

    4. Fuck off back to Huffpo bitch.

    5. Syphilis is an ugly disease.

    6. “People get break-through infections when vaccinated”
      “As vaccines are… effective”

      “As vaccines are free”
      Nothing is free. How many billions of dollars is the government spending on this? Just add it to the debt pile, I guess.

      ” As vaccines are… safe”
      Safe-ish. Probably. I mean, there’s the blood clots and the allergic reactions, but those are very rare. And there’s the stuff like fever which is less serious but common. And there’s, you know, the totally unknown long term effects, which *probably* don’t exist, but there’s no way to tell.

      1. Again, what would the mechanism of a long-term side effect even be with a vaccine that has to be specially refrigerated just to get it to stay stable long enough to use it?

        1. That’s why it normally takes years to get a vaccine on the market, you idiot.

          1. Normal. This is not anything like normal.

            This is a herd of elephants walking through your yard in the night. Really angry elephants.


          Oh that hurt my head to read….

    7. “People get break-through infections when vaccinated…”

      TDS-addled piles of shit are to ber ignored.
      Fuck off and die, asshole.

    8. People get break-through infections when vaccinated, and that strongly suggests that they can get reinfected if they have had the disease.
      Now there is some real scienceing for you.

    9. Except those with naturally acquired antibodies are less likely to get sick enough to show symptoms upon reinfection than the vaccinated, and are contagious for a shorter period of time. Which means there is zero fuckong reason for them to get valued. Now fuck off fascist.

  18. This angels dancing on the head of a pin legal bullshit is what’s going to land us all in the gulag. Where on earth are all the ethical judges who believe in bodily automomy, period, end of story?

    1. I’ve got the right to bodily autonomy too, and I don’t want your fetid, virus-laden exhalations entering my nose. Guarantee that you can prevent your viruses from infecting anyone else, and yeah, you can play Russian Roulette with your own body all you want. The sooner you hit the lucky chamber, the better.

      1. It’s not our job to protect you from nature. Go get your OWN vaccine and stop pretending it’s everyone else’s job.

      2. It is impossible for you to know whose fetid, virus-laden exhalations have entered your nose. Everyone I know who has had COVID has said the exact same thing: “I have NO IDEA how I got this.”

        It is also not a crime in this country to be sick with a virus, preventable or not. If it was, people would be mandated to stop having sex, traveling on airplanes, and visiting third world countries, among other things.

        And even if it were a crime to be sick, you’d have to prove someone committed it. You know, in a court of law. Innocent until proven guilty and all that.

        So while I have the right not to put a vaccine in my body, you have ZERO right to demand that I DO. Too bad, so sad. Why don’t you stay at home forever. Maybe you’ll then solve the problem of dying and get a gold star.

        In the meantime? Fuck off, slaver.

        1. people would be mandated to stop having sex, traveling on airplanes, and visiting third world countries

          Be patient. They can’t get it all done at once.

          1. ‘Great’ Britain has already done all of that.
            Where you been?

            1. I hear Australia is soon going to let Australians leave the country again.

              1. That should lead to a mass exodus.

      3. “right to bodily autonomy too, and I don’t want your fetid, virus-laden exhalations entering my nose.”

        If you’re vaccinated, and you believe that it works, why the fuck do you care?

        Shorter Egypt Steve – “You need to wear a jacket too, so I don’t catch a chill”

      4. I’m curious what’s your answer if I don’t want any of your exhalations vaccinated or not?….

        1. Maybe he is also a global climate warming change warrior, and knows breathing out is the largest source of CO2 emissions.
          I have long advocated for denying everyone who believes in that cult the right to exhale.

      5. I can’t infect you if you stay home.*

        *Maybe. If we live in the same apartment building you’re maybe fucked.

      6. I don’t want your fetid, virus-laden exhalations entering my nose

        Well then you had better stay home or some other place where you can control the environment to that extent. The whole world and everyone’s every exhalation contains pathogens and all kinds of other nasty stuff. Somehow we generally survive encounters with people out in the world.
        And did you miss the part where vaccinated people still catch the virus and spread it to others? You are pretending that a not-that-big difference in degree is some big distinction. The chances of any random non-symptomatic unvaccinated person being infected is very low. Perhaps slightly higher than for a vaccinated person, but still very low. Both have some chance of being infectious, that is quite small. So you are being unbelievably nasty and wishing for people’s death on the basis that they pose a very slightly larger risk, maybe, than the people doing the thing you want them to do. Who also pose nearly the same (negligible) risk to you or anyone else who is vaccinated.

      7. My GOD I love every one of you bastards who replied to this guy. In five replies, I see more logically applied morals than in 1000 Reason articles about The Science! ™

        The one small thing that was not mentioned is that even IF Egypt Steve could give some sort of moral argument insisting that he has a right to protection from someone exhaling viruses, that has nothing to do with Vaccination.

        Whether a vaccinated or unvaccinated person breathes on Steve is irrelevant. If they are NOT infected, they have not done him any harm (whether intentional or otherwise). And we know that both vaccinated and unvaccinated people can be infected, so claiming some right upon my body to force me to Vaccinate has nothing to do with whether or not I am harming him.

        I can see the moral case for a person who knows they are sick to refrain from doing something that was likely to infect others. But for a disease that represents next to ZERO risk to 90% of the population, trying to make federal cases out of it is going to cause more harm than help.

        1. I was trying to make that point, but may not have been as clear as I wanted.

        2. I’m here for the comments, 100%.

        3. Well except in California where you can now knowingly transmit AIDS without legal repercussions.

      8. Only people scared shitless ask government to protect them from every risk in life.

      9. >>I don’t want your

        so don’t breathe.

      10. I want to stop paying high insurance rates because fatties. Put down the donut and run! For the betterment of society!

      11. Do I have the right not to be inundated with your inane bullshit?

      12. “I’ve got the right to bodily autonomy too…”

        You’ve got the right to get fucked with a rusty chainsaw, TDS-addles asshole.
        Fuck off and die.

      13. Forced abortions. Make a cogent argument as to why we shouldn’t demand them?

      14. Eat shit… Die.

      15. I promise to fight for the right for you to hide under your bed, breathing your own recycled air, for as long as you want. In fact, feel free to vacuum seal your property off from the rest of society.

    2. Where are the judges that interpret the law whether they like the outcome or not?

      1. They’re found dead with pillows over their faces.

  19. Non one is being forced to get a vaccine, but as was established by the SC in 1905, the government has the right to require them for participation in certain activities as a matter of public health. You f…g snowflakes think this is just too much of a burden and a violation of your precious freedom to be a jerk. Tough. Stay home.

    1. Explain how it is medically ethical for someone to be forced to take a substance with unknown consequences against his/her will. Explain how it is morally righteous to enact public retribution against them for refusing.

      You may as well be making excuses for the bolsheviks, nazis, klan, or radical jihadists. Scapegoating has never ended well. There are people who have yet to take the childhood immunizations most of us got, and we do not try to shun them from normal activities.

      1. Wardamneagle, the consequences of the vaccines and Covid are both known.

        As with the other vaccines you and your kids were required to get to go to school, public health is a legitimate and overriding concern to your “freedom” to do ……. wha…a …t is it you want to do? If you insist on not getting it we insist you butt out of specific activities were you might spread it.

        Did you really need this explained to you? You’re not as dumb as Tommy Tuberville are you?

        1. “the consequences of the vaccines and Covid are both known.”

          Yeah, I had a cold, and was tired for a week.

        2. Who’s we Kemosabi? Got a mouse in your pocket? How’s about you fuck off and leave the rest of us alone?

        3. “the consequences of the vaccines and Covid are both known.”

          That’s what they said about the swine flu vaccine and the H1N1 vaccine. I suggest you research those, which were also developed as an emergency response in extremely rapid fashion like the COVID “vaccines”.

          1. Millions have received the vaccines. We know what the rare side effects are by now, and they are virtually non existent.

            1. “rare side effects…virtually non existent.”

              The bird is a weasel.

            2. Over 16k dead of the vaccine, hundreds of thousands of other adverse effects. More harm reported than every other approved vaccine since 1990 put together.

              Does not prevent infection or hospitalization. Vaccinated carry full viral loads and drive resistant mutations.

              Safe! Effective!

            3. How do we know if there are long-term side effects, say cancer caused my mRNA strands causing issues? They whipped these things up in a lab in months. Vaccines normally take many many years to develop and test, and widespread release only after their long-term efficacy and safety are demonstrated in trials.

              Gov. Cuomo was right in his COVID vaccine hesitancy.

