That is about masks with no mention of vaccines, and I hope that any person truly interested in the topic would understand that masks are not settled science.
Vaccines however have bene proven safe and effective over and over and over with virtually no contradictory data. It is settled science (though not all the details obviously).
I'm curious to see how enforcing the vaccination policy will work out. I haven't seen any other big company doing this move, and to my knowledge there are many engineers refusing to be vaccinated.
> and to my knowledge there are many engineers refusing to be vaccinated
The majority of the general population is getting vaccinated. I seriously doubt that there are disproportionately large numbers of vaccine holdouts working in positions at Google that are correlated with being highly educated.
It's more likely that these policies will be well-received by Google employees who don't want to be exposed to an extremely risky virus that is known to be highly contagious but easily stopped with a simple vaccine.
It will be interesting because software devs have more than usual leverage against the company. In any other job it would just be "get jabbed or get fired" and that would be the end of it. Being anti-vax is definitely not a protected class, and is easily covered by 'at will' employment policy.
But goog isn't going to fire a meaningful number of devs over it.
Many universities, entities in the healthcare system, events, NYC, etc. Personally, I expect the floodgates to open at least moderately wide as putting requirements in place is increasingly normalized.
Why not extend it to the end of the year? Delta is not a joke, and the evidence isn't firm that vaccinated people are fully safe against it. It's increasingly looking like there may be similar variants, some even more vaccine resistant.
Given the lack of information, no major company should be committing to the end of WFH until the results are clearer. That definitely isn't going to be the case until well after Labor Day.
I don't understand why the major tech companies are so hellbent on re-opening the offices in the fall. It's like they've drawn a line in the sand and they can't even consider reversing course. Which doesn't even make any sense, because for all intents and purposes they've been doing fine. Most tech company's stock price and profits are above their pre-WFH levels. Surely extending WFH until January isn't going to ruin their business.
There is one thing to note though, I would assume Google and maybe a few others might have more people willing to transition to a hybrid model or spend days back in the office specifically for the huge amount of amenities they offer, and the food's pretty good.
Contrast this with contractor body shops, small or medium businesses in regular buildings where your day is a screaming hellhole of a tiny cubicle with low walls or an open plan office that also has support with loud headsets next to you, the only lunch option is an overpriced sandwich or salad, the commute is over an hour each way in a cramped, standing room only transit and not a private company shuttle with wifi and clean seats.
If I was working out of MV I would be more inclined to spend a day or two a week voluntarily at the office.
If I was in an open plan cube farm where I give myself mild tinnitus just having noise cancelling headphones cranked up to eleven for the entire duration, then an hour and a half ACE/Caltrain/BART multiple transfers home, fuck that, 100% remote, if I get pushback on the remote part I leave.
> At the same time, we recognize that many Googlers are seeing spikes in their communities caused by the Delta variant and are concerned about returning to the office. This extension will allow us time to ramp back into work while providing flexibility for those who need it. We’ll continue watching the data carefully and let you know at least 30 days in advance before transitioning into our full return to office plans.
Myself and some friends went to a party three weeks ago. A few days later, a couple of us (myself included) end up with COVID. We're all vaccinated, with the full span of vaccines represented (myself: J&J). We tracked down the person at the party who probably spread it; they were also vaccinated, but only became symptomatic the day after the party. Typical story.
There's evidence that, at least, the vaccines (possibly with hypothetical boosters down the line) are effective in keeping those afflicted out of the hospital. I can only speak for myself, but it did do that. It sucked; about as bad as an influenza bout I had a couple years ago. Go down the list of symptoms and I checked all of them. Ten days later (almost to the day, amazingly), it cleared up.
What does the return to "normal" look like? Well, nothing will ever be normal again, if you define Normal to mean "the way things were in 2019". It isn't going away. Delta is no joke; so we wait until it clears up? Until we have another vaccine? And what about the 2022 variants? You want to wait until 2022, and we'll be in the same exact situation then, and you'll want to wait again, because the Omega Variant is no joke. And in 2023, the Zeta Variant will be no joke. No one is joking.
What do you want "normal" to look like? For many people, it may mean more opportunities to work from home. That can't work for a remotely significant portion of the world; tech is privileged in that it can, sometimes work, but that privilege is born on the backs of thousands of workers in healthcare, telecommunications, manufacturing, services, supermarkets, food processing, etc who don't have that privilege. This isn't "I can work safely, but most can't"; it's "I can work safely because most can't".
