Quote:

---

Along with vaccine rollouts, the U.S. needs a National Hi-Fi (high filtration - 1kiki) Mask Initiative

https://www.statnews.com/2021/01/07/national-hi-fi-mask-initiative-nee
ded-with-vaccine-rollouts/

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

Quote:

---

Along with vaccine rollouts, the U.S. needs a National Hi-Fi (high filtration - 1kiki) Mask Initiative

https://www.statnews.com/2021/01/07/national-hi-fi-mask-initiative-nee
ded-with-vaccine-rollouts/

---

I'm putting a political tag on this, because it's a chance for the incoming Biden* administration and democratic* congress to show me what they're made of.

Unlike other masks which primarily protect others, these masks protect the wearer. So there would be no need to make them mandatory. If you want to protect yourself, just go ahead and wear them. If you have some objection, you can always go without.



If democrats* don't do any different, how are they any better?

---

Quote:

---

White House task force says there could be a fast-spreading 'USA variant' of coronavirus
“Without uniform implementation of effective face masking (two or three ply and well-fitting) and strict social distancing, epidemics could quickly worsen as these variants spread and become predominant.”
https://edition.cnn.com/2021/01/08/politics/white-house-coronavirus-ta
sk-force-reports/index.html

---

Quote:

---

How to reduce air leakage around a mask

Mask fitters

Masks fitters are a "frame" that can be placed over masks to improve the fit and "seal" of the mask against the face to reduce air leakage and increase inhalation filtration efficiency. Using mannequins that could "breathe," researchers at the University of Wisconsin-Madison found that placing either of two marketed mask fitters over a variety of masks increased inhalation filtration efficiencies from just 7% without the fitter to 26% for a 4-ply cotton mask, from 52% to 63% for a 3-ply spunbond polypropylene mask, from 44% to 91% for a surgical mask, and from only 18% up to as much as 95% for a 3-ply disposable non-medical mask with a melt-blown polypropylene center. Sign in to learn make a mask fitter at home or buy either of the two used in the study.

Nylon stockings

Another way to reduce air leaks was suggested by a study at Northeastern University in Boston, which showed that pulling an 8 to 10-inch tube of nylon (cut from a queen-sized nylon stocking) down over a regular mask and to the top of the neck. This significantly prevented air leakage around the mask and improved particle filtration efficiency, making the combined masking nearly as effective as an N-95 respirator which, unlike a medical mask, has an electrostatic charge and is specifically designed to prevent air leakage (Mueller, medRxiv 2020 --preprint; Godoy, NPR.org 4/22/20).

Similarly, a study found that adding a sleeve of nylon hosiery over a medical procedural mask with ear loops (Cardinal Health Inc) increased its overall filtration efficiency from just 38.5% to 80%. Other techniques that created a better fit for the procedure mask to reduce air leakage included tying the ear loops and tucking in the side pleats (see video demonstration), which increased filtration efficiency to 60.3%, or securing the ear loops with ear guards (61.7%), a hair clip (64.8%) or placing three rubber bands across the front of the mask and looped on the ears (78.2%) (Clapp, JAMA Intern Med 2020).

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:


‘Our New York Moment’: Virus Surges in Southern California

In the coming days, Los Angeles County will reach a level where one in 10 residents has tested positive for the coronavirus.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/09/us/california-coronavirus.html

To put that in perspective, the US has a tot al of 22,060,588 confirmed cases ( https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/map.html) or about 6.8% of the population.

---

Quote:

---

"I don't believe we have the evidence on any of the vaccines to be confident that it's going to prevent people from actually getting the infection and therefore being able to pass it on”, says WHO Chief Scientist @doctorsoumya pic.twitter.com/QdTvzj7Nyd

---

Quote:

---

With All Eyes on Covid-19, Drug-Resistant Infections Crept In
The spread of other dangerous germs is surging — a result, in part, of the chaotic response to the pandemic.


