Question 3 in full, since it appears to be truncated:

Mandatory vaccination (or frequent testing) in some settings (e.g. packed offices, schools, hospitals)

Yes.
For. (Until 80-90% of nat'l pop. is fully vaccinated)
For.

Likewise.

Yes.
Against.
For.

Yes
For
For
I want mandatory vaccinations and passports for Republicans/Trumpsters and those who don't want them. Voluntary for everyone else.

"When I was thinking, that it might do some good
If we robbed the cynics and took all their food
That way what they believe will have taken place
And we can give it to everybody who have some faith"
Jewel [[i]emphasis added[/i]]

How predictable this poll. Before seeing I knew the outcome already!

No
Against
Against

To balance the predictability. And because its the true me.

I want mandatory vaccinations and passports for Republicans/Trumpsters and those who don't want them. Voluntary for everyone else.

"When I was thinking, that it might do some good
If we robbed the cynics and took all their food
That way what they believe will have taken place
And we can give it to everybody who have some faith"
Jewel emphasis added

I want mandatory vaccinations and passports for Republicans/Trumpsters and those who don't want them. Voluntary for everyone else. — James Riley

:grin:

Altough... This would mean all survive. But they cant transmit.


"those who don't want them"

Who are those?

Even before I got my Pfizer jab just before the "FDA full approval", I was for mandates and passports. Stopping the spread – not the fuckin' "Steal" – is the only way out of this hole we (Americans) have dug for ourselves. :mask:

Yes.
Don't know. How would it be rolled out? There are gaps in the current system. All most people got as proof of vaccination is a flimsy paper card that is easily lost or destroyed. My first shot was recorded by my health insurance company but my second, at a mass vaccination site while traveling was lost in the ether. Mandatory vaccination for school districts works because the case load is low and pediatricians have had decades to be forced into adequate records compliance. With the vaccine, my fear would be people losing their jobs, access to services, because the shots were flooded out without good records keeping. This would also probably hit poor people worst. This is less of an issue if it continues to be shown that additional shots aren't a risk, since people could just get another.
Yes.

My impression is that many places, like (elementary) schools and military, have used "vaccine passports" of some sort for a long time.
Don't have numbers though, but it does make some sense, doesn't it?

flimsy paper card that is easily lost or destroyed. — Count Timothy von Icarus

Same here. Although Colorado has one of those Driver's Licenses that you can get through TSA with at the airport and they have now created a process where you can get your vax linked to it. You know, so they can load us on the trains and take us to the ovens when we no longer serve Zog's purpose.

:scream:

Yes/For/For, of course

All most people got as proof of vaccination is a flimsy paper card that is easily lost or destroyed. — Count Timothy von Icarus

In the EU, a covid passport is a paper or digital document with one's covid status (recovered, vaccinated, or tested) linked to an online database that can be accessed online by those who have to check if a person has a valid covid passport. Data is fed into this database by medical personnel at vaccination and testing facilities.

So even if you lose the paper document or your smart phone, you can always get a new copy of the passport.

Yes
Don't know
For

Do the vaccines prevent new variants emerging? Any research into this?

Do the vaccines prevent new variants emerging? — The Opposite

No.

No — 180 Proof

K.

If it's true that the vaccines minimize infection rates compared to the unvaccinated and if variants are more likely to arise when more people are infected, then the vaccines won't stop the arising of variants but they will slow it down.

Yes.
Against.
Against.

The vaccine is available and everybody that wants to get vaccinated can (in Europe and the US, what we seem to be talking about). Vaccination willingness seems to be sufficient to avoid deathly illness. More vaccination might lower hospital admittance and IC use but all that is temporary anyway as the cohorts that would end up in the hospital either die or get immunity through having the disease.

The genie is out of the bottle any way, we're going to have to live with Covid and after vaccination/first infection it really doesn't seem worse than the flu. We'll get plenty of new variants. We shouldn't be living in fear. Living healthily is the best protection.

As much as I hate it, I do believe in the freedom for other people to make stupid choices. We never mandated measles vaccines, which was much, much worse in terms of infection rate and slightly higher death rate but also risk of blindness.

We're too scared.

Also fuck boosters except for the elderly and those with known comorbidities and send vaccines to countries that can't afford them. That will save many more lives than boosters can.

Finally, if a hospital is ever faced with a triage situation they ought to boot unvaccinated Covid patients out of the IC regardless of other considerations like age, likelihood of survival, etc. Some consequences ought to be felt.

EDIT: I also think we should be much quicker in closing off borders if a new variant is detected in another country. Just stop all non-essential travel and require quarantine if you travel from such a country until its clear whether the variant is similar or worse than the existing variant.

Finally, if a hospital is ever faced with a triage situation they ought to boot unvaccinated Covid patients out of the IC regardless of other considerations like age, likelihood of survival, etc. Some consequences ought to be felt. — Benkei

Do you feel the same about all known risk factors for hospitalisation? Can we categorise risk factors into those we find acceptable and those we don't by any criteria (apart from the actual risk itself, as a crude number)?

I ask because @Srap Tasmaner and I are discussing just that question and I'm interested in the range of variables people might include.

Finally, if a hospital is ever faced with a triage situation they ought to boot unvaccinated Covid patients out of the IC regardless of other considerations like age, likelihood of survival, etc. Some consequences ought to be felt. — Benkei

Your idea of "ought to" is for medical professionals to carry out petty revenge fantasies?

What an utterly sick statement you made - I find it hard to believe you really meant it, and I question your sanity if you do.

There's nothing sick about it and has nothing to do with revenge. Only an idiot would interpret it that way. But you're probably one of the idiots who didn't get vaccinated and feels personally attacked.

