Covid-19 Mandatory vaccines

Remove this Banner Ad

sorted

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 21, 2016
11,574
14,181
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Oldham, West Ham
Simple question.

Is CFR the only consideration?
No. Maybe get back to me on my OP asking what the rationale for the vaccine mandates are.

If you had to consider other things like long term neurological damage you’d have to change your mind.
Are you proposing vaccine mandates due to long covid?
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Chief

Shill
Dec 1, 1999
101,214
80,148
Gates' Payroll
AFL Club
Carlton
Interesting:



There are few situations where someone can’t have a COVID vaccine for medical reasons. The criteria to receive a permanent medical exemption are very narrow and rarely required.

The only criteria are:

  • anaphylaxis following a previous dose of a COVID vaccine
  • or previous anaphylaxis to any component of a COVID vaccine.
For live vaccines, such the measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) and varicella vaccines, people who are significantly immunocompromised can get a permanent medical exemption. But this isn’t relevant for COVID vaccines because they’re not live vaccines.
 
Last edited:

CM86

Anindilyakwa
Sep 21, 2009
13,734
12,019
AFL Club
St Kilda
The amount of deliberately disseminated disinformation has created a unique situation. The 'anti-vaccine' movement seems to need these requirements put in place, that wouldn't normally be necessary.


So many of the areas are incredibly complicated, multifaceted and highly nuanced. A specialist in one area may not be able to properly understand and explain specialist information from another area. Even though they have clear connection. This is why we have experts, and why we look to them.
Yes, the system sometimes fails, sometimes the majority expert opinion has been wrong. What would you replace it with?

When a single sentence has enough misinformation to require several paragraphs in response, the nuance is gone and it's a serious problem.



Here is some reasons why I mostly support it.

I think it supports the employers/management because it provides them legal protection. It helps every individual business/association/etc work out specific legal frameworks and litigation. And doesn't need to find individual legal advice and frameworks with shareholders, partners, suppliers, retailers etc.

I think it supports workers/employees if their employer/manager is 'anti-vaccine'. They don't have to worry about the power dynamic, or legal positions. They can just point to the Government requirements. There is a clear outline of expectations in the workplace.


The Government/leadership should follow the advice of the majority of the science, research, data, medical expertise and knowledge etc.
 

CM86

Anindilyakwa
Sep 21, 2009
13,734
12,019
AFL Club
St Kilda
The Liberal member for Monash, Russell Broadbent, will not be able travel to his electorate and will be locked out of his ministerial offices as he is not vaccinated.
The other view to that story could be argued that he is making a personal choice, that may reduce or remove his ability to represent his constituents.
I don't think either view is fair.

Parliament’s rules for operating virtually require MPs to use secure video links from their offices, not their homes. Effectively this means that Daniel Andrews has passed laws that prevent an elected Federal member participating in Parliament.
This is, at least, misinformation.
It's a short, powerful looking sentence. But it's fallacious.
Why ignore
1. Any Federal MP sitting virtually, has already reduced their capacity to fully participate.​
2. There have been rules that have been adapted or changed, where reasonable, since the pandemic. This one can continue to change.​
3. There is multiple reasons that a secure video link is required. It makes sense that it would be installed in their electorate office, but doesn't mean it's not possible to install it into certain homes, or to find some other way to connect securely.​
4. The Federal parliament created the strict rules around virtual attendance.​


Additionally, he previously reduced his capacity to participate in certain areas of Government before. When he stood down from "the speaker's panel and his committee chairmanship".
A small part of his reasoning was that he believed Greg Hunt misled him. The implication being that he would now mistrust Greg Hunt.
His very first statement in his list was.
“I’m uncomfortable with mass vaccination of the population, with the vaccine that is, according to Minister Hunt, being trialled across the world.”​



So the story is based on a Facebook post by a Federal MP, explaining his position of mistrust, where he specifically mentions the Federal minister for health, Greg Hunt. And this Federal MP may not be able to participate in Federal Parliament, due to Federal Parliament rules, that could be modified again.

And the takeaway from this, is that "effectively this means that Daniel Andrews has passed laws that prevent an elected Federal member participating in Parliament."

But none of what I've just explained matters to certain people, because it's too much to read, or they will just disagree due to confirmation bias, or someone will throw in a quip that 'justifies' it being disregarded.
Because that sentence is short and looks powerful. While my multiple sentences are boring.
Which is part of why I support the requirements. Because in our current climate, it's seemingly impossible to combat misinformation/disinformation.
 

CM86

Anindilyakwa
Sep 21, 2009
13,734
12,019
AFL Club
St Kilda
I found the the comments from Josh Bornstein interesting. He said it is likely that courts will uphold employer orders compelling employees to be vaccinated. And employers who didn’t ensure their workers were vaccinated could leave themselves open to being sued if, as a result of that failure, people became sick or died.
“Any direction or order from an employer to an employee must be lawful and reasonable in all the circumstances,” Mr Bornstein said.​
“In the context of a pandemic – and in particular Delta variant, which is highly infectious and dangerous – it is likely that courts will uphold employer orders compelling employees to be vaccinated.”​
On the flipside, Mr Bornstein said employers who didn’t ensure their workers were vaccinated could leave themselves open to being sued if, as a result of that failure, people became sick or died.​
Employers have a duty to provide a safe workplace and a failure to take reasonable steps to ensure that safety can result in very extensive legal problems,” he said. - Brisbane Times

I also think his comments are interesting. And they seem clear and reasonable.

