NYC Emergency Executive Order 225

https://www1.nyc.gov/office-of-the-mayor/news/225-001/emergency-executive-order-225

by nanis • 5 years ago

57 119 5 years ago

www1.nyc.gov

cft2• 5 years ago

Big pharma in action

beeboop3• 5 years ago

I blame rampant corruption, self dealing, and identity politics. Americans have massive distrust in their leadership for very good reasons. That trust is really important for these exact situations. We all know all of our politicians are dishonest fuckheads - why believe them about COVID or vaccines?

I am pro vaccine and I am vaccinated - just explaining that I understand people's reluctance to believe anything they hear.

cft2• 5 years ago

I am vaccinated too, since January. HN is no longer able to understand nuance, thus we are both downvoted. I remember the HN of founders in 2010. Now it's HN of employees. Very different forum.

tonfreed• 5 years ago

Not just that, the southern states were flooded with OxyContin and had the opioid epidemic as a result of flagrant big pharma abuse. It's entirely understandable that they've burnt all goodwill there

the_only_law• 5 years ago

I’d be inclined to agree if it was actually people distrusting leadership in general, but too many instead the opposition one side while gobbling up whatever their team is spewing without question.

Grakel2• 5 years ago

Yeah this is way outside the government's power. We don't derive our right to be out in public from the government.

LeoPanthera4• 5 years ago

This order has nothing to do with being "out" at all.

micromacrofoot2• 5 years ago

"Indoor Entertainment, Recreation, Dining and Fitness Settings"

AFAIK these aren't public spaces

txsoftwaredev4• 5 years ago

That seems much worse. Forcing a private "space" to become the covid police.

bagacrap3• 5 years ago

these are public spaces because members of the public congregate there. If you think these are private spaces, who do they belong to? Hopefully the business owners, not the government. In that case this order is even more troubling since it prohibits certain actions in private spaces, which is equivalent to prohibiting certain actions altogether, which makes this equivalent to making it illegal to be unvaccinated.

Grakel2• 5 years ago

Businesses are public spaces. They are not private clubs or homes.

danhak• 5 years ago

darkwizard42• 5 years ago

I think the implication is if you aren't able to be vaccinated, until sufficient overall immunity is reached you probably shouldn't be in areas where the disease is easily passed around

bagacrap3• 5 years ago

how is "sufficient overall immunity" aka herd immunity going to be reached? a combination of vaccines and infections. How will we get there if 40% refuse vaccines and we also prevent them from being infected?

munk-a8• 5 years ago

It allows presentation of the NYC COVID Safe Pass and the NY State Excelsior Pass - I'm not a NY resident and am not certain what these cover but medical exemptions may already be baked into those proofs of vaccination. Otherwise yea - I agree that there isn't an accommodation for those with medical conditions precluding vaccination.

However, I think the negative test result in lieu is a very different question - those tests are highly effective but allowing test proofs in lieu of vaccination would likely burden the testing framework (which I believe is still freely offered by the government in the states) and would allow a route for objectors to avoid vaccination. I believe at this point the primary goal is to increase vaccination proportions to prevent more disease waves.

skyde11• 5 years ago

A negative test of infection is not acceptable because you can get infected at any moment. but they should accept a positive test for anti-body so that people that already recovered from the virus are equal to vaccinated people.

if you have a medical condition precluding vaccination you should not go to indoor activity that are not essential. But i would love to be proven wrong about that.

Current vaccine only have 88% efficacy against variants! I still call this a significant risk given the 5% fatality rate.

AndrewBissell5• 5 years ago

I still call this a significant risk given the 5% fatality rate.

The infection fatality rate is not remotely close to 5%. It's remarkable that we are now over 18 months into this pandemic and so much of the public is still in the thrall of the fearmongering and misinformation about the real magnitude of the threat SARS-CoV-2 poses -- especially to them personally, if they are not in a high-risk group.

josephcsible2• 5 years ago

if you have a medical condition precluding vaccination you should not go to indoor activity that are not essential.

For how long? Until you die?

Someone1234• 5 years ago

The current title isn't great ("NYC Emergency Executive Order 225"). In particular for those currently living outside of NYC.