By Matt Richtel
Jan. 27, 2021 Updated 1:25 p.m. ET

As Covid-19 took hold over the last year, hospitals and nursing homes used and reused scarce protective equipment — masks, gloves, gowns. This desperate frugality helped prevent the airborne transfer of the virus.

But it also appears to have helped spread a different set of germs — drug-resistant bacteria and fungi — that have used the chaos of the pandemic to grow opportunistically in health care settings around the globe.

These bacteria and fungi, like Covid-19, prey on older people, the infirm and those with compromised immune systems. They can cling tenaciously to clothing and medical equipment, which is why nursing homes and hospitals before the pandemic were increasingly focused on cleaning rooms and changing gowns to prevent their spread.

That emphasis all but slipped away amid an all-consuming focus on the coronavirus. In fact, experts warn, the changes in hygiene and other practices caused by the Covid-19 fight are likely to have contributed to the spread of these drug-resistant germs.

“Seeing the world as a one-pathogen world is really problematic,” said Dr. Susan S. Huang, an infectious disease specialist at the University of California at Irvine Medical School, noting that the nearly singular focus on the pandemic appears to have led to more spread of drug-resistant infection. “We have every reason to believe the problem has gotten worse.”

A few data points reinforce her fears, including isolated outbreaks of various drug-resistant infections in Florida, New Jersey and California, as well as in India, Italy, Peru and France. Overall figures have been hard to track because many nursing homes and hospitals simply stopped screening for the germs as resources were diverted to Covid-19.

When even modest screening picked up again early in the summer, the results suggested that certain drug-resistant organisms had taken root and spread. Particularly troublesome have been growing case counts of a fungus called Candida auris, which authorities had tried to fight before the pandemic with increased screening, isolation of infected patients and better hygiene. Some strains of C. auris are resistant to all three major classes of antifungal drugs.

These intensive efforts had limited the spread of C. auris to a handful of cases in Los Angeles County. Now there are around 250, said Dr. Zachary Rubin, who leads the county’s infection control efforts at health care facilities.

“We saw a blooming in Candida auris,” said Dr. Rubin, who attributed the change to a handful of factors, notably the challenges in testing for the germ when so many testing resources went toward Covid-19.

Noxious drug-resistant bacteria are surfacing too, including Carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii, which is considered an “urgent health threat” by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In December, the C.D.C. reported a cluster of Acinetobacter baumannii during a surge of Covid-19 patients in an urban New Jersey hospital with about 500 beds. The hospital was not identified. And hospitals in Italy and Peru saw the spread of the bacteria Klebsiella pneumoniae.

In an acknowledgment of the issue, three major medical societies sent a letter on Dec. 28 to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services asking for a temporary suspension of rules that tie reimbursement rates to hospital-acquired infections. The three groups — the Society of Healthcare Epidemiology of America, the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists, and the Association for Infection Control and Epidemiology — feared that the infection rates may have risen because of Covid-19.

“Patient care staffing, supplies, care sites and standard practices have all changed during this extraordinary time,” the letter stated.

Not all types of drug-resistant infections have risen. For instance, some research shows no particular change during the pandemic in the rate of hospital patients acquiring the bacterium Clostridioides difficile — a finding that suggests the overall long-term impact of the pandemic on these infections is not yet clear.

Dr. Huang and other experts said they are not suggesting that the priority on fighting Covid-19 was misplaced. Rather, they say that renewed attention must be paid to drug-resistant germs. Earlier research has shown that as many as 65 percent of residents of nursing homes carry some form of drug-resistant infection.

Over the years, critics have charged that hospitals and, in particular, nursing homes, have been lax in their efforts to confront these infections because it is expensive to disinfect equipment, train staff, isolate infected patients and screen for the germs.

In response to these and other concerns, a greater effort was beginning to be made before the pandemic to monitor patients for these infections, particularly as they cycled in and out of nursing homes and intensive care units. This revolving door is known to spread germs that are carried by infected patients.