I don't want Normal to mean that. Sure that means we need to be smarter in every industry, to make work and gatherings generally safer. Get vaccinated. Wear masks. Quit it with the open offices and everyone two feet away from each other. But at least for me, it also means, I don't want to work remotely. I don't want that to be the norm in our industry. I want to collaborate with coworkers in person. I'm tired of zoom meetings. I'm tired of the PlayStation in my living room looking at me every time I walk to the home office. I'm tired of bringing on new coworkers and never knowing them beyond a line of ASCII text in a Slack direct messages list. Most of all, I'm tired of saying "yeah we're still work from home for employee safety" to my friends in healthcare and manufacturing, who inevitably feel jealousy and derision because not only was that never an option for them, but its only an option for me because it was never an option for them.
There are higher goals than safety; a time for it, certainly, but that time has passed. The world is not going to get safer. The only reasonable option is to adjust our expectations to be alright with a less safe world. You will get sick. I can say with certainty; it sucks, and may actually be the end for some people. This is going to happen, guaranteed, no matter how isolated you remain. You will make a mistake; you will get COVID; and you'll feel like an idiot, having made so many sacrifices to spend 18 months in isolation only to end up in the exact same place as those who didn't care.
I'm not sure what's being shared externally, but that Oct 18 date is itself contingent on offices entering a stage which is considered safe. It's the earliest that people can return, not an absolute date. October 18 could come and if an office is located in an area with case counts above a certain threshold (or vaccination rates below a certain level) people will not be expected to come back.
Google was one of the first to send people home. I was home weeks before my kids were definitively sent home from school. We are likely to be one of the last to be asked to come back.
I'm not vaccinated. Why? Because before I had the opportunity to receive the vaccine, I had an antibody test for the virus, revealing I have a standard deviation more antibodies (after 6 months) for the virus than the average person does after 2 doses of the Pfizer vaccine (and ~3 months).
There isn't conclusive data (AFAIK) on the relationship between antibody levels and immunity for this particular virus, but it is not unlikely that people like me have better immunity than the average vaccinated person.
I would've thought an inclusive company like Google would take such basic immunological nuances in to account when stigmatising their own employees?
Natural immunity comes in a lot of variations, and sometimes its even so weak that reinfection can occur. Immunity by vaccine is comparatively very predictable and by nearly all accounts at least as strong as most natural immunity, with plenty of studies finding it to be stronger. So, that is part of the concern. Additionally, antibody tests are not fully reliable, whereas being vaccinated is never going to be "wrong". It's simply you are or you aren't, with no chance of false positives.
You skip over the fact that it means you caught covid (either through malfeasance or ignorance) and were lucky enough to have survived, you admit to your ignorance about the relationship between antibody levels and immunity, you don't even mention which antibody test you took (which belies an indifference or an ignorance for the details of immuniology and our collective ignorance about Covid), and then want us to believe that you're a) smarter than Google, and b) more immune than most people to Covid.
I'm glad that it didn't kill you, and that you're not suffering from the effects of long covid. That shit is no joke! Did you have rigorous scientific testing done before you caught covid so that you knew it wouldn't affect you?
The awkward truth is that we know very little about how immunity works for covid. We knew enough to build a vaccine and have a year's worth of scientific papers about it and the disease, but the analogy is the difference between knowing enough to build a ship to sail the ocean find the Americas in the 1400s, and Google maps satellite imagery on smartphones.
Ethics review boards know it's amoral to intentionally expose people to virus, even ones we've vaccinated (Even with informed consent society is just too warped for that choice to be made ethically, given the risks.), which means we're not sure, at the edges, how to test for how protective the vaccine is, because, especially with the delta variant becoming more prevalent, we don't know.
This isn't an argument against taking the vaccine. Get the vaccine. The broad empirical data says it's hugely protective. But if it turns out between testing for IgM and IgG, B-cells and T-cells (and the three types of them) that we're using the wrong kind of test to test for protectivity, and that by the same fluke of chance that whatever antibody test you took that you have higher levels of makes you more vulnerable than the rest of the population, Google isn't willing to accept the liability as your hypothetical employer that they knowingly gave you covid and killed you/someone in your family (children in eligible to be vaccinated, or an unvaccinated elder) through gross negligence that could be argued over in a court of law.
