Google Will Require Employees to be Vaccinated
- Paul Thurrott
- Jul 28, 2021
-
163
Google announced today that employees returning to work at its campuses starting in late October will need to be fully vaccinated.
“Getting vaccinated is one of the most important ways to keep ourselves and our communities healthy in the months ahead,” An email from Google CEO Sundar Pichai to employees explains. “As we look toward a global return to our offices, I wanted to share two key updates.”
First, Google employees who are coming back to work at the firm’s campuses will need to be fully vaccinated. “The implementation will vary according to local conditions and regulations, and will not apply until vaccines are widely available in your area,” Mr. Pichai says. “You’ll get guidance from your local leads about how this will affect you, and we’ll also share more details on an exceptions process for those who cannot be vaccinated for medical or other protected reasons.”
Windows Intelligence In Your Inbox
Sign up for our new free newsletter to get three time-saving tips each Friday — and get free copies of Paul Thurrott's Windows 11 and Windows 10 Field Guides (normally $9.99) as a special welcome gift!
"*" indicates required fields
Second, Google is extending its global work-from-home policy until October 18, giving Googlers more time to get vaccinated. “We recognize that many Googlers are seeing spikes in their communities caused by the Delta variant and are concerned about returning to the office,” he added. “This extension will allow us time to ramp back into work while providing flexibility for those who need it.”
Pichai says that Google employees will find out at least 30 days in advance before they are required to transition back to the office. And those with special circumstances will be able to apply to work from home through the end of 2021.
Conversation 163 comments
-
crunchyfrog
Log in to Reply<p>Curious what the "protected reasons" extend to. What happens to those who simply refuse to get it because they don’t need or want it?</p>
-
SimJeff
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>Who doesn’t "need" it? </p>
-
lvthunder
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>Pregnant women are advised not to get the vaccine. My cousin didn’t know she was pregnant and she got the J&J shot and ended up miscarrying the child because it got blood clots in its brain. They think it’s because of the shot, but who knows.</p><p><br></p><p>I believe they also say don’t get the vaccine until 3 months after you have had COVID.</p>
-
bluvg
Log in to Reply<p>That’s so sad. Very sorry to hear that :(</p>
-
cavalier_eternal
Log in to Reply<p>“<span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Pregnant women are advised not to get the vaccine.”</span></p><p><br></p><p><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Stop with the fear mongering, this is totally untrue.</span></p><p><br></p><p><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"> CDC’s actual guidance:</span></p><p><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">”Pregnant and recently pregnant people are more likely to get severely ill with COVID-19 compared with non-pregnant people. If you are pregnant, you can receive a COVID-19 vaccine. Getting a COVID-19 vaccine during pregnancy can protect you from severe illness from COVID-19. If you have questions about getting vaccinated, a conversation with your healthcare provider might help, but is not required for vaccination.”</span></p><p><br></p><p><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">At no point do they advise against it. </span></p>
-
Calibr21
Log in to Reply<p>They don’t advise against it but you are also leaving out their statement "Limited Data Are Available about the Safety of COVID-19 Vaccines for People Who Are Pregnant."</p><p><br></p><p>The CDC cannot say "we strongly believe vaccines are safe for unborn children" because they do not yet have the data to support that.</p><p><br></p><p>Healthy pregnant women may not want to risk getting a vaccine when there have not been significant trials showing that it is safe for them. It’s a reasonable choice people should respect. We made that same choice to not get vaccinated while pregnant because the vaccine trials didn’t focus on the impact to unborn children.</p>
-
cavalier_eternal
Log in to Reply<p>Then we are in agreement. Ivthunder was making shit up. </p>
-
lvthunder
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>I was not making shit up. I was telling you what my cousin’s doctor told her when she miscarried.</p>
-
cavalier_eternal
<p>My apologize, your cousins doctor made shit up that you heard secondhand and repeated as fact without taking a few seconds to verify the claim … there, I guess your argument is that being a dupe that mindlessly repeats bullshit is better than making up the bullshit.</p>
-
bluvg
<p>C’mon Cavalier… that’s rather, uh, cavalier.</p>
-
richfrantz
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>An ongoing issue long before Covid. It is hard to get reliable studies for safety and dosages on women when the studies exclude women who are "pregnant or considering getting pregnant".</p>
-
wright_is
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>My daughter is still breast feeding and she got herself vaccinated. There is a chance that some of the antibodies will be passed along to the child in the milk, meaning that they could also benefit from increased resistance to COVID-19.</p><p><br></p><p>In January, pregnant and breast feeding mothers were advised not to get vaccinated, purely because of the limited number of doses available – and at the time of the warning, they were only vaccinating >70s and workers in critical healthcare and emergency service roles. But they are at a higher risk of severe effects from COVID, according to German studies.</p>
-
conan007
Log in to Reply<p>Those who already had COVID?</p>
-
wright_is
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>If you have already had COVID, you should wait a period, before getting vaccinated. I’m not sure, what the recommended period is in the USA.</p><p><br></p><p>Studies show that for around 6 months after recovery, the body produced antibodies provide around a 91% protection against further infection <span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">for a majority of patients </span>. But, some people produce relatively few antibodies after the infection. The Robert Koch Institut in Germany recommends getting vaccinated 6 months after recovery. (RKI is the equivalent of the CDC in terms of Corona/COVID tracking and advice).</p>
-
prjman
Log in to Reply<p>Apparently, those entering the country illegally are not required to have it as well.</p>
-
bettyblue
Log in to Reply<p>And many have it…..but let not bring that up.</p>
-
cavalier_eternal
Log in to Reply<p>Oh Jesus, quit insulting everyone’s intelligence and just say “I’m a bigot” rather than trying to tap dance around it with this crap.</p>
-
cnc123