But after the pandemic began, there was much less monitoring and even, at times, a wholesale breakdown of communications about the transfer of such patients, experts said. Plus, the sickest Covid-19 patients were put on ventilators, where drug-resistant infections can cling and then spread.

Another possible contributor has been the heavy and regular use of steroids to treat Covid-19. These drugs help alleviate the virus’s most dangerous symptoms but can leave the immune system compromised in a way that allows other germs to more easily infiltrate the body.

The combination of these factors “is perfect” for the fungus to “take hold,” said Dr. Tom Chiller, the head of the fungal division of the C.D.C.

Earlier this month, the Florida Department of Health published a case report of four Candida auris cases at a hospital in Florida. (The hospital’s identity is masked by the C.D.C. and the state.) In an effort to understand the spread, the Florida department of health visited the Covid unit there in August. Their inquiry found that 35 of 67 patients admitted to the unit from Aug. 4 to 18 were colonized with C. auris, meaning that the fungus was on their skin but they were not yet infected.

Subsequently, six of the patients became infected.

Crucially, the study found that the spread of the fungus from one patient to the next may well have come from health care providers carrying the germ on protective gowns or gloves, as well as on mobile computers and other equipment that had been insufficiently cleaned. This was, the C.D.C. and other experts said, a breakdown in so-called infection control, a practice that had come under intense scrutiny in 2019 after C. auris took root in the East Coast and began to spread.

Nationally, the number of infections had increased to around 1,625 by November 2020, from 952 since the end of October 2019. The current number is likely far higher, Dr. Chiller said, because screening for the germ was largely halted early in the pandemic. When it picked up again, the numbers rose to 83 infections in August and 195 patients colonized — and, even then, testing was not as widespread as pre-pandemic.

The upshot is that the confirmed cases are “likely the tip of the iceberg,” Dr. Chiller said.

© 2021 The New York Times Company

We No Longer Sell Your Personal Information

---

Quote:

---

Opinion: Everyone should be wearing N95 masks now

Joseph G. Allen is an associate professor and director of the Healthy Buildings program at Harvard University’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health. He co-wrote “Healthy Buildings: How Indoor Spaces Drive Performance and Productivity.”

We are rightly grateful to the front-line health-care workers who put their lives on the line each day. Their relative risk of death rose 20 percent in 2020 over previous years.

We should also be grateful for the bakers and cooks, whose risk of death rose more than 50 percent. And for maids and truck drivers, who saw a 30 percent increase in death risk. And construction workers and shipping clerks, up more than 40 percent.


Those numbers come from a new report out of California that shines a light on the shocking risk to covid-19 by occupation. It also shows how necessary it is that we ramp up protections for essential workers. The best way to do that: better masks.

In the scrambling for information and tools in early days of the pandemic, it was acceptable to just say any cloth mask will do because it’s true. Any face covering is better than none.

But we’ve learned so much since then, and we need to adjust our strategy. A typical cloth mask might capture half of all respiratory aerosols that come out of our mouth when we talk, sing or just breathe. A tightly woven cloth mask might get you to 60 or 70 percent, and a blue surgical mask can get you to 70 or 80 percent.


But there’s no reason any essential worker — and, really, everyone in the country — should go without masks that filter 95 percent.

The masks I’m referring to, of course, are N95s. These are cheap — pre-pandemic they cost about 50 cents — and easy to manufacture. Yet our country has failed to invoke the Defense Production Act to produce enough masks for health-care workers and other essential workers. That needs to change, as my colleagues at Harvard Medical School have written

To see the true power of masks as a public health tool, we have to examine them in the context of everyone wearing them, where the power of each mask doubles. That’s because the particles have to pass through the material twice — once after being emitted and again before someone breathes them in. Take the example of two 70 percent efficient masks, which combine to reduce 91 percent of particles. Not bad. But two N95s result in greater than a 99 percent reduction in exposure.


Think about that for a minute. We could reduce exposure by 99 percent for what should be $1 a mask. (Prices are higher now because of the failure to produce an adequate supply.) Throw in better ventilation and some distance between people, and you have hospital-grade protections.

