Hacker News Reader

Comment by michaelmrose | Hacker News Reader

A vaccine mandate admits the possibility of following the law that effective in different jurisdictions, exceptions as required by law, court challenges and so forth. A vaccine that spread like a disease may be introduced in one nation and pass trivially behind national boundaries subject to no law of man.

Insofar as legal mandates we've been mandating that school children be vaccinated for various things for a very long time. I don't see any problem with not allowing a single person to opt to subject the entire rest of society to sickness and death. That seems like a morally dubious sort of freedom.

View on HN

you are in for a big surprise: there are quite a few people that do not build up any response to vaccination naturally, called either primary or acquired immunodeficiency, as well as immunosuppressed who cannot produce a response to a vaccine (those on CD20 inhibitors, or on daily equivalent of 1mg/kg of prednisone, etc, etc, etc).

There are millions of people with primary (1 in 1000), some more acquired, and hundreds of millions of immunosuppressed globally. "not a single person" just sounds laughable in this context.

500,000,000 vs 1.

Is that science? or is it hysteria?

I said.

> I don't see any problem with not allowing a single person to opt to subject the entire rest of society to sickness and death.

That is I don't think its OK to allow individuals to opt out of vaccination because that ignorant minority can not only spread their contagion to vulnerable individuals but also potentially act as a lab for the creation of entirely new variant that bypass existing immunity. Every unnecessary infection is a dice roll with the rest of the human race.

Nobody said anything at all about immunosuppressed individuals. Few of them are incidentally entirely without an immune system else they would soon be dead outside of a clean room. This is to say that their decreased immune systems results in them being at a vastly increased risk compared to the general population and it is more critical not less to vaccinate them even though it doesn't wholly ameliorate their greater risk. I am well aware of this due to my own research my wife's doctors advice.

Lastly 500M would be 1 in 16 not 1 in 1000. In further communication please review the post you are replying to so that it at least makes contextual sense and double check math so as to ensure you aren't wasting the other readers time with trivial errors instead of substantial discussion.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com