Medical Journal Suggests Loss of Employment for Any Person Who Refuses to Take COVID-19 Vaccine

[irosie91]

BIG LEAGUE WELLNESS
Medical Journal Suggests Loss of Employment for Any Person Who Refuses to Take COVID-19 Vaccine


...“Nevertheless, because of the infectiousness and dangerousness of the virus, relatively substantive penalties could be justified, including employment suspension or stay-at-home orders for persons in designated high-priority groups who refuse vaccination. Neither fines nor criminal penalties should be used, however; fines disadvantage the poor, and criminal penalties invite legal challenges on procedural due-process grounds. Both are bad public health policy for a Covid-19 vaccine because they may stoke distrust without improving uptake,” the report continues.


What country do we live in again?

All I can say is WOW.

A group of medical professionals trying to circumvent the legal system urging a government entity to pressure private businesses to 'punish' employees who refuse to take a vaccine, (paid for by whom?) a decision that should be between an individual and their physician only. I guess HIPPAA be damned - wonder who's going to get rich on the vaccine?

It's definitely a violation of HIPAA for employers to even ASK the employees if they got the vaccine.

the "employer"?? nope ----its the health officials who can establish required stuff----with records

 

[irosie91]

It shouldn`t be difficult to have a data base of everyone who has had the vaccine. Employers won`t need to ask. Its also a way of finding out if the job applicant has a measurable IQ.

What of the people who take the vaccine when they were completely healthy and then 15 years down the road they are told by their doctor, "remember that vaccine that we gave you that was developed in China (or some other low wage shytehole), well, it turns out we didn't do the necessary 10 year case study and unfortunately you have _____________ problem because of it".

What would their I.Q be?

That has happened before, the 1976 Swine Flu vaccination scandal. Healthy peoples who were given that vaccine years later developed a paralysing disease called Guillain-Barre Syndrome where the immune system attacks the Central Nervous System.

View attachment 368347
View attachment 368348

The Long Shadow of the 1976 Swine Flu Vaccine 'Fiasco'

Some, but not all, of the hesitance to embrace vaccines can be traced back to this event more than 40 years ago

www.smithsonianmag.com

sorry Lucy-----the connection between FLU VACCINE and GUILLAIN-BARRE, which was an issue in the 1970s------has been, largely, debunked. People got it----most recovered----and it is still happening---rarely, vaccine or no vaccine

 

[irosie91]

BIG LEAGUE WELLNESS
Medical Journal Suggests Loss of Employment for Any Person Who Refuses to Take COVID-19 Vaccine


...“Nevertheless, because of the infectiousness and dangerousness of the virus, relatively substantive penalties could be justified, including employment suspension or stay-at-home orders for persons in designated high-priority groups who refuse vaccination. Neither fines nor criminal penalties should be used, however; fines disadvantage the poor, and criminal penalties invite legal challenges on procedural due-process grounds. Both are bad public health policy for a Covid-19 vaccine because they may stoke distrust without improving uptake,” the report continues.


What country do we live in again?

All I can say is WOW.

A group of medical professionals trying to circumvent the legal system urging a government entity to pressure private businesses to 'punish' employees who refuse to take a vaccine, (paid for by whom?) a decision that should be between an individual and their physician only. I guess HIPPAA be damned - wonder who's going to get rich on the vaccine?

hippa anyone?

TYPHOID MARY anyone?

 

[SeaGal]

It seems to me that if it is determined that avoiding a
vaccination constitutes a public health issue-----it CAN
be imposed on people who interact with the public. It is all a matter of HOW MUCH AND HOW SEVERE is the risk. It seems to me that you got HIPAA all wrong. The law does not ensure that public health officials are NOT ENTITLED------they are. There are all kinds of
REPORTABLE conditions

What part of the below refers to 'public health officials'? What are public health officials going to do - tell the employer they must fire an employee because...? Is that what they do with HIV? - go to a persons place of employment and inform them of that employees diseases?...or medications...or lack of them?

“Nevertheless, because of the infectiousness and dangerousness of the virus, relatively substantive penalties could be justified, including employment suspension...'

They want private employers to be the 'policing' force...in addition they want to avoid 'legal' entanglements...what does that tell you?

If this comes to fruition, and it's a big if - by all means get one for yourself, encourage friends and family to do so - I'll see to my own, thank you.

 

[JustAGuy1]

It shouldn`t be difficult to have a data base of everyone who has had the vaccine. Employers won`t need to ask. Its also a way of finding out if the job applicant has a measurable IQ.

What of the people who take the vaccine when they were completely healthy and then 15 years down the road they are told by their doctor, "remember that vaccine that we gave you that was developed in China (or some other low wage shytehole), well, it turns out we didn't do the necessary 10 year case study and unfortunately you have _____________ problem because of it".

What would their I.Q be?

That has happened before, the 1976 Swine Flu vaccination scandal. Healthy peoples who were given that vaccine years later developed a paralysing disease called Guillain-Barre Syndrome where the immune system attacks the Central Nervous System.

View attachment 368347
View attachment 368348

The Long Shadow of the 1976 Swine Flu Vaccine 'Fiasco'

Some, but not all, of the hesitance to embrace vaccines can be traced back to this event more than 40 years ago

www.smithsonianmag.com

I had just enlisted,

the FACTS are that vaccines are MANDATORY for all kinds of situations.------PUBLIC SCHOOL, MILITARY,
EMPLOYMENT IN HOSPITALS ----etc The wording of the DEMAND seems abrupt do me-----but it really not so FAR OUT

It's very far-out. It's one thing to have a vaccine as a requirement of 'entry' into a school (which can be exempted, btw) or a military or health care professional position...another entirely to require a vaccine to keep your job....at a bank, a carwash, a grocery store, etc. I don't know how they get around HIPPAA with this one.

It seems to me that if it is determined that avoiding a
vaccination constitutes a public health issue-----it CAN
be imposed on people who interact with the public. It is all a matter of HOW MUCH AND HOW SEVERE is the risk. It seems to me that you got HIPAA all wrong. The law does not ensure that public health officials are NOT ENTITLED------they are. There are all kinds of
REPORTABLE conditions

This Covid thing is a joke, it is NOT serious enough to impose farced (freudian thing) vaccinations on us.

 

[irosie91]

It seems to me that if it is determined that avoiding a
vaccination constitutes a public health issue-----it CAN
be imposed on people who interact with the public. It is all a matter of HOW MUCH AND HOW SEVERE is the risk. It seems to me that you got HIPAA all wrong. The law does not ensure that public health officials are NOT ENTITLED------they are. There are all kinds of
REPORTABLE conditions

What part of the below refers to 'public health officials'? What are public health officials going to do - tell the employer they must fire an employee because...? Is that what they do with HIV? - go to a persons place of employment and inform them of that employees diseases?...or medications...or lack of them?

“Nevertheless, because of the infectiousness and dangerousness of the virus, relatively substantive penalties could be justified, including employment suspension...'

They want private employers to be the 'policing' force...in addition they want to avoid 'legal' entanglements...what does that tell you?

If this comes to fruition, and it's a big if - by all means get one for yourself, encourage friends and family to do so - I'll see to my own, thank you.

calm down----you haven't got a clue as to the function of public health. Remember TYPHOID MARY? -----if you give me a clue as to your age, I might be able to remind you how public health laws impacted on you

 

[SeaGal]

It seems to me that if it is determined that avoiding a
vaccination constitutes a public health issue-----it CAN
be imposed on people who interact with the public. It is all a matter of HOW MUCH AND HOW SEVERE is the risk. It seems to me that you got HIPAA all wrong. The law does not ensure that public health officials are NOT ENTITLED------they are. There are all kinds of
REPORTABLE conditions

What part of the below refers to 'public health officials'? What are public health officials going to do - tell the employer they must fire an employee because...? Is that what they do with HIV? - go to a persons place of employment and inform them of that employees diseases?...or medications...or lack of them?

“Nevertheless, because of the infectiousness and dangerousness of the virus, relatively substantive penalties could be justified, including employment suspension...'

They want private employers to be the 'policing' force...in addition they want to avoid 'legal' entanglements...what does that tell you?

If this comes to fruition, and it's a big if - by all means get one for yourself, encourage friends and family to do so - I'll see to my own, thank you.

calm down----you haven't got a clue as to the function of public health. Remember TYPHOID MARY? -----if you give me a clue as to your age, I might be able to remind you how public health laws impacted on you

LOL
Well, that 'reasoned' response certainly gives me 'a clue as to your age', emotionally anyway.
Good talk. ;D