Facebook Warns Growth To 'Decelerate Significantly', Mandates Vaccine For US Staff (reuters.com) 113
Facebook said on Wednseday it expects revenue growth to "decelerate significantly." It also announced that it would require anyone working at its U.S. offices to be vaccinated against COVID-19. Google announced a similar policy earlier this morning. Reuters reports: The warning overshadowed the company's beat on Wall Street estimates for quarterly revenue, bolstered by increased advertising spending as businesses build their digital presence to cater to consumers spending more time and money online. Facebook said it expects Apple's recent update to its iOS operating system to impact its ability to target ads and therefore ad revenue in the third quarter. The iPhone maker's privacy changes make it harder for apps to track users and restrict advertisers from accessing valuable data for targeting ads.
Monthly active users came in at 2.90 billion, up 7% from the same period last year but missing analyst expectations of 2.92 billion and marking the slowest growth rate in at least three years, according to IBES data from Refinitiv. "The user growth slowdown is notable and highlights the engagement challenges as the world opens up. But importantly, Facebook is the most exposed to Apple's privacy changes, and it looks like it is starting to have an impact to the outlook beginning in 3Q," said Ygal Arounian, an analyst at Wedbush Securities. Brian Wieser, GroupM's global president of business intelligence, said all social media companies would see slower growth in the second half of the year and that it would take more concrete warnings about activity in June and July for anyone to anticipate a "meaningful deceleration."
Monthly active users came in at 2.90 billion, up 7% from the same period last year but missing analyst expectations of 2.92 billion and marking the slowest growth rate in at least three years, according to IBES data from Refinitiv. "The user growth slowdown is notable and highlights the engagement challenges as the world opens up. But importantly, Facebook is the most exposed to Apple's privacy changes, and it looks like it is starting to have an impact to the outlook beginning in 3Q," said Ygal Arounian, an analyst at Wedbush Securities. Brian Wieser, GroupM's global president of business intelligence, said all social media companies would see slower growth in the second half of the year and that it would take more concrete warnings about activity in June and July for anyone to anticipate a "meaningful deceleration."
Compulsory vaccination (Score:5, Interesting)
For once, I applaud Google, Facebook and other big tech employers for having the balls to says "vaccination or else."
It's really sad that the private sector has to step up to the plate and get tough with the retards who refuse it: the government should've done that themselves a long ago.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's all well and good until someone brings it home to their ineligible-for-vaccination kid who ends up in the hospital, because they couldn't be bothered to go do what hundreds of millions of people have already done without issue.
Re: (Score:2)
Well gee golly, it's a good thing less then 400 children have died in this country from Covid. While not immune, kids world wide have done remarkable well against covid. Here are a few stats I found pretty interesting.
This is world wide unicef data regarding covid. https://data.unicef.org/topic/... [unicef.org]
8700 under 20s out of 2.7 million. Of that, 40% are under 10, so 3480.
That's for the entire world.
Another link I found was all US deaths ranked by age. https://www.statista.com/stati... [statista.com]
According to that, only 337
Re: (Score:2)
And the latest guidance says that the Delta variant is more likely than past variants to effect children.
How old are those statistics, and do they encompass all variants since 2020Q1?
Re: (Score:2)
The stats are update or at least monthly up to date. The statista.com link was all the deaths from the beginning of the pandemic up to July but they may just be July 1st.
It could be maybe the under 17s really have been overall protected from getting it and maybe it will affect them. It may still be a good idea for children to get vaccinated but I suppose we just do not have enough information. It's really hard to find data on cases and the different severity levels. Also whether or not people had specific p
Re: (Score:1)
Let's skip who is clueless here and get to the point:
1) The corporations want to have the right to access the insides of your body.
2) They want to make sure that only spineless people who agree with this work for them.
Re: (Score:3)
For once, I applaud Google, Facebook and other big tech employers for having the balls to says "vaccination or else."
First off, the mandate is only for US-based offices, so don't assume they give a shit that much. They don't.
Lastly, now that this "or else" door has been opened, you better fucking expect it to be abused.