I'm not remotely an immunolgist, but I've read enough wikipedia after testing negative for IgM antibodies for covid despite having it, to say that the human immune system is ridiculously complex, and (in part, thanks to our lack of universal healthcare) we lack the scientifically rigorous data to know what we're looking for. The measles vaccine has something like 0.02% of non-responders. That is, a tiny number of people who get the vaccine don't develop antibodies for measles. That's something we know and can account for and deal with and handle. But with covid, we're still not even sure what to test for!
How many people are familiar w/ the phenomenon of antibody-dependent enhancement of corona viruses? If you are familiar, how confident are you that it won't be an issue with the current vaccines, and for what reasons?
It's very surprising to me how much support there is in general for outsourcing extremely important, previously personal medical decisions to employers. The concept of autonomy of our own bodies as an important right has taken a major step into the background.
> If you are familiar, how confident are you that it won't be an issue with the current vaccines, and for what reasons?
I'm extremely confident, because we already have population-scale data on the matter. All evidence points to the vaccines producing marked reductions in infection rates and virtually eliminating severe cases and hospitalizations. It's difficult to even find any cases of vaccinated COVID patients getting severe infections.
Antibody-dependent enhancement of corona viruses was a concern before we had data, but it was taken into account in the risk evaluation process like every other well-known factor in vaccine research.
This article is from September 2020 and includes the following passage:
> Should it occur, ERD caused by human vaccines will first be observed in larger phase II and/or phase III efficacy trials that have sufficient infection events for statistical comparisons between the immunized and placebo control study arms.
All evidence in both the human trials and data from the general public being vaccinated has shown the that vaccines (at least the mainstream western ones) greatly lower both the incidence and the severity of COVID-19. That is, ADE is not a problem here.
Where are the prominent voices among researchers and doctors and health officials discussing this? Where are the published papers that have garnered a lot of attention? By all accounts, this appears to be an entirely speculative concern, one among many others that are not well substantiated.
A lot of questions, and none of them asked why one should be able to spread a deadly disease to their coworkers without consequence from their employer.
The unvaccinated are also continuing to mutate this disease, which increases the possibility of it turning deadly even for those that are vaccinated.
Lastly, everyone retains autonomy: The employee is free to work for an employer that does not require vaccination, and the employer is free to require it from their employees.
Basically, it seems to have a very minor impact. There is existing precedent for being forced to vaccinate, though I prefer it be used as a very last resort because I think that being forced to do a thing makes more people oppose it and I'd rather see more light and less heat in the vaccine discussions.
There are real risks to vaccines, but according to VAERS data, they're orders of magnitude smaller than those of the virus itself. If one isn't concerned by a 2% mortality from Covid, it seems absurd to me to worry about a ~0.0002% chance of vaccine injury.
If you were playing an RPG and got a magic item that let you roll 1d1000 every time you died and escape death on every roll but a natural 1, you'd think that was OP. This is effectively what the vaccine is, so it makes no sense to avoid vaccination.
> It's very surprising to me how much support there is in general for outsourcing extremely important, previously personal medical decisions to employers
It's because it's political suicide for any politician who tries. Look at the protests in France. Employers also have the most vested interest in driving up vaccination rates because, for the most part, a drawn-out pandemic hurts businesses.
>It's very surprising to me how much support there is in general for outsourcing extremely important, previously personal medical decisions to employers.
I agree, I believe we should have universal government-provided healthcare for all citizens. Employers have far too much control over healthcare in the USA.
> how confident are you that it won't be an issue with the current vaccines, and for what reasons?
Pretty much confident, since a) researchers are well aware of ADE (more than some random person on the internet) b) they take ADE into account when designing and testing the vaccine
Someone needed to go first to try and get a leg up on the competition in terms of productivity or whatever KPI the company is tracking, and it seems Google is first Big Tech Co to go. It will be interesting to see just how exactly this all will play out considering some in the workforce are vaccine hesitant. I wonder if, besides proof of vaccination, health checks will be required to enter the campus, or if masks will need to be worn at all times indoors, or if social distancing will still need to be observed.
Why not a policy of “vaccinated or recovered”? The data is pretty clear that the latter have ~~10x better immunity against reinfection. They also arguably provide better protection for the rest of us, since their natural immunity is less a monoculture.
Antibodies from the vaccine are a lot more numerous and longer lasting in one's body. Apparently having had it only gives you a shorter duration of immunity.
