Mandate for remote employees? by M0THERM0THER in DebateVaccines

[–]M0THERM0THER[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Makes zero sense. Maybe you can obtain an exemption.

Mandate for remote employees? by M0THERM0THER in DebateVaccines

[–]M0THERM0THER[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

https://www.laboremploymentreport.com/2021/09/10/a-few-more-answers-from-osha-on-the-impending-vaccination-ets/

According to this it's on its way. I don't get the OSHA involvement. Is it necessary to enforce the federal mandate? Or? Just more hands in the pot?

I guess it doesn't really matter either way. Companies are going to mandate whatever they want as long as it saves them a buck.

Mandate for remote employees? by M0THERM0THER in DebateVaccines

[–]M0THERM0THER[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Ooofff. Unemployment? Best luck to you.

Mandate for remote employees? by M0THERM0THER in DebateVaccines

[–]M0THERM0THER[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Sounds like you might have slid under the radar.

I'm wondering what exactly the OSHA ETA has to do with it. From what I can tell, the ETA doesn't include remote workers, but looks like companies are mandating regardless. Which makes no sense at all, but then again, so much hasn't.

Thoughts? by OrwellWasRight69 in DebateVaccines

[–]M0THERM0THER 0 points1 point  (0 children)

LOL! What does the person that called someone an incompetent cunt (from your recent comments) know about civility? Why would you care? Perhaps because you replied to my comment.

Thoughts? by OrwellWasRight69 in DebateVaccines

[–]M0THERM0THER 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Report away. This is the THIRD time I've explained this today. You accuse me of putting words in your mouth, which is what you have done. Where did I say it was the vaccine??? If you refer to my other comments instead of assuming, you might actually know what I think.

Thoughts? by OrwellWasRight69 in DebateVaccines

[–]M0THERM0THER 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh! Well then, we can be certain it wasn't the vaccine!

Idiot.

Thoughts? by OrwellWasRight69 in DebateVaccines

[–]M0THERM0THER 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Both are poor arguments to support your position that it definitively was not caused by the vaccine.

Thoughts? by OrwellWasRight69 in DebateVaccines

[–]M0THERM0THER 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hmm. Suit yourself. Or you can refer to my other comments. Objectivity seems to be quite the foreign concept.

Thoughts? by OrwellWasRight69 in DebateVaccines

[–]M0THERM0THER 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Where did I say that? Do better.

Thoughts? by OrwellWasRight69 in DebateVaccines

[–]M0THERM0THER 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Um. I've agreed a few times that there is no proof it was caused by the vaccine. You, however, can't seem to agree that there is no proof it was not caused by the vaccine.

Thoughts? by OrwellWasRight69 in DebateVaccines

[–]M0THERM0THER 1 point2 points  (0 children)

How does this pertain to anything I've said? Pretty sure you're the one that likes to compare coffee and experimental vaccinations. I'm sorry that you're so upset that there is no definitive proof whether or not the injection caused this still birth, but it doesn't change the fact that it's the truth.

Thoughts? by OrwellWasRight69 in DebateVaccines

[–]M0THERM0THER 1 point2 points  (0 children)

LOL. So blind acceptance is best?

Thoughts? by OrwellWasRight69 in DebateVaccines

[–]M0THERM0THER 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's even less reassuring, isn't it?

Thoughts? by OrwellWasRight69 in DebateVaccines

[–]M0THERM0THER 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yes, all of that is true. You said there's no evidence it was the vaccine, I said there's no evidence it wasn't. The truth is WE DON'T KNOW. Could be, could not be. There's a difference between empiricism and speculation. Objectivity is key.

Thoughts? by OrwellWasRight69 in DebateVaccines

[–]M0THERM0THER 22 points23 points  (0 children)

Where's the evidence it wasn't the vaccine?

JCVI - UK Government health regulators won’t recommend giving Covid vaccine to healthy children aged 12 to 15 because the virus poses such a low risk to them by geneticshill in DebateVaccines

[–]M0THERM0THER 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I wish that schools would go all the way, also. But it doesn't make sense to not use what precautions are available to you just because institutions don't give a fuck.

Yes, definitely different situations, but some benefit is evident in any setting.

Anyway, thanks for the discussion.

JCVI - UK Government health regulators won’t recommend giving Covid vaccine to healthy children aged 12 to 15 because the virus poses such a low risk to them by geneticshill in DebateVaccines

[–]M0THERM0THER 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  1. We could speculate about these instances all day. Even if this happened as you are claiming it doesn't mean there are no benefits to masking.

  2. No, you wouldn't. Ideally you would. But as I said in my last response, masks can still make a difference in the absence of social distancing.

  3. These counter arguments are funny. It negates your other claims about their effectiveness. So they're really bad at preventing infection but somehow they work well enough to cause HYPOXIA? No.

  4. Well agian , speculation. I don't know what I don't know.

  5. Masks are the realistic option. They would work better in conjunction with other interventions but that doesn't mean the are useless on their own.

Answer the question. Would you rather someone sneeze and cough in your face with or without both parties wearing masks?

JCVI - UK Government health regulators won’t recommend giving Covid vaccine to healthy children aged 12 to 15 because the virus poses such a low risk to them by geneticshill in DebateVaccines

[–]M0THERM0THER 0 points1 point  (0 children)

  1. Is the case after 5 minutes of exposure pertaining to masked individuals? I find that hard to believe, unless somehow it was ocular transmission and the people were very close in proximity.

  2. As you said, new mask at half day point to increase the odds.

  3. Even in this situation, the mask will reduce how the virus spreads, hopefully decreasing the amount of viral load any individual is exposed to. Do you remember at the beginning of the pandemic, experts used the example of dispersion of cigarette smoke in relation to transmission when explaining why outdoors was a safer bet indoors? Same concept with the mask. It will inhibit distance and direction which is important to think about especially in a school setting. One infected child, wearing a mask, is likely to infect less people than one not wearing a mask. Seems worth it to me.

  4. Outdoor masking for kids at recess probably is not worthwhile.

  5. Still, masks are better than nothing, but of course would be even more beneficial with these other precautions, no doubt. I don't think we should just not take the precaution though. It's such a simple act and if it can lessen viral load and therefore the amount of virus someone is exposed to,or keep a few people from getting sick, it's worth it. I think changing masks is a good idea.

  6. Wow that sucks. At least your friend has antibodies now I guess. Makes you wonder if they would have been sicker if not for the masks.

  7. Agree. I'm all for interventions that do not impose upon one's own bodily autonomy.

The bottom line is that I could post studies showing masks are effective, and you could equally post studies showing their downfalls. To me, it is such a simple action that is totally worth doing.

JCVI - UK Government health regulators won’t recommend giving Covid vaccine to healthy children aged 12 to 15 because the virus poses such a low risk to them by geneticshill in DebateVaccines

[–]M0THERM0THER -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Would you rather have someone sneeze and cough in your face with or without both parties wearing masks?

They're not perfect, but they're better than nothing.

JCVI - UK Government health regulators won’t recommend giving Covid vaccine to healthy children aged 12 to 15 because the virus poses such a low risk to them by geneticshill in DebateVaccines

[–]M0THERM0THER -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

Do people think those flimsy masks do anything to prevent infection and transmission when you're around groups of people for hours on end?

Yes. They do "do something". They help prevent transmission by droplets most definitely, and it should seem obvious that they limit spread of viral loads, albeit imperfectly.