              1. You always want to compare the risk of taking some action against the risk of not taking the action. In this case, you are making up some hypothetical long-term effect from the vaccines, with no evidence and no model of the mechanism that would cause cancer. Balance that,
                just for one thing, against the new evidence we are seeing that COVID can cause brain damage:


                1. Now do fatties.

            4. Lawful gun ownership in the hundreds of millions, we know the very rare instances of illegal use are virtually nonexistent yet you and your progressive cohorts still howl for gun confiscation. The long term effects of the vaccine are NOT known nor can they be known yet since they literally have not been around long enough.

    2. Public health doesn’t exist. Neither does public good, public commons, or public interest.

    3. YOU can get vaccinated… What’s even the point in trying to force other’s to “stay home”? YOU can decide to protect yourself or not.

      There’s not a single reason for the mandates… It’s all just a sh*t-show of authority for pieces of sh*t who like to boost their pathetic pointless life’s and feel powerful by pointing Gov-Gun-Forces at every opportunity they can. JUST LIKE ARMED CRIMINALS DO.

    4. “Non one is being forced to get a vaccine… your precious freedom to be a jerk. Tough. Stay home.”

      Lol. What is this, I can’t even.

      It’s like critical thinking is their real enemy.

      1. Poke it with a stick.

      2. I think we’re already witnessing the zombie apocalypse.

    5. You sound like corrections officials who insist that prison rape is consensual sex.

      1. Oh yeah, getting a vaccine is just exactly like prison rape.

        You guys are good with the drama. Cue the Nazis, Stalin, and Mao and let’s get this party started!

        1. They were amateurs compared to today’s totalitarians.

        2. Ignorance does seem a prime requisite of the left.

        3. Fuck off and die dramatically, Joe.

        4. Don’t want to be called a Nazi? Stop doing actual things the Nazi’s did. Or just fuck off.

    6. Slavery has been established as legal for even longer!

    7. as was established by the SC in 1905, the government has the right to require them for participation in certain activities as a matter of public health

      What was established was that the a fine for not participating was not unconstitutional. Feel free to prove me wrong.

        1. Below:
          Fuck off and die, Joe.

      1. Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905), the Supreme Court upheld a state’s mandatory compulsory smallpox vaccination law.

        A *STATES* law, duly passed by the legislature of a state. Hardly the same as a warped twisting of a regulatory agency of the federal government. There’s a lot of leeway for states that the federal government cannot do, enumerated powers and all that.

        Let alone some executive mandate with no legislative authority.

    8. No pressure… But you can’t go anywhere or hold a job unless you do. But we’re not FORCING anyone…

      You disengenuous fuck. It’s incredible to watch progs turn into fascists without a contrary though crossing that whitewashed mind.

    9. Fuck off and die, Joe.

    10. Wait, the survivability for this disease is >99%, your chance of going to the hospital if you catch it is 1-5% (and in reality, much lower), and WE’RE the snowflakes?

      1. And yet hospitals in some red states have overflowing ICU beds, are delaying elective surgery, and are starting to have supply problems with getting enough oxygen for all the COVID-19 patients.

        Maybe stop being selfish and get vaccinated for the sake of your community.

        1. There’s that lie again.

        2. You mean… The hospitals that run near capacity normally and are struggling to find staff after being forced to fire the unvaccinated? The hospitals that are denying care to the unvaccinated?

          You’re shooting yourself in the foot repeatedly and ammo ain’t cheap. Also, you’re an idiot and a liar, Liarson.

    11. If you feel like you’re in an at-risk group, then by all means take whatever measures you feel are reasonable for yourself.

      You can politely ask me to help you protect yourself, but don’t expect me to make any effort to help you though and if you try to force me to do so, there is going to be backlash.

      If your kid is deathly allergic to peanuts, I expect you to teach your kid to not eat peanuts, to carry an epipen in case he accidentally does so, and to politely ask me if the cookies I’m serving might possibly have peanuts in them.

      If you inform me before hand, I’ll probably even make an extra effort to avoid creating an issue for your kid.

      But if you say “No one who sends a kid to this school can be permitted to have any peanut products in their home because they could be uncaring assholes and let their kids eat peanut butter toast and wipe their hands on their jacket before coming to school and killing my kid.” then I’ll probably say “Fuck you” and slick my kid’s hair back with peanut oil and send them to school with a PB&J for lunch.

      1. What is it with never talking about the subject actually being talked about. (Which is COVID vaccination, not peanuts.)

        1. Why am I not surprised that you don’t get the analogy.

  20. Things that were once legal:
    -women not being allowed to vote
    -bans on gay and interracial marriage
    -separate but equal

    Legal is not nearly as high a bar as we like to think.

    1. Until mid 1970s, it wasn’t rape if it was your wife.

      Yes, law is perfect, depending on who’s in charge.

  21. Authoritarians can brook nothing less than a one-size-fits-all solution for the unwashed masses.

    1. Except the ruling class gets special rules.

      1. Obama’s birthday, Pelosi’s donor dinner, London Breed’s party, AOC’s gala, Newsome’s supper meeting, Gretchen Whitmer’s shindig, etc. proves that not one of them actually believes the horseshit they’re forcing on the hoi polli.
        Not one of the hundreds of elite present at the events followed the directives. Only the serving serfs were bemasked and deferential to the orders.

        I think that they do it on purpose, to demonstrate their power and our powerlessness. It’s a psyop.

        1. None of them got sick, either.

          1. They were BLM demonstrators ! according to the CDC, they actually healed covid patient during that parties.

  22. In Jacobson v. Massachusetts, wasn’t the case determined that the state, not the federal government, has police powers? I took that case to mean that it would be very difficult for the federal government to mandate vaccination because that was a right granted to the states.

    1. I hate not being able to edit a post on here.

    2. Don’t worry, people like Joe Friday are idiots who can’t be bothered to read a legal decision before citing it ad nauseum to try to score points in a conversation they don’t have the intellectual capacity to engage in the first place.

      It was, in fact, about a local ordinance that was adopted by elected representatives and involved a fine that could be levied upon conviction in a court. It was in no way conceivable related to what Biden is trying to use OSHA to force upon the entire nation which is also in contravention of established federal law.

      Here is an actual observation noted in the decision:

      Not one of the States undertakes forcible vaccination, while Utah and West Virginia expressly provide. that no such compulsion shall be used.

      That would, of course, be overridden by the OSHA mandate.

      1. Chuck, no one has proposed forcible vaccinations and the Biden administration has specifically stated that the mandates for private businesses under OSHA will have exemptions for religious and medical reasons, though the problem with the medical exemptions is establishing any valid reasons.

        “Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld the authority of states to enforce compulsory vaccination laws. The Court’s decision articulated the view that individual liberty is not absolute and is subject to the police power of the state….”

        1. Joe, no one is threatening you, just asking to make the world a better place.
          Fuck off and die.

        2. And that was cited in Buck v. Bell:

          The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes. Jacobson v. Massachusetts

          Maybe the precedent of giving government control over our bodies isn’t so great after all.

          1. Although this opinion and eugenics remain controversial, the decision in this case still stands. Buck v. Bell was cited as a precedent by the opinion of the court (part VIII) in Roe v. Wade, but not in support of abortion rights. To the contrary, Justice Blackmun quoted it to justify that the constitutional right to abortion is not unlimited.[27]

            Yep, rethinking my position on abortion.

        3. I’m rethinking my position on abortion.

        4. Not a single bit of guidance has come down from the feds regarding this so-called “mandate,” including exemptions or deadlines or who pays for the weekly testing that is supposedly an option in lieu of being forced to take the vaxx.

          In fact, seems to me that this so-called EO was only a psyop to scare the crap out of big companies and force them to mandate vaccines. In other words, do Papa Joe’s dirty work for him. Neat trick, huh? Except my family is about to lose everything we worked for for 25 years because of it.


          1. This was meant for Joe Friday’s assertion that “no one has proposed forcible vaccinations.” (Jesus, could Reason please install a more user-friendly comments section?)

          2. “In fact, seems to me that this so-called EO was only a psyop to scare the crap out of big companies and force them to mandate vaccines”

            oooh…close. These people don’t give a fuck about vaccination rates. Their one and only concern was that they get Afghanistan out of the headlines. Mission Accomplished.

        5. Wikipedia? You still didnt read the decision. Go ahead and fuck off unless you actually want to make an effort and not rely on your commie brethren. Those same shit eaters say the 2A only counts for militia. You are small minded and mean spirted man who is enjoying the opportunity to tell others what to do.

          Come on over to my house so I can shoot you in the face when you try it.

