Poll: Will you take the Covid vaccine? | Hacker News Reader

Poll: Will you take the Covid vaccine?

378 pointsNoRagrets840 comments

Assumption: it is available to everyone at the same time. No wait lines.

(Edited to add Assumption)

View on HN

I voted WILL WAIT simply because the idea of becoming Will Smith in my own "I Am Legend" city is appealing.

Doesn't it scare you more to actually be Will Smith in "I am legend"?

He's alone. All those other people were always hanging out together, chasing stuff, hiding from the sun.

Unfortunately you'll end up stuck in there with mostly anti-vaxxers

I'll take it but only later in the year when it is more widely available.

People at high risk should go first, then people who are super social (or stupid + spreading the plague).

Especially younger people, they need to get pricked. Do you really think they're going to avoid drinking close physical contact in spring? Me neither.

No need to worry about who should go first. They will be rolling it out based on need.

When it's available to you, go get it.

> avoid drinking close physical contact

I’ve gone whole months without drinking close physical contact!

While noble to give to the more acutely affected people first, I think distribution at random makes more sense since that decreases the ability of the virus to grow. I'll let the epidemiologists be my guide however.

It still helps the at risk people to take it asap as you won't be a carrier, doesn't it?

There's no evidence that getting the vaccine doesn't mean you can't still be infected and spread it to others (you just don't get sick). So giving it to super social/stupid people up front may not help, because they can still spread it and probably think it's no big deal anymore because they're vaccinated.

I predict that public employees will wrangle their way to the front of the line, needs be damned. They are very powerful in CA.

needs an edit for the assumption. also, half of the planet is already in Spring

So people that are young that have next to no risk from covid should take a highly experimental vaccine with no longitudinal analysis. Not so great risk analysis there.

> ”then people who are super social (or stupid + spreading the plague)”

Many such people will have antibodies already. As do I. I’ll get the vaccine if it becomes a requirement to travel or whatever, but I see no need for it in the short term if you’re low risk and already had Covid.

> People who are super social (or stupid + spreading the plague)

What if somebody has asymptomatic covid infection? He or she spreads it without intent, you can not blame them.

> I'll take it but only later in the year when it is more widely available.

Same. Just like first generation Apple hardware, even if looks as good as the M1, I'd rather have other people take the plunge before I do.

In about a year, I may. By then, we'll have 2 years worth of data from the test group - good enough!

If I perceive any serious risk, I won't. Being young and with no risk factors, I have little to gain - so the rational move for me is to leech off the group herd immunity effect.

So people, please, do the right thing and get vaccinated!! Protect your parents and your neighbors!!!

It's my civic duty to take it as soon as it's offered to me, even if there's some minuscule chance that there will be an averse side effect.

That said, I'll likely be towards the end of the line given my health and occupation.

I completely agree. The economy will recover when the pandemic ends, and I am going to contribute to the end of the pandemic in any way I can. Then we can end the massive business closures and massive eviction crisis that we're currently seeing.

Getting the virus under control is how we help the economy. It's not a trade-off between the two, it's both or neither.

I believe it is your civic duty to not go around infecting people. There is more than one way to achieve that.

Why is it your civic duty? What will you having this vaccine do for anybody but yourself?

It's my civic duty not to, because people are trying to make it mandatory and we have to set a precedent that mandating it is unacceptable.

I honestly think I would have said otherwise a year ago. But after seeing the mishandling of COVID-19, I no longer have faith in my countries ability to use emergency powers scientifically.

I'm surprised to see such a high percentage of "NO" responses. I'm genuinely curious to understand why

Pregnant women or women who are planning on becoming pregnant should not have it according to UK government guidelines. That’s a pretty good reason to click NO.

Right now its 310 YES to 39 NO. From what I've been reading in the (fake?) news, surveys and polls in the USA, I'm actually surprised to see so many yeses.

maybe they're environmentalists? seems like a deadly virus is good for global warming and habitat extinction.

any other reasons?

Edit: before you downvote, these are reasons I’ve read/heard. They do not represent my own views.

1. This is an mRNA vaccine and is the first of it's kind to be widely offered. This appears to be different than the rest of the vaccines out there for other illnesses.

2. There isn't a perceived benefit for many people: the vast majority of people won't get sick or be impacted in any way.

3. It apparently doesn't stop people from getting or becoming transmissions vectors. So, if you get the vaccine and it makes you less sick, then you may take "riskier" actions than if you were to get it and actually have some symptoms. (IOW, why take it?)

4. Some people can't take it due to allergy concerns?

This is just what I've found in my online research.

Do these vaccines prevent a person from spreading the virus? I've heard a number of times that these will prevent the person who got the vaccine from getting sick, but that it won't prevent them from spreading the disease. If that is the case then I could understand why a young healthy person would not want the vaccine as the risk to them from covid is extremely low.

Reasons I’ve heard:

- The rushed nature of the vaccines. “Fastest approved vaccine” is not re-assuring if you don’t understand what trade was made for that accelerated timeline.

- “I’ll just stay isolated until it dies off”

- “I don’t trust western medicine”

- “I don’t trust the FDA or big pharma”

- “I don’t care if I get covid . People at risk can take the vaccine”

Don’t forget how many people don’t even take the flu shot.

From what I'm able to gather, a COVID infection produces robust immunity in most people, which is expected to last several years.

Having recovered completely from such an infection, I should be fine without it, and vaccines generally don't feel great and are not, in fact, without risk.

I think vaccines are a wonderful technology, to be clear. I'll get one for COVID only if it's standing between me and, say, getting on an airplane or entering a foreign country, which, let's be real: it probably will. States see like a state, after all; you can't just be immune to infection, you have to be legibly immune.

Like many others (from reading the sister comments) I voted "NO" because I already had Covid-19, not because I don't trust the vaccination or vaccinations in general.

I've had Covid-19. As far as I know we still don't know if having it leads to immunity but wouldn't having it and recovering be "better" than a vaccine? If so, why get a vaccine for something you are immune to?

I elected "NO" because I have already have had COVID-19 and verified antibodies, and an mRNA vaccine is unlikely to provide any additional level of protection. I believe this should have been a separate option.

There are barely 80 votes at the moment of writing this comment, of which barely 10 are a "NO", so it's a bit early for "high percentage". (Edit: Now it's 73/(798 + 279 + 73), less than 7%, so the point stands.) But I'm a "NO", FWIW. And while I'm not surprised by the "high percentage" of "YES" votes because of HN demographics, I do not approve. I mean, I don't really care what other people do with their lives, but this shouldn't be expected to be the default choice.