Log in to Reply<p>So just to put some numbers on "blaming the Mexicans" for COVID. There have been about 900,000 detentions at the border so far in 2021 and there were about 400,000 in 2020. Let’s say two got through for every one who was detained. This is ridiculous, but let’s just say it’s true to see if there’s anything to this nonsense. That’s 2.6 million people. Let’s say none of them have a vaccine.</p><p><br></p><p>163 million out of 280 million Americans over 12 are fully vaccinated and 190 million have received one dose. That’s 90 million Americans who can be vaccinated but have not received a dose, or about 35 Americans for every undocumented person, even if you assume the illegal entry numbers are absurdly high and not one immigrant is vaccinated.</p><p><br></p><p>So whose fault is this again?</p>
-
bluvg
Log in to Reply<p>The logic is unassailable: vaccines are unproven, dangerous, etc. etc.; we’re anti-vax! Uh, unless it’s for immigrants!</p>
-
bluvg
Log in to Reply<p>So if they’re sneaking across the border illegally and not apprehended, when would the govt vaccinate them? For the unaccompanied minors that are exempted, they wouldn’t be allowed to get the vaccine anyway. You said "Someone that has had COVID and is young, for instance, really has no need to be vaccinated"… unless they’re an immigrant?</p>
-
bluvg
Log in to Reply<p>For folks with compromised immune systems, weighing the risks of taking vs. not is much trickier.</p>
-
rob4jen
Log in to Reply<p>Though it’s a complicated issue I am not interested in receiving any vaccine developed or tested using cells from or derived from aborted children. Guess I can cross Google off my list of potential employers. </p>
-
martinm
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>I respect your right to you opinion and to make your own choices. Please stay at home then, thats the choice you made. </p>
-
rob4jen
Log in to Reply<p>What does staying home have to do with working for Google? I can not work for Google and still leave the house. </p>
-
winner
Log in to Reply<p>Yep. I’m sure somebody else won’t have that requirement, you can work for them instead.</p>
-
bluvg
Log in to Reply<p>Both the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are NOT made using embryonic stem cells or fetal tissue. So you could work for Google if you wanted.</p>
-
cavalier_eternal
Log in to Reply<p>The vaccines aren’t made with aborted cells but the development if the vaccines used a cell line that dates back to an abortion in the 70s/80s. At this point the cell line is are over a thousand generations removed from the original fetal cells but I think this is the objection they have with using the mRNA based vaccines. </p>
-
rosyna
Log in to Reply<p>That’s Pepsi, not the mRNA vaccines.</p>
-
rob4jen
Log in to Reply<p>They were tested against them, which is still a no-go for me.</p>
-
bluvg
Log in to Reply<p>Honest question: if you’re pro-life, wouldn’t you want to protect the lives of people around you as well? </p><p><br></p><p>Another honest question: just saw a story via Fox News that reported an embryo found inside a baby (which is quite rare). If the embryo were growing and causing a danger to the baby, what would you do?</p>
-
ArvindV
Log in to Reply<p>dont talk logic with these people. some people just want to watch the world burn</p>
-
codymesh
Log in to Reply<p>no worries, if you thought MRNA vaccines are made from<span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"> using cells, let alone derived from aborted children, you definitely weren’t going to be employed at Google anyway.</span></p>
-
rob4jen
Log in to Reply<p>Did you not read that I said "tested"? I guess you can cross Google off your list, too, assuming that reading comprehension is a required skill. I guess you were so eager to ‘own’ me that it slipped by you. All US COVID vaccines were either developed and/or tested against cells derived from aborted children. </p>
-
codymesh
Log in to Reply<p>How else do you propose vaccines be made safe for children without testing? Literally all of medicine is like this. This is a self-own. You’re doing all the work my guy.</p><p><br></p><p><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Besides, you said "developed and tested", so what’s your response to it </span><em style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">not </em><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">being developed with it? I know i’m not smart enough to get a job at Google – can’t say that about you lol, because you have them on your list. Save yourself the trouble.</span></p>
-
youwerewarned
Log in to Reply<p>Much better to instead study the MILLIONS that will die as result of this pandemic. Within a few years we will know more about COVID than any prior disease. And the problem will not be the existence of effective vaccines–but rather the curious "dead but free" strategy, and those who promote it.</p><p> Kool-Aid anyone?</p>
-
wright_is
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>There are certain medical conditions, which negate the effects of the vaccine, which means the people can’t be vaccinated, or if they are vaccinated, their body destroys it, before antibodies can be produced. This leaves them vulnerable to COVID, with no way to protect themselves, other than hoping everyone else around them is responsible enough to vaccinate themselves.</p>
-
stvbnsn
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>Reason(s) is probably allergic to an ingredient, or advised by a physician due to a pre-existing condition you should wait or avoid, but that’s probably a handful of employees at most. </p>
-
lvthunder
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>Mostly religious reasons would be my guess. Corporations cannot force employees to do things that go against their religion.</p>
-
lvthunder
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>So how do people feel about employers dictating what medical procedures you are required to get? Are flu shots next? What about the other vaccines? This is a real slippery slope.</p>
-
MadsM
Log in to Reply<p>I feel great about it. I don’t wanna work in a office filled with unvaccinated.</p>
-
prjman
Log in to Reply<p>If you are vaccinated, why do you care?</p>
-
jdawgnoonan
Log in to Reply<p>Exactly. I am vaccinated and I no longer care who I am around at all. My best friend is unvaccinated and we hang out quite frequently and I am not afraid of him nor do I think he is an idiot to choose not to be vaccinated. </p>
-
red.radar
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>Because being around unvaccinated means you can help spread it to other unvaccinated like my children who are too young to receive the vaccination. </p>
-
cnc123
Log in to Reply<p>Because I have children who are not, and I’d like them to stay out of the hospital and alive. </p>
-
waethorn
Log in to Reply<p>If you’re so unsure if someone uninfected is going to make your injection stop working, why would you line up for an experimental injection in the first place?</p>
-
mcerdas
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p><em>Imprimis:</em> The vaccines are not experimental, and they have proven effective worldwide</p><p><em>Secundus: </em>No vaccine is 100% effective. Thus the more infected people I hang around with, the greater the chances I can get infected. It’s just that my chances are much lower than those of an unvaccinated person</p><p><em>Tertius: </em>People who refuse to get vaccinated are not only imperiling their own health, but also the health of those who can’t get vaccinated, like immuno supressed persons or children too young to get the vaccine. Also the more infected people, the greater the chances for new variants to appear</p>