  23. How long will this absurd war on vaccines last? And why only covid? Let’s stop completely vaccinating against everything.
    How did this madness come about, and why does it last?

    1. are there many other vaccines that caused the CDC to change how it defines the term? Are there many others associated with breakthrough cases? Are there any others sold under the premise that “your case of the disease will be milder”?

      1. Flu vaccines are touted that they MAY make “your case of the disease will be milder”.

      2. Are there many others associated with breakthrough cases? Are there any others sold under the premise that “your case of the disease will be milder”?

        Measles, polio, smallpox, mumps, rubella, pertussis. Any vaccine that needs a booster. And in fact, there is no way for any vaccine to prove ‘sterilizing immunity’. There is also no reason to believe it even exists in nature.

        What is not at all surprising is how quickly anti-vaxxers have latched on to this sort of ‘standard’ for vaccines. As if a 100% permanent efficacy standard has always existed – when in fact it has NEVER existed.

        1. Lol. Keep rationalizing your fear chicken little. Such a fucking statist now.

        2. I will take ‘more lethal than all other vaccines since 1990 combined’ as solid metric for rejection.

        3. Man, the thread is full of these assholes.
          Fuck off and die, JFree.

        4. Name a vaccine that requires a booster every 45 days for the rest of your life. Name one. One.

          1. Are you saying COVID vaccines require boosts every 45 days? Cite?

            1. White Mike thinks a six-month booster for the rest of your life is normal.

    2. How long will this absurd war for FREEDOM last… Why can’t everyone just sell their souls to the [WE] foundation; because YOU don’t own you, [WE] own you!

    3. Opposing being ordered to take a vaccine that operates on a newly developed principle compared to most other vaccines does not equal a war on all vaccines.

      1. You know that there are COVID-19 vaccines made using the old technology too, right?

        1. Which are not available in the US. Shocking, right?

          1. Johnson is available, and it was made with old technology.

            1. With older technology than the Pfizer shots, but still not a traditional vaccine.

              1. Older sounds better. So OK get that one.

                It is very high tech vaccine developed by Janssen. It uses an attenuated adenovirus to get synthetic DNA into the cell. Then the nucleus pumps out mRNA to produce the protein.

                The mRNA vaccines never enter the nucleus where your DNA is stored. They operate in the cytoplasm where the proteins are made.

                Bottom line is get whichever you find more trusted. The three we have here are the best available.

                1. But their long-term safety remains unknown.

        2. Swing and a miss there champ.

        3. Yeah… one that won’t be released until after vaccination deadlines have been passed.

          So why should they even bother finishing its development?

      2. The delivery system used by the mRNA system is newer. It is a harmless lipoprotein. The J&J system uses an attenuated adenovirus to deliver DNA to the cell which then produces mRNA to the cytoplasm. The genetic material is synthesized.

        All of them act to induce the cell to produce segments of the spike protein which are carried on the cell surface and provoke an immune response. The spike protein is how Corona attaches to cells so that is the target.

    4. Because no other vaccines are being forced on the entire population. That’s the madness. That’s what is different here.
      There is no war on vaccines. There is a fight to have an open discourse and there is a fight against vaccine mandates.

      1. This is actually the first I’ve seen of this argument. Are we now going to see the media narrative shift to “War on All Vaccines”?

        1. Jeff, Brandy, Mike, and sarc have all used that strawman.

          1. If they’re not lying, they’re not trying.

        2. They really are determined to go with tarring everyone who disagrees as “anti-vax”.

      2. All vaccines only make sense when the majority are vaccinated. Isn’t that so?

        1. No. That only really matters for vaccines that can effectively eliminate the virus in question from circulation. And even then, they still are advantageous to the people who choose to take them. The herd immunity effect is an added bonus to many vaccines. But the primary thing is still the protection for the person who takes it.
          It is clear at this point that none of the covid vaccines are effective in that way. Even the most highly vaccinated countries and localities have continued high rates of infection. This is not going to be ended like smallpox or measels or polio. It’s great that the vaccines exist. But getting everyone to take it is not going to produce the results that you seem to think it will. I had hoped that would be the case, but it does not appear to be so.

          1. I think I see where the confusion is coming from. You’re following science, Andrey is following The Science.

          2. Even the most highly vaccinated countries and localities have continued high rates of infection.

            This is just utter bullshit. The 10 countries with the highest fully vaccinated rate (and # cases/deaths over last month compared to peak) are:
            UAE – 10225 cases v 95787; 53 deaths v 371
            Portugal – 21682 cases v 306838; 198 deaths v 5576
            Singapore – 56354 cases v current; 104 deaths v current
            Spain – 66,158 cases v 814854; 1488 deaths v 16079
            Qatar – 3062 cases v 43,500; 3 deaths v 167
            Iceland – 948 cases v 2830; 0 deaths v 14
            Denmark – 12,836 cases v 83114; 61 deaths v 828
            Chile – 19,277 cases v 202700; 599 deaths v 4634
            Uruguay – 3628 cases v 96075; 27 deaths v 1660

            In all but one case (Singapore) the numbers for both cases and deaths are currently a tiny fraction of what they have seen there. Maybe 10% or so. Singapore – like Israel which is no longer in top-10 vax – had a hugely discriminatory distribution of vaccine. The most serious cases and deaths are among the unvax not the vax.

            1. Maybe 10% or so. Singapore – like Israel which is no longer in top-10 vax

              That’s because the “safe and effective” vaccine crapped out in 6-8 months.

              1. No. The reason Israel is not in the top-10 vaxxed anymore is because Israel vaxd its Jewish population very quickly but has little interest in vaxing its Israeli Arab population. The latter still has low vax rates and that is where covid is still prevalent.

                The only significant decline in vaccine efficacy over time so far is among the over-70’s. That is from the ISRAEL data if people would bother to look at it. Which is not a surprise really since the elderly always have weaker immune response systems.

                1. That is a lie. Israeli Arabs are enrolled in the same health system as other citizens and had the same access as everyone else. Lower vaccination rates are likely for the same reason as black Americans. Minorities tend to be distrustful.

                  The other group with lower rates are Haredim Orthodox Jews. For the same reason.

                  1. They may be in the same medical system but the low income almost always have worse access (and yes lower trust as well). Which means vaxing that group requires more active outreach – which is what is not really happening.

                    Obviously Palestinians is different.

                    1. The Israeli medical system is what we would call socialist. There are four HMO entities you can choose from. You are in one the minute you are born. Every citizen is covered. There is no distinction as to religion, income or ethnicity. None.
                      It is paid for by payroll and other tax. Low income have the same access.

                      You alleged discrimination that is totally untrue.

                      Israel health has done all it can to reach out to reluctant communities that includes some Arabs and Haredi Jews. There is so much you can do just as anti vaxxers here.

                      You have no idea. Yet you accused them of religious ethnic discrimination.

                2. Palestinians have low vaccination rates but what do you expect when you government is the PA and Hamas. They actually have vaccines now but people are rejecting them due to distrust and disinformation.

          3. I agree. But diseases refuse to behave the way we want them to. It’s good that the vaccine works at all.

    5. Democrats of all sorts started it…but whodathunk that Trump supporters would agree with Gov Cuomo about not trusting a COVID vaccine?!

      New York governor Andrew Cuomo (D.) said Monday that it is “bad news” that a vaccine may come during the Trump administration and that he is working with other state governors to stop the vaccine rollout plan “before it does damage.”

      “We can’t let this vaccination plan go forward the way the Trump administration is designing it because Biden can’t undo it two months later—we’ll be in the midst of it,” Cuomo told George Stephanopoulos on Good Morning America. “I’ve been talking to governors across the nation about that, how can we shape the Trump administration vaccine plan to fix it or stop it before it does damage.”

      “I think it’s going to be a very skeptical American public about taking the vaccine, and they should be,” Cuomo said on Good Morning America.

      “This administration is saying, ‘The day we get the vaccine, that’s when it ends.’ That’s not true,” he said. “The day we get the vaccine, we then have to prove to the American people that it’s safe.

      Kamala Harris’s widely mocked NASA video featured child actors
      Southwest Airlines, union says pilots did not walk out to protest vaccine…
      Andrew Cuomo wearing a suit and tie: MailOnline logo © Provided by Daily Mail MailOnline logo

      Governor Andrew Cuomo is threatening to withhold a COVID-19 vaccine from New York until his team of doctors deem it safe because he doesn’t trust the FDA or CDC, raising serious questions about how and when it will eventually become available and who will be the arbiter of it.

      Cuomo said during an interview with Good Morning America that the American people will be ‘skeptical’ about a vaccine because of how the federal administration has handled the pandemic and that he won’t rush to recommend it.

