Hacker News Reader

Comment by jowday | Hacker News Reader

It sounds like you just disagree with the tradeoff between liberty and safety, then. But it does lower transmission, and flashing a card before you go into a bar the same way you flash your driver's license isn't as onerous as the weird government pod scenario you outlined above.

>unhealthy, unclean, even dangerous.

This is probably how I'd describe wilfully unvaccinated people, yeah.

Also curious where you got the 100 million number from - AFAICT there have been 40 million covid infections in the US.

View on HN

Over 100 million Americans have superior antibodies from past covid. Why would you WILLINGLY describe those like that who refuse the vaccination as unhealthy, unclean, and even dangerous? Unless you're naive and don't know history? Or perhaps you simply keep ignoring the links being provided because you've been tricked by the narrative and it feels good to be tribal/partisan about it as if it's a matter of politics? It won't be long now until everyone has antibodies one way or another, yet people falling for the "vax vs unvax" narrative are going to create a problem much worse than covid if they insist on drawing battle lines and inching closer and closer to full-on dehumanization of tens of millions.

Source for how many people had covid:

https://www.publichealth.columbia.edu/public-health-now/news...

Anew study published in the journal Nature estimates that 103 million Americans, or 31 percent of the U.S. population, had been infected with SARS-CoV-2 by the end of 2020

The number you mentioned is the number verified, but based on the modeling of infection rates and spread they've come up with the bigger number. It will keep getting bigger.

In any case, "flashing a card" to go into a bar is the precipice of the slippery slope. And yes, it's slippery. It doesn't take much effort to see the writing on the wall and observe the tyranny emerging in other places. If you're not simply ignorant to history and being tricked by the narrative, at least be honest about what you actually want - which is to control others. Don't try to pass it off as being concerned about health though, I wasn't born yesterday.

> Over 100 million Americans have superior antibodies from past covid.

Then they should get antibody tests, and if their level of antibodies is high enough, we should let them do all the same things that vaccinated people can do.

But that's not what I hear. I just hear people ignorantly claiming they are immune because they got COVID (some even never confirmed, just they "think" they had it), without any idea as to what kind of antibodies they have in their blood. While some of them probably are just as immune as vaccinated people, I expect that a significant number of them (especially those who caught COVID earlier in the pandemic) don't have a level of immunity approaching that of a vaccinated individual. So... go get antibody tests, and lobby health authorities to recognize post-infection immunity as valid, assuming it's been tested by a lab.

Then they should get antibody tests, and if their level of antibodies is high enough, we should let them do all the same things that vaccinated people can do.

Nope. The default position is for people to all be able to do everything the same. I'm okay with mask mandates when case numbers are above N. Since we already have 100 million Americans with superior antibodies from natural immunity, and vaccines freely available, why mandate and build systems around that? To give someone control?

But that's not what I hear. I just hear people ignorantly claiming they are immune because they got COVID (some even never confirmed, just they "think" they had it),

That's not your problem. See about your own vaccination and wear a mask. It's on them to be straight forward with their health. If they work in a NICU or want to dorm in a college that requires vaccinations already, then by all means use existing protocols to expect a report proving they have antibodies. That's fine. But it's not your problem or my problem whether or not smoeone just "thinks" they had it.

Here's an example of how you can see why I have a problem with your approach. You know how we're going to spend federal dollars to make take-home test kits available at-cost at retailers? Are you okay with people getting those test kits and seeing the results entirely privately in their own home, with no one knowing? If not, then the problem is on you. If you are, then what's the need for anyone to gate-keep access to society by demanding proof at the door? If you can't trust your fellow citizens when you're shopping, why trust them to build and run a system of enslavement like one where you have to use a covid passport to go to school or the bar or a theater or the gym or anywhere else?

So... go get antibody tests, and lobby health authorities to recognize post-infection immunity as valid, assuming it's been tested by a lab.

This is progress, but yeah, still a no. Limit the scope of these authorities now before they decide everything for you.

> Over 100 million Americans have superior antibodies from past covid.

Are you absolutely certain of this? Is it true for all individuals? Even if their infection was 12 months ago? Or 18 months ago?

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-08-27/previous-...

https://www.science.org/content/article/having-sars-cov-2-on...