-
prjman
Log in to Reply<p>1) The vaccines are approved under an emergency use authorization. We have no data on their long term effects.</p><p>2) Agreed. In the case of the COVID vaccine, however, it appears that those that have been vaccinated are still able to transmit the virus.</p><p>3) People who refuse to get vaccinated are making their own health decision. They may have had COVID already. They may fall into a demographic that is at very little risk from COVID and would rather wait for more data on the long-term effects of the vaccine. They are imperiling no one. If you are concerned about COVID, get vaccinated. There are three vaccines available to you.</p>
-
cavalier_eternal
Log in to Reply<ol><li>The majority of side effects (short or long term) are found in the first two months of a vaccine trial. This is specifically why the CDC required to months of data prior to emergency approval. Further the vaccines have been in use for over a year. So the claim that there is no data is both factually incorrect and shows a lack of understanding of the entire process. </li><li>Yes, but a vaccinated person carries a lower viral load over a shorter period of time. That less likely to spread covid that a person that isn’t vaccinated and gets sick. </li><li>No, they aren’t simply making a decision for themselves. They are making it for the community they live in. There are people that cannot get vaccinated (children under 12 are a perfect example but there is a laundry list). So having low risk is irrelevant when you can pass it on to someone else that is higher risk. You don’t just get vaccinated for your own well being but for the well being of those that are more vulnerable and cannot get vaccinated. Opting out is just being a selfish prick. </li></ol><p><br></p><p><br></p>
-
waethorn
Log in to Reply<p>Keep repeating CNN talking points and don’t listen to Frontline Doctors. You know, because the media doesn’t lie. /s</p><p><br></p><p>(please research Project Mockingbird)</p>
-
trparky
Log in to Reply<p>Ah, we have a conspiracy theorist here. Go away.</p>
-
waethorn
Log in to Reply<p>Conspiracy "theorists" were saying from the start that this was to push vaccine passports and that this was created in a lab. Yet here we are – both facts have been proven.</p>
-
cavalier_eternal
<p>Vaccine records, “passports” as you dumbshits like to call them, already existed and were required for any number of things prior to the pandemic so there was literally no need to create them. There also hasn’t been an investigation that shows this was created in a lab. So you are zero for two on your claims. </p><p><br></p><p>Reading your comments in this thread is like getting sprayed in the face with fully carbonated stupid. </p>
-
waethorn
<p>Name any other vaccine you need to show documentation for to go to the store, to work, to a restaurant, to a sports game or music concert, etc.</p><p><br></p><p>Why are illegal aliens being allowed in the country without vaccinations or proof of vaccinations? But you’re not allowed to travel in or out of your own country without one?</p>
-
anderb
Premium Member<p>Let me guess. The election was stolen too, right?</p>
-
cavalier_eternal
<p>For work? In the state of Texas (where I live) the list includes but isn’t limited to MMR, Influenza, Varicella, Hep B and Pneumococcal depending on your occupation. </p><p><br></p><p>For stores, restaurants, sport and music neither the federal government nor any state government require proof of covid or any vaccination for that matter. </p><p><br></p><p>I’m not sure why you brought up illegal immigration as it is totally irrelevant. </p><p><br></p><p>As for travel, the U.S. doesn’t require vaccinations to travel in and out of the country. </p><p><br></p><p>Look at that, you managed to make no points and further prove you have no fucking clue what you are talking about. </p>
-
waethorn
<p>Oh you mean to tell me that Biden didn’t actually go on camera in front of the American public and say that you wouldn’t have to wear a mask after getting a shot? Because the Internet doesn’t forget that.</p>
-
bettyblue
<p>I have never had to show that I had been vaccinated for anything after I got out of the military. In the military I only had to show I had certain vaccinations when I was deployed. That was to protect me, not anyone else from getting yellow fever or whatever.</p><p><br></p><p><br></p>
-
waethorn
<p>Fauci’s own emails prove he was complicit in sending money to Wuhan via proxy (which he knew about), despite it being completely illegal (which he also knew about, and tried to skirt the issue) to research how an animal virus could infect humans by purposefully genetically manipulating one. This is incontrovertible. He doesn’t even deny it. He continues to deny any wrongdoing despite gain-of-function research being illegal. His own previous papers as well as the CDC’s published definition of gain-of-function research contradict his current testimony where he claims what is being done is not that. Remember, Kary Mullis even called the guy an idiot and said that Fauci believes that if he found some piece of a virus under a microscope, Fauci would proclaim that the subject would be infected, sick, and infectious, which is exactly what Mullis’s PCR test is being used for, even though Mullis decried it as only designed for lab environments for research. Mullis claimed that medical people like him have an agenda and shouldn’t be in a position of power like he is. This is available on a number of video websites if you don’t believe it, although YouTube has been removing factual videos like this that don’t play into the current narrative.</p>
-
cnc123
<p>This is nonsense. There are no vaccine passports in the US. Doesn’t exist. </p><p><br></p><p>And if the virus was created in a lab, shouldn’t you get a vaccine to protect yourself from it? You’re not going to get a vaccine for this "lab created" virus that might kill you? Why wouldn’t you? By trading your health to spite the so-called "creators?" In what universe does that make any sense?</p>
-
bluvg
<p>No, both have not yet been "proven." Saying this pandemic was crafted to push "vaccine passports" have been proven is just laughably silly and incoherent. Made in the lab: <em>leaked</em> from lab is considered plausible (and Biden argued in early 2020 we shouldn’t take China’s word, fwiw; China’s actions thwarting investigation have definitely raised suspicion), but the scientific consensus based on genetic evaluation has been that it was not <em>made</em>/<em>engineered</em> in the lab–i.e., this isn’t evidence of a bioterror project. The one major argument that it was (made by David Baltimore, Nobel laureate), was proven incorrect, and Baltimore later agreed. And regarding the nonsensical deliberate leak theory: if they had wanted to unleash a bioterror agent, they wouldn’t have started in their own country, and they could have made it <em>far</em> more effective.</p>
-
bluvg