"First, anyone coming to work on our campuses will need to be vaccinated. We’re rolling this policy out in the U.S. in the coming weeks and will expand to other regions in the coming months."
This is the trend in the last couple weeks among many companies and governments. It's just a shame the need for this wasn't realized 2-3 months ago. We could be far ahead of where we are today if more entities had been more aggressive about vaccine mandates. It almost feels like we're feigning collective surprise that a big chunk of Americans decided to take a staunchly anti-science, anti-medicine, anti-rationality stance. In reality, I think most of us saw this coming a mile away.
Fucking lol. I'm glad that you think Joe Schmoe has outsmarted Google legal, but losing your god-given right to work at Google if you don't get vaccinated is actually not a violation of the Nuremberg code.
[+] [-] 13years|4 years ago|reply
“their approach to the pandemic is grounded in more scientific rigor, not less.”
https://centipedenation.com/transmissions/mit-study-finds-th...
How about we not label anyone idiots and simply debate the data? Whatever your perspective, maybe there is data you haven't seen.
[+] [-] standardUser|4 years ago|reply
Vaccines however have bene proven safe and effective over and over and over with virtually no contradictory data. It is settled science (though not all the details obviously).
[+] [-] maxwellito|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] mavhc|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] PragmaticPulp|4 years ago|reply
The majority of the general population is getting vaccinated. I seriously doubt that there are disproportionately large numbers of vaccine holdouts working in positions at Google that are correlated with being highly educated.
It's more likely that these policies will be well-received by Google employees who don't want to be exposed to an extremely risky virus that is known to be highly contagious but easily stopped with a simple vaccine.
[+] [-] JumpCrisscross|4 years ago|reply
Morgan Stanley de facto did. Vaccination requires to enter the office. Office work required to keep job.
I’m sure there will be a job market for those who refuse to get vaccinated in low-density population centres.
[+] [-] lm28469|4 years ago|reply
It's illegal in many countries
[+] [-] rootusrootus|4 years ago|reply
But goog isn't going to fire a meaningful number of devs over it.
[+] [-] ghaff|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jxidjhdhdhdhfhf|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dcolkitt|4 years ago|reply
Given the lack of information, no major company should be committing to the end of WFH until the results are clearer. That definitely isn't going to be the case until well after Labor Day.
I don't understand why the major tech companies are so hellbent on re-opening the offices in the fall. It's like they've drawn a line in the sand and they can't even consider reversing course. Which doesn't even make any sense, because for all intents and purposes they've been doing fine. Most tech company's stock price and profits are above their pre-WFH levels. Surely extending WFH until January isn't going to ruin their business.
[+] [-] ev1|4 years ago|reply
Contrast this with contractor body shops, small or medium businesses in regular buildings where your day is a screaming hellhole of a tiny cubicle with low walls or an open plan office that also has support with loud headsets next to you, the only lunch option is an overpriced sandwich or salad, the commute is over an hour each way in a cramped, standing room only transit and not a private company shuttle with wifi and clean seats.
If I was working out of MV I would be more inclined to spend a day or two a week voluntarily at the office.
If I was in an open plan cube farm where I give myself mild tinnitus just having noise cancelling headphones cranked up to eleven for the entire duration, then an hour and a half ACE/Caltrain/BART multiple transfers home, fuck that, 100% remote, if I get pushback on the remote part I leave.
[+] [-] supergeek133|4 years ago|reply
> At the same time, we recognize that many Googlers are seeing spikes in their communities caused by the Delta variant and are concerned about returning to the office. This extension will allow us time to ramp back into work while providing flexibility for those who need it. We’ll continue watching the data carefully and let you know at least 30 days in advance before transitioning into our full return to office plans.
[+] [-] lazyjones|4 years ago|reply
Latest official numbers for the UK, Delta variant:
CFR 0.03% for fully vaccinated < 50 years
CFR 0.03% for unvaccinated < 50 years
https://twitter.com/kerpen/status/1418562741246300167
(I checked his numbers with the official source, they are correct in this regard, although rounded from 0.026 and 0.028 respectively)
[+] [-] 015a|4 years ago|reply
There's evidence that, at least, the vaccines (possibly with hypothetical boosters down the line) are effective in keeping those afflicted out of the hospital. I can only speak for myself, but it did do that. It sucked; about as bad as an influenza bout I had a couple years ago. Go down the list of symptoms and I checked all of them. Ten days later (almost to the day, amazingly), it cleared up.