For the record, vaccines are not a controversial topic in my country like they seem to be in the USA. Kids are vaccinated at school, I received numerous vaccines during my life, some of them totally optional and quite expensive, which I paid for anyway, because it felt like a safer way to be. And of course I do not think vaccines are an evil plan of Bill Gates to... I'm not even sure what the crazy conspiracy theory about that is supposed to be, but I'm pretty sure there is some.

But I am a crazy conspiracy theorist in a sense that I firmly believe that COVID-19 is hugely overhyped. Of course, I'm scared and ashamed of saying that, because nowadays this seems to be a stronger version of saying "Hitler did nothing wrong", but you are asking about "why no", so here we are.

Basically, it's a trade off between reasons to do it and reasons not to (as always).

Is there a reason to avoid doing it? Well, yes. Basically, expectation that everyone should do it is that reason: the topic is insanely hot, and it's never a good thing. This is a huge business opportunity for every pharmaceutical company that gets to push their vaccine right now, and this is some hastily cooked shit you expect me to take. Some of these vaccines are quite a novelty, which is not a bad thing on its own, but this is unlike most vaccines I have ever taken, which are basically decades old and literally millions of people have taken them before me. Maybe it's totally safe, maybe it isn't. No couple-months-long trial will ever answer that.

Is there a reason to take it? Well, sure. Like there is a reason to take a flu vaccine. Which I don't do, because there are new mutations every year, and there are countless more versions of "common cold". Yes, people die of that, and it's never a pleasant experience, and I live in a cold climate, where this is a very common seasonal thing, but it's just how things are. It's ok. And I'm not going to elaborate on all "Hitler did nothing wrong" thing, because what I've said so far is more than enough to trigger someone, but, well, I know people that had been sick with COVID-19. I contacted them in person when they were already sick, and it just so happens that neither of us was wearing any mask. I wasn't really a responsible citizen all the time. It doesn't seem that the stakes are much higher than with a flu. For some of people it seemed to be more like a really light version of a common cold.

So there's a little of "no" vs a little of "yes" and it just so happens that "no" overweights quite confidently.

Maybe it is fair to say that I should've voted "I'll wail", because this "no" isn't final. But then no "yes" is final either, anything can happen, the last year should've taught us that if anything. And I don't have any specific date I have to wait for. The point is, currently I'm not going to do that, and I hope it stays this way.

I know it's not the answer you're hoping for, but some people have medical issues which make taking any kind of vaccine too dangerous.

I feel reasonably confident my overall health is good enough that if I got COVID it would be OK.

The vaccine, while probably fine, seems like more of a wildcard to me. It seems like a low-probability lottery ticket to bad news, whereas COVID seems like a lower-probability lottery ticket to bad news.

(Of course, the government may force the issue. I hope not, though. My body, my choice and all that.)

The no response isn't that much higher than the Lizardman constant.

https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/04/12/noisy-poll-results-and...

Reckless disregard for normal bioethics is likely what created and released novel COVID19 in the first place, and the "fast-tracked" vaccine is the same thing again. Just get a tan instead.

I voted NO and here's my reasons: I believe there's enough science to support my expectation that if/when I get covid it will be mild to no symptoms case - my body can take care of it without a vaccine. And for the vaccine - so far I don't like the odds - reportedly 0.6% of population have allergic reaction to it. I'm not a big fan of auto-immune issues so I'll take my chances elsewhere.

Young and healthy, don't really care to get covid as risk is very low. But the vaccine is new we never know what we could discover about its effect in 10 years

From a community perspective, no, because AFAIK no vaccine confers sterilising immunity, so my being vaccinated isn't likely to help reduce transmission. I will be very happy to see human studies that prove otherwise. It's be shown that AZD1222-vaccinated macaques still spread virus, with upper respiratory viral loads the same as controls.

From a personal perspective, no, because my age-based health risk, and my local community transmission rates approach zero, so vaccination has negligible upside at this point in time and space for me.

I might see data that could change either perspective and my willingness to be vaccinated. Also if I need to travel internationally I may be willing or forced to do so.

I’m no anti-vaxxer, but the current situation feels like a scam to me. “Hurry, take this vaccine, save lives!” I’m being asked to suspend critical thinking and accept a chemical into my body under duress and time constraints. “Take it now, this is your time! It’s finally available to you. Don’t you want to resume your normal life?” I’d rather wait and see, even if waiting carries a small, known amount of infection risk. That’s much better than the unknown risk of taking a brand new vaccine in hurry. “While supplies last!”

I will take it after a year or two. The US did a great job at politicizing the virus such that I don't really trust that pharma companies actually did their due diligence with regard to testing and safety measures. I accept that doctors and scientists will take it under the guise of them "knowing it's safe", and I accept that lots of people will say "If they're doing it, you should too", but I think this strategy just generally ignores common sense. Doctors use and prescribe drugs all the time with unintended adverse side effects, the difference here is that those side effects are known and well studied. A vaccine that showed up to save the world (and also start a culture war in some countries)? I do not accept that the powers at be have verified this drug's safety.

I think that this vaccine is a choice, and once it's readily available it is still a choice. If you choose not to get it, you are accepting the possibility that you might get COVID and die. Once the vaccine becomes available to my age group and health demographic, the people that actually need it will have been given the option to make their choice as well.

Well, dunno if I should explain my reasoning but here goes...

For the same reason I never got a rabies vaccine until having to work in close proximity with rabid animals. Up until that point, my chances of dying from rabies were pretty slim to none.

Likewise, my chances of severe complications, death, or even experiencing any symptoms at all are slim to none. The at risk people around me will be likely vaccinated, so i'm not putting them at risk.

Now, the rabies vaccine came with some known risk, a bit higher than others, hence why it's only given to people who request it or need it.

This covid vaccine is brand new, rushed, the manufacturers are legally exempt from liability for damages the vaccines cause most places in the world and it's a mostly new technology not really tested or used before.

There are potential side effects, these side effects are potentially long term and severely debilitating and despite being a low risk, it's still a higher risk for me than experiencing anything terrible from covid.

So, why put myself at some unknown risk from some unknown thing over something that, is more than likely not, going to cause me severe problems?