How well a mask works isn’t just about filtration; it must also fit well. A mask with a good set of filters doesn’t do much good if your breath can escape out the sides or top. The mask needs to go over the bridge of your nose, down around your chin and be flush against your cheeks.

Americans should become familiar with ways to test a mask’s fit. Every time you put on a mask, do a “user seal check.” Put your hands over the mask to block the air moving through it, and exhale gently. You shouldn’t feel air coming out the side or up toward your eyes. Then, test to make sure it stays in place by moving your head side to side and all around. Read passages of text, like the “Rainbow Passage” that’s commonly used for respirator fit testing, and see whether the mask slides around too much when you talk.

Beyond the basics of filtration and fit, consumers will need to navigate a confusing market. Is a KN95 mask acceptable? How about KF94? Does country of origin matter? What about counterfeits? A formal federal program could help by offering clear guidance on hi-fi masks.


Until that happens, here’s my cheat sheet: If you can find an N95, go for it. These are certified in the United States. Barring that, I’d go for the certified mask used in South Korea, the KF94. Next I’d choose KN95s, but there is a catch: The government reports that KN95s out of China might not meet standards unless the manufacturer holds a “NIOSH (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health) Certificate.”

If you can’t find one of these masks, or if you’re not sure whether they meet the standards, there’s something you can do right now with confidence: Double-mask with a surgical mask and a cloth mask. The surgical mask gives you good, certified filtration, while the cloth mask on top helps improve the fit. Research shows this can achieve greater than 90 percent filtration.

---

Quote:

---

Many people ask if they need an N95 on their morning runs or while sitting on a park bench. The answer to both is no. Choose masks based on the level of risk for that activity. If you’re out for a jog with no one around or on a walk outside with a friend, a simple two- or three-layer cloth mask is fine. But use a hi-fi mask or double-mask if you head indoors. If you’re an essential worker, a hi-fi mask is critical.


I’m not alone in calling for better masks, and certainly not the first. But I am joining the chorus calling for them. This could be the key to slowing the pandemic and limiting spread from the new more highly transmissible variants

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

After months of ignoring it when not outright belittling it, western media finally has to admit Russia's COVID-19 vaccine Sputnik V is an international hit.


Putin’s Once-Scorned Vaccine Now Favorite in Pandemic Fight

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-02-06/putin-s-once-scorne
d-vaccine-is-now-a-favorite-in-pandemic-fight

---

Quote:

---

Deaths of Elderly Who Recovered From COVID-19, but Died After Vaccine, Raise Questions
Sharyl Attkisson
February 10, 2021 Updated: February 11, 2021

Two small clusters of deaths after COVID-19 vaccination have been reported among nursing homes in Kentucky and Arkansas.

In Kentucky, four seniors died the same day of their vaccination on Dec. 30, 2020. Three of the four who passed away reportedly already had had coronavirus prior to getting vaccinated.

In Arkansas, four seniors died at a long term care facility about a week after their vaccination. All tested positive for COVID-19 after vaccination.

The deaths are reported in a federal database called VAERS, the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System.

Deaths after vaccination don’t necessarily mean the vaccine is to blame. Of those receiving coronavirus vaccines, many are elderly and frail, or already suffering from serious illnesses. That makes it difficult to know whether there’s a connection.
Kentucky Nursing Home Deaths

According to VAERS reports, the Kentucky deaths occurred on Dec. 30 after vaccinations with the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. An ill 88-year-old woman who was “14 + days post covid” was given the Pfizer-BioNTech shot while she was “unresponsive in [her] room.” She died within an hour and a half (914961-1). An 88-year-old who was “15 days post covid” got the shot, was monitored for 15 minutes afterward, and passed away within 90 minutes (914994-1). A third report says an 88-year-old woman who was “14 + days post covid” vomited four minutes after receiving her shot, became short of breath, and passed away that night (915562-1). And an 85-year-old woman vaccinated at 5 p.m. was “found unresponsive” less than two hours later and died shortly after (915682-1).