<p>Biden was inaccurate when he said "you’re not going to get COVID if you have these vaccinations." It’s not a guarantee, but that does NOT mean that it isn’t abundantly clear from real world stats they’re very effective. And, it’s not quite on the same level as telling people to ingest bleach to cure it.</p>
-
waethorn
<p>Try to go to a sports game or a restaurant in a state like California without your COVID (certificate of vaccination ID) card. You won’t get very far. Other countries are already mandating them, and some are already doing smartphone apps like China does with their social credit system. Don’t take your SOMA, I mean latest jab, and your access to money and travel rights are turned off. It’s only a matter of time – they already suckered a whole whack load of people to load their location tracking apps that, surprise surprise, took in far more data than they let on. Oh, but there’s probably somebody that will defend the health service app creators for lying about collecting more information than they should’ve.</p>
-
bluvg
<p>No, Fauci’s emails don’t "prove" that he was "funding gain-of-function" research. NIH director Francis Collins–an absolute gem of a human being–made that crystal clear as well. The only people saying that are folks like Rand Paul who are cynically exploiting the situation for their own political gain, turning Fauci into a scapegoat and deliberately misconstruing information because they know it’s red meat for their base who won’t understand it, but will gladly parrot back their talking points. </p><p><br></p><p>Rage votes, not truth. That’s what you’re being sold.</p>
-
cavalier_eternal
<p>Actually was in San Diego California all of last week visiting family. California has no requirement that you show proof of vaccination when going out and I not one dispensary, coffee shop or restaurant asked for proof of vaccination. So once again you have said something that is completely fucking wrong. Rational people would take a moment of introspection after getting so many things wrong and perhaps question where they get their information from. But you seem to take the approach of the Bigfoot hunter. No acknowledgment that you are making shit up and just moving on to your next fantastical claim. </p>
-
mcerdas
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>I’m not getting my health advice form CNN. I get it from Costa Rica’s Ministry of Health and the University of Costa Rica. So even though I already have my first vaccine dose, I will keep using my mask and social distancing. </p>
-
waethorn
Log in to Reply<p>I’ll tell you about public health officials: in Canada, public health officials said it was safe to mix and match vaccines from different vendors, even after the manufacturers and the WHO themselves said not to.</p>
-
jdawgnoonan
Log in to Reply<p>The vaccines do not make you immune the virus. Not even close to immune to the virus. They make it so that when you get it you don’t get sick (or as sick) and then you still give it to your unvaccinated friends. As a vaccinated person, I am the risk to the unvaccinated. They aren’t a risk to me.</p>
-
waethorn
Log in to Reply<p>should say "someone uninjected". damn auto-spell.</p>
-
Elan Gabriel
Log in to Reply<p>I’m vaccinated, and think people who can but are not are idiots, but I don’t like what Google is doing. What will they do, let go of the people who won’t get vaccinated ? Is it even legal to do that/dictate that ?</p>
-
prjman
Log in to Reply<p>They will find out soon enough, as lawsuits will be pending regarding this.</p>
-
bluvg
Log in to Reply<p>I share your opinion. I’m somewhat sympathetic to the view that these types of requirements are perhaps the only way to an acceptable level of infection where we won’t be dealing with this years–the good of the many outweigh the good of the individual rationale, since there are so many that hold to an unfalsifiable belief on this, fueled by conspiracies and anecdotes rather than data. But so many in that camp have made this part of their core identity, it’s probably just infeasible, so everyone else is going to have to suffer because of their stubborness out of respect for individual rights.</p>
-
prjman
Log in to Reply<p>How are you ‘suffering’ if someone doesn’t get vaccinated, but you are vaccinated?</p>
-
SimJeff
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>Vaccinations is a group effort – to claim the unvaccinated do not harm the vaccinated shows a complete lack of information on how vaccines work. </p>
-
jdawgnoonan
Log in to Reply<p>The vaccine doesn’t prevent the virus, so why force the unvaccinated to get it? If you are vaccinated you don’t get as sick, but you can still get and spread the virus. I am vaccinated and I am the risk to the unvaccinated, they are of no more risk to me than every other vaccincated person, so what is the point?</p>
-
bluvg
Log in to Reply<p>Because we’d all like the pandemic to be over. Large swathes of the population being unvaccinated effectively prevents that for everyone.</p>
-
waethorn
Log in to Reply<p>I guess you don’t remember the time when they used to call vaccinations by their former name: immunizations.</p>
-
bluvg
Log in to Reply<p>Or inoculations. Or before that, variolations. What’s your point? Are you making the strawman argument that immunity is only immunity if it’s 100%? </p>
-
youwerewarned
Log in to Reply<p>So I’ve read through all this right-wing moron blathering of yours. I worked with Dr Fauci NIAID and you haven’t a CLUE as to his intensions and expertise. Nor his retirement fund contents. But those are classic tells of the Fox-as-news-syndrome–and you’ve got a bad case of it.</p><p>A most disturbing aspect of this pandemic is that the brilliant minds behind these amazingly-effective vaccines have to watch IDIOTS refuse to save themselves or others. The fact that fully 1/3 of the population can be pulled by their nose (through religion, racist identification, or any number of "groups" we primates are enamoured of) demonstrates that a fat cortex isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.</p><p><br></p><p><br></p>
-
bluvg
<p>"Fox-as-news-syndrome"</p><p><br></p><p>Right, until they realized they might get sued (again), then back-tracked. And then disavowed any back-tracking. At least they realize they can’t lie in court, where a judge (a Trump appointee, no less) ruled in favor of Fox due to Fox’s lawyers arguing that no reasonable person would take Tucker Carlson literally (not making this up): </p><p><br></p><p>"[The] ‘general tenor’ of the show should then inform a viewer that [Carlson] is not ‘stating actual facts’ about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in ‘exaggeration’ and ‘non-literal commentary.’"</p><p><br></p><p><em>"Fox persuasively argues, that given Mr. Carlson’s reputation, any reasonable viewer ‘arrive[s] with an appropriate amount of skepticism’ about the statement he makes."</em></p>
-
waethorn
<p>What’s funny is watching people turning fear into a virtue.</p>
-
waethorn
<p>If I had a nickel for every time some anonymous person on a chat forum came along out of the blue and claimed to be a formerly employed expert in the field in which I deride, such as IT executives supposedly working in Forbes 50 companies, I’d probably be a rich a-hole like a certain former adulterer software company CEO, booking a side trip on the Lolita Express to a Fantasy Island on the way to a Davos conference with his Nazi collaborator mentor to plan how to lord over the rest of the world.</p>
