virgil

So sorry for your loss.

That's a bad idea. None of us know exactly what caused these patients' condition. You know that they got the vaccine and that they then got sick. You do not have an established cause for the illness- that whole 'difference between causation and correlation' thing. Making assumptions about a patient's diagnosis without actually being involved in their care, and then reporting those assumptions to the press, is irresponsible. WNY, I hope your friends' get better.

We've vaccinated over 3000 people without any serious issues.

You should definitely have a written agreement. There are templates available online if you do a google search.

Couldn't agree more with your last statement. The problem is that, in this current partisan political environment, even the idea of compromise is considered treasonous to the party and is political suicide.

All valid points. But, not exactly honest to pretend that this all just started in 2016. Obama dealt with all manner of disrespect and obstruction from the beginning of his presidency- the 'birther movement', for example. Both sides are guilty and only want to hold the other side responsible, never their own.

Culver, I usually find your posts interesting and insightful, even when I don't necessarily agree with them. I just have no idea where you're going with this one. And, by the way- that wasn't my definition of the difference between the words 'truth' and 'fact'. It was Webster's, if I recall correctly from the google search.

Truth is an instance of quoting one or many of the facts while describing or discussing the subject. The difference between truth and fact is that fact is something that cannot be combated with reasoning, for it is logic itself. But truth is something which depends on a person's perspective and experience.

Yes

Remember, that statement said it was from the trial period- that's the whole purpose of trials. There is nothing listed about fertility issues in the risks since the trials were completed.

That is a crazy and overreaching proposal and would violate all kinds of privacy laws.

This is from the clinical trial period- pretty standard stuff for any clinical trial.

That article doesn't seem to account for the fact that hospitals are no longer vaccinating only their own employees. Hospitals have been charged with providing vaccine to health workers in the community as well as first responders. For whatever reason, the first responders are not coming as expected. That might explain why hospitals have been slow to use up their supply. At my hospital, the overwhelming majority of employees have gotten the vaccine. I just got it this morning- I was the last in my department. Of about 70+ employee in my departments, only two declined. I don't know what NYS' plan is yet for making it available to the general public. But, hospitals are not set up for that yet- and haven't received nearly enough vaccine to meet the anticipated demand. I would imagine that it'll require a huge number of dispensaries and manpower as compared to what's available now through just hospitals.

You could apply this same thinking to patients who suffer from health conditions purely resulting from their poor decisions and habits- obesity, smoking, etc.

We use a scheduling system for our employees- managers make the appointments for our own people. This is how we know exactly how many employees have accepted the vaccine. At the very beginning, only employees were being offered the vaccine. Then, we were mandated to make it available to other front line workers in the community.