Maybe go with the subtitle instead:

Requiring COVID-19 Vaccination for Indoor Entertainment, Recreation, Dining and Fitness Settings

Since it is more descriptive of the content.

rolph3• 5 years ago

thanx for the full title, That helps indicate content.

munk-a8• 5 years ago

I think there is some value in retaining the fact that this requirement is being enacted via an emergency order though.

txsoftwaredev4• 5 years ago

Looking forward to the vaccinated only water fountains next. The US government has found the ultimate power grab that they can now use to control the population at their desire. This has never been about them caring about the health of their citizens (feel free to smoke and drink all you want). Those in power aren't even able to follow their ridiculous health standards they've created. One politician after another is spotted not wearing a mask, going to places they told us not to etc.. It's such a sad state we are in now and I fear we've gone too far to undo it.

Arkanum• 5 years ago

Looking forward to the vaccinated only water fountains next.

This feels a touch melodramatic. I understand the point you want to make, but maybe a 1984 reference would work better. Vaccination is (barring some relatively uncommon exceptions) a choice, and not something that you have no control over.

josephcsible2• 5 years ago

Okay, how about comparing it religions then? After all, you have the choice to convert to a different religion.

HiJon89• 5 years ago

Or maybe the sad state is that there are still people dying every day from a pandemic THAT WE HAVE A SAFE AND EFFECTIVE VACCINE FOR.

skyde11• 5 years ago

How being vaccinated allow the government to control you? Are you implying there is a chip in the vaccine allowing them to control you?

I’m half joking each time i see a comment like that I don’t understand what you think the government is trying to achieve by vaccinating you.

The only evil thing I can think of is some politicians would make more money if more people get vaccinated because they own shares of the company producing the vaccine.

But if that’s is the case nothing is stopping you to go ahead and also buy stock of pharma

nanis4• 5 years ago

Are you implying there is a chip in the vaccine allowing them to control you?

This is a rather disingenuous comment.

Since the fragile card stock vaccine record is not practical to carry everyday & everywhere, this will push people towards installing apps on their phones. This opens the door to digital tracking.

Next, strictly speaking, having the app is not sufficient. You also need to show ID. Which ID?

“Identification” means an official document bearing the name of the individual and a photo or date of birth. Examples of acceptable identification include but are not limited to: driver’s license, non-driver government ID card, IDNYC, passport, and school ID card.

Great. Now there is the problem of how to check these are not faked. Bars/restaurants have all sorts of methods and some of them actually involve scanning your identification[1].

Please add two and two together and recognize two-pronged approach to constant tracking of everyone's everyday activities.

[1] https://viage.com/

bwship5• 5 years ago

Well I have been shouting at the heavens about how this was overreach since March of 2020. Good to see many more people on HN realizing what is playing out. Moved the frickin whole family out of LA cause I knew they weren't gonna stop. Now it is a contest between CA and NY of who can be the most authoritarian. Meanwhile, down here in the south, everyone is fairly over this charade.

piva002• 5 years ago

Down there in the south there are mobile mortuaries being moved and states of emergency being declared. Lots of freedom it seems.

bwship5• 5 years ago

Not in Charleston. Not even sure what moving mobile mortuaries are, but there aren't any of those on my block.

jwilber4• 5 years ago

I’ve spent the last year between New York and California and I have felt zero authoritarian measures in my life. Not one aspect of my life has changed aside from donning a mask when I go to and from a public building. And even that is a personal choice - legally it’s completely optional.

munk-a8• 5 years ago

I am a bit surprised this was passed but I do think that public sentiment in NYC has reached a point of it being acceptable. I think the real challenge through this pandemic has been juggling public opinion and trying to encourage high levels of vaccination while also avoiding large riots in the streets that will only further the spread of the pandemic.

The disease is a challenge at this time - but managing the public's reaction seems to be the more difficult issue. We've solved the technical problems of this pandemic (we have a vaccine) now we just need to solve the social side of it - distributing it globally and making sure everyone gets vaccinated.

To this end NYC seems a pretty good test bed due to the strong liberal leanings there and high vaccination rates.

verdverm2• 5 years ago

It wasn't passed. It is an executive order by the mayor and not a law.

vineyardmike2• 5 years ago

and high vaccination rates.

It's high relative to the south or florida but the order says the vaccination rate is 56%.