In response to questions about the Kentucky cluster, a spokesman for the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) said its experts noted “no pattern … among the [Kentucky] cases that would indicate a concern for the safety of the COVID-19 vaccine.”

---

Quote:

---

Scientists differ on whether people who have had coronavirus, like the Kentucky patients, should receive the COVID-19 vaccination at all. The CDC insists it’s safe for people who have recovered from COVID-19 to get vaccinated and that there’s no minimum interval recommended between infection and vaccination.

“Vaccination should be offered to persons regardless of history of prior symptomatic or asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 [the virus that causes COVID-19] infection,” it states.

But other scientists say vaccinating people who are already considered immune after a natural COVID-19 infection wastes valuable doses of vaccines when there are shortages. And neither Pfizer’s nor Moderna’s studies showed any benefit to vaccinating previously infected patients.

The Kentucky patients were vaccinated shortly after the CDC disseminated false information on this point. The CDC claimed studies showed that vaccines are effective for people who have had COVID-19. The disinformation was given on the agency’s website, in its Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report and in a webinar instruction to medical professionals.

In the webinar, the CDC’s Dr. Sarah Oliver falsely stated, “Data from both clinical trials suggests that people with prior infection are still likely to benefit from vaccination.”

Under pressure from Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), who first flagged the CDC’s incorrect information in December, the agency recently issued a correction but used wording that still falsely implies studies showed that the vaccines helped people previously infected with COVID-19.

Meantime, preliminary results from a study co-authored by a team of more than two dozen researchers noted that people infected with COVID-19 in the past “experience systemic side effects with a significantly higher frequency” after vaccination than others.

The CDC confirms that it’s monitoring reports that people who’ve already had COVID-19 seem to be suffering significantly more frequent or more severe reactions after vaccination, or “reactogenicity,” than those who didn’t have COVID-19.

“CDC is aware of reports of increased reactogenicity (such as fever, chills, and muscle aches) in persons who have had COVID-19,” said a spokesman.
Arkansas Nursing Home Deaths

Four nursing home deaths in Arkansas occurred after vaccination with the Moderna-manufactured vaccine. All four patients tested positive for COVID-19 after vaccination, according to the VAERS reports. But there’s no indication as to whether they had coronavirus at the time of their vaccination or acquired it after their shot.

A 65-year-old man (921547-1) who received the Moderna vaccine on Jan. 2, 2021, died two days later, with the VAERS report noting that he had COVID-19. Three other Arkansas seniors died about a week after receiving the Moderna vaccine on Dec. 22, 2020. The person reporting the death of an 82-year-old man (917117-1) six days after his shot said he was vaccinated in an attempt to “mitigate his risk” and that “this was unsuccessful and [the] patient died.” The VAERS report notes, “After vaccination, patient tested positive for COVID-19.”

Two elderly women, ages 90 (917790-1) and 78 (917793-1), were vaccinated the same day as the 65-year-old man and also tested positive for COVID-19 about a week after their shots and died. According to the unnamed person who reported the 90-year-old’s death, “the vaccine did not have enough time to prevent COVID 19” and “There is no evidence that the vaccination caused patient’s death. It simply didn’t have time to save her life.” The person who reported the 78-year-old’s death claimed she died “as a result of COVID-19 and her underlying health conditions and not as a result of the vaccine.”

In response to questions about the Arkansas cluster, the CDC said, “Surveillance data to date do not indicate excess deaths among elderly patients receiving COVID-19 vaccinations.” Overall, says the agency, the number of deaths at long term care facilities after COVID-19 vaccinations is no higher than what would be expected to occur naturally.

Frail Patients
Separately, the CDC is monitoring the impact of the vaccines on already-frail patients such as the chronically ill in nursing homes.

In Norway, alarm bells sounded when 23 people died shortly after vaccination. After investigating 13 of the deaths, Norway’s medical agency has concluded side effects that are common with the Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines, such as fever, nausea, and diarrhea, “may have contributed to fatal outcomes in some of the frail patients.”