The natural immune protection that develops after a SARS-CoV-2 infection offers considerably more of a shield against the Delta variant of the pandemic coronavirus than two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine, according to a large Israeli study that some scientists wish came with a “Don’t try this at home” label.

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01442-9

People who recover from mild COVID-19 have bone-marrow cells that can churn out antibodies for decades, although viral variants could dampen some of the protection they offer.

Note that on this last link from Nature, we now know that past covid is effective at preventing known variants including Delta, per the first two links.

Source for # of Americans who had covid:

https://www.publichealth.columbia.edu/public-health-now/news...

A new study published in the journal Nature estimates that 103 million Americans, or 31 percent of the U.S. population, had been infected with SARS-CoV-2 by the end of 2020

Your first article states that the risk of a breakthrough case for someone with natural immunity is 13 times higher if the infection took place 6 months ago. It also states that vaccinating improves protection for those people.

This would seem to contradict your original claim (and validate my reply), since your statement was predicated on the assumption that someone who was naturally infected in 2020 has as much protection today as someone infected a month ago (or someone who was vaccinated a month ago).

Those 103 million Americans infected last year (well, the survivors anyway) would absolutely benefit from taking a vaccine now if they haven't already.

I missed your link in the parent - if there's plenty of evidence that getting the vaccine is actually more risky for a certain group than not getting it, sure, let's avoid giving them the vaccine. It should be obvious that when I say "willingly unvaccinated" I mean people who aren't at risk or have a condition that prevents them from getting vaccinated who refuse it.

>If you're not simply ignorant to history and being tricked by the narrative, at least be honest about what you actually want - which is to control others.

I want to keep myself and my loved ones safe - I've got 3 different family members who are both vulnerable to COVID and require in-home care. It's not feasible for them to self-isolate.

Virtually nobody is at higher risk from vaccination than the disease.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/sep/10/boys-more-at-r...

https://datacenter.kidscount.org/data/tables/101-child-popul...

That's 25 million people in the USA alone, and that's just based on the data we have right now. Virtually no one? And you ignore that the people with antibodies from natural immunity don't need it. See the links in the parent comments I posted.

Natural Immunity might confer more protection to the individual against covid, but it's a terrible public health policy position if your goal is protect as many people as possible while you have perfectly good vaccines available.

For those 100m Americans to get that immunity, you had to have a lot of deaths and externalities pushed onto your hospital systems along the way. Healthcare staffing costs are shooting up, health insurance costs will likely rise across the board. Pressure from the delta waves are going to leave a lot of residual costs in the system, and it largely preventable.

Vax passports/documentatio is a whole separate issue, but I'll never understand why Americans are so adamantly against preventative healthcare measures.

We don't formulate public health policy based on 0 cases of flu or cold or covid. Otherwise we'd all be living in temperature-controlled air-corrected 24/7-monitored government housing pods would reduce the transmission to 0. Maybe those pods are the best public health policy? Because they could ship us food contact-free and let us out for exercise at times determined by an efficiency algorithm?

For those 100m Americans to get that immunity, you had to have a lot of deaths and externalities pushed onto your hospital systems along the way.

This is exaggerated. Here is how I know: roughly half of the hospitalizations that have occurred were mild or asymptomatic cases.

Source:

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2021/09/covid-hos...

Quote from article: "In other words, the study suggests that roughly half of all the hospitalized patients showing up on COVID-data dashboards in 2021 may have been admitted for another reason entirely, or had only a mild presentation of disease."

So you have fear induced by media relentlessly spamming our brains via feeds and doom-scrolling, and people then see the # of hospitalizations and assume that means a doomsday scenario like the film Contagion. If the reality is that our numbers have been misleading or incomplete, then it is impossible for you to accurately measure those externalities you mention. Therefore some rumored externalities should not be the basis for policy that strips people of their rights and livelihood. And it CERTAINLY should never be the basis for fabricating a false dilemma like vaxed vs unvaxed.

How many people got scared about their symptoms and rushed to the hospital because the media caused a panic? Per that source I mentioned, it's entirely possible this happened.