Seattle has a 78% vaccination rate [1] and SF has a 71% rate [2]. NYC is pretty low rate of vaccination relative to major libral cities. It seems that boston, a comparable east-coast city has a closer, but still higher vaccination rate of 65% (link somewhat out of date) [3]

[1] https://kingcounty.gov/~/media/depts/health/communicable-dis...

[2] https://sf.gov/data/covid-19-vaccinations

[3] https://www.mass.gov/doc/boston-vaccination-data-report-july...

BCM43• 5 years ago

FWIW, the Seattle rate you've cited is for people 12 or older, while the 56% NYC rate is for everyone in the city. NYC's vaccination rate for those over 12 is closer to 75%.

TMWNN2• 5 years ago

Seattle has a 78% vaccination rate [1] and SF has a 71% rate [2]. NYC is pretty low rate of vaccination relative to major libral cities.

New York City is 25% black. Blacks have the lowest vaccination rate among US ethnic groups. (<https://www.kff.org/coronavirus-covid-19/issue-brief/latest-...>)

Seattle is 7% black.

San Francisco is 6% black, and is one third Asian (double that of NYC), the ethnicity with the highest vaccination rate in the US.

walterbell• 5 years ago

Those interested in public sentiment in NYC can check out the 3,800 people who are organizing on Facebook for pro-science policy that respects medical freedom, https://www.facebook.com/groups/203524481709348

Unlike the EU health pass, the NYC health pass does not have a provision for negative tests or proof of recovery/immunity. CDC recommends testing, since vaccinated people can be infected and the vaccine suppresses symptoms, so they won't know to self-isolate, https://www.webmd.com/lung/news/20210729/cdc-reverses-guidan...

Even if they’re not showing symptoms, fully vaccinated people should “get tested 3-5 days after exposure to someone with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 and wear a mask in public indoor settings for 14 days after exposure or until they receive a negative test result,” ... “Our updated guidance recommends vaccinated people get tested upon exposure regardless of symptoms,” CDC Director Rochelle Walensky, MD, told The New York Times

bwship5• 5 years ago

You can have their vaccine. I'll take my chances with my immune system, thanks.

munk-a8• 5 years ago

This isn't how pandemics work - and this is a large part of why I emigrated from America. There is this insane conflation of liberty and personal freedoms.

You aren't getting vaccinated for yourself - you're getting vaccinated to help create a safe environment where this pandemic can be stamped out. We've lived with this for more than a year now - it isn't just going to magically disappear and, if we haven't done anything by winter, it's going to get worse again.

bwship5• 5 years ago

Worse in what way. A .5% death rate. I'm not getting vaccinated specifically for my own health reasons.

echelon3• 5 years ago

Stay away from me and my family, thanks.

txsoftwaredev4• 5 years ago

If you and your family are vaccinated then you have nothing to worry about. Right?

bwship5• 5 years ago

Don't shed on my family bro.

dang6• 5 years ago

Please don't take HN threads further into cheap flamewar, and definitely not on the most flaming flamewar topic of the moment.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

dang6• 5 years ago

Please don't take HN threads into cheap flamewar, and definitely not on the most flaming flamewar topic of the moment.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28225993.

nanis4• 5 years ago

Section 1. I hereby order that a covered entity shall not permit a patron, full- or part-time employee, intern, volunteer, or contractor to enter a covered premises without displaying proof of vaccination and identification bearing the same identifying information as the proof of vaccination.

While people in other countries may be used to always having to carry identification, this is rather provocative in a city and state which does not require identification, among other situations, when you register to vote or vote. It is also deputizing museum workers, gym owners, restaurant waitstaff as identity checkers. This will presumably drive all those business to install identity check solutions used by bars but expand their used to a whole range of activities. It is an amazing amount of extra tracking/surveillance that is being introduced to everyone's everyday activities and is an intrusion into the lives of all, vaccinated and unvaccinated alike.

vineyardmike2• 5 years ago

It is an amazing amount of extra tracking/surveillance that is being introduced to everyone's everyday activities and is an intrusion into the lives of all, vaccinated and unvaccinated alike.

A simple regulation could also make this safe from surveillance while still allowing verification:

Allow people to check identity, but make it illegal to store or share this information.