Stop smoking, or else.
Get the flu shot, or else.
While we're at it, get the rest of your corporate-mandated vaccines, or else.
Become aligned with corporate political beliefs, or else.
Give up your "assault" weapon ownership, or else.
Change your religious ideology to fully accept all LGBTQ, or else.
It's really sad that the private sector has to step up to the plate and get tough with the retards who refuse it: the government should've done that themselves a long ago.
It r
Re: (Score:1)
I've also been to work 95% of the days I was working, and none of the people I have interacted with have gotten it... the current death rate for covid is essentially ZERO, explain to me again now that we know how to do deal with this why we should be making ultimatums like this fo
Re: (Score:2)
Yah, but fuck all that noise. This should not be incumbent upon Google an Facebook. it should the government mandating vaccinations for anyone and everyone; no ifs, ands, or buts, and no exceptions. At least as recently as smallpox; some anti-vax nutter went all the way to SCOTUS to try to assert his "right" to be a filthy plague rat and murder other people via disease, and got his ass shot down. So the precedent is already there.
Instead of dragging those of us who've rightfully done everything asked of
Re: (Score:1, Informative)
Only 36% of African Americans and 41% of Latinx Americans people are currently vaccinated. How is this helping them? Facebook and Google need to rethink their policies and start asking how does this help with diversity?
Re: (Score:2)
Only 36% of African Americans and 41% of Latinx Americans people are currently vaccinated. How is this helping them?
Maybe it suits Facebook and Google just fine [wired.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Compulsory vaccination (Score:4, Insightful)
Not to mention it discriminates against people of color.
Only 36% of African Americans and 41% of Latinx Americans people are currently vaccinated.
... in the general population. What makes you think that Facebook employees would be the same? They are chosen on merit, not randomly with racial quotas (I hope!).
How is this helping them?
By giving them a safer workplace, duh! And by encouraging responsible self-help.
Re: (Score:2)
"What makes you think that Facebook employees would be the same?"
They are chosen on merit, not racial discrimination (I hope!),
Re: (Score:2)
"What makes you think that Facebook employees would be the same?"
They are chosen on merit, not racial discrimination (I hope!),
How does that make any sense? Can you please explain why people chosen on merit at a wealthy tech firm would represent the general dumb population?
Do you have any evidence that smart black people have lower vaccination rates than smart white people?
Re: (Score:1)
Interesting history to this sort of thing. Around WWI, institutions got very interested in objective measures. Harvard starting
Re:Compulsory vaccination (Score:4, Insightful)
Not to mention it discriminates against people of color. https://www.kff.org/coronaviru... [kff.org]
Only 36% of African Americans and 41% of Latinx Americans people are currently vaccinated. How is this helping them? Facebook and Google need to rethink their policies and start asking how does this help with diversity?
If you had statistics about the rate of vaccination of highly educated and affluent African Americans and Latinx Americans, then maybe your talking point might be relevant to Facebook and Google employees. As it is, you don't, and it's a pointless way for you to bait.
Re:Compulsory vaccination (Score:4, Interesting)
Data point on affluent African American vaccination rates:
Prince George's County, MD - 51.6%
(majority Black, one of the highest income AA areas in the US)
Montgomery County, MD - 69.1%
(43% White, 18% Black, higher income than Prince Georges)
Both are suburbs of Washington, DC.
Affluence helps with non-White vaccination, but does not eliminate the difference.
(from CDC county data as presented here [cnbc.com].
Re: (Score:2)
It helps them by encouraging them to not get a preventable disease and die? Also an option: regular testing if you don't want the vaccine. So there you go, get jabbed in the arm once or twice, or get jabbed in the sinuses weekly. Because while you have a right to not get the vaccine, we all have a right to not be killed by obstinate people that refuse the vaccine over the mountains of evidence that it is safe and effective.
And, as with other rights, you don't have a right to be free of consequences for e
Re: (Score:2)
Not to mention it discriminates against people of color. https://www.kff.org/coronaviru... [kff.org] Only 36% of African Americans and 41% of Latinx Americans people are currently vaccinated. How is this helping them? Facebook and Google need to rethink their policies and start asking how does this help with diversity?