“There is a possibility that these common adverse reactions, that are not dangerous in fitter, younger patients and are not unusual with vaccines, may aggravate underlying disease in the elderly,” said Steinar Madsen, medical director of the Norwegian Medicines Agency.

A World Health Organization (WHO) expert panel disagrees. It says the deaths “are in line with the expected, all-cause mortality rates and causes of death in the sub-population of frail, elderly individuals, and the available information does not confirm a contributory role for the vaccine in the reported fatal events.”

But one unanswered question is whether patients who are both frail and have already had COVID-19 might suffer a double-whammy that puts them at greater risk when vaccinated. First, those with a previous COVID-19 infection might be more likely to suffer adverse events upon vaccination, according to scientific reports. Second, their frailty may make them less able to handle the adverse events, as Norway’s medical agency found with some patients.

In the United States, VAERS reports contain numerous other cases of elderly, frail people who’d had COVID-19, got vaccinated, and died.

A 96-year-old Ohio woman tested positive for COVID-19 in November, got the Pfizer vaccine on Dec. 28, 2020, in a rehab facility after a fall, and died that afternoon (915920-1).

A 94-year-old Michigan man at a senior living facility who had COVID-19 and other illnesses received the Moderna vaccine on Jan. 2, 2021, and died of cardiac arrest two days later (918487-1).

A 91-year-old Michigan woman with Alzheimer’s and other illnesses at a senior living facility who had tested positive for COVID-19 received the Moderna vaccine on Dec. 30, 2020. She died four days later (924186-1).

And an 85-year-old California woman with Alzheimer’s and other disorders at a senior living facility received the Pfizer BioNTech vaccine on Jan. 5, 2021, and was found dead the same day. After her vaccination, an earlier COVID-19 test from Jan. 3 returned positive, though she’d had no symptoms (924456-1).

In other cases, elderly, frail patients tested positive for COVID-19 shortly after vaccination.

A 104-year-old woman in New York received the Pfizer vaccine on Dec. 30, 2020. The next day, a COVID-19 test was done and came back positive. She became ill the following day and died on Jan. 4, 2021 (920832-1).

And a 71-year-old New York man received the Moderna vaccine on Dec. 21, 2020, developed a fever and respiratory distress, and tested positive for COVID-19. He was given Remdesivir. He died after 6 days (922977-1).

A WHO vaccine safety subcommittee reviewed reports of deaths among the frail, elderly after the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. The members determined, two weeks ago, there’s no cause for concern. “The benefit-risk balance of [Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine] BNT162b2 remains favorable in the elderly, and does not suggest any revision, at present, to the recommendations around the safety of this vaccine,” said the WHO officials.
Pfizer, Moderna, and CDC Responses

In response to questions for this report, Pfizer issued a statement saying: “We take adverse events that are potentially associated with our COVID-19 vaccine, BNT162b2, very seriously. We closely monitor all such events and collect relevant information to share with global regulatory authorities. Based on ongoing safety reviews performed by Pfizer, BioNTech and health authorities, BNT162b2 retains a positive benefit-risk profile for the prevention of COVID-19 infections.”

Pfizer said that millions of people have been vaccinated and “serious adverse events, including deaths that are unrelated to the vaccine, are unfortunately likely to occur at a similar rate as they would in the general population.”

Pfizer didn’t answer whether it has concluded that any deaths might be linked to vaccination. It also wouldn’t answer whether it has looked at any clusters of deaths, or noted any patterns or areas of concern. And the company wouldn’t say whether it recommends that those recently or currently infected with COVID-19 get vaccinated.

Moderna didn’t answer our questions or request for information and comment.

Currently, the CDC recommends vaccination for people who’ve already had coronavirus.

The agency didn’t directly answer the question of whether it’s safe for people to get vaccinated while they have an active COVID-19 infection. A CDC spokesman said that deferring vaccination is recommended in those instances, but didn’t say whether it was due to a safety issue.