Healthcare staffing costs are shooting up,

Because hospitals are imposing those costs on themselves by firing nurses that are not complying. To the point where some hospitals in NYC are now unable to deliver children.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/new-york-hospital-pause...

This is a problem caused by the mandates.

health insurance costs will likely rise across the board.

For years before covid, the common narrative online was always that health insurance companies are bad. It's been known for YEARS that they make record profits and always pass on costs to the customers anyway. In the form of higher premiums, higher deductibles, and shittier services. So why are some on HN now peddling sympathy for them? Those costs are exaggerated and their bottom line is still fat from years of gouging the customers.

Vax passports/documentatio is a whole separate issue, but I'll never understand why Americans are so adamantly against preventative healthcare measures.

Get rid of the mandates tomorrow and say "masking when cases are above N in your area" and I'm sure everyone will be okay with that. No need to impose vaccination mandates anymore - people who want the protection can get the protection voluntarily.

And the small subset of people who cannot, could be taken care of through other creative means like giving them funds to stay at home until the pandemic is officially over. A cost that is a much smaller drop in the bucket compared to this tyranny that is poised to emerge.

>Because hospitals are imposing those costs on themselves by firing nurses that are not complying. To the point where some hospitals in NYC are now unable to deliver children.

I believe record numbers of health care workers are dropping out of the profession from stress & over work, from the pressure of treating those 100m cases. I doubt the number being let go for vaccine refusal is significant in this sense. Nurses in particular already have other vaccine requirements as a part of their job, this shouldn't be a suprise to them.

>For years before covid, the common narrative online was always that health insurance companies are bad. It's been known for YEARS that they make record profits and always pass on costs to the customers anyway. In the form of higher premiums, higher deductibles, and shittier services. So why are some on HN now peddling sympathy for them?

I am not peddling sympathy for insurance companies, I should have written that as premiums will rise - everyone paying for healthcare will shoulder the burden of higher costs.

Are you also against the FDA mandating the fortification of foods with folate and vitamin D as a public health initiative? Is that tyranny against your rights to drink unadulterated milk?

I gave quality sources for everything I said. Whereas what you said is "I believe" and "I doubt" and "Nurses should." That's...not evidence and it's not arguments. It doesn't matter what you believe. Or what you doubt if it's not backed by the evidence. The evidence I provided explicitly says that some hospitals are suspending services due to nurses quitting because of the covid mandate. And here's another source where a union in another state is saying that 30% of their staff may quit over mandates.

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2021/09/01/survey-show...

No doubt some are going to leave because of exhaustion as well, but it's not rocket science to see what's happening because of the mandates themselves.

Regardless of existing vaccine requirements, one would have to bury their head in the sand to not see the difference between what is happening now and what is the norm otherwise. Everyone for the most part is expected to take this vaccine or get fired, regardless of superior natural immunity. Not just nurses. Everyone including the 100+ million people who already had covid and don't technicaly need it. It's a power grab trying to ride the coattails of "nurses already have to get vaccinated."

I am not peddling sympathy for insurance companies, I should have written that as premiums will rise - everyone paying for healthcare will shoulder the burden of higher costs.

Are you also against the FDA mandating the fortification of foods with folate and vitamin D as a public health initiative? Is that tyranny against your rights to drink unadulterated milk?

I don't care about milk. I don't drink milk. What does milk have to do with people being banned from putting food on the table if they don't submit to tyranny? Particularly those 100+ million people who had covid already and thus have better antibodies already? What does milk have to do with people having to live in a "papers please" society in NYC if they want to go to the bar or watch a movie or do anything? You can buy milk fresh from the farm if that's what you want. Make friends with farmers and they'll take care of it. Buy the fortified stuff if that's what you want. You're not mandated one way or the other or threatened with your livelihood if you choose "wrong" on which milk you purchase for yourself, are you?

You seem more interested in a debate. Otherwise why bring up fortified milk as if it's actually a worthwhile comparison? I'm not here to debate, my friend. I'm here to ring the alarm bells because something is wildly wrong and it doesn't take a genius to see it. Go peruse those links in my comments on Australia, and let me know if you think the frog is in the pot yet. Here, I'll paste them for your convenience:

They're going to force people who quarantine at home (rather than a government-mandated quarantine "hotel" with guards) to install and use an app. Facial recognition, GPS tracking in your own home. And it will randomly ping you, and if you don't respond within 15 minutes it'll send the police to your house to conduct an in-person quarantine check. Source:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/09/pandemic-a...