-
bluvg
Log in to Reply<p>Because I’d really like this pandemic to be effectively over. But we’re not going to get there when half the country buys conspiracy crap, lining the pockets and fueling the ambitions of those spreading it.</p>
-
bsobotta
Log in to Reply<p>Lol.</p>
-
stvbnsn
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>There was already a case in Houston, the judge threw it out. It’s heated but it’s legal to require employees to get vaccinated, or to be provided reasonable accommodation like required to wear a mask any time they’re in the office, get tested at intervals, or work from home (which is what Google is coming back from, so that might not be reasonable in Google’s eyes.) </p>
-
lvthunder
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>That depends on where you are and what the laws are. In the US it is pretty untested by the courts, but I could easily see some states banning a requirement.</p>
-
cnc123
Log in to Reply<p>Google employees are at will. They can be fired for any reason at any time. Posing an existential health risk to your coworkers and their unvaccinated children seems like a plenty good enough reason to me.</p>
-
cavalier_eternal
Log in to Reply<p>“<span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Are flu shots next? What about the other vaccines?”</span></p><p><br></p><p>Most hospitals, assisted living and other office required medical professionals and caretakers to get yearly flu shots as well as maintain other vaccines. Schools require students and teaches to be vaccinated. There are countries that require vaccinations for entry. Work place requirements for vaccinations are literally nothing new. </p><p>So, there is no; “are they next?” They already are and will continue to be. </p><p><br></p><p>Maybe do some level of research before you shit your pants, run around with your hair on fire and ask moronic questions. </p>
-
mikegalos
Log in to Reply<p>Exactly. When I joined the US Medical Reserve Corps, along with the background check I was required to get current on my adult vaccinations (things like MMR boosters) and vaccinations for several diseases not normally on the list but that were more likely for me to be exposed to due to the nature of the job.</p><p><br></p><p><br></p>
-
red.radar
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>No different than the government telling you to vaccinate children to a minimum standard to go to public school. </p>
-
captain_proton
Log in to Reply<p>Unlike covid shot, the one mandate by schools is 100% FDA Approved has years of long-term studies under them. Covid Shot, on the other hand, is for experimental use only has no long-term studies, and from what I read recently, the big 3 had to shut down their double-blind study as to placebo subject got the shot. </p>
-
cavalier_eternal
Log in to Reply<p>These aren’t experimental. Experimental medicine is referred to and regulated as “Compassionate Use” by the FDA. These are are “Emergency Use”. Needless to say that “Emergency Use” and “Compassionate Use” are very different things. People using the term “experimental” in reference to “emergency use” are being misleading in order to whip of fear. </p>
-
red.radar
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>But your overlooking the overwhelming amount of data that has been generated from the emergency use authorization. we have administered 342 million doses and the numbers reporting side effects have been in the PPM territory. The years of study are not needed because the test methodology and delivery plan was different. They did a staged rollout and the scale of the studies were much larger to get to statistical relevance quicker for those rare side effects. FDA approval is a talking point and really only means something for those who are classified "at risk" such as those with per-existing conditions or very young children. For everyone else the data is iron clad and the vaccine is as good as approved. </p><p><br></p><p>Its like Windows Update service. The FDA said. Look all the PCs out there that are older than 18 years can get this update. We will continue to testing on the newer ones and deliver the update on those when we have data to ensure system stability. Their legacy approach was full testing and release via a CD publishing service. </p>
-
waethorn
Log in to Reply<p>"Fully vaccinated" from what?</p><p><br></p><p>If you believe what Fauci et al are telling you, the vaccines aren’t working against the "Delta variant", and testing sites will tell you that there isn’t even a PCR test that can isolate this variant.</p><p><br></p><p>So what Google is saying is: "get every vaccine you’re told to, for every variant that comes out". There’s already a "Lambda variant" and an "Iota variant" on the books, meaning vaccines forever. This is Gattaca, become real.</p>
-
MadsM
Log in to Reply<p>Vaccines work against the Delta variant too. They are just less likely to protect against infection but still incredibly effective against severe symptoms. Why are vaccine skeptics always so badly informed?</p>
-
prjman
Log in to Reply<p>Natural immunity is also highly effective against severe COVID in all of its variations. </p>
-
bluvg
Log in to Reply<p>At least for Pfizer and Moderna, the data seems to be showing that the vaccine is more effective against variants than having been infected.</p>
-
prjman
Log in to Reply<p>Perhaps. Natural immunity, however, is still highly effective. Someone that has had COVID and is young, for instance, really has no need to be vaccinated.</p>
-
winner
Log in to Reply<p>Wrong. While being young is less dangerous, it is still a risk – death, organ damage.</p><p>Such misinformation.</p>
-
bluvg
Log in to Reply<p>Why is the <em>only </em>consideration what’s good for the individual? If they don’t care about their own need for it, they should at least care about the impact to others, society, the economy, having to wear masks, variants, etc. The main reason for the whole push is to put an end to the pandemic for everyone. (And yes, though vaccinated can still get infected and infect others, the data has been showing vaccination greatly reduces the spread.)</p>
-
trparky
Log in to Reply<p>If you survive it, that is. The Delta variant is said to be even worse than the first one.</p>
-
waethorn
Log in to Reply<p>Virus mutations NEVER get more deadly in nature. This is a pure science fact that’s been bastardized in the last year to push for more unscientific mandates.</p>
-
SimJeff
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>That is not true at all – maybe learn how science works. Lots get more deadly – however – the danger is when they get slightly less deadly and then spread faster than they can be mitigated. So they do become a bigger problem due to longevity permitting it to travel longer, and therefore further. More deadly is normally solved by isolation first.</p><p><br></p>
-
prjman
Log in to Reply<p>There is no evidence that Delta is more dangerous than other strains. More contagious, certainly, but not more dangerous.</p>
-
bluvg
<p>For Delta, yes, but the data for some of the other variants have shown them to be more serious.</p>