There are a lot of half-wits, especially in tech, who think reflexive contrarianism is a sure sign of intelligence and wisdom.

A series of questions/answers I've had with doctors and nurses and quite a few intelligent and educated people. (PhD's, MD's and RN's included)

Q: Does all medicine go through a rigorous efficacy testing that is certified by the FDA?

A: Yes.

Q: Do vaccines?

A: No.

Q: Why?

A: It would be unethical.

This is surprising to people who don't know how vaccines are made.

edit: removed hyperbole

I will get it, but once higher risk individuals have gotten their needs. I'm healthy, not immunocompromised, and WFH by myself. There won't be enough to go around at first, and others like front-line-workers, elder, and at-risk-patients need it before I do.

I can continue to keep the travel to zero, and only leave home for the bare needs until then. I consider it my civic duty.

I'll not going to rush out and get one. I have no interest in being a beta tester for something like this. The stories of how bad the test kits were is enough to keep me away from v1. Fortunately I'm not in a high risk group and I'm not forced into a situation where I have little choice.

I have a peanut allergy so I will likely wait based on the allergic reaction news.

I was onboard being first in line until the allergy reaction news. I have a severe allergy so I think that means I'm waiting as well.

That's only the AZ/Oxford vaccine right? Pfizer hasn't issued a warning.

Not only yes, but fuck yes.

We could have knocked this way down by wearing masks. As a long distance truck driver I see few people wearing masks, mostly counter workers who want to keep their jobs. A few truckers who want to get into the store, a few more "civilians." I see a lot of freedom fighters daring anyone to say something to them.

California is about the best I've seen.

I always wear a mask except when I'm in the truck, regardless of signs, and regardless of whatever a state's rules are at the moment.

Since we're not going to wear masks, the vaccine is our only hope.

I want to prevent my infection, for myself obviously, but equally so that I don't spread to anyone.

If a problem is discovered ... I'm old, and I've lived long enough. I'd be happy to contribute that bit of data.

I dont think there is room for ambiguity here. When the government calls you for your shot are you going to say: ill do what you ask of me? Or are you going to say: nah thanks/ Just let me wait a bit and then maybe? The choice in this case is pretty binary. You dont get to have your cake and eat it too.

With it being a seasonal jab you probably can :/

Missing choice:

4. I overcame COVID already

Otherwise those people will probably answer NO, which can lead to poor interpretations.

That option is PHI though and would itself receive skewed results because of that.

I’ll take it because I don’t have much other choice. I know my current employer is going to be asking me to fly to 10+ cities this year because I’m “essential” and I don’t want to risk being asymptomatic and spreading it to my less-than-healthy parents.

I'll wait until I see no adverse effects in 6-12 months, and I'll be damned if I let someone inject it into me before that!!

TIL we can create polls on HN

Yeah what is this magic?

By the time they would let me get it, it'll be the GOTY version with all the release day bugs patched.

Those who think the economy will recover should at least read this book

https://www.amazon.com/Crisis-capital-effectiveness-useless-...

Could you expand some, for the rest of us who didn’t read the book and can’t draw any conclusions based on your statement and the summary on the amazon page?

For some reason I get a blank screen on HN polls on my normal Chrome configuration, javascript error trace:

  Uncaught TypeError: Cannot read property 'querySelector' of null
    at HNComments.markupToNodeList (hn.js:397)
    at HNComments.apply (hn.js:666)
    at Object.doAfterCommentsLoad (hn.js:1265)
    at Object.loadMoreLink (hn.js:1243)
    at Object.doCommentsList (hn.js:1070)
    at Object.init (hn.js:797)
    at hn.js:1913

Works in Incognito, so must somehow be related to one of my extensions; but it's not uBlock Origin, which would normally be my first suspicion. Anyone else have this problem?

You can slowly enable some extensions in Incognito until it happens again.

Will definitely take it considering my age.

But technically I am already immune for a few months at least as I managed to contract it a few weeks ago. Fortunately me and the wife did not end up in hospital but it was not a pleasant experience.

I'll take it, but the headline "White House orders FDA chief to authorize Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine Friday or submit his resignation" in WaPo is absolutely horrifying.

What the hell were they thinking. There's already enough vaccine hesitancy before people found out that this was rammed through under political pressure. They're going to (continue to) get people killed.

Fairly odd view to take given that other modern, western countries have already approved it...

I will wait a few months to see if there are any immediate obvious side effects. I will of course continue to quarantine at home in the mean time to an extreme degree, as I have done since March

How many of the yes voters took the seasonal flu shot? Genuinely asking

I didn't because it's really hard to get it in my country this year. It's been prioritized for those highly at risk. At this point I'm likely not going to bother given how difficult it is.

Usually I do take it fwiw.

I did.

The harder part was getting elderly relatives the seasonal flu shot safely. Going to the doctors is unsafe right now if they have no specific appointment otherwise.

Luckily they did a "drive through" flu-shot event, and we got it for them that way. Essentially just stick your arm out the window, jab, and go.

It's not recommended for me in my country (Germany) to take the seasonal flu shot, because I'm not over 60. I suppose it might be similar in other countries.

I voted yes. I get a flu jab every year, including this year.

I voted yes and got my flu shot this year.

Voted yes, get the flu shot annually.

This is a great question, and I wouldn't be surprised if the answer was quite low. Not because people are against it, but because people don't make the effort to get it. This will be a big hurdle for the covid vaccine as well I think.

A quick Google search tells me that in the US, 33.9%–56.3% of adults get the seasonal flu shot (children are higher at 46.0%–81.1%).

The assumption is a pretty important aspect. Everyone agrees healthcare workers + a few other groups should be among the first to benefit from covid immunity.

But that's what, 5-10% of the population? There will be waiting lines for the other 50-70% of the population needed for herd immunity.

I hope to see us all act in a civil way, waiting our turn and being kind to each other during those times. I will take it when without asking for any special treatment (neither to be inoculated sooner, nor later).

No.

Already had covid, was dizzy for like a day or two and breathing was a little tougher than normal. Doubt I could get sick again or that it would be much of an inconvenience if I did.

There are different strains of COVID-19 with different effects.

Unfortunately my vaccine choice is somewhat limited by medication I'm on, and therefore I may have to wait for the right type of vaccine.

This is why it's important that everyone who can take it does take it, because there's a percentage of the population who can't, and we are only protected when the community reaches some level of heard immunity.

