SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Judge blocks Biden vaccine rule, citing “liberty interests of the unvaccinated”
A federal judge yesterday blocked a Biden administration COVID-19 vaccine mandate for health care workers, granting a request for preliminary injunction filed by Republican attorneys general from 14 states.
US District Judge Terry Doughty ruled that the government lacks authority to implement the rule that "requires the staff of twenty-one types of Medicare and Medicaid healthcare providers to receive one vaccine by December 6, 2021, and to receive the second vaccine by January 4, 2022." Providers that don't comply face penalties, including "termination of the Medicare/Medicaid Provider Agreement."
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) mandate regulates over 10.3 million health care workers in the US, of which 2.4 million are unvaccinated. The Biden vaccine rule is being challenged by the attorneys general from Louisiana, Montana, Arizona, Alabama, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Utah, West Virginia, Kentucky, and Ohio. The Republican AGs' lawsuit was filed against CMS and the US Department of Health and Human Services.
The preliminary injunction they won applies nationwide except for 10 states that "are already under a preliminary injunction order dated November 29, 2021, issued by the Eastern District of Missouri," a court order said. Those states are Alaska, Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, New Hampshire, Nebraska, Wyoming, North Dakota, and South Dakota.
What states did not participate in this lawsuit and were not covered by the earlier preliminary injunction — i.e. got swept into this decision?
California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District Of Columbia, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 02 2021, @05:55AM (15 children)
The unvaccinated are hogging medical services. Let's put them in the back of the line if they don't want the vax
(Score: 5, Insightful) by pTamok on Thursday December 02 2021, @09:17AM (11 children)
Cigarette smokers are hogging medical services. Let's put them in the back of the line if they choose not to give up
The obese are hogging medical services. Let's put them in the back of the line if they choose not to control their eating
The poor are hogging medical services. Let's put them in the back of the line if they choose not to work harder
Drunks are hogging medical services. Let's put them in the back of the line if they choose not to be sober
Parachutists are hogging medical services. Let's put them in the back of the line if they choose to throw themselves out of aircraft that work fine.
It can be argued that anyone who chooses a course of action that generates an increased risk of needing medical services is placing an unreasonable load on medical services, and therefore should be denied those services.
Medical ethics works on the basis of treating the patient and not looking at why the patient is presenting themselves. Collectivised and insurance-based payment for medical services takes the view that it is reasonable and fair to spread the risk across the paying population so that individuals who are hit by rare (or even not-so-rare) catastrophic events are not ruined by medical expenses.
Excluding people for making poor choices is not ethical. I agree that it is a huge problem, and the problem of people making poor choices needs to be addressed. It is possible to debate whether coercion is an appropriate response, considering the public health crisis we are living in. Some people take the strong view that it is always wrong to coerce in a free society - although coercing psychotic people into medical treatment seems to be generally accepted - but no everyone agrees that non-coercion is correct when the consequences are dire.
I think individual liberty is important. Not everyone does, and certainly when individual liberty has consequences for other people, we get into a difficult area. I have no simple answer.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 02 2021, @11:44AM (8 children)
An overbroad statement is rarely true. A counterexample proving this false as an iron-vlad rule is organ transplants not being given to smokers or drunks.
(Score: 2) by stretch611 on Thursday December 02 2021, @12:05PM (7 children)
You might want to check your facts... then again you probably don't care about facts.
My father was a drinker and smoker (2 packs of unfiltered camels a day at his peak; at least half his life at that level of smoking.)
20 years ago he had his heart and both lungs transplanted at the same time. (from a single donor) Prior to that he had a kidney transplant (I don't remember if it was just one or two.)
While he obviously abstained from drinking and smoking while in the hospital waiting for a donor he went right back to both after he was released.
Now with 5 covid vaccine shots/boosters altering my DNA :P
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 02 2021, @12:18PM (5 children)
You provided 1 example of someone who squeaked by, but that doesn't disprove my counterexample at all:
https://www.upmc.com/services/transplant/liver/candidates [upmc.com]
(Score: 5, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 02 2021, @01:54PM (2 children)
And to a European, this is the worst of all: "Lack of adequate insurance". It is not health care, it is medicine for profit.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday December 02 2021, @10:55PM (1 child)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 03 2021, @02:40AM
Wtf?
Seriously, I don't get this. "But somebody has to pay for it! Waaaaah!" Of course somebody has to pay for it, numbnuts!