There are so many small, simple laws that could go long ways to protect people from surveillance while still allowing us to do new things to protect us. I wish we got 10% of the obvious laws many people want.

mikecoles2• 5 years ago

I agree. Keeping only 10% of the laws is a fine start.

derriz2• 5 years ago

"this is rather provocative in a city and state which does not require identification"

I've spent not more than a couple of weeks in total in the NY and during that time I was required to produce identification more times than I had in years spent in various continental European countries - where in theory you were obliged to carry Id with you at all times.

Just because I wanted to buy a beer or order wine with food in a bar or restaurant. I was in my late 20s at the time.

It's just what you're used to.

nanis4• 5 years ago

Please quote correctly. I said:

this is rather provocative in a city and state which does not require identification, among other situations, when you register to vote or vote.

kevin_thibedeau• 5 years ago

NY state does require you to identify yourself to police upon request. You don't have to carry a document to achieve that, however.

tw044• 5 years ago

It is also deputizing museum workers, gym owners, restaurant waitstaff as identity checkers. restaurant waitstaff as identity checkers

Every gym I've ever been a member of requires you to validate your ID. You either swipe your membership card (which has your personal information tied to it), or provide your license to get into the gym. If you can't provide either, they aren't letting you in the door.

Every restaurant in the US is already supposed to validate your ID when you order an alcoholic drink. Bars won't even let you in the door without showing an ID.

I don't think anyone is happy this is required, but when people that are unvaccinated decide to put others at risk because they don't want to be inconvenienced, this is what happens.

mikecoles2• 5 years ago

No, this is what happens when politicians see an opportunity to get on a soapbox.

What bars won't let you walk in without showing an ID? Maybe a college town, but it is rare elsewhere.

dragonwriter• 5 years ago

While people in other countries may be used to always having to carry identification, this is rather provocative in a city and state which does not require identification, among other situations, when you register to vote or vote. It is also deputizing museum workers, gym owners, restaurant waitstaff as identity checkers.

Restaurant waitstaff are already regularly “deputized” that way by alcoholic beverage control laws.

bagacrap3• 5 years ago

This seems ridiculous. If the government doesn't have the authority to mandate vaccinations, then banning unvaccinated people from participating in life should also be outside of its authority.

We should not be taking further steps to protect people who are able but not willing to be vaccinated. If you are unable to be vaccinated, then you can stay home voluntarily (this order just makes it mandatory which doesn't seem like an improvement).

skyde11• 5 years ago

you don’t have to stay home you just can’t be wrekless and go kill people.

Next thing you will say you should not need a driver license to drive a car because it limit your freedom?

beeboop3• 5 years ago

I was thinking the other day how odd that these people aren't all up in arms about being required by law to wear a seatbelt. In my opinion that's much more controlling than requiring a vaccine.

dang6• 5 years ago

Please don't take HN threads further into cheap flamewar, and definitely not on the most flaming flamewar topic of the moment.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

LeoPanthera4• 5 years ago

Indoor entertainment is not necessary for "participating in life".

dang6• 5 years ago

Please don't take HN threads further into flamewar, and definitely not on the most flaming flamewar topic of the moment.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

tw044• 5 years ago

If the government doesn't have the authority to mandate vaccinations

The government absolutely has the right to mandate vaccinations, they just have chosen not to. I've heard this repeated more than once and I don't know where people got it from. On top of the supreme court ruling, just about every state has a state-level law giving the governor the right to enforce vaccinations as well.

https://mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/1824/jacobson-v-mas...

tzs5• 5 years ago

This seems ridiculous. If the government doesn't have the authority to mandate vaccinations, then banning unvaccinated people from participating in life should also be outside of its authority.

Are you trying to make a general argument, or an argument specific to just vaccinations.

If the former, there is quite a bit of historical precedent that says otherwise. For example, the government does not have the authority to mandate that I have a motor vehicle, but they can ban me from walking or using a non-motorized vehicle on the freeways. I'm sure you can think of plenty of other examples where the government can require that you have something or meet particular conditions in order to do some activity or enter some place, but they cannot mandate that you have that something or meet those conditions.

We should not be taking further steps to protect people who are able but not willing to be vaccinated.

