COVID Developments and News

[Ultramaroon]

Originally Posted by soundman98

that's where all the graphics cards went!

[humfrz]

Originally Posted by soundman98

In that case, I've been leaning towards the 90% rule...

Whatever works for you -

(however, my exposure to other people is rather limited since I retired - )

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by Atmo

..Lawsuits are flying.

Its already been legally determined that an employer can require vaccinations except for two very specific exceptions (verified religious objections and medical reasons). I'm also guessing the same officers are already required to have other vaccinations. You can file a lawsuit over anything, but this one seems unlikely to have the outcome they want.

[soundman98]

anyone can sue anyone for anything. proving the case and winning is somewhat a different story though.

if they lose, the case sets a precedent for civil servants being required to get the vaccine..

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by soundman98

if they lose, the case sets a precedent for civil servants being required to get the vaccine..

Yea, I agree but given Pfizer is now approved, the precedent has already been set, and was likely set way before COVID started. The only straw they really had to hold onto was the emergency authorization, which is no longer the case.

[Atmo]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

Its already been legally determined that an employer can require vaccinations except for two very specific exceptions (verified religious objections and medical reasons). I'm also guessing the same officers are already required to have other vaccinations. You can file a lawsuit over anything, but this one seems unlikely to have the outcome they want.

I'd agree except the irony here is those filing lawsuits are some of the governor's biggest campaign contributors who constantly look for favors so they may get their way. The governor has a reputation for changing her mind on a whim.

The gov is term limited out next year but is still fundraising for her party's down ballot candidates.

[Atmo]

Originally Posted by soundman98

anyone can sue anyone for anything. proving the case and winning is somewhat a different story though.

if they lose, the case sets a precedent for civil servants being required to get the vaccine..

True, and I think many in the health care field see it coming and are resigning or retiring instead of taking the shot.

It's another irony, those leaving their careers behind (at least in this state) fit into studies that show the more highly educated demographic is the most vaccine hesitant along with the least educated at the other end of the curve.

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by Atmo

True, and I think many in the health care field see it coming and are resigning or retiring instead of taking the shot.

"Many" may be an exaggeration, although there will likely be a few. For example, a local large Health System (20,000 employees) have 100 that filed suite over the mandate which is 0.5%. Not sure that's Many.

I'm really not sure I "get it" since these folks already have to agree to all sorts of vaccinations and tests, some on an annual basis. It's really just part of the career path they've chosen.

I sort of understood before it was "approved", but now it just seems they just can't let it go, even if it is for the greater good and their own protection. (and I realize you probably don't agree, that's OK).

I do agree that anyone should have the right to refuse it, just as their employer has the right to required it. It's the employee's decision to accept or not accept that requirement of their position.

[Atmo]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

"Many" may be an exaggeration, although there will likely be a few. For example, a local large Health System (20,000 employees) have 100 that filed suite over the mandate which is 0.5%. Not sure that's Many.

I'm really not sure I "get it" since these folks already have to agree to all sorts of vaccinations and tests, some on an annual basis. It's really just part of the career path they've chosen.

I sort of understood before it was "approved", but now it just seems they just can't let it go, even if it is for the greater good and their own protection. (and I realize you probably don't agree, that's OK).

I do agree that anyone should have the right to refuse it, just as their employer has the right to required it. It's the employee's decision to accept or not accept that requirement of their position.

I'll settle for "some". Enough for at least one (!) hospital Administrator saying he'll soon be in an even bigger staffing crisis.

It looks like the lawsuits are relying on Oregon law that's said to have broader protections for citizens than Federal law and whether the governor's EO can override existing law.

Part of this video shows a state trooper who made a YouTube video that got him placed on paid leave. The rest describes the legal maneuvers in process that hinge on a judge declaring the governor's EO unenforceable.

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by Atmo

I'll settle for "some". Enough for at least one (!) hospital Administrator saying he'll soon be in an even bigger staffing crisis.

Those deciding to retire makes some sense, not sure what others intend to do for a living once they quit.

They also will likely not be eligible for unemployment as the primary requirement for unemployment is losing your job through "no fault or decision" of your own. Quitting or getting fired because of a company policy is definitely squarely against that.

[Atmo]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

Those taking deciding to retire makes some sense, not sure what others intend to do for a living once they quit.

They also will likely not be eligible for unemployment as the primary requirement for unemployment is losing your job through "no fault or decision" of your own. Quitting or getting fired because of a company policy is definitely squarely against that.

They'll probably emigrate to either TX, FL, or TN, the favored destinations at the moment. You'd think they'd move a few miles across the river to state income tax free WA but their governor signed a nearly identical EO too.

The OR gov said after her EO release that those resigning won't be eligible for unemployment for the reason you mentioned.

[new2subaru]

Originally Posted by Lantanafrs2

If you've had covid and gotten through it, I envy you. I wish I had natural immunity

Some people suffer from long term side effects "Longhaulers"

[Atmo]

Title of an article written by an MD who looks at some data from the US and abroad and comes to conclusions contrary to many popular opinions.

https://www.americanthinker.com/arti...not_quite.html

"We are all in this together and will sink or swim collectively based on the actions of those charged with making reasoned and evidence-based decisions. Dishonestly presenting data will only dig us all into a deeper hole."

[Spuds]

Originally Posted by Atmo

Title of an article written by an MD who looks at some data from the US and abroad and comes to conclusions contrary to many popular opinions.

https://www.americanthinker.com/arti...not_quite.html

"We are all in this together and will sink or swim collectively based on the actions of those charged with making reasoned and evidence-based decisions. Dishonestly presenting data will only dig us all into a deeper hole."

Except dadhawk's infographic directly from his employer seems to contradict the claims that 95% of covid hospitalizations is too high of a number. That was a "here are the patients we have right now" kind of thing iirc, and that was well after the vaccine was available to everyone and the take rate died down. The basic premise that the timeline of the data affects the result is sound, but I didn't see any claims as to how much the hospitalization rate is affected and in what direction.