If you're able to take it please do.

This is an important and under-considered factor when people are deciding about getting vaccinated. Other groups of people who can't currently get vaccinated, at least in my country, include children and pregnant women. They all deserve protection.

I wish you safety and good health until a suitable vaccine becomes available to you.

I had Corona, it’s quite unclear what I should do.

Is there a mathematically optimal means for distribution? (eg, 2 persons in every household or somehow best spreading out to achieve the benefits of herd immunity). I'm not in the most vulnerable group, so I'm okay with waiting. But I wonder if targeting 'likely vectors' would be most effective. Administer in airports for anyone incoming?

Yes, definitely as soon as I'm able. I won't be in the first batch since I'm not in the medical field. I think the majority of issues will be worked out by that point. I don't plan to change my behavior much until we reach herd immunity, but it will be nice not to have to worry as much about getting the disease.

I voted "yes," but in practical terms, "yes" and "I will wait" are one and the same thing.

Will be actively doing testing, and will likely be among the first wave of "guinea pigs". Still going to take it, unless science says otherwise at that moment. There's a lot to be said for taking this more seriously than the current WFH group on HN (which seems to be quite a large one).

Interesting- the options in HN polls are listed in random order. You can tell by refreshing the page.

Yes, but...

I live in an Eastern European country where this is unfortunately not a purely medical, but partly a political question as well. The pandemic handling our government has implemented is very untransparent.

They made it very unclear which vaccine they ordered from. There were some statements that indicated the Russian one. I would gladly take any of the "Western" vaccines, but I do not really trust that the Russian or the Chinese ones work at all. I would rather choose medicine based on science, not politics.

We have a website where we can pre-apply for vaccination by filling a form with personal information (gov id, social security number etc). Nobody knows what the purpose of this registration is, because supposedly we already have a vaccination plan that would allow anyone to be vaccinated. A few days ago it turned out that the data entered to this website is handled by a shady company that supplied software for the last election and has close ties to the governing party.

The government has already been caught lying about many covid-realted issues, if my choices are "blindly doing what they tell" or not doing anything, then a "no" answer might be the lesser bad choice.

Remember, for many of the people on here, you are taking this for others, not yourself.

I would urge my parents to continue quarantining and take it once most other people have taken it without side-effects. I don't see why I would take it as I'm young and I've probably already been exposed at this point.

But I'll be last in line, white-collar work-at-home, privileged person that i am.

and to be clear, that's fine with me.

Will have to wait 7 months or more because of my age (30s). So I will wait

Yes - all of my grandparents are immunocompromised so I want to be very careful around them. Not to mention it will probably be a requirement on college campuses once it becomes generally available.

TIL u can do surveys on HN

The how is left as an exercise to the reader^W hacker

This is the first poll I took part in HN. How does one get to do one?

As soon as possible. I've got a bicuspid heart valve, and while its in good shape, I really want to stop having to worry about suddenly needing to replace it.

We have officially entered the age of distrust.

Immediately. And recently begun idly wondering if people are going to be jumping the queue. (and how they might do so...)

Highly disagree and you should stop pushing that narrative.

It is your basic human right to decide what happens with your body. And I can not blame people to reject the current vaccine situation.

Don't push the shaming narrative, it is pathetic.

I WILL WAIT for Months, just to make sure that it will work 100% to others. I am not taking that risk.

that depends, YES, if I need to travel a lot in the near future, or I WILL WAIT if I don't need to travel much.

If you voted YES and were able to choose among the available (Western) vaccines, BioNTech/Pfizer, Moderna or Oxford/AstraZeneca, which one would you take? Does it matter for you?

Why did you specify western?

I don’t want to have to decide. So, I’ll get tested and hope that I’ve unwittingly already had it.

I'm a little cautious about this mRNA vaccine. Novavax though looks awesome, it produces some insane amount of anitbodies and uses a very well established vaccine tech.

I wonder if the distribution will reach permanent residents as well at the same time as citizens.

Beware multiple options are possible

If it's a condition for international travel, which in some way it likely will be, then anyone wanting to travel won't really have a choice. Given that, I'll be getting it. Australia is in a bit of a weird position in that I have no idea what level of virus circulating we'll tolerate even post vaccine though, and I must admit it's concerning that we might reduce deaths by 99% with the vaccine but still not tolerate any infections.

Given a limited supply of vaccine and the order it will be administered, I don't understand how airlines can entertain this policy.

The problem with this question is that there are likely to be multiple vaccines. Each will have its quirks.

The first round of vaccines will require two doses a few weeks apart. Each one of those requires a visit. Failure to get the second shot will likely lead to severely reduced efficacy.

The first two vaccines likely to be available in the US will be mRNA vaccines. They are based on an entirely new platform that's never been deployed at scale. That's going to lead to some surprises - possibly good but maybe not so good.

Later vaccines will be more traditional such as the adenovirus-based vaccine being developed by J&J.

Numerically, we're likely to see severe reactions or even death in hundreds or thousands of cases at least. The clinical trials are being run on tens of thousands of patients only, and can only pick up so many reactions. As hundreds of millions get vaccinated, we'll see the full range of effects, some of which could be serious even with the safest vaccines. It's important to keep this in perspective as the news of incidents starts to come out.

I sometimes hear the statement "I'm waiting until it's proven safe." If that's you, you might want to ask yourself what evidence you'll need to know the vaccine is safe.

I was a vaccine trial participant and got injected 6 months ago. I'm still alive. AMA.

Did you do an antibody test after to see if you got the placebo or the real thing?

Do you know if you got the real thing?

Have you felt kinda lousy/lethargic/sickly since then, more so than usual?

Are you a zombie?

Pfizer? Side-effects?

Did you ever find out if you were given the real vaccines or the placebo?

I totally forgot polls existed on HN. Wow.

Edit: It’s amazing what you forget after 10 years on a website.

Yes because I want to travel and hang out with people and eat in restaurants and ...

I am going to wait. I am concerned about the amount of time and the record of the companies that have created the vaccine.

I work remotely and live on my own, so my exposure to other people most of the time is pretty minimal and I am convinced anyway I may have had it already (I had some sort of illness in April which included a sore throat) though I would have no way of knowing unless I have a anti-body screening.

Wow, I assumed there were no longer polls on HN because I haven’t seen one in years

I will take it as soon as possible.