Dafuq is this? People of Color and Hispanics (and I'm Hispanic btw) lag behind because of socio-economic conditions and lack of access to health care facilities (not to mention the bulk of POCs lagging behind in vaccination reside in red states.)
But that doesn't represent POC and Hispanic cohorts that are better off on a social scale (and who tend to be vaccinated)? How the hell does that demographic cohort you referred to overlap with Black and Latino engineers making 6-figure salaries at FB, with healt
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe where you live is different, but here in San Diego county we are extremely diverse. A great many of our grocery stores have pharmacy inside the store, even in the poor parts of town. At this point, anyone that is able to make it to the store could be getting the vaccine.
Obviously if you can't even get out of the house, let alone get to the store, you probably have a hard time getting vaxed. You also aren't exactly hurting anyone being at home.
If you live an hour from a potential vaccine place, then it
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Compulsory vaccination (Score:5, Interesting)
As opposed to knowingly allowing potential virus spreaders through your doors and endangering the rest of the staff?
If I had a company, I'd mandate anybody who poses a health risk to my employees to stay home until such time as they don't pose a risk no more - be it from COVID or a simple flu. Stay home long enough, and you can go find work someplace else: I'm not paying you to stay at home.
Of course, I may decide to pay people to work from home, in which case that's fine. But apparently Google and Facebook want people to come back to the office. So... It's vaccination or go work somewhere else. Clearly the lawyers told the suits they'd be in a lot less legal trouble from people like you suing them for "company enforced torture" than for letting COVID superspreaders back into the building and causing co-workers to get sick.
Re:Science Denier. (Score:5, Insightful)
But the Vaccines do not stop you being a virus carrier/spreader - This has always been the claim.
Are you always such a black & white thinker?
Reality is more nuanced, vaccine is never 100%, they reduce the risk of being a spreader. Is that too hard to understand?
While we have some data on the effectiveness of vaccines in reducing risk of infection and hospitalisation, we still really do not know how much full vaccination reduce the risk of spread from an infected person. Probably a lot, certainly not 100%.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You're right, reality is more nuanced, even more so than you'll admit to support your own faulty arguments predicated on pure speculation.
Go ahead and point us to the data that VACCINATED PEOPLE who in breakthrough cases that get sick but also SPREAD the virus that causes severe enough cases to lead to hospitalization or death, the ONLY REASON we've addressed covid-19 like we have by wearing masks/social distancing.
Reality is getting back to normal and accepting that people will always spread sickness, and
Re: (Score:2)
Diet, exercise, avoiding drugs and alcohol, and getting vaccines are all personal choices.
Not the same. The last one is an outlier. Yes, abuse of drugs and alcohol puts a burden on society and harms others, but not nearly to the same degree.
If anti-vaxers stayed home, they would be like the alcoholic, but when they go out in public, they are like drink-drivers.
Re: (Score:3)
There's a difference between spreading nuisance sickness like common colds or mild flu strains.
This is a disease that killed over 4 million people in a year. Can you see the difference?
Re: (Score:2)
There's a difference between spreading nuisance sickness like common colds or mild flu strains.
This is a disease that killed over 4 million people in a year. Can you see the difference?
The only difference in terms of deaths figures between covid and the flu is that humanity is (was) completely naive to covid.
What we are paying out now is the entrance fee. With the other things you mention we've already purchased the virus long long ago and are merely paying ongoing maintenance fees.
Either way Covid isn't going away and everyone will get it sooner or later. Hopefully as many people as possible get a chance to be vaccinated first.
Re: (Score:1)
Perhaps, unless they embolden folks the pretend 'Everything is back to normal' while the following is true:
1 - The disease is out there. Unless you socially distance and mask up, you will be a spreader.
2 - If you're any kind of spreader, you're contributing to the creation of a possibly incurable verison of Covid.
In that case, the vaccine becomes like Valtrex and makes the condition it was designed to address worse.
Re: (Score:2)
But the Vaccines do not stop you being a virus carrier/spreader - This has always been the claim.
