Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

Politics
posted by mrpg on Friday May 28, @11:26AM   Printer-friendly
from the what-could-go-wrong dept.

Ohio lawmakers want to abolish vaccine requirements:

[...] Lawmakers are working on legislation to call off the lottery immediately. They're also trying to head off any plans for "vaccine passports." And last month, they introduced a sweeping antivaccination bill that would essentially demolish public health and vaccination requirements in the state—and not just requirements for COVID-19 vaccines, requirements for any vaccine.

[...] State Rep. Beth Liston (D-Dublin) blasted the bill, telling The Columbus Dispatch, "Not only would it prevent schools, businesses and communities from putting safety measures in pace related to COVID, it will impact the health of our children... This bill applies to all vaccines—polio, measles, meningitis, etc. If it becomes law we will see worsening measles outbreaks, meningitis in the dorms, and children once again suffering from polio."

[...] "At its core, this proposal would destroy our current public health framework that prevents outbreaks of potentially lethal diseases, threatens the stability of our economy as it recovers from a devastating pandemic and jeopardizes the way we live, learn, work and celebrate life," the letter said.

[...] "HB 248 would put all Ohioans at risk while increasing the cost of health care for families, individuals and businesses," spokesperson Dan Williamson said. "This proposal applies to all immunizations, including childhood vaccines. If passed, this legislation could reverse decades of immunity from life-threatening, but vaccine-preventable diseases such as measles, mumps, hepatitis, meningitis and tuberculosis."

Also: Ohio GOP lawmakers, citing 'need to protect' from vaccines, seek to expand exemptions, nix COVID passports


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by ElizabethGreene on Friday May 28, @04:11PM (16 children)

    by ElizabethGreene (6748) on Friday May 28, @04:11PM (#1139694)

    You are already required to vaccinate your children upon registering them for public school. How is this any different?

    The MMR, DTaP, and Varicella vaccines have decades of safety and efficacy data. The COVID-19 vaccine is the first FDA approved and mass produced mRNA vaccine and the longest term safety data we have on it is from the Phase one trial participants in May 2020 twelve months ago. One of which is dead, but he was very old so that's not a huge shock or a factor to consider. [1]

    That is a nontrivial difference. ... so, does that justify for me not getting vaccinated? No, not really. I'm in the 40-49 age cohort. Based on that data, my risk of dying from COVID-19 is 0.4%, roughly 1-in-200 chance. I feel, based on solely that and a year of safety data that I'm more likely to die from the disease than the vaccine. [2]

    There is another consideration too. We don't talk about it much, but there is a nontrivial level of immunity if you've recovered from Covid-19.[3] Since I had COVID in January, the data says that provides a natural immunity that is of similar efficacy to having the vaccine. Spitball estimate, this moves my risk goes of dying from Covid from 1 in 200 to roughly 1 in 1,000. It's very hard for me to assert, on faith, that there isn't a 1-in-1,000 chance of severe long-term side effects from the Covid vaccine based on current data.

    Sources:
    [1] https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/william-shakespeare-first-man-in-world-to-get-approved-covid-vaccine-dies-at-81/ar-AAKn1H9?ocid=entnewsntp [msn.com]
    The dude was 90 and his death was completely unrelated. It's not a data point worth consideration vis-a-vis safety to me.

    [2] https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/coronavirus-age-sex-demographics/ [worldometers.info] COVID-19 Fatality Rate by AGE
    Special thanks to the CDC for intentionally obfuscating this data here:
    https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/investigations-discovery/hospitalization-death-by-age.html [cdc.gov]
    That's a dick move.

    [3] https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00662-0/fulltext [thelancet.com]

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Flamebait=2, Insightful=3, Informative=1, Overrated=1, Disagree=1, Total=8
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 3, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 28, @04:27PM (9 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 28, @04:27PM (#1139709)

    Christ, hearing the cherries being picked under the guise of faux scientological rigor is honestly worse than listening to religious liberty arguments.

    • (Score: 0, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 28, @06:45PM (5 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 28, @06:45PM (#1139793)

      So even those who got COVID and recovered must take the vaccine? You don't even make sense; you are a vaccine fetishist because taking it is a sign of allegiance to your political tribe, not a matter of immunology.

      • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 28, @07:27PM (4 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 28, @07:27PM (#1139807)
        We have logs of every administration of vaccines, but not not of people who have caught and kicked COVID. (you could be contributing to solving that problem instead of crossing your arms and shaking your head.)

        you are a vaccine fetishist because taking it is a sign of allegiance to your political tribe, not a matter of immunology.

        Coming up with an inconsistent myriad of reasons to be anti-vax or anti-mask is about being part of a poltical tribe. WTF'ing over moronic self destructive behavior... isn't.

        • (Score: 0, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 28, @08:24PM (3 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 28, @08:24PM (#1139820)

          So you are going to demand proof-of-vaccination from everyone, forcing them to get a vaccine whether they need it or not. Sorry, but NO.

          • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 28, @08:35PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 28, @08:35PM (#1139824)

            For certain activities and hopefully for a limited time, yes. Or is the concept of a pandemic beyond your ability to understand? If the disease sticks around then expect it to become another vaccination requirement for public schools. Once enough people are vaccinated and the case load becomes insignificant I expect vaccination requirements will go back to pre-COVID levels.