“Vaccination of persons with known current SARS-CoV-2 infection should be deferred until the person has recovered from the acute illness (if the person had symptoms) and criteria have been met for them to discontinue isolation,” says the CDC. “This recommendation applies to persons who develop SARS-CoV-2 infection before receiving any vaccine doses as well as those who develop SARS-CoV-2 infection after the first dose but before receipt of the second dose.”

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by SIGNYM:
The risk of death from vaccination is still low, but it seems that people most at risk from dying of Covid-19 .... or who, ironically, survived Covid ... are also the ones most at risk for death from vaccination.

---

Quote:

---

Speaking of vaccination deaths ...

The risk of death from vaccination is still low, but it seems that people most at risk from dying of Covid-19 .... or who, ironically, survived Covid ... are also the ones most at risk for death from vaccination.

---

Quote:

---

A coronavirus variant that probably emerged in May and surged to become the dominant strain in California not only spreads more readily than its predecessors but also evades antibodies generated by COVID-19 vaccines or prior infection and is associated with severe illness and death, researchers said.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:
That may be the objection your brother's friend had to them.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
... after enough people have gotten it (a COVID-19 vaccine) they will start enforcing penalties against people who choose not to get it.

My guess is that they'll withhold your license to work if you refuse to get it.

People keep telling me that's not going to happen in America, but we're not close to the level of people who willingly have to get it because they're terrified or just tired of this horrible new normal the Government has imposed upon the weak willed people of America.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

"No. He clearly stated that his objection to them was that it typically takes 6 to 8 years before a vaccine is approved."

Then he's wrong. Flu vaccines are approved in less than a year.

---

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 1KIKI:

The predictions thread
http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?bid=18&tid=51008&p=19

Quote:

---

Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
... after enough people have gotten it (a COVID-19 vaccine) they will start enforcing penalties against people who choose not to get it.

My guess is that they'll withhold your license to work if you refuse to get it.

People keep telling me that's not going to happen in America, but we're not close to the level of people who willingly have to get it because they're terrified or just tired of this horrible new normal the Government has imposed upon the weak willed people of America.

---

---

Quote:

---

He asked his wife, Ann, what he should do. Speak out, she said. “You don’t want to wake up in a year and see the body count and know that you didn’t do all you could to prevent it.”

---

Quote:

---

57% of workers support a mandatory Covid-19 vaccine for return to office: CNBC Survey

---

Quote:

---

Can employers mandate workers be vaccinated before returning to work?

It's pretty clearly established that yes, [individual] employers can require mandatory vaccinations, as a matter of prior health crises and common law.

---

Quote:

---

Can Your Employer Require You to Get a COVID-19 Vaccine?

The short answer: Yes. An employer can make a vaccination a requirement if you want to continue working there.

---

Quote:

---

Proof of vaccination will be very valuable — and easy to abuse
Imagine a two-tiered society: One group has access to jobs and public places, one doesn’t

---

Quote:

---

Until a vaccine is fully approved and widely available, we should not — except in the rarest of cases — make participation in society depend on immunity status. And yet the vaccination cards that will be issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and other public health agencies worldwide will make enforcing that norm a challenge.

---

Quote:

---

These are laudable goals, but the cards could easily become de facto entry documents required for people to attend school, get a job, dine at a restaurant or patronize businesses. Employers might mandate that workers show coronavirus vaccine cards before they return to the office, and once vaccines are available for children, schools might require students to show these cards to attend. Tech companies are already scrambling to create apps that would include vaccine and coronavirus testing information, and a digital vaccine passport for travelers will soon be introduced by the International Air Transport Association, a major airline trade group.

---

Quote:

---

Letting people make high-stakes decisions based on vaccination status would create other risks, too: A black market in forged cards could emerge. And there would be powerful incentives for people to find ways to cheat the system to get the shot sooner. Such scenarios underscore why, for now, the health secretary ought to limit the use of vaccine cards to their intended purpose: to help remind people when their second shot is due.

---