What does the return to "normal" look like? Well, nothing will ever be normal again, if you define Normal to mean "the way things were in 2019". It isn't going away. Delta is no joke; so we wait until it clears up? Until we have another vaccine? And what about the 2022 variants? You want to wait until 2022, and we'll be in the same exact situation then, and you'll want to wait again, because the Omega Variant is no joke. And in 2023, the Zeta Variant will be no joke. No one is joking.
What do you want "normal" to look like? For many people, it may mean more opportunities to work from home. That can't work for a remotely significant portion of the world; tech is privileged in that it can, sometimes work, but that privilege is born on the backs of thousands of workers in healthcare, telecommunications, manufacturing, services, supermarkets, food processing, etc who don't have that privilege. This isn't "I can work safely, but most can't"; it's "I can work safely because most can't".
I don't want Normal to mean that. Sure that means we need to be smarter in every industry, to make work and gatherings generally safer. Get vaccinated. Wear masks. Quit it with the open offices and everyone two feet away from each other. But at least for me, it also means, I don't want to work remotely. I don't want that to be the norm in our industry. I want to collaborate with coworkers in person. I'm tired of zoom meetings. I'm tired of the PlayStation in my living room looking at me every time I walk to the home office. I'm tired of bringing on new coworkers and never knowing them beyond a line of ASCII text in a Slack direct messages list. Most of all, I'm tired of saying "yeah we're still work from home for employee safety" to my friends in healthcare and manufacturing, who inevitably feel jealousy and derision because not only was that never an option for them, but its only an option for me because it was never an option for them.
There are higher goals than safety; a time for it, certainly, but that time has passed. The world is not going to get safer. The only reasonable option is to adjust our expectations to be alright with a less safe world. You will get sick. I can say with certainty; it sucks, and may actually be the end for some people. This is going to happen, guaranteed, no matter how isolated you remain. You will make a mistake; you will get COVID; and you'll feel like an idiot, having made so many sacrifices to spend 18 months in isolation only to end up in the exact same place as those who didn't care.
[+] [-] cmrdporcupine|4 years ago|reply
I'm not sure what's being shared externally, but that Oct 18 date is itself contingent on offices entering a stage which is considered safe. It's the earliest that people can return, not an absolute date. October 18 could come and if an office is located in an area with case counts above a certain threshold (or vaccination rates below a certain level) people will not be expected to come back.
Google was one of the first to send people home. I was home weeks before my kids were definitively sent home from school. We are likely to be one of the last to be asked to come back.
[+] [-] krona|4 years ago|reply
There isn't conclusive data (AFAIK) on the relationship between antibody levels and immunity for this particular virus, but it is not unlikely that people like me have better immunity than the average vaccinated person.
I would've thought an inclusive company like Google would take such basic immunological nuances in to account when stigmatising their own employees?
[+] [-] standardUser|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lamontcg|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 13years|4 years ago|reply
https://www.biznews.com/health/2021/06/28/covid-19-vaccine-i...
[+] [-] fsund|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] fragmede|4 years ago|reply
I'm glad that it didn't kill you, and that you're not suffering from the effects of long covid. That shit is no joke! Did you have rigorous scientific testing done before you caught covid so that you knew it wouldn't affect you?
The awkward truth is that we know very little about how immunity works for covid. We knew enough to build a vaccine and have a year's worth of scientific papers about it and the disease, but the analogy is the difference between knowing enough to build a ship to sail the ocean find the Americas in the 1400s, and Google maps satellite imagery on smartphones.
Ethics review boards know it's amoral to intentionally expose people to virus, even ones we've vaccinated (Even with informed consent society is just too warped for that choice to be made ethically, given the risks.), which means we're not sure, at the edges, how to test for how protective the vaccine is, because, especially with the delta variant becoming more prevalent, we don't know.
This isn't an argument against taking the vaccine. Get the vaccine. The broad empirical data says it's hugely protective. But if it turns out between testing for IgM and IgG, B-cells and T-cells (and the three types of them) that we're using the wrong kind of test to test for protectivity, and that by the same fluke of chance that whatever antibody test you took that you have higher levels of makes you more vulnerable than the rest of the population, Google isn't willing to accept the liability as your hypothetical employer that they knowingly gave you covid and killed you/someone in your family (children in eligible to be vaccinated, or an unvaccinated elder) through gross negligence that could be argued over in a court of law.