If people wilfully refuse preventive treatment and then get the illness they could've prevented then obviously they ought to move down the line of priorities when doctors have to make decisions about where to commit resources. So if you're a strapping young lad without a vaccination and you need an IC bed and a 90 year old vaccinated granny needs one as well, you both have Covid but there's only one bed, you can most definitely go fuck yourself. If she fell down the stairs and you have Covid and both need the bed you can still fuck yourself. Only when you get into the hospital for something else but Covid should regular rules apply.

That said, I think this should be the case with respect to all vaccinations. Children who can't decide for themselves yet exempted or course.

Of course, it has to do with revenge.

Some consequences ought to be felt. — Benkei

Your disdain for people who make different decisions than you, regardless of their reasons, shines clearly through your posts. You dislike these people, and wish them to be punished for their mistakes. The fact that they were forced to pay their entire lives for collective healthcare - ergo for a large part paid for bad decisions of others - apparently irrelevant.

I've told you before, your opinions seem based on surface level representations of a problem, and you don't make the slightest attempt at looking beyond your own moral framework - apparently even when it concerns matters of life and death.

Like it is a game, it is stated that "people should be booted out of the IC."

If people wilfully refuse preventive treatment and then get the illness they could've prevented then obviously they ought to move down the line of priorities when doctors have to make decisions about where to commit resources. — Benkei

You know just adding the word 'obviously' to a proposition doesn't act as a substitute for a justification, obviously.

Should doctors treat car passengers above motorcycle riders in a RTA? Cars are a demonstrably safer means of travel and such information is publicly available, so if someone willfully avoids a practice which reduces their risk of hospitalisation, they should feel the consequences, right?

What about diet, exercise, health and safety recommendations, alcohol consumption, sporting activities...? Are we going to use those criteria in triage too?

Then we'll have to factor in access to information, of course. Those with learning difficulties will need to be identified (we can't hold them to the same standard of willful disregard), those with English as a second language, recent immigrants, the minorities in culturally oppressive groups like women and older children... All shunted to the back of the queue for refusing advice they barely understood or had little control over?

Your disdain for people who make different decisions than you, regardless of their reasons, shines clearly through your posts. — Tzeentch

It's not disdain to insist choices have consequences. Nor is it novel. That choices should have consequences is clear. And your "but they paid their entire lives" doesn't make them special, so did the 90 year old granny.

Except she got vaccinated.

You keep thinking I would deny health care to unvaccinated people but I've been very clear under which circumstances.

Like it is a game, it is stated that "people should be booted out of the IC." — Tzeentch

Under rather specific circumstances, which you keep happily ignoring. Do you disagree with the examples I gave?

Should doctors treat car passengers above motorcycle riders in a RTA? Cars are a demonstrably safer means of travel and such information is publicly available, so if someone willfully avoids a practice which reduces their risk of hospitalisation, they should feel the consequences, right? — Isaac

No. The difference is when you have a victim of the person exceeding the speed limit and the person who exceeded the speed limit. If that information would be available at the moment if having to decide who to operate first, the moral decision is clear. It's about conscious choices and whether that choice is a proximate cause or not.

Those with learning difficulties will need to be identified (we can't hold them to the same standard of willful disregard), those with English as a second language, recent immigrants, the minorities in culturally oppressive groups like women and older children... All shunted to the back of the queue for refusing advice they barely understood or had little control over? — Isaac

Of course we can and we already do. A learning disability is no excuse for paying taxes late, parking in the wrong zone or not knowing how to lodge a complaint against a government institution. These aren't solved by tweaking the rules but by providing systems of care.

The difference is when you have a victim of the person exceeding the speed limit and the person who exceeded the speed limit. If that information would be available at the moment if having to decide who to operate first, the moral decision is clear. It's about conscious choices and whether that choice is a proximate cause or not. — Benkei

Riding a motorcycle is a conscious choice. So are all the other factors I mentioned. And their link to increased risk is no less demonstrable. To be clear, not getting vaccinated does not cause covid, it increases the risk. We're entirely talking about actions which foreseeably increase risk. Choosing to ride a motorcycle instead of a car is such an action.

A learning disability is no excuse for paying taxes late, parking in the wrong zone or not knowing how to lodge a complaint against a government institution. — Benkei

These are all mitigated by circumstance. Punishment will almost always be less severe in such cases.

The objection is simple;

Triage is based on the principle of maximising human life. Scarce resources are put to that end in the order in which they will most effectively achieve that goal entirely because it is a goal we find to be higher than any other outcome triage processes might yield.

You're suggesting that above the value of human life, we should hold the value of 'teaching them that actions have consequences', or the value of creating a more 'deserving' society by weeding out those less worthy of its benefits.

Riding a motorcycle is a conscious choice. — Isaac

Yes, but not a proximate cause of an accident and still considered generally safe, which is why some cars aren't permitted on roads.

You're suggesting that above the value of human life, we should hold the value of 'teaching them that actions have consequences', or the value of creating a more 'deserving' society by weeding out those less worthy of its benefits. — Isaac

I think all lives are equally valuable but for any contributory negligence. I don't see any good reason to prioritise young people over old people, for instance, but I do see good reason to prioritise help if someone culpably has put himself in a particularly dangerous situation. In most cases this choice isn't forced because there's plenty of room and resources available with acceptable waiting lists for non urgent healthcare. But in a triage situation, sure, I don't think someone in a car accident should not be helped because the IC would be full with unvaccinated Covid patients. I'd kick one of those Covid patients off the IC without any guilt.

But in a triage situation, sure, I don't think someone in a car accident should not be helped because the IC would be full with unvaccinated Covid patients. I'd kick one of those Covid patients off the IC without any guilt. — Benkei

You should not ever be allowed to triage.