-
bluvg
Log in to Reply<p>Where do you get this crap. That is not at all what the science says, and we are witnessing it before our very eyes. </p>
-
richfrantz
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>usually don’t, not never</p>
-
winner
Log in to Reply<p>Studies have shown that a first COVID infection with the original strain imparts about 33% protection against getting Delta. Not a lot, but something. Less protection than a vaccine provides.</p>
-
waethorn
Log in to Reply<p>Show me proof of this. They don’t even claim that you can’t get infected or aren’t infectious via your first shot (or first 2 if you’re going with mRNA vaccines). Do some research on this. This isn’t a vaccine under the previous definition prior to this virus. MMR and other vaccines provided full immunity. This doesn’t. It’s only designed to reduce mild symptoms. Guess what? That’s what Tamiflu does. I guess Tamiflu is now considered a vaccine under the new definition then.</p>
-
bluvg
Log in to Reply<p>Goodness gracious, where are you getting that info and misdirection? The CDC, Fauci, et al have NEVER said you can’t get infected. No vaccine provides that assurance. MMR provides "full immunity"? Nope: 97%, similar to Pfizer and Moderna. That’s still FAR better than no protection. But even then, this fails to distinguish between "infection" and severe illness and death, which the statistics clearly show are dramatically reduced, including for Delta. </p><p><br></p><p>Don’t buy the crap that some are spreading so they can get clicks, viewers, and pad their wallets and other self-interests.</p>
-
waethorn
Log in to Reply<p>If it’s 97%, you wouldn’t need 6-month booster shots for variants. Nobody needs 6-month boosters for MMR. Yet this is what Pfizer is pushing. You won’t ever be "fully vaccinated".</p>
-
waethorn
Log in to Reply<p>The only person pushing misinformation is Fauci. His retirement fund is mostly Moderna stock. Moderna didn’t produce anything before this. Yet he committed gain-of-function research, i.e. bioterrorism research, with the Chinese lab, who thanked him for the money for that purpose, while trying to hide it through Daszak’s organization and subsequently getting the CDC to reclassify it after the fact so as to not face scrutiny. And then he had the gall to lie about that in front of Congress and his emails prove this. Try reading those some time – they’re full of juicy stuff. He’s flip-flopped on masks, vaccines for young people, lockdowns, etc., all while cozying up to the media. And Kary Mullis, inventor of the PCR test, RIP – 2019, had some choice words about him.</p>
-
bluvg
Log in to Reply<p>Are you just trolling, or what? These are all just regurgitated nonsensical conspiracist talking points.</p><p><br></p><p>Fauci’s retirement fund: prove it. Gain of function: nice try. Masks: he explained this clearly. Emails: ha! Folks deliberately trying to misconstrue, based mostly on ignorance of the field. How about not telling people to take their Clorox Chewables to help make this disappear in April 2020 like it was supposed to? Unbelievable why people are demonizing him, except for… wait for it, oh yeah, it serves their political interests. Why not watch the interview of the Australian that actually <em>worked </em>at the Wuhan Institute of Virology to find out what a load of crap they’re shamelessly selling for their own selfish interests. </p><p><br></p><p>Moderna: they’ve been around since 2010. mRNA research dates back to 1971 and really took off in the 90s. </p><p><br></p><p>Absolutely crazy how many of the same people were cheering the accomplishment of the previous administration of delivering a vaccine in near-record time (courtesy of mRNA research dating decades), and now saying it’s not a vaccine, it’s a government conspiracy, it’s Biden’s push and therefore we need to be against it, it’s population/mind control and other totally pulled-from-their-hind-end garbage. When CPAC cheered about the current administration not hitting their vaccine goals after the same people cheering the previous administration’s delivery of a vaccine in record time, it tells you <strong>it’s precisely about tribalism, nothing else. </strong></p>
-
waethorn
<p>False. The first mRNA application was in 89 and the first study was done in 90. Modernas first product is their COVID vaccine and Fauci funded the trial. Prior to that, they were only a research company.</p>
-
bluvg
<p>Nope, not false: mRNA research began in the UK in 1971. And so what if they Moderna was a research company up until whenever, or if "Fauci funded them" (which is part of the scope of the NIH)? That should somehow invalidate what they’re doing? They’re only allowed to produce something if they’re 100% privately funded, only have a long history of previous products, etc. etc.? That’s incoherent. The clinical trials applied to Moderna just like J&J, AZ, and other companies with a long history. </p>
-
waethorn
<p>The discovery was announced in 61 actually. The first actual application tests weren’t performed until 89 – 90 as I stated.</p>
-
bluvg
Log in to Reply<p>This is based on the false premise that MMR and COVID are equivalent.</p>
-
prjman
Log in to Reply<p>Our society has now placed absolute safety over all else. It will be out undoing.</p><p><br></p><p>COVID isn’t going away. Like the flu, we will have a seasonal surge every year. Best we learn to live with it and move on with our lives.</p>
-
cnc123
Log in to Reply<p>The 600,000 dead people can’t really learn to live with it, can they? Literally the way to live with this is to get a vaccine.</p>
-
SimJeff
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>So many of those reasons are not even valid reasons but also definitely not an invaliding "need"</p><p>(also, safe bet to ignore anything waethorn types – will save a lot of time).</p><p> </p><p>Facts can be hard to verify. Good sources are hard to find. Some of you don’t seem to be even trying.</p>
-
cnc123
Log in to Reply<p>Dude – you’re lost. Give yourself a break from the QAnon stuff for a month. Talk to real people in the real world instead. Seriously. Just try.</p>
-
reesecupsftw
Log in to Reply<p>Honest question. Since when do employers get to dictate what I put in my body? Next they’ll be telling me I can’t eat that cheeseburger because I’m overweight. All under the guise of "Public Health".</p>
-
MadsM
Log in to Reply<p>This is where you should find another employer that will cater to your irrational fears.</p>
-
prjman
Log in to Reply<p>Perhaps an employees irrational fears are none of the employer’s business.</p>
-
bluvg
Log in to Reply<p>Eating a cheeseburger won’t cause others to involuntarily eat a cheeseburger. :P</p>
-
reesecupsftw
Log in to Reply<p>I don’t know. If you saw the cheeseburgers I eat you just might have to have one. ?</p>
-
lvthunder
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>They will unless the employees’ revolt or the government passes a law making it illegal. My guess is this is just the start for some.</p>
-
bettyblue