I'm not remotely an immunolgist, but I've read enough wikipedia after testing negative for IgM antibodies for covid despite having it, to say that the human immune system is ridiculously complex, and (in part, thanks to our lack of universal healthcare) we lack the scientifically rigorous data to know what we're looking for. The measles vaccine has something like 0.02% of non-responders. That is, a tiny number of people who get the vaccine don't develop antibodies for measles. That's something we know and can account for and deal with and handle. But with covid, we're still not even sure what to test for!
[+] [-] wonnage|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dilap|4 years ago|reply
It's very surprising to me how much support there is in general for outsourcing extremely important, previously personal medical decisions to employers. The concept of autonomy of our own bodies as an important right has taken a major step into the background.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41564-020-00789-5
(For the record, I did get vaccinated, but it seems crazy to me to mandate or compel it.)
[+] [-] PragmaticPulp|4 years ago|reply
I'm extremely confident, because we already have population-scale data on the matter. All evidence points to the vaccines producing marked reductions in infection rates and virtually eliminating severe cases and hospitalizations. It's difficult to even find any cases of vaccinated COVID patients getting severe infections.
Antibody-dependent enhancement of corona viruses was a concern before we had data, but it was taken into account in the risk evaluation process like every other well-known factor in vaccine research.
[+] [-] spywaregorilla|4 years ago|reply
> Should it occur, ERD caused by human vaccines will first be observed in larger phase II and/or phase III efficacy trials that have sufficient infection events for statistical comparisons between the immunized and placebo control study arms.
All evidence in both the human trials and data from the general public being vaccinated has shown the that vaccines (at least the mainstream western ones) greatly lower both the incidence and the severity of COVID-19. That is, ADE is not a problem here.
[+] [-] standardUser|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ProfessorLayton|4 years ago|reply
The unvaccinated are also continuing to mutate this disease, which increases the possibility of it turning deadly even for those that are vaccinated.
Lastly, everyone retains autonomy: The employee is free to work for an employer that does not require vaccination, and the employer is free to require it from their employees.
[+] [-] selestify|4 years ago|reply
Why not? Regular vaccines are already compulsory for public schools.
[+] [-] Natsu|4 years ago|reply
https://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=19410631&cid=61625009
Basically, it seems to have a very minor impact. There is existing precedent for being forced to vaccinate, though I prefer it be used as a very last resort because I think that being forced to do a thing makes more people oppose it and I'd rather see more light and less heat in the vaccine discussions.
There are real risks to vaccines, but according to VAERS data, they're orders of magnitude smaller than those of the virus itself. If one isn't concerned by a 2% mortality from Covid, it seems absurd to me to worry about a ~0.0002% chance of vaccine injury.
If you were playing an RPG and got a magic item that let you roll 1d1000 every time you died and escape death on every roll but a natural 1, you'd think that was OP. This is effectively what the vaccine is, so it makes no sense to avoid vaccination.
[+] [-] 1helloworld1|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] arrrg|4 years ago|reply
So I’m not sure what you are talking about.
[+] [-] worker767424|4 years ago|reply
It's because it's political suicide for any politician who tries. Look at the protests in France. Employers also have the most vested interest in driving up vaccination rates because, for the most part, a drawn-out pandemic hurts businesses.
[+] [-] minikites|4 years ago|reply
I agree, I believe we should have universal government-provided healthcare for all citizens. Employers have far too much control over healthcare in the USA.
[+] [-] raverbashing|4 years ago|reply
Pretty much confident, since a) researchers are well aware of ADE (more than some random person on the internet) b) they take ADE into account when designing and testing the vaccine
[+] [-] pmastela|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] breck|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Kaze404|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] runawaybottle|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] wombat-man|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] throwitaway1235|4 years ago|reply
Use your heads, this isn't supposed to end.
[+] [-] standardUser|4 years ago|reply
This is the trend in the last couple weeks among many companies and governments. It's just a shame the need for this wasn't realized 2-3 months ago. We could be far ahead of where we are today if more entities had been more aggressive about vaccine mandates. It almost feels like we're feigning collective surprise that a big chunk of Americans decided to take a staunchly anti-science, anti-medicine, anti-rationality stance. In reality, I think most of us saw this coming a mile away.
[+] [-] fsund|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] fsund|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] lonesomemoo|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] lazyjones|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] worker767424|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] CubsFan1060|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] 13years|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] scdp|4 years ago|reply