I don't have allergic reactions.

The risk of the vaccine on 50k people has proven safer than a random sample of 50k people exposed to Covid-19.

FYI this just came out today:

White House chief of staff told FDA chief vaccine must be authorized Friday or he needs to resign

https://www.cnn.com/2020/12/11/politics/white-house-fda-chie...

"I will wait" and "No" are really the same answer.

I will move into the 65 and over cohort in a week. Can't wait.

More than a Third of Adult Americans Are Unwilling or Unsure about Taking a COVID-19 Vaccine

https://greenwaldresearch.com/more-than-a-third-of-adult-ame...

Those who voted no, why?

It's funny to me there is a dead comment answering you question. Wish I could unflag it. EDIT: Found out how to. Why flag a comment that's answering a question?

I am worried about potential long term risks of the vaccine. We didn't know COVID could have long term side effects until well into the pandemic. It's a tough choice to make, what if the vaccines cause long term problems? What if I don't take the vaccine and get COVID and develop long term problems...

It's hard to trust pharma companies. I lost a lot of people to overprescribed opioids and that shook my trust in the healthcare industry.

I don't at all miss the "life" precovid, and my job doesn't require me to be in office or travel. My family is closer nowadays than before. So I'm not chomping at the bit to get the vaccine.

I'm curious to hear people's rationales for 2) and 3).

I voted to wait. It's because I'm in an age and fitness bracket where I'm unlikely to be in serious danger from becoming infected, and a lifestyle bracket where I'm unlikely to be infected at all. I expect supply will be limited at first, so someone staring down a lot more risk than I am should get it.

Waiting:

- I'm young & healthy and want to wait until people who are more vulnerable than me have gotten theirs.

- I wouldn't ever run .0 releases in prod. I don't have a pressing need for the vaccine and can afford to see if there are any unexpected side-effects or complications with other diseases and conditions that don't show until its given to a larger population.

- I am currently very sick and so receiving any vaccine would be dangerous for me.

- I've already gotten COVID so I should be the last person in line.

Never:

- I already know that I'm allergic to something in the vaccine.

- I have a weakened or compromised immune system and can't take most vaccines and my doctor says this is no exception.

- (I don't know if this one is true) I've already gotten COVID so I don't need the vaccine.

I'm not sure if this is the dogfood version or not.

I already had it. No need to get vaccinated for something I've already had where the current research is indicating that immunity is either permanent or very long-lasting.

Ignoring "I'm in a low risk group that won't get it for months", which is true, the vaccine available here has storage requirements meaning it's only given at a number of central locations. Travel + potential for lining up for hours == no for me.

When it's a 10/15 minute job at a local pharmacy like the normal winter flu jab then by all means I'll get it.

3) since I'm not sure about quality of vaccine available in my country. Will wait until more statistics will be gathered for it, or until other types of vaccines will become available for purchase.

Yes, hopefully the mRNA version! Excited to try new technology.

The last thing we should want in our bodies is "new technology".

This is not a gadget for you to be excited about. This is not a Captain America or Spider-man origin story. This is someone writing code in most complex language you can think of and testing it in production without any way to do a roll-back.

I will wait because I don't fully trust it yet.

Sort of a biased audience to begin with though, no?

I have 4 family members in trials (2 Moderna, 2 Pfizer). I would volunteer for challenge trials if given the opportunity. I got the swine flu vaccine in 2010ish.

I would take basically any covid vaccine in a heartbeat. Personally, I see it as a moral obligation, since it is a necessary step to end the pandemic, and avoid impacting those that cannot take any of the vaccines.

Historically, vaccine side effect profiles are at most as bad as just getting the disease itself. There are early examples of contaminated vaccines (polio with SV40 in the 50s), but we’ve learned a lot about vaccine production since then.

I don’t expect to have the chance until ~July or later.

People voting for NO, whats your main point?

Maybe they already had COVID-19, are in the high allergy group, are under-18, or hit one of the other medical exclusions (e.g. HIV, pregnant/trying, auto-immune disease, etc).

There are legitimate "No" votes just on purely medical grounds. I voted Yes though.

One reason I've seen is that the companies behind the vaccine have not actually disclosed how the mRNA gets inside the cell. They have said its some type of nanoparticle lipid mixture that is able to get inside your cells, but they haven't disclosed publicly or to the review panels what it actually is or how its made, since its proprietary tech. [0] Back in 2017, Moderna was taking a similar approach, wrapping the mRNA in lipid nanoparticles, but found that it had safety issues, and never made it to human trials. [1] Hopefully they have fixed their problems, but nothing I've seen has outright proven that its safe over the long term.

Personally, I can kind of understand this reasoning, I would prefer to know exactly what is going into my body and how its made, and that information should absolutely be made open. Something I also wonder is that moderna had a bunch of mRNA vaccines set to go to human trials, and I wonder where they went. [2]

[0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7553041/

[1] https://www.statnews.com/2017/01/10/moderna-trouble-mrna/

[2] https://www.biospace.com/article/why-secretive-5-billion-bio...

Please, by all means, wait.

I would love to move up in line.

Yes, but I won't be an early adopter.

Yes. Which and when? Very much TBD.

The demographics data behind current polling are interesting: https://i.imgur.com/nu1ZfE0.png

Younger people are much less likely to take the vaccine than are older people. People under 45 years old are evenly split between wanting the vaccine and not wanting it. Black respondents are also much less likely to report willingness to the vaccine, perhaps reflecting historic distrust of the medical system.

Question—have there historically been any comparable vaccines whose problems have become apparent long after the shot (> 6 months) while having seemed fine before that?

Comparable, I don't know. But during the swine flue influenza, the Swedish government rolled out a large vaccination campaign, encouraging everyone to get vaccinated. Unfortunately, it turned out that children in a certain age could get chronic narcolepsy from the vaccine Pandemrix. About 230 children have been reported suspected to get this side effect from the vaccine.

We’re about to get 10 million data points.

To me it doesn’t look like they have a lot of data yet.

Don’t these studies typically need to go for much longer?

The Pfizer study:

43,448 patients ages 16 and up.

19,000 vaccinated patients

170 people caught the Coronavirus

Of the sick people:

- 162 received a placebo

- 8 received the vaccine

They typically need to go for much longer for two reasons:

1. You normally don't expose so many people to an untested medicine, so trials tend to be smaller than this. In this case there was no shortage of volunteers, and the larger the trial the faster it can reach a certain level of confidence in a result.

