Would you support mandatory vaccines? (you can add conditions that would affect your choice of either yes or no, but please answer clearly with a yes or no)
Would you support proof of vaccination requirements for things like travel, work in companies/government, schools (here adding vaccinations for current virus outbreaks) or other types of activity/participation?
If yes, please say what activities/participation you would support restrictions based on lack of proof of vaccination.
As I mentioned in another thread a number of sources are saying/claiming that more pandemics are on the way and soon or relatively soon. So, having a position on this might be a good idea.
Healthcare workers are on the front line of the vaccines … if we fuck that one up, there’s no going back. What 12 years in med school, for every doctor on earth, and the vaccines are a conspiracy…
Talk about shooting yourself in the proverbial foot.
If the elites are that stupid, they deserve everything coming to them.
In 46% of the tested people, the vaccine had serious side effects: Fever and a decrease in white blood cells (neutropenia), which could mean that the vaccine could directly attack the immune system. 46%, this is no trivial matter.
The Covid19 vaccine is a completely new type of vaccine. Normally, a vaccination involves the introduction of viruses into the body, against which the body then builds up antibodies. In this case, however, it is a genetic vaccine that introduces parts of the genetic information of the virus into the body. This manipulates the genetic processes in our cells.
The “fastest” vaccine that came on the market was tested for 5 years. And only then you might call a vaccinations safe.
I wouldn’t normally participate in this kind of poll but for sake of being an amicus curiae.
No.
No.
This is the kind of thing that requires someone smarter than me to deal with. There needs to be vaccines available. There needs to be trust that the vaccines are only what they are proclaimed to be. Right now neither of those are evident.
So what I think is that those two things must be established before any mandates are put in place. I could guess as to how to get that done but that wasn’t the poll question and I would only be guessing anyway.
If a mandate is made before those two needs are met - trouble - possibly very very serious trouble.
Don’t do it until you know that it succeeds.
The US FDA doesn’t allow (supposedly) ANY medication into the market until it has proven with substantial evidence that the medication helps and most importantly doesn’t hurt even more.
That strategy should apply to government as well as individual choices. How is government going to ensure that its policies and mandates are going to do more good than harm regardless of what kind of policies they are? They are even divided as to their own goal in everything they do. Someone smart needs to work that out.
How are they going to encourage the citizenry to be accepting the same strategy in not taking any medication until they personally know that what they are doing to themselves is going to do more good than harm? Half of the government doesn’t even want them to use the same strategy. Again someone smarter than me is going to have to work that one out.
What is going on right now is so manipulative there can be no trusting of what anyone is advertising as “the science” or even as “God’s will”. But that doesn’t stop them from trying. The distrust merely grows. So, having failed at doing things right, they resort to just overriding consent and using force - “if they can’t win legitimately they cheat”.
So in light of not having a solution for the real needs, I say don’t act until you/they do. If the threat is too great, make your best guess and hope you didn’t do more harm than good.
I’m sorry, but Karpel Tunnel’s “troll” would like to make a few points…
The most gut wrenching aspect of questions like this revolves for me around children.
It’s one thing to argue that adults ought to be free to choose to be or not to be vaccinated. They are at least able to make a more or less informed choice.
But what about the kids? When should parents be permitted to gamble with their lives as well? When is it reasonable for the state/government to intervene and start mandating behavior here.
Think of those religious fanatics that refuse to take their children to doctors and hospitals even when seriously ill because they put everything in the hands of God.
In other words, if covid-19 were as virulent and readily transmitted as HIV and a vaccine was created for it, how might that alter your view about getting one?
It has always been the case, and no different in this case, that if it can be proven that harm has been done to a child by a person that person is criminally liable. It doesn’t matter if it was done for religious reasons, government policy reasons, or just personal bad actions.
So far, the greater evidence is that children suffer extremely little from the disease and no evidence at all concerning the vaccine yet. And it is not even proposed that children take the vaccine - YET.
And it is a different question than the poll question (not at all surprised coming from you).
Yes, it will take longer for children – washingtonpost.com/health/2 … ine-delay/ – but eventually parents and governments around the globe are going to have to confront state policies aimed at making it mandatory for children to get the vaccine.
On the other hand, who gets to decide when the greater harm is either in vaccinating or not vaccinating children against it?
Is there a frame of mind here that is not embedded in one or another “political prejudice”?
And what if in regard to the next pandemic to come down the pike, children especially were vulnerable? And what if covid-19 were more akin to HIV…and far more able to be transmitted. Would that obligate the government to be more demanding in regard to masks and social distancing and vaccines?
Yeah, sure, make this all about the points that I raise here “derailing the thread”.
My reasons? Many have known about the damage that modern vaccines have been doing for years, so only those that are into suicide will take it and those supporting it, into murder.
Again a change of topic and already addressed in another thread - to you specifically.
How would you ever know? To you no matter what anyone says, you interpret into a bias and then go on and on about something off topic. Apparently you have no capacity to comprehend logic. So what’s the point.
The commies may not make the vaccines mandatory by law but will use corporations to do their dirty work, companies will require vaccines similar with the mask mandates to enter most places. Then the governments cannot be blamed for anyones exclusion from enjoying a normal life.
Yes on the condition that the vaccine is thoroughly tested and proven to work with no long term complications.
In the context in which you’re asking this, the answer is a resounding NO.
Some rushed drug that we hope helps against a new virus, that may turn out to be far worse in the long run (unlikely as that may be) should never be forced on anyone.
But anti-vaxxers that want to risk bringing back the black death because they are too uneducated, I don’t think should be permitted to incubate the next strain of plague to kill the rest of us, nevermind their own kids.
Erm no… what would be the point?
The only risk someone poses to others by being a carrier (in a scenario where the others are successfully vaccinated) is permitting the virus to mutate and become a strain for which there is no vaccine.
THAT risk is not mitigated by any measure shy of quarantine or forcing the vaccine on that person…
If not, they will infect one of the “vaccinated” people in some other venue and then this new strain will be spread by people thinking they are safe, because they got vaccinated.
Since I asked the question, I decided it would read all posts depite any foe categorizing I’ve done.
Everyone who directly answered the questions so far answered NO to both questions. I assume that one participant, possibly two, would answer yes to one or both, but they didn’t directly answer or were off topic.
It’s very interesting, people against mandatory vaccines seems to be a position taken by people of a variety of different political, philosophical, and social viewpoints, it may very well be the only thing in 2020 going into 2021 that a majority of people can actually agree upon. Very interesting.
Keep in mind that destroying the entire US economy (joblessness), culture, and all dissenters is the goal. That includes euthanasia of the old (why do you think Gov Cuomo sent those COVID patients into the elderly care homes and now insists on people staying in their homes where the science says most transmission occurs?).
People not having jobs - for ANY reason - is a part of the intention.
A question to James years ago (I don’t remember which board) was whether unemployment would destabilize a nation. His immediate response -
“If you want to destroy a nation, just create mass unemployment, sit back and watch.”