Unvaccinated people increase risk for vaccinated people. There was a useful infographic in this Ars article [1]. Imagine two hypothetical states, each with a population of 1 million. State A is 70% vaccinated, state B 30%.

What you'd expect is state A to have 130 cases per week and B to have 5114.

In state A it would be 29 cases among the vaccinated and 101 among the unvaccinated. In B it would be 250 among the vaccinated, 4864 among the unvaccinated. That's a rate of 41 per million among the vaccinated in A, and 833 per million in B. A vaccinated person is 20 times as likely to get infected in state B.

For the unvaccinated, the rate in A is 337 per million and in B it is 6949. An unvaccinated person is 20 times as likely to get infected in B.

Hospitalizations would be 1.4 in A and 18.8 in B.

In A that would be 0.1 among the vaccinated and 1.3 among the unvaccinated. That's 0.14 per million and 4.3 per million respectively.

In B it would be 0.3 vaccinated hospitalizations per week and 18.5 unvaccinated. Those are rates of 1 per million and 26.4 per million.

A vaccinated person in B is 7 times as likely to be hospitalized as a vaccinated person in A. For unvaccinated people, it is 6 times.

Note that in either state, vaccinated people are much better off than unvaccinated, both in terms of cases and hospitalizations. But in B, the state with the low vaccination rate, both vaccinated and unvaccinated people are quite a bit worse off than those in B, the state with the high vaccination rate.

[1] https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/08/pandemic-of-unvaccin...

munk-a8• 5 years ago

I am stealing this graphic as it's amazingly well put together thank you for the resource.

The main roadblock I often find when talking about vaccination to people is this group effect "You can get vaccinated if you want but I'll make the choice for my body." without realizing that they're also potentially making the decision for my body as well.

Maybe a good way to reframe this is to shift it off of authoritarianism vs. individualism to authoritarianism vs. authoritarianism. One side may be saying that everyone needs to get vaccinated - but the other side is saying "I reserve the right to get everyone else sick" by not getting vaccinated.

mikem170• 5 years ago

Cool! I like numbers, too. How about this: NYC = 8.8 million people [0], U.S. death rate is currently 8.997 per 1000 [1], which works out to 216 people dying per day in NYC. The current 4 week average for covid deaths in NYC is 5 per day [2]. Hospitalizations are increasing, the 28 day average of 70 patients has increased to 88 in the last 7 days.

5 out of 200+ deaths per day and around 100 beds taken by covid patients doesn't sound like a crisis or justification for this executive order. Maybe I'm missing something?

I also found it interesting that the per-capita deaths this year and last don't show an increase over the prior/predicted line on the graph. I assume this is because the baby boomer generation is getting older.

None of this runs counter to the numbers you presented, but does seem to show that this pandemic is not killing people or putting them in the hospital at a rate anywhere close to what it was doing last year. It's predicted that this will continue to affect people less as it becomes endemic, like the other coronaviruses that circulate and don't bother anyone much [3].

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nyc

[1] https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/deat...

[2] https://www1.nyc.gov/site/doh/covid/covid-19-data.page

[3] https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2021/08/how-we-l...

jwilber4• 5 years ago

Why is this post getting flagged? Whether you agree or not, hiding it won’t make it go away.

LeoPanthera4• 5 years ago

Presumably because of the overwhelming number of comments from people unable to express themselves in a civil manner.

meowster• 5 years ago

Then shouldn't the comments be flagged, not the post itself?

beeboop3• 5 years ago

It doesn't create interesting conversation. Already there are anti-vaxxers here pounding their chest and asserting themselves.

_yoqn• 5 years ago

It's not just about anit-vaxxing. It's about the erosion of civil liberties. I think these conversations should be had.

AndrewBissell5• 5 years ago

First read about this idea in March 2020 when it was going around various conspiracy-related circles. Now you see people making extraordinarily dishonest arguments like, "well you need a yellow fever vaccine to go to Zambia and this is basically the same thing" or "this is just like needing a driver's license." Someone on Twitter aptly described this phenomenon as the "that's a crazy conspiracy theory"-to-"it's always been like this" pipeline.