2. Normally, with vaccines, you need to wait a very long time for enough people to contract the disease and measure how effective it actually is. In this case, there are so many people infected in the general population, that reaching the required number of participants infected happened much faster than usual. In fact, when the trial was planned in the spring, it was expected that it wouldn't reach its required 164 infected participants until sometime in late summer 2021. The reason this happened so quick is that the number of infections in the general population exploded, and so the required data was available much earlier.

1. I stay in Australia where the prevalence of Covid-19 is really really low however my parents stay in India and if either of us were to visit each other, I'd prefer all of us vaccinated and even then we'll not be socialising with the extended family. Reason being that the vaccines so far have proven to be effective in preventing disease if someone is infected but no proof yet on whether they prevent transmission/infection as well

Apart from handling the pandemic in the worst way possible, my country (Sweden) also had the misfortune of being one of the few countries mass-vaccinating against swine flu. This was completely unnecessary and resulted in hundreds of people getting narcolepsy. Even though this was an isolated case of a bad vaccine (Pandemrix) it affected the public opinion a lot, so I'm worried that people will be afraid to take the vaccine now.

You might not know, but that’s been discredited since. The vaccine didn’t cause narcolepsy.

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/concerns-history.... and https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/history/narcoleps...

It'll be months before it's available to the general public, at which point any quirks should have been discovered and I'll feel comfortable taking it.

One exception: I read that the Pfizer vaccine can cause problems for people with severe allergies. I have a severe nut allergy, so it's possible I fall into that camp. Still, there are other vaccines on the way and we should know more as they all roll out to frontline workers.

Easy - I will take it as soon as it becomes available.

But that's a trick answer. I live in the antipodes. They seem putting the covid vaccines are going the same validation process they put every vaccine through, and that takes time. So an antipode YES is about the same as a USA I WILL WAIT, but with a big implied dose of I trust my government to get it right thrown in.

Gawd, I feel so smug.

Interesting to see the HN crowd poll more likely to take the vaccine (~85% at the time of this comment) compared to Americans polling at 60%. https://www.statnews.com/pharmalot/2020/11/10/harris-poll-co...

I am not American.

Other than helping yourself and others being vaccinated also means you don't get hit by the full force of a virus. Not just covid but the damage done by any virus is lessened after being vaccinated. Even if you do happen to get infected even after being vaccinated (which is still possible). A full strength virus from the wild versus being infected after being vaccinated is quite different.

Yes, but I'm in a pretty isolated context currently so if that continues I might delay it not because I don't trust the vaccine but because it just wouldn't make sense (EDIT: be worth the hassle for anyone and consume a by the beginning limited resource). (But then there is a good chance the context changed when vaccines are available for the general public in Germany ;-) )

I plan on taking it, but I would be lying if I said I weren't a bit anxious about taking it given it's the first vaccine of its kind.

(reads news)

"The F.D.A. accelerates its timeline to authorize the Pfizer vaccine to Friday evening after a threat from Trump's chief of staff: The White House told the F.D.A chief he should start working on his next job if he didn't get the vaccine authorization done Friday, an official said." -- NYTimes

... I think I will select, "I WILL WAIT"

The FDA doesn't actually approve drugs, it has an independent group of scientists/professors that approve them.

How do you make an HN poll?

ive had SARS-1 back in 2003 it wasnt fun. ive had SARS-2 it was like absolutely nothing and was confusing the lab because i tested positive for the SARS-2 covid virus but had antibodies to it. i am now a donor of plasma for antibody infusions, and i expose myself to the virus everytime i can and have not tested positive for the virus.

you need 2 shots due to the way the virus interacts with the immune system on first time ever exposure. the 2nd shot actually sets you up for lasting immunity so it is CRITICAL, to get that second dose, or, _not recommended_, but a second exposure to the live virus.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Priming_(immunology)

long and short of it is, it would be a waste of resources for me to be vaccinated, it wouldnt do me any good and my body will no longer allow the virus to incubate.

Yes, as soon as possible.

Here is where risk analysis come in. Lower chance of vaccine rare side effect short term vs long term and vs getting Covid in those periods, which also has its own set of less rare side effects.

The best bet is get it the fist chance you are offered it as most people won’t get it right away and you will already see most of the effects.

I answered No because I already had it, so I may be n/a? But if they still want me to take the vaccine, i will.

The recommendation is to get vaccinated even if you had it.

<<3>>

However, this will likely be taken care of for me, because I'm 1) not an essential healthcare worker, 2) not a senior citizen and 3) live in a large urban area. Those people will get the vaccine first, and in mid-june (or later) based on the fallout of the vaccine if things seem normal I'll get it.

In the best case, supply constraints nicely follow the change in risk/reward this way. Then by the time you are eligible, the risk profile looks right...

Yeah, I would assume the majority of the people answering 3 would probably be required to wait anyway.

I'm 31 but Type 1 diabetic so I'll be interested to see how early I can get it. The main risk factor for COVID seems to be Type 2, but with how much Type 1 can ruin just about every aspect of your health, I wonder if I'll be able to get in line sooner. If I can, I will.

That said, something like ~50% of Americans said they won't get the vaccine (we'll see what really happens when folks' doctors say it's ready and they should get it) so maybe nonessential non-senior citizens might be able to get it faster than expected

Which one? By the time non-high risk groups get vaccinated there will be more versions available based on more traditional platforms. I would prefer a more traditional one than a highly experimental one like the mRNA ones.

I guess we will know more about the mRNA ones soon as the British has started large scale vaccinations.

The process has been too rushed and now the white house is interfering with the approval process. If the vaccine is not safe, then administering it to everyone at once could be as bad or worse than COVID. I'll be looking to the CDCs/FDAs of other countries because ours is tainted at this point.

Why don't we just give it to the old and sick people? Why would everyone take it?

Because I'm not a front-line worker, or obese/overweight, or in a nursing home, I will have to wait anyway. While I certainly believe in vaccines, I don't know if I'd want to be the very first anyway. Let other people get experience with it for a couple of months first.

I’ll take it and I’ve already had and recovered from COVID. We know virtually nothing about the viruses long-term effects. Anecdotally there’s quite a bit to be fearful of.

At least with the Pfizer vaccine there were only 2 in 10,000, reported to have serious side effects. Much better odds.