Do you find any of it unusual or unreasonable?

Does this imply that employers who compel employees to be vaccinated could leave themselves open to being sued if, as a result of the vaccine, people became sick or died?
You make a compelling point in support of the requirements.

Also, I feel like the comments you keep referring to, explained it.
On the flipside, Mr Bornstein said employers who didn’t ensure their workers were vaccinated could leave themselves open to being sued if, as a result of that failure, people became sick or died.​
Employers have a duty to provide a safe workplace and a failure to take reasonable steps to ensure that safety can result in very extensive legal problems,” he said. - Brisbane Times
So in this case, the employer is following regulations, requirements, the law etc.

I'm struggling to envisage a scenario where the employer could be successfully sued, in your 'hypothetical'. Can you expand on it please?

Also, from the same article.
Associate Professor at the ANU College of Law, Dr Ron Levy

Dr Levy said a court faced with human rights claims, would balance that with the untold social upheaval, economic catastrophe and, most of all, widescale death and morbidity from COVID-19.​
“It is likely that the court will back the Victorian government, either in whole or in part,” Dr Levy said.​
“Courts particularly tend to defer to governments in times of emergency, like this one.” - Brisbane Times

From what I understand, if it all turns out to be an international conspiracy. The employer would still be protected, but the Government could then be sued.



Josh Bornstein seems a bit muddled. The vaccine mandates are State Government measures. But he's talking about employers being liable.

If employers are liable for people getting sick by failing to apply vaccine mandates then they would also be liable for people getting sick by applying vaccine mandates.
How?

What's another scenario where you'd hold your position?
Harnesses, safety goggles?

It's possible that our views on these things are so opposite, that I'm completely missing important context, or what you might feel is base knowledge.
 

sorted

Brownlow Medallist
Aug 21, 2016
11,574
14,181
AFL Club
Geelong
Other Teams
Oldham, West Ham
I’m saying there is more than just deaths to consider.

Passing it on to a more vulnerable person. Health system strain, now and into the future.

And so on.
I'll take that as a no - you don't think vaccines should be mandatory because of the risk of long Covid.

I think there's a case for health and aged care workers to be vaccinated. But look at the list of authorised workers who have to be vaccinated to continue working. It includes marriage celebrants, Federal Parliamentarians, journalists. high-performance sportspersons, miners, forestry workers, farmers.

How does it make sense?
 

Seeds

Hall of Famer
Sep 15, 2007
44,420
40,405
I don't know
AFL Club
Geelong
Under 50 chances of surviving as a healthy person from covid 99.99%

assuming this is true it seems a shame to lose liberty for mandatory vax.

More so if the above FDA fact is correct.

I can see why the french are not impressed
So you want to reduce the average life expectancy of all people just cos you cant be bothered to spend five minutes getting an injection?

the time it takes to get a drivers license is a hell of a lot longer yet they are mandated to drive. is it an unacceptable loss of liberty when society forces you to get a license before you can drive?


i think its a loss of liberty when i have to wear masks and i cant travel without threat of getting a virus thats quite dangerous to older people and causes severe long term illness in some younger people. But the loss of liberty isnt imposed by the government. Its imposed by the unvaccinated.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

bourbons

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 1, 2007
16,531
18,367
Melbourne
AFL Club
Carlton
So the anti mandatory vaxxers on here … are you prepared to open up with no vaccines? Also prepared to have no one take polio, whooping cough, tb, smallpox etc etc? I mean what if everyone thought the same way ..”can’t force me to vax”? Or are you happy to say no and have you and family protected from everyone getting vaxxed?
I guess personally for me the difference between covid vaccine and the others you mention are these
  • Development time - polio, whooping cough etc are all old, completely tested, known and mapped vaccines. Covid vax simply isn't, by definition it can't be with a 12 month or so development time. Long term side effects are guesstimates at this stage. Having said that, on available data I believe they're safe enough, and have been vaxed myself.
  • Societal overreach, if I can put it that way. The kids innoculations are for things that are very serious for their age group, and are required so they can attend school, day care etc. and mix with other kids - all reasonable and fair. But needing a covid vax to attend a pub, restaurant, sporting event or concert? Or go to a supermarket (happening in France)?. Nah, step too far imo.
End of the day I'm a personal choice and personal responsibility kinda guy I guess ie. you do you, get the vaccine if you'd like that additional protection, and the majority will. But it shouldn't be required to participate in day to day society.

As to your specific question of would I be happy to open up with no vaccine? Tough one, probably no last year, probably yes this year. I think its reached a tipping point (in Victoria anyway, can't speak for the rest of the country) where the safety protocols are causing more harm than they're preventing - definitely effecting more people than covid would be likely to anyway. Lucky we do have a vaccine at this point, and are on the path to opening up.
 

