(Re- anti-vaxxer’s:) Not sure I’d seriously advocate this, but

Regardless of illness.  That’s what I voted for in the last election.

Check the U.S. Treasury… The amount of money that has been printed over this year far exceeds what has been printed in well over a decade. That’s called inflation and is it going to be run-away inflation? That is going to hardly matter when you can’t afford to stay in your homes over one major medical emergency.

Hell, no... I'm not giving up...

Such bull,its more ‘othering’ of vax hesitant. How bout a seperate category for fat?  driving too fast? High blood pressure? Slippery slope

Yes, they are making a bad choice, but every human being makes some bad choices about their health. If a bad choice makes a person uninsurable, eventually we will all be uninsurable.

You open a can of worms with this argument.

Where do you draw the line? Should people who smoke, drink, eat unhealthy foods, or engage in risky behaviors have reduced access to healthcare or pay more for such care?

Premiums are going to go up for a number of reasons, most of which have nothing to do with vaccines. Healthcare costs throughout the system continue to rise regardless for the reasons a person seeks care. The pandemic could end tomorrow and the costs still go up. They’ve been going up for decades.

No pandemic has been tamed with vaccines alone and the vaccine we have for this one certainly are stopping it.

Those who buy into the Pharma narrative are helping fill hospitals and crush the working poor.

To be clear: Sterilizing (infection-blocking) vaccines would be a great tool and if what we had were sterilizing then current arguments for mandatory vaccination would make sense but the vaccines for Covid19 only limit symptoms and their efficacy fades rapidly.

The singular emphasis on vaccination offers NOTHING for the vaccinated. It pretends that the only thing that people can do or need to do is get vaccinated but vaccinated people get covid then what? They played by the rules — isolated, vaccinated, masked up but they got covid anyway. Don’t they deserve effective treatment? Wouldn’t effective treatment following EVERY positive test, symptomatic or not, be the right thing to do from a public health stand point?

Merck and Pfizer had the FDA calling ivermectin “horse dewormer” and mocking the sick and desperate while Merck and Pfizer got their own versions of ivermectin-like protease inhibitors patented. They blocked off-label uses of cheap widely-available and proven safe drugs for the last 18 months so that they alone could charge $700+ per patient. THAT helped fill up hospitals and contributed to tens of thousands of deaths.

If saying that person who got vaccinated and then reported adverse effects (Clapton, Dore, etc) are “anti-vax” then by the same standard isn’t a person who doubts the studies on ivermectin and fluvoximine “anti-treatment”?