They're arresting people for making Facebook posts against lockdowns. Source:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-54007824

Australia presumes to say how many people can visit your home. Source:

https://theconversation.com/vaccine-passports-are-coming-to-...

“NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian yesterday announced freedoms for fully vaccinated people once 70% of the state’s eligible population are double dosed. These include being able to go to hospitality venues, hairdressers and gyms, and have five people to your home.”

They can arbitrarily lock you in your apartment building for up to weeks, no one allowed to leave. Source:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-53316097

So do you think your question about fortified milk is still relevant?

throwawayfear,

I share legitimate concerns about the Australian federal government's moves in recent years which show a lurch towards the surveillance state and authoritarianism. The points you raise which are related to regulations surrounding the response to COVID are needless fear-mongering however.

Yes, the rights of the individual with respect to movement and to assembly are important. But, so are the rights of citizens to not be infected and be put at risk of hospitalisation and even death.

So, a (temporary) regulation to limit the spread of COVID by reducing the number of people you can have in your home is acceptable in the same way that drivers are forced to drive at 40km/h around schools and playgrounds.

The great majority of Australia's citizenry understands this trade-off, thus supports the (predominantly) state government efforts during this time of COVID. And this support has been shown to provide health dividends; which, astonishingly, even the anti-lockdown Murdoch press seems to be grudgingly accepting:

https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/health-problems/cov...

Being in the middle of an epidemic changes the norms as far as regulations go, in much the same way that such norms are altered during times of war. Citizens know these changes are unpalatable, but also know the alternatives are worse.

EDIT: typo.

> The great majority of Australia's citizenry understands this trade-off, thus supports the (predominantly) state government efforts during this time of COVID.

Wow. Where to begin. Firstly I'm in Australian Lockdown Hell and I do not support the state government's efforts. Not one bit.

Victoria, day 226 of lockdown. It's 8pm and I need to visit supermarket before it closes due to curfew. Actually, it's too late.

Masks are required outside. Check-ins everywhere. Angry state authorities appear on the screen on my wall blaming and condemning the public for "visiting their families" or "watching the sunset" or other unforgivable immoral acts.

The faces on the screen threaten to restrict freedoms and enforce new rules that go beyond simple contact tracing. Vaccinated or not, I will not support proving I'm vaccinated every day. There's an assumption that everyone is "sick until proven healthy", or "untrustworthy until trusted", or a "dirty virus spreading threat until proven vaccinated which is a sterilizing bullet-proof shield".

The Australian capital ACT, just announced a 4 week lockdown because of 32 reported cases yesterday. The ACT has seen 3 deaths since the start of the pandemic. Three deaths.

Meanwhile, day 226 of lockdown in Victoria, and I can't drive more than 5 km. I could be fined $5,000 for visiting my family. My family can appear on my screen, however, and the conversation is not listened to by the authorities, only logged for now. The warrant-less monitoring comes later, the frequency of which depends on my use of phrases like "I feel like protesting against lockdowns" and so on.

This is Australia, 2021. It matters not that the masses are submissive to coercive control. They're being blackmailed. The "rewards" promised are only the things we already had, now taken away.

> ...acceptable in the same way that drivers are forced to drive at 40km/h around schools and playgrounds

The glaring flaw with analogies involving speeding drivers, is the speeding driver is always speeding by definition. The drunk driver is always drunk by definition. An unvaccinated person is not always infected or spreading the virus. And vaccinated people can still be infected and spread the virus too, which further derails the analogy: A sober driver cannot suddenly become unwillingly intoxicated in the way a vaccinated person can become infected. So please find a better analogy.

Your number is way off. The CDC estimates that 120M Americans have been infected as of July (more by now).

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/cases-updates/burd...

40 million REPORTED COVID infections... Two family members had positive tests REPORTED (they got tested). Three others got symptoms (it WAS COVID) while quarantining but never got tested (therefore never got REPORTED). Only 40% (of those in this household) got REPORTED.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com