So please stop denying the science.
Are you special? The science is quite clear you are not a significant spreading risk when fully vaccinated. You can still contract the virus, but as you do your infectious window is days rather than weeks as the virus is quickly beaten by your immune system, and for the day you're infectious you're not going around sneezing, coughing, blowing your noise, wiping snot from your gross face while high-fiving your sick bros at the office.
If you're going to accuse someone of being a science denier it really helps
Re: (Score:2)
The science is quite clear you are not a significant spreading risk when fully vaccinated.
Obviously this is not true or CDC would not have reversed course on mask mandates for vaccinated. Delta variant is shown to produce 1200x increase in exhaled virus and Israeli data is showing Pfizer only 39% effective at preventing someone from becoming infected.
Delta is a complete game changer in terms of transmission and still way way too early for "science" to be anything approaching quite clear on the implications.
You can still contract the virus, but as you do your infectious window is days rather than weeks as the virus is quickly beaten by your immune system, and for the day you're infectious you're not going around sneezing, coughing, blowing your noise, wiping snot from your gross face while high-fiving your sick bros at the office.
The pre-symptomatic viral phase is the most important. If your sick and you know it you
Re: (Score:2)
But apparently Google and Facebook want people to come back to the office. So... It's vaccination or go work somewhere else.
I'm not sure where you're getting that. https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/0... [cnbc.com]. "Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg announce that the company will allow all full-time employees to work from home if their jobs can be done remotely."
Re: (Score:2)
"... If their jobs can be done remotely."
That would be where they are getting that. There are jobs that are perceived to not be able to be done remotely, as well as jobs that actually cannot be done remotely. Example: how does someone empty a trash can over Zoom?
Re: (Score:3)
If I had a company, I'd mandate anybody who poses a health risk to my employees to stay home until such time as they don't pose a risk no more
Are you talking about sickleave? Oh you're going to have to explain that to your US employees.
Re: (Score:2)
No actually. I'm talking about "Stay home and get paid at your own discretion".
20 odd years ago, I used to work for an US employer who instructed his staff to do that: his rationale was that it cost him less to pay me to recover at home than have 10 people I infected not being able to attend work.
As a result, the company policy was: if you feel sick, even a little, stay the fuck home and you don't need to bring a note from your doctor. Of course, if you abused the system, you'd get found out and fired event
Re: (Score:3)
Sounds like socialist sick leave to me ;-)
You're right though it absolutely makes sense which is precisely why its policy in so many countries.
Re: (Score:2)
Why not just have everyone, or at least the majority of staff, work from home all the time? Much less chance of them spreading flu and COVID, better work/life balance for them, lower CO2 emissions and you can probably get rid of some of your expensive office space.
Re: (Score:2)
For some people that's a perfectly reasonable solution. I've been working remote for 7 years for 2 different companies and I love it. Never going back into an office if I can help it.
For some other people though, they appreciate the social environment, or have jobs that are easier with in-person social interactions.
And there are other people that just can't stay focused on their work when at home - they are easily distracted by children, pets, etc. or just don't choose to concentrate on work in favor of o
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if there might be a market for communal offices people can use. Libraries used to provide spaces for people to work too.
Re: (Score:2)
As opposed to knowingly allowing potential virus spreaders through your doors and endangering the rest of the staff?
If I had a company, I'd mandate anybody who poses a health risk to my employees to stay home until such time as they don't pose a risk no more - be it from COVID or a simple flu.
Everyone and everything is a potential spreader of any virus. There are inherent risks in existing. Without quantifying the level of risk you are willing to accept (no risk = no employees) it is impossible to evaluate your statements.
Covid is never going away and domain experts have been saying everyone should expect to eventually be exposed to it eventually from very early on. Now that we have vaccines there will never be a better exit ramp. In the US where you have to be bribed to get your shot there i
Re: (Score:3)
Prepare yourself now. The vaccines are weeks to months ahead of full approval. Then what? What will your tripe be then?
Re: (Score:2)
What will your tripe be then?