Depends on what other people do. If no one takes it I’ll take it. If everyone takes it I won’t take it. We need 50-80% vaccination rate overall. So, if I take the values of this survey which is at 70% vaccination rate at the moment, I would take it to be on the safe side.

Not sure. I had COVID recently, so according to the current research I should be good for a few months at least. I guess will see that science says then and act accordingly. In any case I'd be at the end of the line for people who need to be vaccinated.

If the authorities in my state encourage my population (20s, male, low BMI) to take the vaccine, I’ll take the vaccine.

It’s a risk, sure. But the older people have borne the risk so far. I can’t speak for other young people but I feel personal responsibility to take it ASAP.

Which of the several vaccines?

Edit: original order was broken so removed number.

Edit2: seriously, which vaccine are you trying to poll for? Before most of us have a chance at whichever jab you’re talking about, there will be several vaccines available to most HN readers.

Yep definitely. I've already had the rona, and while it didn't do anything severe to me, this madness with governments killing small business needs to end. It looks save and the promise of mrna vaccines is quite extraordinary.

As late as possible. I'm perfectly capable of continuing this quarantine and man others are not. Plus I'm happy to wait until I'm satisfied that the vaccine my family and I get is maximally effective.

I'll take it, but still mostly isolate for a while. My infant son is likely to get a vaccine a year later in the best scenario, and I'm not about to expose him to this thing if at all possible.

"EVENTUALLY" should be an option. I'm low risk and was full time remote even before this. Better to let high risk, health care and service industry people have first go at the vaccine.

would wait for people who are higher risk

To the people who are going to wait because they want it to be tested more:

What kind of concerns do you have? Would you feel more comfortable taking a Adenovirus/inactivated vaccine instead of an mRNA vaccine?

I don't get why they don't take 10% of the initial supply and auction or sell at a high price. It would increase the perceived value of the vaccine and let market forces evaluate safety.

There is more than one vaccine. I will probably take a particular vaccine if I am convinced it is safe and if it's mandatory or something I see almost everyone else doing.

I don't belong to a high risk group so I don't think I need it for now. There are priorities. Also I'm not risking my otherwise good health with a beta vaccine to prevent the low risk of dying from COVID.

I totally trust science but not companies and governments that are in a mission to save "The Economy" and their fat-arsed pockets.

I'm not saying that a company shouldn't care about making profits. But let's not forget some pharma companies' scandals from the past. Would you rush to consume some magical piping hot medicine/vaccine someone made? Is it ready yet? Is it tested enough? Is it safe for everyone?

And guys, please. The economy is not all those people who lost their job. I don't think any country's government cares about them. Market changes are here to stay. This is not going to be reversed. We aren't going back to "normal" after covid.

It baffles me that some people wants herd immunity. But are against vaccination.... That's really what herd immunity is about folks. So yeah 1)

What if the coronavirus vaccines don't work well enough? I still have doubt about it and not really sure to take it.

I've been kind of astounded at the number of people I've seen who claim that they won't be taking the vaccine, no matter what.

Depending on if the sequence matters. If I take vaccines on a later date will give me a higher effectiveness rate, I will do so.

YES

Yes

YES

Yes

I will be taking it asap, I'd rather face the risks of taking a tested vaccine than the risks of getting or spreading Covid.

Yes as soon as it is available. The positive of being immunized greatly outweighs the hypothetical risks of taking the vaccine.

Why take a vaccine for something healthy people like me fight off in a day or two? It doesn't make sense.

I can take a Zinc tablet, and some Vitamin D, or HCQ, etc.

Now older and sicker people should think otherwise, or those who interact regularly with those populations.

And yes, I know asymptomatics allegedly, potentially, in some rare cases, might possibly spread it to people who may get seriously ill. That is what we called "nature" before 2020.

Because it will take days for you to notice that you have it and you will continue to spread it. Even if you do not die from it, others that caught it from you might. If you are vaccinated it might be that you do not spread it anymore. It seems that there is no data yet for the current corona vaccines, but other vaccines prevent spreading so the new ones might as well.

waiting just because I am not at imminent risk, and other people should take priority

Two mice are chatting at the water cooler:

“Are you going to take COVID vaccine?”

“What? Are you crazy? It hasn’t been tested on humans yet!”

I'm going to wait until the first batch goes through then I'll decide whether I want it. I'm hesitant a bit about this vaccine because it was developed so rapidly, they didn't do the usual testing period and the FDA allowed for a fast-track process. I'd rather have waiting until they tested it thoroughly with multiple trials, instead of just one.

mRNA vaccines are fantastically specific in their biochemical action because of how they were designed for use as treatment for specific instances of cancer and this and their significant history of testing gives me high confidence in their safety and effectiveness.

I will wait because I a tiny bit skeptical. The first people to get it will be a huge study group and the results will, I expect, convince me to take the vaccine as well.

But, you never know if the vaccine accidentally turns us all into infertile beings. Which would be awesome, and I'll line up to get a shot. I hate humans.

That study group already happened.

From what I read it seems people who are young and not otherwise at risk don't really need to take the vaccine as it doesn't inhibit transmission (results not concluded but very likely it does not). In any case it is unlikely it will be available to you if you fall in this demographic anyway.

I have not seen any information that it likely does not inhibit transmission. All I have seen is that we don't have data on this. AFAIK, every other vaccine on the planet inhibits transition. Do you have a source?

100%, zero hesitation.

If vaccines restrict travel, then a lot of young people wanna get vaccinated

there is more than one vaccine. also the first wave of vaccines are focused on reducing symptoms and deaths. the vaccines that actually prevent viral infection altogether, are still in development.

I will wait, we don't know yet the total effects of the vaccine.

i'm terrified of needles, gonna wait till at risk people have it and then going to face my fear.

FDA approved, im not scared of whats in the vaccine, i just hate the idea of getting stabbed.

seems mostly blue collar lower class here that are emotionally hyped up for the vaccines. seems to make sense.

I'd like to travel out of the country, and I imagine vaccine documentation will become a part of airport customs processes for a year or two.

easy for me to say yes, nothing seems weird to me about a vaccine helping stop the pandemic with immunity

I will wait for a safer vaccine.

I think there's a difference between:

(a) I WILL WAIT because I don't trust it yet, and

(b) I WILL WAIT because I want to let the more at-risk people to have access it to first

That seems to be lost in the poll

Or (c) I will tell everyone that I'm waiting so that more at-risk people can have access it to first, but secretly I'll be happy others are field-testing it for me...