          • (Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 28, @08:46PM (1 child)

            by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 28, @08:46PM (#1139829)

            So you are going to demand proof-of-vaccination from everyone, forcing them to get a vaccine whether they need it or not.

            You see... if you had been thinking about this undipshittedly you'd be making suggestions like: "What about getting waivers for the vaccine?" or asking questions like: "What can we do about these practical considerations that won't survive a one-size fits all solution?", and we'd be talking about how to minimize pandemic-related-causalities. But, no, we're gonna shake our heads cos we don't like who's coming up with the life-saving ideas.

            Here's something for you to ponder: Every single news personality you're parroting your hard-nosed opinion from on has already been vaccinated. They have also not once mentioned vaccine requirements for attending public schools... which you've benefitted from.

            Lots of 'adults' are going to be siting at the kids table this Thanksgiving.

            • (Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 28, @09:42PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 28, @09:42PM (#1139851)

              I try to keep those "adults" away from the children, thank you very much. I don't need another round of them being told the Muslims are going to bomb their school or the "socialist demonrats" are going to steal their teddy bears.

    • (Score: 3, Informative) by ElizabethGreene on Friday May 28, @10:44PM (2 children)

      by ElizabethGreene (6748) on Friday May 28, @10:44PM (#1139870)

      Please be specific about the cherries I picked. I cited more credible sources than you.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 29, @04:15AM (1 child)

        by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 29, @04:15AM (#1139945)

        Next time you should read them then. "The quality, quantity, and durability of protective immunity elicited by natural infection with SARS-CoV-2 are poor relative to the much higher levels of virus-neutralising antibodies and T cells induced by the vaccines currently being administered globally." And the conclusion sentence is "These data are all confirmation, if it were needed, that for SARS-CoV-2 the hope of protective immunity through natural infections might not be within our reach, and a global vaccination programme with high efficacy vaccines is the enduring solution."

        • (Score: 2) by ElizabethGreene on Sunday May 30, @03:14AM

          by ElizabethGreene (6748) on Sunday May 30, @03:14AM (#1140168)

          I did read them, and I read the underlying reference as well. You're right, I did pick a cherry.

          The authors assert that the level of immunity is correlated with circulating antibody levels, that those levels vary widely post infection, and that the levels decline as a function of time. Those are completely reasonable assertions.

          The cherry I picked is in the prior paragraph:

          they determined from that, in general, past infection confers 80·5% protection against reinfection, which decreases to 47·1% in those aged 65 years and older. Hansen and colleagues acknowledge the many limitations of their analysis being restricted to only PCR data, including the possibility that people might change their behaviour after a positive PCR test. This confounder is addressed by noting that the findings are similar in a sensitivity analysis of nurses, doctors, social workers, and health-care assistants who were tested regularly due to their profession.

          If you go to the underlying citation on the efficacy testing of the vaccine candidate (https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31604-4/fulltext) Figure 4 graphs A and B the circulating antibody levels for PCR confirmed COVID patients is higher than 14 days post one-shot and lower but not dramatically so after the booster. That leaves a quandary. Did that study (n=5) randomly pick people only with very high levels of antibodies?

           

  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by epitaxial on Friday May 28, @06:24PM (2 children)

    by epitaxial (3165) on Friday May 28, @06:24PM (#1139781)

    mRNA has been studied for years. It's nothing new. What is new is using it to deliver a vaccine.

    • (Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 29, @06:31AM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 29, @06:31AM (#1139966)

      It is new in fact, everything we know is new. Humans have been plodding along for millennia, you're speaking on a mechanism underpinning biology that has only been around for 60 years. The world as we know it is about 100 years old. We don't know shit.

      • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 01, @02:52AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 01, @02:52AM (#1140639)

        Better not use Wi-Fi. Who knows what could happen, the technology is just too new.

  • (Score: 5, Informative) by sjames on Friday May 28, @07:38PM (2 children)

    by sjames (2882) on Friday May 28, @07:38PM (#1139810) Journal

    You would have personally received vaccines with MUCH shorter safety records (the very same ones you mention). Plenty of people here on Soylent didn't get MMR because they started school before the combination was approved (but would have gotten measles and mumps vaccine separately). You probably got MMR only a year or two after it was approved.

    Note that all of the vaccines you mentioned are intrinsically riskier than an mRNA vaccine.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 29, @01:43PM (1 child)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 29, @01:43PM (#1140019)

      COVID vaccines have not yet even been officially approved. The emergency use authorization is a means of temporarily bypassing normal safety requirements.

      So no, nobody would have ever been forced to get vaccines like this. The COVID vaccines are literally experimental.

      • (Score: 2) by sjames on Sunday May 30, @12:14AM

        by sjames (2882) on Sunday May 30, @12:14AM (#1140136) Journal

        The difference between the emergency use authorization and full approval is a metric assload of paperwork and the final efficacy studies. They have made it through the safety studies and the mass distribution has borne that out.

        Much of that metric assload of paperwork and some of the testing only became required after the typical childhood immunizations were approved.

        So realistically, people my age and a little younger were required to be vaccinated with vaccines that were roughly as well tested as the COVID vaccine.