Chief

Shill
Dec 1, 1999
101,214
80,148
Gates' Payroll
AFL Club
Carlton
End of the day I'm a personal choice and personal responsibility kinda guy I guess ie. you do you, get the vaccine if you'd like that additional protection, and the majority will. But it shouldn't be required to participate in day to day society.
The response there is whether you think things like drink driving laws are infringing on personal responsibility.

The things we do affect other people.
 

Marcel Proust

"Oohh WADA ooga booga" {Jul 11 2013}
Sep 6, 2018
20,840
30,405
#BigBigSound
AFL Club
Richmond
.
So you want to reduce the average life expectancy of all people just cos you cant be bothered to spend five minutes getting an injection?

the time it takes to get a drivers license is a hell of a lot longer yet they are mandated to drive. is it an unacceptable loss of liberty when society forces you to get a license before you can drive?


i think its a loss of liberty when i have to wear masks and i cant travel without threat of getting a virus thats quite dangerous to older people and causes severe long term illness in some younger people. But the loss of liberty isnt imposed by the government. Its imposed by the unvaccinated.
Iirc Australian chief health officers have said you are wearing masks essentially forever so take it up with them.

Many people die and are sick prior to pandemic - What's different with corona? How many children die every day from preventable causes? No one seems to care about those issues.

My very health coworker (runs 10k for a laugh) was apparently in hospital for a long time after his 2nd vax...

Apparently "a FDA spokesman saying males under 40 have a greater risk with the COVID injections, than getting COVID infection. "

pregnant woman fetus death, via xcovid vax sounds rather unsavory too. Etc.

These are the types of things that concern me not waiting 5 min for a needle.
 
Last edited:

TheGreatBarryB

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 20, 2007
29,479
30,405
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Texans, Astros, Leeds
But needing a covid vax to attend a pub, restaurant, sporting event or concert? Or go to a supermarket (happening in France)?. Nah, step too far imo.
But it shouldn't be required to participate in day to day society.
The more unvaccinated people the more virus that is around. So pubs, restaurants become more dangerous especially to the more vulnerable. Kids have got quite sick from it overseas and of course long covid can impact as well

As to your specific question of would I be happy to open up with no vaccine? Tough one, probably no last year, probably yes this year.
Seriously? How many deaths do you think that’ll create? Judging by other countries tens of thousands. Businesses won’t be operating in that environment anyway.

Your responses seem a little insular and impact on you rather than on others .
 

bourbons

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 1, 2007
16,531
18,367
Melbourne
AFL Club
Carlton
The response there is whether you think things like drink driving laws are infringing on personal responsibility.

The things we do affect other people.
Yeah I do acknowledge that argument, although I'd think drink driving presents a far greater risk to your fellow man than not having a vaccine (assuming everyone who wants it can actually get it, as I said earlier).

In a funny way, I'd probably be more supportive of the mandate were the vaccines an actual marvel of modern science that stopped you from getting or spreading covid (I realise that they're roughly in line with the flu vax for example in terms of effectiveness negating these). But as you can still get and spread it even when vaxxed I'm not sure its a no brainer when things like vaccine passports for restaurants are being considered. Ok, it reduces the chances that you will - how much? Are you 10% less likely to pass it on than someone who is unvaxxed? 5%? Say its 20% - still unsure even then if the trade off for that much regulation of public venues and movement is warranted. And thats before you even factor in the reduction in chance that the other person you're potentially spreading it to is getting coz they have been vaxxed.

One things for sure, glad this is all just personal opinion and I'm not in charge of figuring it out. Anyone who reckons they have all the answers is kidding themselves imo.
 
Last edited:

bourbons

Brownlow Medallist
Mar 1, 2007
16,531
18,367
Melbourne
AFL Club
Carlton
The more unvaccinated people the more virus that is around. So pubs, restaurants become more dangerous especially to the more vulnerable. Kids have got quite sick from it overseas and of course long covid can impact as well
Yep, but how much more? 10%? 20%? Is that worth such regulation on movement and attendance at public venues? Its a balancing act imo. Like I said, if the vaccine was a scientific miracle that gave you a 80 or 90% less chance of passing it on, then yeah mandates become far more palatable.

Some kids have gotten quite sick from it no doubt, very few have died though and they're in the safest age bracket in terms of the stats.

Seriously? How many deaths do you think that’ll create? Judging by other countries tens of thousands. Businesses won’t be operating in that environment anyway.
Yep, all but guaranteed 5 figures, hopefully on the lower end. Its a pandemic. Businesses would have to make their own decision about whether to open in that environment, but I doubt they universally wouldn't be. Pretty sure a lot of the ones who have already gone to the wall this year would have been open given the option, for example.

Is that life cost worth it for a return to a 'normal' society? Again, last year I would have said no, 12 months on and another year into this sh*t I probably say yes.

Your responses seem a little insular and impact on you rather than on others .
Probably, I'm honestly not in the best mental space and haven't been for awhile now. Personally know a few families who are doing even worse, its probably influencing my thoughts somewhat.
 
Last edited:

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad