Yeah, in the past, it's lead to the U.S. becoming a dictatorship ... oh wait ... that's not true. History of vaccine mandates in the United States ... Vaccine mandates For more than a century, schools have played a crucial role in reducing vaccine-preventable diseases in the U.S. In 1802, Massachusetts became the first state to encourage smallpox vaccinations. Forty-eight years later, it was home to the first school to require vaccination. By 1900, nearly half of the states required children to be vaccinated before beginning school. By 1963, 20 states, Washington D.C. and Puerto Rico mandated a variety of vaccines for children. In the late 1960s, efforts were underway to eradicate measles in the U.S. In the ’70s, states requiring the measles vaccine had incidence rates 40% to 51% lower than the states not requiring it. Alaska and Los Angeles found themselves among the poorer-performing areas in that regard — forcing health officials to strictly enforce the existing requirements. In Alaska, 7,418 of 89,109 students (8.3%) did not provide proof of vaccination and were not permitted to attend school. A month later, fewer than 51 students were still excluded. In Los Angeles, 50,000 of 1,400,000 students (4%) were not allowed in school. Most of them returned within a few days. In both cases, the number of measles cases plummeted, proving enforcement of vaccine mandates to be an effective public health measure, Malone and Hinman wrote. ... https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/history-of-vaccine-mandates-in-the-united-states
If you're asking me to ban members that don't want to get vaccinated (based upon whatever reason they come up with) so that you can continue being a sponsor, then the answer is absolutely not. The entire purpose of a discussion forum is to discuss the various angles and viewpoints on specific topics. Banning people for having an opposite view on a health topic is not happening.
Yeah, because locking people down, that disagree with being locked down, is a good political move, and will get you re-elected, which leads to more power for that politician. Oh wait, that's crazy talk.
Corndog? Lucky..I'd love a corn dog. They brought me this today at the hospice and I might be a big lad but I don't think I can eat it all.
Science is a consensus and changes with new data The CDC and the FDA all use boards and take votes to guide there decisions There are many views and there are votes both for and against a policy....Just like here on ET many sides to an issue (NYSE: PFE) and BioNTech SE (Nasdaq: BNTX) announced today that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) Vaccines and Related Biological Products Advisory Committee (VRBPAC) voted 17 to 4 in support of the FDA granting Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for the companies' COVID-19 mRNA vaccine
Yes, I could have worded it more clearly. Credibility would have been a better word to use. Interesting you are not challenging my Covid points so far. Assuming you are not in agreement with my points, why?
For better or worse, many boards consist of those with close association with industry, in this case, pharmaceutical companies, right?
My point was that mandates didn't lead to the U.S. becoming a dictatorship. Classical Slippery Slope Fallacy.