      It’s unclear if, once the FDA approves it, Cuomo will have the power to stop it from being administered across the state.

      But in a lengthy vaccine administration plan that his office released on Sunday, he says he will consult a ‘task force’ of his own doctors about it and, if necessary, withhold it.

      ‘The Task Force will advise on the vaccine safety profile, legal authority to withhold vaccine, and clinical best practices if New York State must withhold or pause distribution of the vaccine.

      ‘Once New York’s independent Clinical Advisory Task Force has advised that a COVID-19 vaccine is safe and effective, the vaccine will be distributed and administered throughout New York State,’ the plan reads.

      New York Governor Andrew Cuomo on Monday said he would only endorse and distribute a vaccine after his own team of doctors have deemed it safe and that he won’t rely on the FDA – raising serious question about how people who do trust the FDA will gain access to it © Provided by Daily Mail New York Governor Andrew Cuomo on Monday said he would only endorse and distribute a vaccine after his own team of doctors have deemed it safe and that he won’t rely on the FDA – raising serious question about how people who do trust the FDA will gain access to it

      He also appeared on GMA to talk about the vaccine and his doubts that it will be safe.

      ‘I’m not that confident [in the CDC] but my opinion doesn’t matter.

      ‘You’re going to say, “here’s a vaccine it was new, done quickly but trust this administration that it’s safe?”

      ‘I think it’s going to be a very skeptical American public and they should be.

      ‘We’re going to put together our own group of medical experts to review the vaccine and if they say it’s safe I will go to the people of New York and say it’s safe.

      ‘But I believe all across the country, you’re going to need someone other than this FDA and CDC saying it’s safe,’ Cuomo said.

      1. Regardless of who started it, it is dumb not to get vaccinated. It is especially dumb to not get vaccinated because of politics.

        1. Yay for baseless assertions.

  24. “Your right to privacy and bodily integrity does not apply to being made to take a vaccination.”

    The judge’s bald, apparently unsupported assertions that those things just do not apply to vaccination is a not terribly convincing argumment.

  25. We have reached a point where sides have been declared and both of them are digging up as much ammunition to support their view as possible. Given the billions of users of the internet it is almost guaranteed that both sides will find plenty of “data” to back their side of the argument and hence, it will be “reasonable” to support mandating vaccines and “reasonable” to deny that mandate. We are a society locked into indecision. Paralyzed by too much information and tribalism. This is the perfect breeding ground for a virus.

    1. No amount of data can answer this question. It is a moral and practical question, not a scientific one.

    2. Hopefully a new exciting one.

    3. This is why I said above that this is a moral decision that science cannot answer.

      Whether you are talking about Climate Change, Income Inequality or Vaccine Mandates, we have been snookered into substituting a moral framework for feel-good studies by people we agree with. Individuals should make data-driven decisions. But when you are talking about balancing the interests of millions of people, you MUST, MUST, MUST approach the decision morally, rather than pragmatically.

    4. Stuff a running chainsaw up your ass.

  26. If the vaccines work as advertised, please explain why more people have now died from COVID-19 under Uncle Joe’s watch…9 months with vaccine fully available… than did under Trump…9+ months with no vaccine available? There is no logic to this phenomenom if the vaccines work. The fact is, this is a therapeutic, not a vaccine.

    1. There is no logic in Lysenkoism. And there is no doubt that is what we are seeing.

      Masks suddenly prevent viral transmission?
      Vaccines with boosters every 6 months?
      As many cases at 70% vaccinated as at 0%?

      Believe in Science! The truth is out there.

    2. Delta variant. Relaxation of cautions. Most of the hospitalized and deaths are the unvaccinated.

      1. Fuck off, Liarson.

        1. Good for you. It is happening elsewhere. Especially in red states.

          1. I’m going to ask you the same thing you ask others: Citation?

        2. That can happen due to waning protection as we are finding out. Those people are likely among the first to be vaccinated and are at high risk. Boosters are the answer.

  27. Forget about the legal and the political. If medical specialists perscribe vaccinations at certain intervals then do it. Who else are you going to listen to, Little Mario?

    1. When did you get your last TDAP booster?

      1. Like a month ago.

  28. “Even If Requiring People Who Have Recovered From COVID-19 To Be Vaccinated Is Legal, That Doesn’t Mean It Makes Sense”

    When is Reason going to drop the Libertarian schtick?

    1. When are you going to fuck off and die?

  29. A classmate of mine from grade school got the measles twice. His doctor was incredulous, but the test proved the second case.

    We don’t know if natural immunity to Covid is lifetime, or how long it is.

    We know that immunity to coronaviruses that are the common cold only lasts a few months.

    1. “His doctor was incredulous, but the test proved the second case.” What proved the first case? It’s only a reinfection if _both_ cases were correctly diagnosed. It’s possible that the kid had some quirk in his immune system that prevented retaining immunity, but far more likely that the first case wasn’t measles. The symptoms of measles are rather distinctive, but it used to be so common in children that a doctor seeing spots like measles might stop looking for any indication of other diseases… until the same kid comes back with measles spots for a second time, but then it’s too late to redo the first examination.

      COVID is much more likely to be misdiagnosed. Unlike measles, COVID often has the same symptoms as a dozen other viral infections, and the test used for most of 2020 was biased to minimize false negatives but allow a considerable number of false positives. Sniffles plus a positive COVID test is probably COVID, but there’s a chance of over 1% that it isn’t. I’ll believe it’s a COVID reinfection only when samples were kept from the first infection and retested with a far more accurate test than doctors and hospitals have been using.

  30. “The researchers found that unvaccinated people were more than twice as likely to be reinfected as fully vaccinated people.”

    Mr. Sullivan, you need to read that paragraph more closely… as the claim by that non-peer reviewed piece by CDC researchers published by the CDC is that “The researchers found that unvaccinated people were more than twice as likely to be reinfected as fully vaccinated people” WHO WERE VAXXED AFTER RECOVERING.

    The whole press release style coverage of that CDC piece reeked of obfuscation. It appears to me the unclear prose was intended to plant the false idea you ran with.

    1. Yes. This is confusing a lot of people and helping them to push vaccines. The real question to ask is, what are the actual chances of re-infection for both groups, and does taking a shot and getting that chance cut in half mean anything? I suspect probably not since we know the re-infection risk is pretty darn low.

      zero times two is zero basically.

      1. It worked to make smoking not acceptable. Increase chance of lung cancer by 20% and you have a 1% chance (vs 0.85%). The difference is negliglible.

  31. If covid was killing 1 in 10 instead of 1 in 1000, you wouldn’t need mandates , everyone would be waiting in line for a shot. It’s not dangerous enough for most age groups to need it. Mandate it for at risk groups. People need to feel like the government is intelligent for them to have trust and confidence in it. It’s not intelligent or wise to mandate vaccines to groups that are introduced to more risk by getting the vaccine , than from the virus itself. It’s up to the individual to take precautions to not get infected by other people. Not vice versa. The whole thing does get cognitively burdensome trying to juggle all the conditions mentally. One thing is for sure , Biden lost a lot of fans. Plenty of democrats that didn’t want the vaccine. Most of the rest looked to the media to tell them what to do. Must obey corporate establishment megaphone or else flush ego down toilet.

    1. You contradicted your own argument – see your first and third sentences. You say if covid were more dangerous then you wouldn’t need to mandate vaccines and then go on to argue that vaccines should be mandated for at-risk people. Like, what?

      1. Agreed. It was a ridiculous statement in an otherwise good post.

  32. Totally irrelevant and purely observational; every person I know who actually got a case of the Communist Chinese virus got it after they were vaccinated.
    Every. Single. One.

    1. I got it unvaccinated. My wife immediately got it from me at vax + 5 months. Lesser symptoms, over faster. Just as contagious. If she hadn’t known I had it she may not have quarantined.

      1. Look at all the science being done in these comments.

        1. First step in science is always observation.

          1. I’m sure they’ve thought of that.

  33. This what happens when the party that says “follow the science” actually ignores the science. Studies from John’s Hopkins and the Israeli Ministry of Health show that natural immunity is 13 to 30 times more robust then that from the vaccine. This raises another question. Can we even really call the COVID shot a vaccine when its immunity is not measured in a lifetime or even years but in months? How many of you out there had to get boosters for polio, smallpox, mumps, measles or rubella every six months? Me neither. Those were real vaccines. As for natural immunity, I had chicken pox as a kid. I have been exposed to many infected kids (including my own) in the ensuing 55 years yet no subsequent infection despite zero booster shots. Hmmm. Just saying.