You just can't stand the fact that they pay much less per capita than American healthcare, and it's OMG SOCIALIST. OMG capitalism couldn't find the optimal solution!! OMG! GOM! GHOM! MOHGHOMYOG!
(Score: 3, Informative) by stretch611 on Thursday December 02 2021, @11:23PM (1 child)
And you provided reference to only a single place with those requirements... and it is specifically for livers (and alcohol consumption has a major influence on liver health.) And it does not specifically mention smoking.
As another poster mentioned... "adequate insurance is required"
Also notice "adequate social support"... so if you don't have enough family/friends to watch over you, they will let you die. (and I doubt a large facebook friendslist will qualify.)
"Other diseases or conditions"... oops you are one of the many adults with diabetes... disqualified.
The fact is that different locations have different qualifications. Some places will not take high risk patients because their staff may not be experienced and refer you to a place with better qualified doctors that can give better care for increased chances of success. (Or they are interested in boasting a high rate of success and do not want to risk their reputation on a high risk individual.)
Yes, my father was a high risk case. He actually had 2 heart attacks before he was even 50. He also needed an aortic stent before a transplant could even be considered. He actually went into NY and saw the (in)famous Dr Oz. Dr Oz refused to do anything because he was high risk and Dr Oz kept his success rate up by only treating easier cases with higher chances. My father ended up going to a university hospital in Philadelphia (IUP iirc) where they accepted high risk cases.
There are no universal standards (as already pointed out.) The fact is that when an organ becomes available it doesn't necessarily go to the best candidate... in fact it often goes to the best *local* candidate as the length of time the organ is not in a living body has a large impact on the success rate.
smokers/drinkers may not have as easy time getting a transplant, but the are not disqualified.
Now with 5 covid vaccine shots/boosters altering my DNA :P
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday December 03 2021, @07:33AM
My argument was that it happens, which requires exactly 1 example. In order to disprove me, you have to show that there are NO examples.
You failed Logic 101. Jesus fuck. What did they teach you in school..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 05 2021, @04:26PM
"Sure, you say murder is illegal but the zodiac killer murdered a bunch of people and was never arrested. Q.E.D."
(Score: 4, Touché) by epitaxial on Thursday December 02 2021, @01:09PM
Let me know when those conditions are contagious.
(Score: 2) by digitalaudiorock on Thursday December 02 2021, @04:33PM
While the things you've listed do use a lot of medical services, none of them, nor even all of them put together, ever causes an ICU to run out of beds.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by DannyB on Thursday December 02 2021, @06:10PM (1 child)
Singapore to end free Covid treatment for unvaccinated [soylentnews.org]
I predict more countries will do this.
Simple fact: It is the unvaccinated that are clogging up hospitals and taking up all of the ICU beds. Yes, some vaccinated do get breakthrough infections, and some portion of those get hospitalized -- but not in nearly the numbers of the unvaccinated.
A person with a heart attack or who was in an auto accident should not be denied an ICU bed because someone wouldn't get vaccinated.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 02 2021, @07:54PM
No. More countries will not do that. If you read, in detail, Singapore's plan you would realize this.
Note the sentence in bold.
The Singapore government doesn't normally offer free covid treatment. For anyone. It was an exception made to ease the pandemic, and public perception. But now the pandemic has gone on longer than expected and this is costing the govenment more than they planned. They're not taking away treatment for unvaccinated patients, they're ending a program that was created for the pandemic. Starting with unvaccinated patients. Who will now rely on the existing heath benefits they always had before the pandemic.
Singapore isn't taking away anything. They are ending short term benefits which never existed before the pandemic. And this is why comparing them to any other country is apples and oranges.
(Score: 1) by Coligny on Friday December 03 2021, @05:50AM
No…
Just really no…
Full pandemic - pre vaccine France.
Hospital load for covid patient was 4%.(official data report from the healthcare ministry)
Now, with the lack of previous flue season there are real worries for this year flue season.
Not for the next unicron planet eating mutation of covid.
Also… taking into account the appearance of new variants.
Really tell tell me how you prove a negative in the “vaccine prevent complications” for covid. Just tell me how you can state that it’s because of the vaccine and not the usual mechanisme by which, virus that are good at spreading are bad at killing…
Or… how the vaccine could work so well at reducing risks on variants but need countless booster shots because they also don’t work on variants…. Or something….
Lastly… how can companies come up with so many vaccine but no treatment. Or why on earth Russian or chinese vaccine are not recognized by western healthcare ministries…
If I wanted to be moderated by mor0nic groupthinking retards I would still be on Digg and Reddshit.