Log in to Reply<p>Just lie and say you got it. No one is checking anything. As soon as the mask mandate was lifted basically anyone that wanted to not wear their mask did so. Those that thought they really helped continued.</p><p><br></p><p>I have had the vaccine at my employers request. As soon as I could I took off my mask. No one checked that I got it, even though I carry the card in my wallet. I know plenty of people that did not get it and stopped waring masks as well. No one check them either.</p><p><br></p><p>At this point putting back on a mask or trying to force anyone to get it is useless. Where I live 90% do not wear it and things are back to normal. It is summer and everyone is out and about. I was at Disney World just last week…and it was packed! I flew on planes…..100% packed. The only thing not normal is the fact there is fewer restaurants open now because people are still getting paid to stay home by the man. At least that ends in September. There will be a scramble to find jobs by those people…and there will be fewer of them because lots are gone forever.</p>
-
ArvindV
Log in to Reply<p>will you eating the cheeseburger cause the one sitting next to you die in about 3-4 weeks? if yes then that cheeseburger needs to be banned from getting into the public if not then you can continue to eat it.</p><p><br></p>
-
ahajra
Log in to Reply<p><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Google should just let its employees continue to work remotely for the foreseeable future.</span></p><p>Name me a worse vaccine than the Covid one(s). Maybe the flu shot? </p><p>I’ve never heard of anyone vaccinated against measles, mumps, rubella, tetanus, typhoid, diphtheria, whooping cough, HPV, shingles or meningitis ever getting any of those diseases. But people vax’d against Covid still get it ALL THE TIME. </p><p>Covid Vaccination is obviously a false panacea and making it the end-all-be-all for a return to normality is going to make the pandemic worse. </p>
-
jdawgnoonan
Log in to Reply<p>Because it actually isn’t a vaccine. It is a theruputic that they have called a vaccine. It doesn’t prevent COVID, it makes it less severe, and that makes it not a vaccine.</p>
-
bettyblue
Log in to Reply<p>Just like Tamaflu.</p>
-
bluvg
Log in to Reply<p>This is false. How is it not a vaccine? It trains the immune system to fight a type of infection. That’s the same premise going back even to variolations in the 1100s .</p>
-
lvthunder
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>Most people aren’t exposed to those diseases due to the vaccines.</p>
-
IanYates82
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>Those other viruses are not circulating in the community *because* of high vaccination. That’s why you don’t hear that people have caught one of them </p>
-
cavalier_eternal
Log in to Reply<p>Paul, Brad anyone that moderates…</p><p><br></p><p>Can we get the metric ton of vaccine misinformation and conspiracy theories removed from the comments. This isn’t Facebook and this crap shouldn’t be tolerated. </p>
-
darkgrayknight
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>I don’t see the need to worry about the "metric ton" of vaccine misinformation, as it there isn’t more than a few comments that might be off, but overall I see decent discussion with minimal misinformation.</p>
-
cavalier_eternal
Log in to Reply<p>You must not see<strong> </strong><a href="/users/waethorn" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);"><strong>waethorn</strong></a><strong style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">’ non-stop parade of bullshit. </strong></p>
-
lvthunder
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>Anyone who makes a decision on vaccines based on comments of a website or a social media site is a complete idiot. Nothing is achieved by silencing people. Everything you say is misinformation has been challenged so there is no need to delete stuff.</p>
-
cavalier_eternal
Log in to Reply<p>That’s a neat trick. You show up, say things that are untrue and then absolve yourself of accountability. What a clown</p>
-
bettyblue
Log in to Reply<p>Who are you "cavalier_eternal" a comic book character, infectious disease scientist or just some dude on the Internet. Anything you say is no better or worse than the rest. </p>
-
cavalier_eternal
Log in to Reply<p>You literally have encouraged people to lie about their health status and potentially put others at risk. Within the gay community we have people do what you suggest and lie about their HIV status. The results have been the same, more people contracting the virus and dying. You are a disgusting human being I am in fact better than you.</p>
-
bluvg
Log in to Reply<p>Fully agree, silencing debate is not helpful. If there’s a misleading or ignorant or downright dangerous point of view, as long as it doesn’t incite violence or inhumane treatment, let it be exposed to sunlight and challenged.</p>
-
cavalier_eternal
Log in to Reply<p>This misinformation has a body count. It isn’t a benign thing. </p>
-
bluvg
Log in to Reply<p>Agreed, but silencing it isn’t the solution. Many people have unfalsifiable beliefs, and they get some measure of self-worth and safety in group think by making this part of their identity, which enables the willing suspension of disbelief. But not everyone.</p>
-
cavalier_eternal
Log in to Reply<p>Sorry, but all I got from that is people intentionally spreading misinformation that causes others bodily harm up to and including death is totally a humane thing to do. That is a head scratcher of for sure. </p><p><br></p><p>Anyway, we have openly debated these clowns for over a year. We heard social distancing was needed, it was no worse than the flu, heard immunity is just around the corner and a non-stop parade of various other bullshit. Your idea that we should give it a platform and debate it hasn’t resulted progress and just made the issue worse. If you want to continue down the path of being an apologist these folks then knock yourself out but don’t expect any results other than the same failure you got over the last year. </p><p><br></p><p>FWIW, this new crock about COVID being driven by immigrants on the southern boarder that came out of the right wing echo chamber has resulted in an executive order in Texas that requires state troopers to detain anyone they think could be an immigrant with covid….. But hey! We got that idea out in the public and gave it a platform just like you wanted!!! Congrats on your progress!!!</p><p><br></p><p><br></p>
-
SimJeff
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>The problem is those looking for confirmation latch onto "people are saying" to then do whatever they wanted anyway.</p><p>I get this is a very difficult line – it would be easy if we as a group handled "someone posts something stupid – gets pointed out as stupid with information and minds got changed" Evidence is showing the original source of stupid won’t be enlightened, and others stop reading when they found that first message.</p><p>So then we rely on moderators to impose a value they have to nuke from space the mixed info, imposing the values they have – and causing even more validation in the minds of the original misinformed group. How many of these people think Facebook is a massive "left-leaning / anti-Right" controller of information – despite operating as a giant corporation and top 10 impressions lists contradicting all that information.</p><p><br></p><p>to be fair – I also don’t have a better answer than "nuke from space" with how most of this flow of information works when it goes bad.</p>