    1. That’s false Jeff (links to studies at the article):

      “Some people who get COVID-19 receive no protection from reinfection – their natural immunity is nonexistent. A recent study found that 36% of COVID-19 cases didn’t result in development of SARS-CoV-2 antibodies. The people had different levels of illness – most had moderate disease, but some were asymptomatic and some experienced severe COVID-19.

      “Vaccine-induced immunity is more predictable than natural immunity,” says Dr. Rupp. The COVID-19 vaccines provide great protection from severe disease, hospitalization and death.

      Natural immunity fades more quickly than vaccine immunity
      Natural immunity can decay within about 90 days. Immunity from COVID-19 vaccines has been shown to last longer. Both Pfizer and Moderna reported strong vaccine protection for at least six months.

      Studies are ongoing to evaluate the full duration of protective immunity, including the Johnson & Johnson vaccine.

      Real-world studies also indicate natural immunity’s short life. For example, 65% of people with a lower baseline antibody from infection to begin with completely lost their COVID-19 antibodies by 60 days.

      What about that Israeli study suggesting natural immunity is stronger? Infectious diseases expert James Lawler, MD, MPH, FIDSA, carefully evaluates the study design of the retrospective Maccabi Health System study in his Aug. 31 briefing. In the briefing, he identifies two concerning sources of error that were not corrected for: survivorship bias and selection bias.

      Natural immunity alone is weak
      One study compared natural immunity alone to natural immunity plus vaccination. They found that, after infection, unvaccinated people are 2.34 times likelier to get COVID-19 again, compared to fully vaccinated people. So vaccinated people (after infection) have half the risk of reinfection than people relying on natural immunity alone.

      “Studies show that the vaccine gives a very good booster response if you’ve had COVID-19 before,” says Dr. Rupp.

      Furthermore, there is no country on the globe in which natural infection and natural immunity has brought the pandemic under control. In countries like Iran or Brazil very high levels of natural infection have not prevented recurrent waves of infection. ..”

      1. “Natural immunity alone is weak
        One study compared natural immunity alone to natural immunity plus vaccination. They found that, after infection, unvaccinated people are 2.34 times likelier to get COVID-19 again, compared to fully vaccinated people. So vaccinated people (after infection) have half the risk of reinfection than people relying on natural immunity alone.
        That’s the obfuscation at work. That’s recovered people who remained unvaccinated, compared to the recovered who got vaxxed, giving them a supercharged immune response to SARS2.

        I’m comfortable leaving my recovered state unsupercharged. I can be expected not to get a serious case, if any case at all.

        1. It’s not all about you.

          1. And the fact that you resort to that type of emotional blackmail shows why your side should be rejected.

          2. Oh that’s some real irony, Karen.

          3. The 2X improvement between those two groups – unvaxxed infected vs vaxxed AND infected was a reduction in reinfection risk from 0.26% to 0.13%.

            So we are gonna mandate something based on a trivial improvement in absolute risk?

            1. I don’t support the mandates. I am strictly talking about whether to get vaccinated or not, by voluntary choice. To not get vaccinated is selfish, and shows no regard for your fellow Americans.

      2. Joe the Liar has linked to a study with 72 subjects to refute studies of data that include millions. He needs to be slapped.

        1. Chuck, your personal attacks belie the weakness of your position and your low character.

          If you are speaking of the Israeli study, it was a data collection report, not an actual observed study of controlled subjects with lab analysis, and it has come under criticism for it’s means. Even it however found benefits to recovered unvaccinated patients receiving a vaccination.

          1. Eat shit, Joe. 72 subjects.

    2. The vaccine works very well at preventing severe disease, and is still going strong at that after 8+ months. It doesn’t do as good of a job at stopping the spread. But if everyone who is at risk of a bad outcome gets vaccinated, spread doesn’t matter.

      I definitely call it a vaccine. Getting near perfect protection from a bad outcome is great for me. What it is bad at is protecting others, but since they also have the ability to get the vaccine, I don’t need to worry about them because they can take care of themselves.

      1. …I’m sure you’re well paid for the BS, but it’s still shit.

        Immunity fades fast, you can still get infected and spread, and it has more adverse responses and deaths reported than all other approved vaccines since 1990 combined.

        Oh, and it’s not a vaccine.

        1. Infections are irrelevant. It stinks to spend a day or two in bed, but whatever. The important thing is that severe disease, and it does a very good job of preventing that.

          1. And yet that vaccine that’s still going strong at 8+ months needs a booster shot. My vaccine in April did not stop me from getting COVID 2 weeks ago. And my COVID experience was not noticeably different from my friends who were unvaccinated. (We are a diverse crowd!) Also there were longer and shorter disease runs on both sides of the vaccine divide. Those appear to be the outliers.

            1. It doesn’t need a booster unless you are immunocompromised. Biden wanted to give people boosters, so the people got boosters. It is notable how unenthusiastic the scientists looking at the data were about boosters.

              Your experience is not inconsistent with what I am claiming. You got infected. You didn’t go to the hospital. I am sure it sucked, but you are fine, you didn’t get severe disease. ~98% of the unvaccinated who get COVID also won’t have to go to the hospital and basically won’t have an experience that different from the vaccinated. The vaccine helps knock that 2% down to essentially zero (note that the 2% is highly dependent on age; virtually nobody under 50 gets hospitalized for COVID, regardless).

  34. The unvaccinated are the new sub-class. It’s no longer PC to diminish blacks, latinos, LGBTQ2IA, or women – but unvaccinated?, let the hate begin…

    1. Well, blacks are still disproportionately not vaccinated.

      The vaccine mandates seem sure to put millions of blacks out of work–and without being able to make UI claims! But the mandates will never be called racist for their impacts, unlike any other action taken by a Republican administration.

      1. It’ll be like the crime bill. It’ll be acknowledged as racist decades later, and none of the Democrats responsible will be blamed.

      2. I guess it could put millions out of work, but doesn’t seem likely since they can just go get vaccinated. Also, OSHA doesn’t have the resources to enforce the mandate (which doesn’t exist yet).

        (Standard disclaimer: I oppose the OSHA mandate.)

        1. Fuck off, slaver.

    2. They’re being judged because of their behavior and that’s completely legitimate.

      1. Which is why everyone tells you slavers to fuck off.

  35. I’ll save the debate on forcing people to get the vaccine for a later date…however getting the vaccine even if you’ve had covid IS scientifically sound as your immune response won’t give you as dense a number of antibodies as the vaccine

    1. From a personal health standpoint, perhaps. From a public health standpoint, we should be exporting those doses to the highly vulnerable in lower income countries and revisit around April when the world has enough doses to go around.

      All of these mandates on low risk groups (kids and prior infected) is an inhumane “America first” policy that tells 80 year olds who desperately want the vaccine in Africa and South America to go pound sand; we would rather give the vaccine to someone who doesn’t want it and who will derive one thousandth the benefit. Apparently, vaccines in the developing world are important enough to try to abscond with Pfizer’s IP, but not important enough to hold off on barely useful mandates.

  36. Mandates for covid vaccination don’t make sense.

  37. Let’s change the judge’s ruling to speech:

    “The MSU speech policy does not force Plaintiff to forgo her rights to freedom of speech, but if she chooses not to comply, she does not have the right to work at a government agency at the same time.”

    I don’t think that is how rights work. Can someone who understands the case better explain to me how firing someone for exercising their rights isn’t a violation of those rights?

    1. It´s called employment at will.

      1. Which would be valid argument if MSU was a private company and not an arm of the government. Arms of the government should not be taking adverse action against a citizen for exercising his or her rights. While “at will employment” makes it harder to prove the case because no reason must be provided for the firing, in this case, MSU made it perfectly clear that the firing was due to exercise of a right. I am surprised the judge can just glide over that and not have to make some ruling that the state has some overriding compelling reason to circumscribe the right.

      2. Remember you said this when a gay or black or woman or old or handicapped or fat or ugly…person is fired.

  38. There are two significant issues I did not see addressed either in the lawsuit nor this piece.

    First, every one of the availble injections here in the stares are made with human cells derived from aborded babies. THAT is a HUGE moral issue for many, one that MUST be accomodated.

    Second, having studied the VAERS data, it is very evident that anyone who has had the disease and recovered from it has a HUGELY increased statistical probability of very severe adverse reactioins, far higher death rate in response to the disease, and THAT huge risk being FORCED upon people is not right. I know I have strong iimmunity to the disease, and, knowing this fact, I absoltuely WILL NOT take any of the innoculatioin products on the market now.