Oh this is the easiest thing to predict ever: "They rushed the approval through in order to convince more people to get the evil Democrat vaccine! I'm still not going to do what is necessary to protect myself and my family, because FREEDOM."
Just wait for it.
Re: (Score:1)
Fuck youre a retard, they can fucking quit if they dont like it, nobody is forcing them to stay. Your fantasy that they can be held responsible for side effects is also utter bullshit.
Dont quit, you accept-easy. Now fuck off back to whatever right wing shithole you usually hang out at and let the fucking adults talk you dumb cunt.
Re: (Score:2)
Should a company mandate that an employee take the vaccine or be fired, then the company is liable for the outcomes.
They can say they were following CDC recommendations, and be absolved of guilt. Or at least avoid punishment.
Re:Compulsory vaccination (Score:5, Insightful)
Not you fucking business. It is a sick as fuck for any company to think it can mandate compulsory any medical procedure
It's a good thing people like you weren't around in 1955. Today the medical system would be bogged down by millions of extra patients isolated for life in iron lungs.
Companies sometimes mandate medical procedures for employees who, if untreated, would raise costs for a company health plan as a whole - morbid obesity, say. Letting employees stay unvaccinated in a deadly pandemic would not only affect the company, but might be a nucleus for the next variant. To me that would be sick as fuck.
Re: (Score:3)
"Today the medical system would be bogged down by millions of extra patients isolated for life in iron lungs."
A fun fact that I just learned: Mitch McConnell is a polio survivor.
A second fun fact: his treatment nearly bankrupted his family.
Re:Compulsory vaccination (Score:4, Insightful)
I call them moronic idiots taking financial risks they are not allowed to. Should a company mandate that an employee take the vaccine or be fired, then the company is liable for the outcomes. If they did, kiss 10 million goodbye minimum.
Come on, it's pointless for you to hand-wave when it's easy for you to estimate cost/benefits. Let me spell them out for you.
Vaccine is mandated for anyone who choses to return to the office, while those who chose to remain remote can remain unvaccinated. Chance of severe adverse reaction https://www.cdc.gov/coronaviru... [cdc.gov] is about 1000 in 180 million. Most of Facebook's employees are in the highly educated affluent demographic who have 80%+ uptake of the vaccine. Given the risk for the remaining 20% of Facebook's 60k employees, the expected number of people which this mandate effects and who have severe adverse reaction is 0.07. Given that the vaccine is only necessary for returning to the office, and people can chose not to, I'd give about 50% chance of a lawsuit succeeding. Given your $10mil estimate, the expected loss is only $0.3 million, i.e. the about the cost to the business of about 0.3 developer-years. (The rule of thumb is it costs twice a developer's wages to employee them). In other words your concern is completely financially insignificant.
Since you're keen on costs, you should consider another bigger cost. The vaccine seems to knock many people out for a day. If 60k employees get the shot, and half of them lose a day of work, that's 30k days of work lost - about 125 developer years. This cost is two orders of magnitude larger than your cost.
What about the opposite scenario, where people are required to return to work but vaccination isn't mandatory? Here we have to look at the cost of hospitalization for people who get covid, both in terms of developer-talent lost and insurance. (Facebook will naturally bear the insurance cost of hospitalizations - the money has to come from somewhere of course). I don't know how to calculate the numbers here. Hospitalization rates are reported as about 5 per 100k people, so I guess we'd expect 2 Facebook employees to be hospitalized and cost $0.1m each in hospital fees, and I'm guessing a few thousand other people sick enough from the disease to need two weeks off work.
What does all this add up to? -- I don't know. My analysis is crude enough that I might be out by an order of magnitude or two. The only thing I've clearly demonstrated is that your talking point (of liability) is a bizarre red-herring.
Re: (Score:2)
Not you fucking business. It is a sick as fuck for any company to think it can mandate compulsory any medical procedure
It is sick "as fuck" for our government to not mandate this medical procedure as compulsory, but since it isn't, certain corporations are taking steps to protect themselves by doing what government should be doing to protect the entire nation.
