In most populations the benefit is generally held by experts to be greater than the risk. Part of the licensing process. But there is a difference (I would say) between suing an employer who prevented the proper use of a licensed drug; and suing a pharma company in re adverse events of a drug (which is how I would expect that scenario to play out - and of course that does happen).
j
I was talking about an employer requiring a vaccine being liable for side effects of the vaccine, not the pharmaceutical company.
IANAL, but in the case of proper use of a licensed drug, I’m not sure an employer could be held liable - that was my point. But it’s a fair question. Is it not the case that (for example) the US armed forces can insist on eg vaccination of “staff” (so long as the vaccine is approved, hence the difficulty with COVID vaccines, and hence why I’ve seen stuff about this).
Any lawyers around?
j
As a PS - typically it’s the pharma company that is sued, but that may just be pragmatism - deeper pockets.
Do you know how soon the full authorization of Pfizer and Moderna might be? Surely the work done on the emergency authorization will speed up the process?
(yes, I know you are not a vaccine refuser)
But there’s a difference between getting the newest phone (affects only you) and responding to a world-wide pandemic (affects everyone). Those people sitting on the sidelines going “it’s too new - I’m going to wait and see what the side-effects are before I get a shot” are selfish. That’s really all that the ENTIRE anti-vax crowd are - “why should I put my kids up for some slight possible minor complications of a vaccine when I’m going to benefit from herd immunity because everyone else is vaccinated!” Yeah, selfish as hell. Side effects from the vaccines so far have been flu-like symptoms the next day. Serious effects are much less frequent than serious effects from COVID. Long term effects (several years down the road) of both the vaccine and the disease won’t be known for several years. If you’re eligible (and everyone is by now), then get the vaccine. It’s what’s good for society in general.
I’m not especially familiar with the fine detail of US licensing procedures, and that’s a pretty unusual circumstance we’re talking about. (My long winded version of “no”.)
But yeah, you would have thought that regularising the status of the vaccines would be a priority. One thing does spring to mind: generally two pivotal studies are required to approve a medicine (a repeatable result), and IIRC all the vaccines got their emergency use authorisations on the basis of one. So that is likely an issue.
j
IANAL but from a legal standpoint I’d think any business requiring a vax or not would potentially be liable for a bad outcome. Once the vaccines are certified then I think requiring it would be legally safe.
Remember, employers are protected from most suits by Workers Compensation laws. An employee could make a claim I suppose. Googling reveals this:
In general, “if an employer mandates that an employee receive a vaccine in order to be on work premises and the employee has some sort of severe reaction to the vaccine, causing serious illness or injury, the employee could be entitled to workers’ compensation benefits,” said Amanda Van Hoose Garofalo, an attorney with BakerHostetler in New York City.
Workers’ compensation bars all other claims, she noted. So employees would likely be blocked from seeking monetary damages in court.
I assume that that is for vaccines accepted as safe. Would that be true for the current COVID vaccines? Once they are certified as safe then the above applies.
Yeah, I must admit that, when I first asked about the liability issues arising from requiring an employee to not be vaccinated, the current status of the vaccines (emergency use authorization rather than full, approval) had slipped my mind. I assume it must be a complicating factor.
j
I’m not now coming up with the cite I saw someplace recently, but the expectation by the professionals is that both Pfizer and Moderna will have full normal FDA authorization by the end of 2021. So call it 6-ish months from now, and perhaps a bit sooner.
So any/all arguments or policies pro- and con- that hinge on EUA will be moot fairly soon.
We are collectively conducting a truly huge “Phase IV” trial nationwide (worldwide?) right now, and the data coming back is pretty favorable as to both efficacy and safety.
What with the craziness about spike proteins leaking out of the vaccinated and causing abnormal periods and other health problems, I’m looking for a suitable “I’ve been vaccinated” t-shirt to wear, so that antivax loons will keep their distance.
This might work.
Good one. But it really needs a very prominent “Stand back!” as the lead line.
As a vaxxed person myself the thing I want most of for all the hostile anti-vaccinated to stand well back; they are the only thing I have left to fear. I’d really prefer they just get sick and die en masse in private, but that’s just not on offer. Yet. COVID is still young and one can hope.
I think I’d prefer something with a technical schematic of the nanochip. 
With radio waves depicting the 5G menace.
This. I’ve been trying to explain this over and over again but it seems there’s a group of people simply not willing to put the greater good before their own gut feelings. Some people are extremely irked by the idea that there might be things more important than their individual choice. And that group includes doctors and nurses, who should really know better. Utterly frustrating.
Love your avatar. Some kind of spider?
Thanks! 
Yes. It’s a jumping spider. I’m actually quite the arachnophobic but this one’s cute.