    I am well into the ‘high risk age categrory” for this disease, and have one other ‘high risk” factor. I never played the Covidiocy Game, stayed active and out and about never put the mug nappie accross my face….. and when I got it the business had been “going around” for nearly two years. Ive never taken any of the seasonal fly vaccines, and have never gotten any of those diseases, ever. I have NO IDEA how it is I contracted the disease, did NOT have most of the symtptoms but turnd up with a positive test.. the Rapid Test which is, from what I learned, only about 1% false positive. I simmply maintian my own health in such a way my immune system is VERY strong. Might get a common cold maybe every four or five years, and am just feeling low for a day or maybe two, but always remain fully functional. Often the folks that contributed the cold to me were flat out in bed for ten days or more I MAY have missed one day’s productivity, but then back to normal.

    this whole charade is SO insanly blown out of all sanity or proportion.

    1. Tionico, good for you, but dodging a bullet – odds were in your favor – does not make you an expert. You might consider the odds you faced if you had been vaccinated as they were much more favorable.
      You do know 700k Americans have died from Covid already, right? That’s about 1 in every 450. At most 3 have died from Covid that had been vaccinated. Do the math.

      “Over 339 million vaccine doses were given to 187.2 million people in the US as of July 19, 2021. The vaccines have been proven to be safe and effective. Vaccination is happening under the most intensive safety monitoring in U.S. history.

      Between December 2020 and July 19th, 2021, VAERS received 6,207 reports of death (0.0018% of doses) among people who got a vaccine, but this does not mean the vaccine caused these deaths. Doctors and safety monitors carefully review the details of each case to see if it might be linked to the vaccine. There are three deaths that appear to be linked to blood clots that occurred after people got the J&J vaccine. Since we now know how to correctly treat people who develop these blood clots, future deaths related to this very rare side effect can be prevented.

      After careful review of the additional data, doctors have decided that there is no evidence at all that the vaccines contributed to the other patient deaths. ..”

      1. ” At most 3 have died from Covid that had been vaccinated. ”

        I’m inclined to give you the benefit of an accidental typo here. Otherwise you’ve told a horrifically laughable lie.

        1. “I’m inclined to give you the benefit of an accidental typo here.”

          Haven’t read many of Joe’s posts I see.

        2. Read the linked research mpercy

        3. I am sure that Joe meant that only 3 people have died due to COVID vaccine.

          Last I saw, there were around 3,200 fully vaccinated Americans who had died with COVID being a contributing factor. Standard caveats about “died with” vs “died of” apply. The fact that CDC has only counted around 800 fully vaccinated “died with” COVID deaths seems dubious to me given that hospitals are testing everyone and we know that while the vaccines are very good at preventing severe disease, they are no longer good at preventing infection. So, I suspect the 3200 is an overcount.

          1. Over 16,000 have died from the vaccine.

            1. That is an outright lie.

              1. No, that’s as official as it gets right now from the underreported VAERS, you ignorant troglodyte.

                1. No fool. I have posted directly from the VAERS website explaining what it is and is not. You don’t know either. If you get a vaccine, any vaccine, and die of cancer the next day they want you to report it. They specifically state that no conclusions can be drawn from the raw data. It is not a study it is a raw passive reporting system. Your ignorance is encyclopedic.

                2. I don’t care what you do. The problem is people like yourself spreading disinformation are a danger to others.

                3. VAERS counts “died with the vaccine”, not “died from the vaccine”. The VAERS rules avoid trying to untangle the whole medical history of each case and distinguish vaccine-caused deaths, vaccine-unrelated deaths, and what I expect is the most common category – people who weren’t going to survive the next bit of extra stress, whether it was vaccine, disease, or a tax audit. But they do that by counting all deaths soon after vaccination. Probably most of the deaths were partially due to the vaccine, but were people with one foot in the grave to begin with – like most COVID deaths, but certainly not all of them.

                  If I’d died from a heart attack 3 days after my vaccination, it would have been counted and probably would have been from the vaccine – myocarditis is a confirmed, although rare, side effect. But if I had a heart attack right when the nice lady from CVS stuck the needle in my arm, VAERS would still have counted me. If I’d been killed while going home by a maniac driving 55 in a 35mph zone, and someone had noticed the vaccination record in my pocket, I’d have been counted.

            2. That number died after getting the vaccine. The vaccine didn’t necessarily cause they’re deaths. The vaccine isn’t a miracle cure that prevents terminally ill people from dieing or healthy people from getting in car accidents for two months after getting it.

              1. Hm, died with and of Covid didn’t seem to matter.

                Also, fuck you, no, these are not frivolous reports. A VAERS document is a pain in the nuts and undercounted in the extreme.

          2. Iridium – Joe is an idiot and doesn’t try to debate anything. He’s a troll plain and simple. Mute him and be done he offers zero value. I posted this link for him a week or two ago which shows in my area 9 of the 10 folks that died at the care home were vaccinated from covid but died of it.

      2. As of October 4, 2021, more than 185 million people in the United States had been fully vaccinated against COVID-19.

        During the same time, CDC received reports from 50 U.S. states and territories of 30,177 patients with COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough infection who were hospitalized or died.
        Total number of vaccine breakthrough infections reported to CDC

        Deaths Hospitalized, non-fatal*
        Total N=6,617 N=16,889

        1. mpercy, I provided you with the current research on those 6,617 “deaths”. Please read my post.

          1. No you didn’t. You can keep saying VAERS is self-reported and not confirmed which is fine. These are the CDC’s own numbers.

            1. Sorry. VAERS and the numbers I gave count different things. VAERS counts reported deaths and adverse reactions FROM the vaccine. The CDC numbers I gave are breakthrough deaths and hospitalization from/with COVID after having been vaccinated. We’ve got to be clear as to which we’re talking about. As far as I know, despite VEARS, I’m unaware that the CDC is actively tracking deaths FROM the vaccine, because if they did, they’d have to report them so it’s better for everyone not do that research, n’est-ce pas?

      3. I feel your pain, loser.

  39. “But when it comes to vaccine mandates, the relevant question is whether an unvaccinated person with natural immunity is substantially more likely to catch and transmit the coronavirus than a vaccinated person without natural immunity. On that point, medical experts disagree.”

    How is that? I’d think the relevant question is whether an unvaccinated person with natural l immunity is substantially more likely to catch and transmit the coronavirus than a vaccinated person with natural immunity.

    1. I think it would be hard to describe the unvaccinated natural immunity folks as a “grave danger” if it turns out they are less likely to be infected/contagious than the vaccinated no natural immunity folks who are allowed to keep their jobs.

      1. Exactly!
        Unless the grave danger is they might be Republicans. Better require the vaxx just to make sure. Pass the shibboleth.

        I’ve never voted in a GOP primary, and I have voted in every primary beginning in ’72.

  40. A rousing meeting of Libertarians For Telling Employers What To Do . . . .

    1. Nobody is surprised that you’re to stupid to understand the topic at hand.

    2. If only the government would stop telling employers what to do, maybe they could make smarter decisions, instead of ones designed to look good, but will save few, if any, lives.

      It’s not like employers love firing people in the middle of a labor shortage.

  41. Current best medical knowledge is that people who have recovered from the disease have a more robust immunity than people who have been vaccinated but have not had the disease.
    So it is medically unnecessary to require them to be vaccinated.

    The whole point of mandatory vaccinations in general is that the public good outweighs the personal risk to the individual of an adverse reaction.
    But there is no public good in giving shots to immune people. The risk of a bad reaction to the vaccine seems to be very small, but nobody has data on long-term effects.
    From the very beginning of the pandemic, much of public policy in the US has been performative or political instead of based on hard science. It was apparent very early on that some conditions made people particularly vulnerable to serious disease, and having those folks take extra precautions would have been sensible.
    Policy has just ignored the fact that many millions of people have recovered and achieved reasonable immunity.

    I am sure Pfizer is lobbying heavily for a world where every single person is required to get a shot every 8 months in order to participate in society. The board of directors could all build solid gold houses.
    But forcing medically unnecessary procedures on healthy people in order to buy those houses is just evil.
    And although Pfizer has protection against liability should vaccine-related birth defects or whatever start showing up, it may be that schools and private companies may not have the same protections.

  42. ou might consider the odds you faced if you had been vaccinated as they were much more favorable. There are plenty of people working and at risk. I have talked to several employers frustrated that they frequently have staff out for 1 to 2 weeks with the disease and that the understaffing is stressing out their operations.

  43. Why would any concede that forced vaccination is legal? That is plain wrong. And why do we need a vaccine for a disease that most recover from? There are a number of good protocols for treating covid used by many doctors with good success, but you’d never know it if you watch govt. television, like CNN or MSNBC.