I think the implication is, if it's available to you, the at-risk people have already had a chance to get it. At least that's what I've heard from the rollout strategy.

Isn't that covered by the prompt?

> Assumption: it is available to everyone at the same time

This reads like "everyone who wants it will get it"

And there's another option:

I WILL WAIT because I have severe allergies and people say not to take it...

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25358753 UK has warned people with allergies not to take the Pfizer/Biontech vaccine.

People could be conflating those two reasons.

I'm not aware of any localities or nations that are just dumping the vaccines off at a pharmacy and letting people do what they want. Everywhere has a roll-out plan, with healthcare workers and high-risk individuals prioritized over the totally healthy mid-20's athlete. So (b) in your list isn't really a concern. If you have access to it, you should get it.

Well, I was completely unaware that HN supported polls. This is a pleasant surprise.

People who don't realize that they are alive today because their parents trusted doctors and took the vaccines. These things sort themselves out, over time :)

EDITED to remove most of the post.

Does anyone have information on possible side effects?

LOL, the nerds of sillicon valley discussing the effectiveness of the vaccine. What is this? A group of 50 year old ladies with Facebook?

My plan is to not take it, but I have a feeling that it will be mandatory sooner then later, so it will be unavoidable.

My reason for not wanting to take is, because I'm very weak mental health-vise and wouldn't want to interrupt my body while I'm healing with current medication (Flouxetine), I fear that vaccine affects could swing me a bit too much into the wrong direction and then poof I'm dead.

Just my thoughts though, I do think that vaccine are life changing and allow us the comfortable life that we have now.

Edit: I'm from Slovenia, not the USA!

I'll take it as soon as I have access to it. I'm ok even with the Oxford/AstraZeneca one. I'd be ok even with the Russian one (I live in the US, so there's pretty much zero chance this would become available here).

If it's available from private clinics for hundreds of dollars before it's available for free, I wouldn't take it. I'll wait until my turn comes for the free vaccine.

PS: I fully trust the FDA. Once they give their authorization, I have no hesitations to take the vaccine. It goes without saying that I wouldn't take the Oxford/AstraZeneca or any other vaccine if it hasn't received the FDA EUA.

"No" people, why not?

Remember Thalidomide? Remember asbestos?

I'll wait.

I'm really interested in the people who are saying 'no.'

Sign me up. That data looks good. Anyone waiting, or objecting to getting it is ignorant.

The vaccine should be given to BIPOC people first as pointed out by VOX [1] because they have a higher mortality rate from the disease. Once POC in at risk segments have received their dose then we can give it to others. Its interesting to consider the inequality outcome here, ie if we dont give it to POC first, and they cant return to the office when others can, then they will end up losing to office politics.

[1] https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2020/10/2/21493933/covid-...

The current knowledge, is that the Pfizer mRNA vaccine:

1) Claims 95% efficacy.

2) But it was not widely tested. Meaning they didn’t test it on people who had allergies. Or who could have an allergic reaction to it.

3) Health officials are now warning people who have allergies, to NOT take the Pfizer vaccine. (Uhh.. what?)

4) The Pfizer mRNA vaccine will not prevent you from getting sick. It will just prevent major malfunctions from severely harming you, or killing you.

5) Taking the Pfizer mRNA vaccine might end up making you a non-symptomatic transmitter of the virus.

So.. you’re literally a walking and breathing virus transmitting zombie?

Good grief. It’s a choose-your-own-adventures world with this Pfizer mRNA vaccine.

Meanwhile.. no word from the western media about China’s vaccine using the traditional method of an inactivated virus.

I WILL refuse it if they try and make it mandatory, no matter the consequences. Because of it being untested and me thinking this will be used as a test run to see what the government can force on us.

If they make it voluntary, I will wait, because of me being suspicious of long term consequences.

Heck no. I dodged conscription on principle in my homeland, even though the expected risk to my health was far less severe.

If the mythical "civic society" thinks that my taking the risk is important, they should feel free to offer a fair payment in exchange, as they do to soldiers these days.

I'm genuinely curious as to why people have so much faith in big pharma after the whole benzo crisis that's hit America. Weren't these same companies paying doctors to get people hooked on Xanax?

Orwell: Predicted a dystopian surveillance state where every word is monitored, unacceptable speech is deleted, history is rewritten or deleted altogether and individuals can become 'unpersons' for holding views disliked by those in power

Revelations: Predicted that "both small and great, both rich and poor, both free and slave, are to be marked on the right hand or the forehead,so that no one can buy or sell unless he has the mark"

It's as nonsensical question as "Will you stop your car when you see red traffic lights?". If it's not obligatory it's useless or at least at high risk of being so. So I consider such poll too preposterous to even deserve an answer.

I will not be taking anything under any sort of widespread social pressure or appeals to authority. I fundamentally lack trust in modern medicine and society in general to the point that it doesn't matter what "scientific evidence" says. Modern medical care gives us robotic, heartless nonsense like "routine" circumcision. Humanity cannot be trusted to act intelligently and empathically on a collective level.

I'm a skeptic asshole who second guesses claims just because I have access to Google scholar and sci-hub, a good for nothing contrarian made dangerous by the internet. Adult hall monitors trying to shame people over anything covid-related are disgusting people. I'll take the firing squad before any injections.

To some degree it doesn't matter what sort of revelations or facts I come across, not that they can't or won't change my opinions. They will, and I can admit being wrong. I'm very much interested in an empirical worldview. This is different, however. It's "fuck you, I don't trust you to work in my best interests".

Fck no! Definitely not. Not only is the amount of misinformation from both governments and the medical industry regarding Covid widespread, but everybody seems to ignore the fact that many more people are suffering and dying from issues much much more devastating, relevant and important to combat than this so-called pandemic that I find the current state of affairs extremely mind bugling.

WHO (Accidentally) Confirms Covid Is No More Dangerous Than Flu:

https://off-guardian.org/2020/10/08/who-accidentally-confirm...

Oh, yes, I know, this is going to be down voted before anyone actually reads the information in the article!

People saying "NO" or "I WILL WAIT" should be ashamed of themselves for falling for misinformation and harming the rest of us.

(Unless people are confused and saying "I will wait" when in fact they're going to be forced to wait until their turn comes around)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com