This is a major step towards full-blown corporatism as envisioned by Neal Stephenson in Snow Crash and The Diamond Age, or perhaps given the pandemic I ought to cite Margaret Atwood's MaddAdam series.
Had the vaccine been properly approved yet
At least the mRNA vaccines are definitely going to be approved, then
Re: (Score:2)
You got that wrong. You, and only you, make the decision to get vaccinated. It's not company mandated that you get vaccinated.
We can also just replace you with someone who is.
It is your free choice.
Re: (Score:2)
It's sick that you want to your coworkers to be exposed to a communicable disease.
I'll bet that (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They tried.
https://www.lifewire.com/whate... [lifewire.com].
Re: (Score:2)
My Body My Choice except when it isn't (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:My Body My Choice except when it isn't (Score:5, Informative)
Yes and no. Yes in that you can still get a breakthrough infection, likely from the delta variant. Even if you don't get seriously ill, several long-term effects are emerging.
No in that you can still be a carrier and infect others who may get seriously ill, perhaps even someone that matters to you other than yourself.
Re: (Score:2)
Additionally, there's been no studies confirming that in breakthrough cases where vaccinated people get sick, that they spread it, not to mention cause serious illness in anyone, vaccinated or unvaccinated.
False.
The reason [cnn.com] that the CDC just changed their indoor mask guidance is because the delta variant is so virulent that they are finding enough virus in fully vaccinated people's nasal passages that they are able to "shed" virus to some degree without any other symptoms. The vaccines are still protecting your lungs, but apparently it's not creating enough of an immediate immune response to totally prevent transmission.
Do you really think they just throw a dart at a board or something before changing guidanc
Re: My Body My Choice except when it isn't (Score:5, Insightful)
The vaccine is 60% effective at avoiding infection and 90% effective at keeping you out of hospital. Given those numbers, it makes basic business sense that you don't want employees out of action home sick since that'd hurt your bottom line.
I think you're trying to put an agenda spin on a straightforward economical decision.
The other aspect is just plain meritocracy. If you have highly talented developers for whom the virus risk of coming in is too high due to being immunocompromised or pregnant, then you're needlessly throwing away talent.
Re: (Score:3)
Absolutely false.
88% Pfizer, 60% AZ https://www.gov.uk/government/... [www.gov.uk]
3-5 fold lower from 96% response for Pfizer which puts it in the 80-88% effectiveness range with non the less a 95% total immune response https://www.nature.com/article... [nature.com]
In Canada they determined the effectivity was not statistically different from their results to the Alpha or Beta variant Pfizer (87% vs 89% Alpha and 84% Beta) and no full vaccination data from the AZ, but the partial vaccination data showed the same level drop as Pfize
Re: (Score:2)
Effectiveness of a vaccine depends on whether we speak about preventing infection, preventing any symptomatic disease, or preventing severe illness. So the claim "The vaccine is 39% effective against delta" is not entirely wrong but very misleading. Here is the original source of this number:
"New figures released by the Health Ministry claim that the COVID vaccine is only 39% effective at preventing the transmission of the coronavirus, but more than 91% effective at preventing severe cases."
Source: https:// [timesofisrael.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Your UK numbers are for symptomatic infection, and Israel claims the true number is 41%. Meanwhile, 39% is the chance to become infected and carry the disease. Israel had claimed that protection was in the high 60s even against delta, but new numbers have changed that
Forbes [forbes.com] CNBC. [cnbc.com]
Re: (Score:2)
[Citation needed]
Seriously, don't say shit that pretends to be factual without actually backing it up with something. You are not believable when there is easy to find information that directly contradicts your bullshit.
Re: (Score:2)
That only covers Pfizer, but it was a quick Google away.
Yes, there are many sources that claim the greater protection, but those are older, less comprehensive results. 39% protectection against infection, 41% against symptoms are the latest numbers.
Re: (Score:3)
I think you're trying to put an agenda spin on a straightforward economical decision.
Careful, you're going down the rabbit hole that leads towards employer granted sick leave, which we all know is what happens in those evil socialist countries. If you stay down that path you may end up with 4 weeks annual leave, better quality of life, less stress, and then all hell will really break loose.