    And no young person should ever take this vaccine, especially no children, nor any pregnant women. It is ludicrous and dangerous. Fifteen thousand 15,000) are already reported on VAERS as dead by the covid vaccines with over a 1/2 million serious side effects, some permanent injuries. Only and indoctrinated person goes along with the lie that such a vaccine is necessary.

    And older folks, why would you want to take an injection of an experimental drug that may kill you or injure you worse than covid…or even give you covid. After all, the spike proteins they produce are just as dangerous as covid. Please do some research and save your own life.

    1. Who is applying force? Please be specific.

      1. Please stay out of conversations about current events if you can’t be bothered to keep up with the news.

    2. A few things:

      VERS is reporting how many died WITH the vaccine, not OF the vaccine. If you give the COVID vaccine to a terminally ill person, they aren’t going to suddenly live for the next two months, so deaths are expected.

      The vaccine can’t give you COVID because the vaccine doesn’t have all the parts to make the full virus, just the spike.

      The spike alone isn’t enough to infect cells and have them make more spikes. Therefore, it is far less dangerous than the full virus, which can enter your cells and force them to produce more virus, which then enter more cells, etc. in an exponential cascade.

      1. VAERS is the only metric because nobody else is willing to count, and its numbers are repressed and underreported.

        Hopeful never said the vaccine caused Covid, he said the spike protein it produces is dangerous. And it is – the spikes are cytotoxic and do not stay at the injection site as designed. Within 24 hours, most are in your bone marrow, organs or ovaries.

        Again… Untested product. We are the trial group.

        1. The spike protein does not just float around. It would just degrade. It is produced by the muscle cells where it is injected for a short period of time, a few weeks. The mRNA taken in by the cell is degraded in a day or so just like the mRNA you produce. It cannot replicate.

          The protein, really a subunit of the viral spike protein is expressed on the cell surface and provokes an immune reaction. That is why your arm hurts. It too just goes away and the cells go back to business as usual.

          There are a lot of articles out there explaining how these and other vaccines work. Also look up RNA and protein synthesis. It may clear up some of the disinformation to learn the basic biology.

          1. Shitspinner, refer to Japan and do some research. You’re an ignorant gaslighter who’s been embarrased repeatedly for your ignorance. Stop being a fussy bitch.

        2. I will post it again. From the VAERS website

          report to VAERS generally does not prove that the identified vaccine(s) caused the adverse event described. It only confirms that the reported event occurred sometime after vaccine was given. No proof that the event was caused by the vaccine is required in order for VAERS to accept the report. VAERS accepts all reports without judging whether the event was caused by the vaccine.

        3. 6.5 billion vaccine shots worldwide. Only 2 very rare significant side effects have been demonstrated. I think we would know by now.

          What we are learning about is how well it works as variants emerge and how long the vaccines provide protection. Also now boosters.

          In medicine just about everything is an experiment. You are dealing with nature.

        4. Please see the part after the ellipses in Hopeful’s post: “injection of an experimental drug that may kill you or injure you worse than covid…or even give you covid.”

          I am not sure where the claim that the vaccine hasn’t been tested is coming from. The New England Journal of Medicine even published the results of the phase 3 trial:

    3. You obviously do not know what VAERS is. It must be one of those things circulating on wing nut websites and media. I posted something below from the VAERS website.

  44. Every argument against naturally acquired immunity being un know and variable, also applies to vaccine acquired immunity.

    Based on other viruses and vaccines the argument that the body produces a more complete immunity because the entire virus is seen versus seeing a very small portion of the virus make more sense.

    The arguments that the vaccine acquired immunity is more complete appears to fall short based on their own numbers.

    To me the naturally acquired immunity is more complete and probably longer lasting as well. Not that you should seek out naturally acquired immunity by contracting Covid-19.

    If you are in a high risk category, you probably are better better off getting the vaccine than not, but this should be entirely your personal decision.

    Eventually the vast majority of people will contract some sort of Covid-19 variant. The numbers demonstrate that regardless of the precautions taken that the general trend lines are basically the same regardless.

    The media will attempt to spin it, attempting to assign blame, but despite the claim of following the science, they are in truth following the politics.

    1. You could get a mild case and acquire less immunity. The virus’s effects on you depend heavily on your viral load. The vaccine is standardized for everyone and the outcome is immunity. Anyone willing to get infected with COVID simply has no argument to make for why they won’t get the vaccine for COVID. Their deep sense of bodily integrity is functioning in a fundamentally irrational way.

    2. uomo, none of that is true. You should read current research.

      1. I feel your pain, loser.

  45. “Overall, the advantages of vaccination compared to waiting for an infection are clear, especially since people who catch the virus can transmit it to others and may suffer severe symptoms.”

    Yeah, like death or permanent disability. If the virus didn’t hurt people, we wouldn’t be having this conversation. Anyone advocating a “natural selection” approach may feel like they’re contributing something to the so-called “debate,” but they’re admitting failure before even trying. Not to mention a little genocide-y.

    “It’s only the fats and old who die, who cares?” Say a bunch of Trumpers, who are all young and fit. Oh wait no they’re all fat and old and dying by the hundreds of thousands.

    Yes let’s have a debate on science with them.

    1. Sure, let’s have a science debate Tony.

      I remember the last time we debated, you were a wellspring of very unusual facts when it came to petrochemical processing. I imagine that your understanding of virology is at about the same level, so this should be humorous.

      1. My position on science has always been the same: consult the science.

        I don’t know why everyone’s dumb aunt doesn’t get this. You don’t have to rely on internet rumors for facts. The internet has other parts.

        1. Excellent point Tony. Indeed the internet is reference desk most of us carry in our pocket, yet so many choose to listen to anonymous or amateur rumor mongers. Let’s hope it’s the newness of the technology and a stage that will pass as people realize the wealth of information they do command. It may be the only hope for democracy which requires wise citizens, and now there are few limitations on their becoming intelligent.

        2. Google scholar is good. I get a lot of information there.

      2. Humor is an interesting term to use in this context. I suspect an over production of yellow bile followed by phlegm.

        A course of rest along with chicken soup as tolerated will help restore body balance.

        Chicken soup actually helps in viral illness. I could give you a recipe from a physician who was well versed in the works of Hippocrates and Galen.

        One 4- to 5-pound fowl or yearling (soup chicken)—a roaster will do
        5 quarts water or water to cover
        1 parsnip, peeled and cut into thirds
        1 large onion, peeled but left whole
        1 turnip, peeled and cut into quarters
        2 stalks celery with leaves, cut into thirds
        3 or more carrots, peeled and sliced into 1-inch lengths
        Fresh dill, 3 or more sprigs to taste
        Fresh parsley, 2 sprigs or more if parsnip isn’t being used
        Salt and pepper to taste

        Cut the chicken into pieces. Place the pieces in a large soup pot and cover with water.
        Bring the water to a boil and simmer for 30 minutes, skimming the top of the liquid to remove all of the brown foam.
        Add the remaining ingredients and cook over low heat until the chicken is quite tender and the vegetables are soft, about 2–3 hours.
        Remove the chicken with a slotted spoon. Discard the dill and parsley. Remove the vegetables to nibble on, and save the carrot for later use in the soup. Strain the soup so that it is nice and clear.
        Place the soup in a clean pot, and add the carrots.

        Or however your grandmother made it.

        It provides all of the nutrients a person needs and oral hydration.

        1. “Or however your grandmother made it.”

          Open Cambell’s can, dump in pot, heat and serve.

    2. “It’s only the fats and old who die, who cares?”

      Nobody is arguing this. All obese people and seniors have been offered the vaccine. Begged to get it even. And it is available in thousands of places on a walk-in basis and the tax payers are even picking up the entire tab.

      Why is it appropriate to fire working age folks who are largely low risk, because the at-risk folks won’t take the vaccine? At what point do we make people responsible for their own health? Why should I have to get a vaccine to protect someone who refused theirs? This whole debate is aimed at the wrong people. We should be entirely focused on vaccinating seniors. Everything else is a deadly distraction.

      Vaccinate the seniors and the at-risk, and, then we will be in the place of not having to worry about COVID. On the other hand, if you vaccinate all the working folks, the seniors and obese are still screwed because the vaccine provides only limited sterilizing immunity, so it will keep spreading, just slower. Which isn’t exactly a win, as roughly similar number of at risk folks will eventually get infected. If those at risk folks were vaccinated prior to exposure, they’ll be fine. If not, then they are risking a bad outcome. So, the key is to vaccinate them as quickly as possible, not stuffing the airwaves with debate on mandates on the wrong people.