-
bettyblue
Log in to Reply<p>No it is supposed to be a tech site. Can we just dump the whole article. I mean if Google or Microsoft had a new policy on bringing your lunch to work….would tech sites cover some company policy.</p><p><br></p><p><br></p>
-
IanYates82
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>Yeah. It’s a site that covers Microsoft and other tech companies </p><p><br></p><p>If they got a new ceo, it’s not about tech itself but it is relevant to the company. Same as if they moved campus, doubled employee salaries, built a theme park, donated money, bought an island, or started to give out free lunch. </p><p>This is news. It’s just a shame the comments section has become a bonfire of conspiracy theories. </p>
-
cnc123
Log in to Reply<p>Agree. Someone please nuke this entire comment section from orbit.</p>
-
richfrantz
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>It’s the only way to be sure.</p>
-
red.radar
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>Reading these comments …. We are screwed. </p><p><br></p><p><br></p>
-
waethorn
Log in to Reply<p><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Yup. I guess everyone can take Thalidomide because it’s plain safe and the Tuskegee experiments were just a daydream then.</span></p>
-
codymesh
Log in to Reply<p>oh yeah, you’re definitely totally an anti-vaxxer out of concern for poor people of colour that were victims of systemic racism from the US government.</p>
-
red.radar
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<ol><li> The vaccines went through normal trials by volunteers who were briefed on the risks they could be taking. This was all prior to the emergency use authorization. The comparison to the human rights violation of the Tuskegee experiments is not accurate. </li><li> As of this morning 342 Million doses of the 3 approved vaccines have been administered in the USA. Side effects have occurred but on the order of thousands on a nation wide scale. That means we are in PPM (Part Per Million) defect territory. So for every million people that get a vaccine maybe 50 (I am being generous.. its reported lower than this) have some side effect and in that 50 a few deaths <strong><em>allegedly </em></strong>have occurred. That is in PPB (Part per Billion) territory. So what is more likely to happen? You remain un-vaccinated and die, which as of this morning is a 1.7% chance (1700 people for every million)? or … do you worry about some side effects if your one of the unlucky 50 out of every million. Its basic math… </li></ol><p><br></p>
-
Daekar
Log in to Reply<p>Paul, you had to know the comments for this article would be terrible… I hope you don’t have to spend too much time moderating. </p>
-
ArvindV
Log in to Reply<p>i dont expect Paul to moderate this. he might be a conspiracy theorist himself.</p>
-
chump2010
Log in to Reply<p>So a company that wants everyone to use their online services to work from anywhere, won’t let its own staff work from home any longer than it has to? Have I got that about right? Surely Google, like Microsoft and so forth, would be enamoured of the idea of their staff working from home as much as they want, because it proves that it can be done.</p><p><br></p><p>Which is a good starting point, to tell the world, sign up to our services and you will be able to work from home trouble free too! Instead to me, the message is it can get you through in a squeeze, but we need everyone back at the office to get real work done.</p>
-
richfrantz
Premium MemberLog in to Reply<p>Loving these comments! Once again, you can only reason with reasonable people.</p>
-
clutem1987
Log in to Reply<p>I love all the pearl clutching in this thread about getting a vaccine. We’ve been getting vaccines our whole lives and it helps everyone make our communities safer. Literally no one cared about the approval process for vaccines until COVID. Now everyone is a self proclaimed public health expert. A vaccine passport isn’t a real thing. Getting the vaccine is the one thing every eligible citizen can do to help end the current crisis. Anything counter to that is the height of selfishness and has no basis in fact or science. Strange hill to die on. </p>
-
bsobotta
Log in to Reply<p>There are plenty of reasons to not get this vaccine. Among them is that is still in clinical trial. That alone is reason for me.</p>
-
bluvg
Log in to Reply<p>This is a misconception and a red herring. The difference right now is between the FDA’s Emergency Use Authorization and a license granted via a Biologics License Application (what people are labeling "full" approval). The clinical trials for the EUA were done last year, and even once the BLA is granted, COVID and all aspects of it, including all the different vaccines, will be studied for years, maybe decades. But even now–as if 4B+ doses administered already wasn’t enough data–as one medical researcher put it, " “In the history of medicine, few if any biologics (vaccines, antibodies, molecules) have had their safety and efficacy scrutinized to this degree." </p><p><br></p><p>However, among everyone I’ve asked that have raised this same objection, "Once the FDA grants the BLA license, will you get it then?" the answer is still "no." So for these folks, this is a bad faith objection borne out of pride, stubborness, self-worth wrapped up in group (political) identity, and inability to admit being wrong. A decade of data wouldn’t be enough, because it isn’t about the data.</p>
-
nicholas_kathrein
Log in to Reply<p>People’s brains are wired differently. People who have had covid and nearly died from it still say they won’t get the vaccine for next time so we’re not going to change people whose minds are made up. Maybe that’s some biological programming so that at least some of the species survives. So when one side was wrong the other ends up being right and survives. The vaccine just helps us fight Covid limiting its reproductive ability and most likely killing it in our bodies before we spread much of it. Whereas if you don’t have any of vaccine your body just replicates it and shares it with everybody and over and over and over again and as it replicates it replicates incorrectly and that’s how you get variants. I can real life they’re strong survive and usually the strongest variants are the ones that keep spreading and make things worse should we get to a point where they’ll have to redo a covid vaccine to attack the new variants and then we’ll have to wait another year for testing and for us to be able to get an emergency approval. All the while it’s spreading and mutating again. Yeah fun times.</p>
-
ZeroPageX
Log in to Reply<p>It’s really sad it’s come to this. It’s pathetic how easy it is for a politician or pundit to convince their followers that these vaccines are designed to control, track, or sterilize you, or that they are completely untested and more dangerous than the virus it protects you from. We had a fringe group of anti-vaxxers before all this, and we all considered them to be crazy, but now it’s partisan politics, because a major political party decided to make it their platform.</p>