We've done that for decades in this country.

> All 50 states (plus the District of Columbia) mandate diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis (whooping cough), polio, measles, rubella and chickenpox. In addition, every state except Iowa mandates immunization against mumps.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/10/08/states-have...

The comparison to mandates for children to receive well-tested and -understood vaccines, against illnesses far more threatening to them than Covid, for the narrow purpose of attending public school, is so dishonest as to be a form of gaslighting.

FWIW I believe Florida is in the process of relaxing mandates for some of the other required vaccinations -- certainly there is now political hay to be made from doing so because the concept has been so poisoned by the Covid vaccine mandaters.

> for the narrow purpose of attending public school

That doesn't seem all that narrow; 90% of the population goes through the public school system. (Side note: I'm in NY, and our vaccination mandate covers private/religious schools, too.)

> well-tested and -understood vaccines

Like the COVID vaccines, sweet.

> illnesses far more threatening to them than Covid

Missed the chickenpox one, did you? Killed ~100/year before the vaccines. COVID's killed 805 children in the US so far, per https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#demographics.

> > well-tested and -understood vaccines

> Like the COVID vaccines, sweet

More gaslighting. The publications from the manufacturers themselves are chock full of unanswered questions and risks they say we must wait years for the answer to.

"well-tested and -understood vaccines"

In what way are the COVID vaccines not well-tested or not well understood? I understand many laypeople want to declare an arbitrary length of time that they can pretend means a new drug is safe. But the professionals who have informed opinions on the matter are essentially in unanimous agreement that these vaccines have been proven safe.

The point is that if you aren't in agreement, then you can't be part of the group of people that say they are safe.

They have tried making MRNA shots for a long time with consistently negative results. Maybe they got it right this time, but still there is reason to be skeptical, as a "lay" person you have to trust the system that this shot was produced properly, tested properly, stored properly, and administered properly. Even if on a large scale there are low risks, something can go wrong on any one of those steps.

We also have never had a shot like this brought to market in such a short period of time. There is barely a year of data in the public, and that data is heavily politicized. It's nearly impossible to ask an honest question as someone who may be worried for fear of being labeled a lunatic or a "walking bio-weapon" as someone said before in this very thread.

And then we see how much money a company like pfizer has made off of this, and their track-record in the past as well as the track record of many other pharmaceutical companies, and you have a recipe for people to be worried. Remember, public health looks at outcomes on a population level. If they push something and they think it will have a net benefit overall, they are not thinking about you and your own risk profile. You have to do that and unfortunately we're increasingly telling people that doesn't matter, that you must do what is right for the group and by-the-way, you can't possibly know what's right for you anyway.

"as a "lay" person you have to trust the system that this shot was produced properly, tested properly, stored properly, and administered properly"

Like most people, I have done this for dozens of drugs developed during my lifetime. Until it became politically charged I never saw much pushback. How many years had Cialis or Claritin or Wellbutrin been in use before people starting taking them without a second thought? And those drugs likely had much smaller trials.

The difference is that kids still get to go to school if the parents refuse these vaccines. It has never been publicized, but it's always ultimately been up to the parents.

Not here in NY, it’s not.

This would be acceptable to me if the vaccinations were in any way comparable. The diseases you speak of have been known for centuries (I am comfortable being wrong on that) and the vaccines have been tested and are understood as part of being distributed for decades.

This is a common argument, and honestly it's garbage.

Actually, the vaccines they used decades ago are definitely not the same ones they use today. For starters, vaccines from centuries ago tended to have actual non-zero mortality rates.

Vaccines are never tested "for decades" either, because people kind of assume that it is highly unlikely that there are super-long-term side effects from small acute doses. I would tend to agree.

The argument is therefore not garbage at all.

"the vaccines have been tested and are understood as part of being distributed for decades."

Obviously during the first years they were in use these vaccines had not been "distributed for decades". That's the era we're in with COVID.

Yes, the US populace has elected to fund a public health organization which has advised on public health measures since its inception (which is not recent or coincident with Covid-19).

You are not forced to take any vaccine, though many (public and private) institutions will require you to do so to participate in their functions (e.g. attending public school, serving in the military, working in hospitals, etc...).

In any case, the will being applied is that of the people (indirectly) through its (mostly) elected representatives (who could abolish the public health organization any time it chose), not some nefarious government.

> You are not forced to take any vaccine

Can we please just stop? “Take this or lose your job and pension” is not a choice.

I mean, it is because you can look for another job or start your own business if that's the hill you want to die on.

But in general society has rules and we must abide by them if we want to participate. For instance I'm sure most people wouldn't appreciate if I walked around naked, which does not harm anyone unlike needlessly having an increased risk of contracting and/or spreading COVID.

Please stop spreading misinformation. I encourage everyone eligible to get vaccinated, but by your definition vaccinated people are also "walking bioweapons". The main benefit of vaccination is in preventing severe symptoms, not transmission. Since the virus is now endemic we'll all likely get infected eventually regardless of vaccination rates.

https://www.businessinsider.com/delta-variant-made-herd-immu...

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3...

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02689-y

hardly disinformation. vaccinated individual are less contagious, tend to clear their system of the virus faster, etc.

are they still potentially vectors? yes. could the virus still potentially mutate? yes.

is the chance of either of those happening greatly reduced? absolutely. so relatively speaking the vaccinated are walking bioweapons in comparison.

> but by your definition vaccinated people are also "walking bioweapons".

Worse than unvaccinated really, since they're less likely to get sick they won't know they're infected and that they should try to stay home.

How disingenuous. It's been proven time and again that those who have been vaccinated can still catch and transmit Covid.

This is the trick. Force private companies to force you so that we can technically say we're not forcing you so you should shut-up you walking bio-weapon.

I hope you understand how ridiculous this is.