      1. “Nobody is arguing this.”

        I have seen literally this argued here, numerous times.

      2. How about allowing debate on the efficacy, safety and necessity of the not-vaccine first?

  46. So scientists working under Trump got better results in 8 months than Mother Nature did after 100’s of thousands of years?

    1. Oh. They were working under Trump. Hard to get the pipette in the vial under such circumstances.

      I give the government credit for funding some of the development and advance orders for these vaccines. Development was an effort that started before all of this. That was good. Now if only more Americans would get them. That would be better.

    2. Not really. Our natural immune system cures COVID 99.5% of the time. The scientists just help it boost its performance .48% or so.

      That being said, outperforming mother nature shouldn’t be considered to be some miracle anyway. Yeah, it has had a long time to optimize, but it comes up with general solutions. The Trump scientists were focused specifically on COVID. Specialized solutions usually outperforms general solutions because it is so much easier of a problem to solve.

      1. “Trump scientists” you mean the ones in Belgium and Germany who developed Pfizer BioNTech vaccine and took no government money, or the Janssen J&J vaccine which was developed in Belgium by a division which had been been developing and producing vaccines for years. It is why J&J acquired them Perhaps the folks at Moderna who had been working on this technology for over a decade including research into to the related SARS virus.

        Trump scientists. Working in his secret lab under Mar A Lago.

        1. Donald Trump, Jr. apparently believes his dad was there in the research labs leading the development personally.

        2. I was just using Don’t look at me!’s terminology.

          It appears that Trump appointees did an excellent job of picking candidates to contract with, with 4 of the 7 being recognized by WHO and a 5th likely to be recognized within a month or so. But, yes, for Pfizer-BionTech, it is less clear what influence the federal government had over its development.

      2. I have seen the original data but this is from a news article reporting on data from the Israeli Health ministry.

        “However, the two-dose vaccine still works very well in preventing people from getting seriously sick, demonstrating 88% effectiveness against hospitalization and 91% effectiveness against severe illness, according to the Israeli data published Thursday.”

        There are conflicting numbers on total symptomatic cases prevented from Israel and the UK.

        Preliminary data from Israel demonstrate that a 6 month booster restores overall protection to 95%. How long that lasts remains to be seen.

        1. Our statements are not really in conflict. If you assume a naive IFR of 0.5%, that implies a survival rate of 99.5%. If the VE against death (what I was talking about) is 90%, that makes the IFR 0.05% and the survival rate 99.95%, which, in absolute terms, is a 0.45% greater than the naive survival rate. So, I may have slightly overestimated the effectiveness of the vaccine (personally, I believe these observational studies likely somewhat overcount breakthrough deaths [it is difficult to ascribe death to a single cause, and I believe some breakthrough deaths would have died anyway] so was using a VE of 95%), but not in a way that materially changes the argument.

    3. Does anyone feel like if Trump had won the election and instituted vaccine and mask mandates, large swaths of Democrats would be in the streets protesting and “resist”-ing?

      I mean, if Literal Orange Hitler orders you to take this shot “for the common good”, are they really going to just sit down and do it?

      1. That’s what’s important to focus on in this public health crisis: red vs blue team partisan politics!

      2. I don’t feel that way. Since I do not belong to either team I don’t really care who does it.

      3. Not sure. I do know that he would not have gotten a pass by the media on extending the eviction moratorium after the Supreme Court struck it down, while fully admitting it was just a delaying tactic.

  47. Right! COVID-19 vaccines can help prevent new variants from emerging. As it spreads, the virus has more opportunities to change. High vaccination coverage in a population reduces the spread of the virus and helps prevent new variants from emerging.

    1. If that is the goal, we should be exporting the vaccine and getting people without natural immunity vaccinated. Vaccinating people who already have natural immunity will likely have limited impact on variant formation, as their body will kill the virus in fairly short order, regardless.

      1. Right now we are just giving boosters to people over 65 and people at risk so I do not think it will affect global supply.

        There are logistical issues with some of the vaccines to places like central Africa. Plus a lot of places just have lousy government. There are also places like Russia with a high rate of people refusing it.

        1. Right now COVAX doesn’t have enough supply for current demand. Many countries absolutely have the capability to vaccinate more but can’t get enough vaccine. If they had more, it would get into arms.

          I wasn’t even talking about boosters though. There are tens of millions in this country who have natural immunity, who are going to get bullied into taking the vaccine. That would absolutely make an impact on global supply.

    2. This is really basic knowledge, but we still get people commenting here who seem to be completely unaware.

      1. Like you, Liarson?

  48. Reason still doesn’t get it. It is not, and never been about sense, it is and always has been about government control.

  49. I do not agree with government mandates. I still do not agree with government outlawing private business from requiring vaccination for employees.

    1. Which is happening in Texas now.

  50. “We” don’t spend anymore. “We” invest. Investments sometimes fail to achieve a goal. In politics, “we” (a majority) trust an elite to rule us (run our lives, take our money by force). When that paradigm fails, “we”, i.e., the voters and non-voters, the govt. supporters and the govt. resisters, all suffer. If the govt. invests taxes and money borrowed using our property as collateral, and the public find out their money went to enrich the politicians/bureaucrats/cronies, without public benefit, the voters change some of the faces of govt. but not the paradigm. Rulers still rule. The ruled still suffer from their rule, waiting to be protected instead of exploited. After 200+ years of systematic violence by an elite against their supporters, reason, rights, and choice have been sacrificed without NET benefit. How long will this dangerous superstitious politics continue to tax humanity? Answer: As long as a majority continue to worship the concept of being ruled, being treated like children, e.g., politically immature.

  51. Actually she is not entirely correct. No natural infection does not mean immunity. Just like all other viruses SARS-CoV 2 mutates. And as it does it escapes certain neutralizing antibodies causing a secondary reinfection.

    1. The same mutations will escape the immunity given by vaccination. Except that natural immunity (and immunity from the old technology shots using attenuated or killed virus) is to many proteins in a virus, but the MRNA vaccine only introduces the spike protein. ONE mutation and there’s no immunity from these vaccinations, while natural immunity will still react to other parts of the virus that haven’t mutated.

  52. Every drug in that photo is experimental. How can there be a mandate to inject them?
    Pfizer? How stupid must we be to trust those motherfuckers?

    1. Even if a drug is NOT experimental, how can there be a mandate? The lack of willingness on the part of “libertarians” here to defend our rights to medical privacy and self-determination is appalling.

  53. “A widely cited Israeli preprint study posted in August suggested that natural immunity is more effective than vaccination at preventing infection by the delta variant.” Well, that should be intuitively obvious. Vaccination only triggers the formation of circulating antibodies, the second line of defense; natural immunity triggers the formation of the first line, mucosal immunity, as well. Being vaccinated doesn’t mean that the virus can’t set up residence in your nose and mouth, whence you can infect others as freely as if you had ever been vaccinated; it only means that the virus can’t penetrate past the mucous membranes. But if you’ve developed antibodies through being infected, since it reached you through your mucous membranes you have antibodies there as well as in your bloodstream.

  54. hope you 2 are well!
    Academy of Fashion And Art was incorporated in 2007, with a main objective of imparting world class training programme to meet the demands of students who are aspiring for NIFT, NID,PEARL, TDV, JSAA, UPES, UCEED, CEED, IIAD, UID and other Art and Design Entrance Exams across India and abroad. In pursuit of which, Academy of Fashion and Art has mooted with a team of outstanding and dedicated faculty members, State-of-the-art infrastructure and winning methodology that provides comprehensive , stimulation towards exploration and systematic guidance to students “who aspire for nothing but the best.”

    Today, AFA has become synonymous with quality coaching for Design Entrance Exams across India. AFA has been consistently producing Top Rankers and Future Designers in PEARL, TDV, JSAA, UPES, UCEED, CEED, NID, NIFT, IIAD, UID and other design entrance exams in India every year. Our expertise in the training, more than 1,000 selections in various Design Entrance Examination, a network of over 6 centres across India, collective annual student base of more than 900 students every year and above all, trust of parents, has made us a household name for focused and quality coaching for NIFT/NID. Candidates approach us from the word of mouth by the references of our current and previous students.

  55. Yes people after recovering from the covid is necessary to get vaccinated which help in boosting the anti bodies.

  56. We must follow the prescription advised by our doctors. It’s not necessary that after the Covid-19 treatment an abundant amount of corona antibodies develops in the body. So, it’s important to follow the necessary checkup to check our immune system has been developed enough to fight with coronavirus.

Please to post comments