Re: (Score:2)
The vaccine is 60% effective at avoiding infection
Those numbers are suspect to start with, and apply to different variants to differing degrees. They're suspect because they're hard to track when people aren't seeking care.
and 90% effective at keeping you out of hospital
Yeah, this is more on target. We know by about how much it prevents death or hospitalization, because those things are easy to track.
Re: (Score:3)
What makes you think they are about respecting boundaries or personal choices? What if I want to use an Oculus headset without signing up for their website? What if I don't want them assembling a shadow profile on me that I never consented to?
They - the ones making the decisions - don't suffer from cognitive dissonance because they don't believe the BS they shovel out. They hold no principle or ideology beyond ripping from you every shred of information and moment of attention that they can, and squeezing a
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Vaccines save lives through herd immunity, not by guaranteeing that everyone who gets a shot will be safe.
Herd immunity for Covid is widely believed to be impossible.
Re: (Score:2)
Then there's little to no point in taking an experimental vaccine, is there?
No of course not. You take the vaccine so your immune system won't be completely naive to the virus *WHEN* you are exposed to it.
The whole point of all the lockdowns and masking and control measures was to buy time so that medical systems don't collapse and everyone who is at risk can get vaccinated if they desire.
Whatever the fuck may be wrong with covid vaccines whatever unknown dangers they present does not hold a candle to the danger presented by naive exposure to covid in adults.
The choice for everyon
What Americas put in their bodies daily. So ironic (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
It's amazing what rubbish the average American puts in their bodies on a daily basis, yet then complain about the vaccines.
Not to mention the vaccine protects them from a virus that is known to have negative long-term effects.
Re: What Americas put in their bodies daily. So ir (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"It is forbidden for employers to even ASK any medical information."
So when hiring a fireman, you can't ask whether they are paralyzed below the neck?
You can ask if the person has any conditions that would prohibit them from performing their job function or endanger themselves or others while performing their job. In that vein, asking someone who will closely interact with other employees and/or customers if they have been immunized from a highly contagious disease that there is a CURRENT pandemic which ha
In other words (Score:1)
"Data harvesting behemoth warns that its sole basis for existence is slowly being pulled out from underneath it"
And nothing of value was lost.
Yea, Apple (Score:1)
Growth (Score:2)
Sniff Test (Score:2)
Telling people that we will destroy your lives, your livelihoods and your families if you don't take a vaccine is unprecedented.
I am not sure what is going to happen, but I can probably guess.
Pass the popcorn.
Re:The vaccines are GREAT! (Score:4, Funny)
No! For fuck's sake, NO!
Don't get vaccinated! Go to events instead, if the infection numbers go down, I have to go back to the office!
Screw the world, screw your life, I don't want to give up my home office! I need you, people, to stay strong in the face of adversity and get infected.
Your sacrifice will not be in vain.
Re: (Score:2)
Your chosen pseudonym is especially applicable to this post. Well done.
Re: (Score:2)
You know, there was a time when I did care about humans. I worried that they get manipulated into making decisions that are against their very own interest. And I tried hard to get them to understand that they are working against their own best interests.
Then I stopped trying to teach them.
Then I stopped worrying.
Then I started to find out whether I can benefit from their idiocy.
Then I started to enjoy life again.
Re: The vaccines are GREAT! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Worry? About what?
Re: (Score:2)
I, as an essential worker, am willing to do just that for you! In fact, I have have been the entire time.
Re: (Score:2)
You're not exactly the intended audience for this rant. You're probably vaccinated (at least I hope you are) and I also hope that you at least get a bonus for risking your life because you had to, or else society breaks down.
This is more aimed at the goofballs who could easily avoid getting infected but are deliberately ignoring that for muh freedumz.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
May your last coherent breath before being intubated at the ER be one of those confessions that you should have taken the vaccine.
Re: (Score:2)
Because unvaccinated people are a breeding ground for further variation. And further variation gets us strains that are better at breakthrough infections. See: Delta, and why we're now having this discussion.
Please try to keep up.