You can tell that they are trying to roll this and the other mandates out as quickly as possible before it becomes clearer to people that keeping their "fully vaccinated" status (and the attendant freedoms which used to just be a matter of course in 2019) will require getting re-injected at regular intervals in perpetuity.

All these permanent changes to our lives and erosion of our freedom, being meekly accepted to combat (supposedly) a virus that's killed a fraction of the number who died in the 1918 Spanish flu. It's really something to watch.

nanis4• 5 years ago

Is there really a legitimate reason for this post to be flagged? This is the literal text of the rules one must obey if one is going to set foot in NYC.

LeoPanthera4• 5 years ago

I think it's reasonable to flag posts for the content of its comments as well as the content of the post itself.

colpabar2• 5 years ago

Even if all the comments you find problematic are flagged and downvoted so that no one can even see them? Would you make the same argument for all the conspiracy theories regarding Apple's CSAM scanning announcement; that we shouldn't be allowed to talk about it because there's too many bad comments?

munk-a8• 5 years ago

That unfortunately opens us up to the heckler's veto[1] it's a fine balance to screen content that will produce interesting discussions while also not excluding content that enrages a portion of the user base.

I do think it's quite fair that this article was flagged since the comment section quickly got mobbed by some pretty rabid commenters and HN doesn't want to deal with that - but it does have a chilling effect.

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heckler%27s_veto

ghaff• 5 years ago

Probably that it's one of those topics that generates a lot more hysteria than rational discussion.

rolph3• 5 years ago

submissions may be problematic, the response may be as well. HN doesnt like to be a gladitorium or a platform for ideologies. it carries much more wieght to discuss the facts rather than how ones perception of the facts elicits visceral response.

its not about you having done something its about other users and the optics, you may notice those have been moderated as well

criddell• 5 years ago

Probably for the extraordinarily low signal-to-noise ratio of the discussion that would follow.

dpifke• 5 years ago

From https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html:

"If they'd cover it on TV news, it's probably off-topic."

This has been covered to death on TV news.

dang6• 5 years ago

All: if you're going to comment in a thread like this, make sure you're up on the guidelines. In particular, please don't post flamewar comments. It leads to tedious, repetitive nastiness. Not what this site is for.

That implies not posting predictable or shallow comments, because when the topic is super inflammatory like this one, those automatically count as flamebait.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

hamburgerwah2• 5 years ago

It's strange to me that the very same people who are absolutely adamant that the government be kept out of the exam room for some things are now codifying totalitarian requirements for other medical procedures.

gunfighthacksaw• 5 years ago

Compare it to the hot takes on the voter ID issue.

Never mind that PoC vaccination stats are dwarfed by white people (with good historical reasons) thus de facto segregating them from everyday life.

I’m against both as a concept BTW but my opinion is moot as a non-American.

munk-a8• 5 years ago

I feel like this comes back to whether something is a societal issue or not. I'm not totally certain what other exam room procedure you're talking about since you left it quite vague but I assume you're talking about proposed abortion access or gender reassignment limitations - if I've guessed wrong please feel free to correct me and clarify your statement.

Both of those procedures are exceedingly personal medical decisions the ramifications of which will never spread beyond yourself or, at most, your immediate family. The question of vaccination isn't an individual decision - it's a societal decision. We all (or most, technically) get vaccinated so that we can curtail an ongoing pandemic, it isn't effective if done to only a small segment of the population and the US is currently sitting just short of 60% vaccinated with at least one dose.

The big difference is between it validly being a personal choice or being something necessary for society to function.

hamburgerwah2• 5 years ago

I understand that your opinion is that vaccines are different from other medical procedures because you are using an ends justify the means argument that you think is valid there. I disagree fundamentally and I do not believe that the government has any right to coerce people into medical procedures under our constitution. To be clear I am vaccinated and I believe the current covid vaccines benefits outweigh its risks relative to the risks of covid.

There is no evidence that these types of coercion tactics actually increase vaccinations. It's an emerging field of study but there is a growing body of evidence that they actually decrease vaccination acceptance.

2-3% of people are medically contraindicated from getting some or even all vaccines because the risks of the vaccine due to their age, existing illness, genetics and medications are higher than the risk of the diseases prevented.

I think it makes more sense to keep the government out of the exam room in all cases.

NYC Emergency Executive Order 225

Related Stories