"Hegseth: Flu Vaccine Optional"

[Halifax Tar]

Is the flu vaccine required for DAG green for CAF?

Nope. Never taken it. I also turned down the anti malarial otions for my Afg tours.

If you ever want some insight into the extreme critical biases going on over anything USA right now, look no further than this thread for a great example.

The US DoW implemented a policy that mirrors a CAF policy re: flu shots not mandatory. First that bit of non-news somehow warranted a thread about it... and look at some of the extreme responses about it.

Biases. Its a hell of a drug.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Yes, because it's an ideological change.

So what? All of politics is founded on ideological differences. In the US, conservatives will tend to change things in ways that favour individual liberty at the cost of some safety/security and progressives will tend to change things in ways that sacrifice individual liberty for some gains in safety/security.

The entire American project is a bet that the freer (and risk-tolerant) people are, the more prosperous and powerful their society will be. If they're right, they "win" and "win" big.

 

[The Bread Guy]

Tiny bit of extra detail - this from a conservative media outlet with a touch more detail than the info-machine shared:

... Under the new guidelines, individual branches of the military have a 15-day window to request specific exceptions if they believe a mandate remains necessary for certain high-risk operational environments, such as recruit training centers ...

More on that here:

... The services can submit requests for exceptions to the new policy over the next 15 days to Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness Anthony Tata.

“The notion that a flu vaccine must be mandatory for every service member, everywhere, in every circumstance, at all times, is just overly broad and not rational,” Hegseth said in a video address. “Our new policy is simple: If you — an American warrior entrusted to defend this nation — believe that the flu vaccine is in your best interest, then you are free to take it. You should. But we will not force you because your body, your faith and your convictions are not negotiable.” ...

It'll be interesting how they plan to balance the orange bit with the yellow bit in real life - "you can choose, but you don't have to deploy/work in the 'certain high-risk operational environment' in question"? Also not clear what the criteria'll be, and whether the approval buck'll stop with Tata, or need further OK's up the line.

Full memorandum attached (highest level 3-short-para one-pager), for the record.

 

[Halifax Tar]

. The services can submit requests for exceptions to the new policy over the next 15 days to Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness Anthony Tata.

“The notion that a flu vaccine must be mandatory for every service member, everywhere, in every circumstance, at all times, is just overly broad and not rational,” Hegseth said in a video address. “Our new policy is simple: If you — an American warrior entrusted to defend this nation — believe that the flu vaccine is in your best interest, then you are free to take it. You should. But we will not force you because your body, your faith and your convictions are not negotiable.” ...

I fully appreciate that.

 

[QV]

So what? All of politics is founded on ideological differences. In the US, conservatives will tend to change things in ways that favour individual liberty at the cost of some safety/security and progressives will tend to change things in ways that sacrifice individual liberty for some gains in safety/security.

The entire American project is a bet that the freer (and risk-tolerant) people are, the more prosperous and powerful their society will be. If they're right, they "win" and "win" big.

It seemed to have been working for at the least the first 250 years.

 

[Infanteer]

The U.S. had a policy that brought them to a higher level of medical force protection. They have chosen to change that policy and consequently reduce their degree of medical force protection for reasons that are likely quite ideological. It's noteworthy. 'Canada was less prepared than the U.S.' doesn't mean anything for the tangible merits or lack thereof of their changed approach.

He's right though - people point to the new US policy and say it's sending the US back into the stone age, when the CAF has the same policy and we seem to do fine.

 

[brihard]

He's right though - people point to the new US policy and say it's sending the US back into the stone age, when the CAF has the same policy and we seem to do fine.

By the time QV made that post there was only a single reply here that was describable as a harsh response, the one by Navy_Pete. And only Navy_Pete has posted further along that same vein here; any other criticism or skepticism has been quite mild. I recognize there’s some hyperbole on your part here, and I also recognize that elsewhere you would find responses like what you describe. But QV inaccurately and unfairly described the character of this thread when he said that. I was correcting his somewhat over the top take on the army.ca response, and I was doing so reasonably gently.

 

[Infanteer]

By the time QV made that post there was only a single reply here that was describable as a harsh response, the one by Navy_Pete. And only Navy_Pete has posted further along that same vein here; any other criticism or skepticism has been quite mild. I recognize there’s some hyperbole on your part here, and I also recognize that elsewhere you would find responses like what you describe. But QV inaccurately and unfairly described the character of this thread when he said that. I was correcting his somewhat over the top take on the army.ca response, and I was doing so reasonably gently.

Hmm...here were the first few comments.

"He really wants to go back to the Civil War doesn't he."
"Compared to our policy of mandatory flu vaccinations for the CAF, it does seem like an oversight."
"Not sure when 'conservative' became 'regressive' but here we are."

So is the CAF a regressive organization stuck in 19th century policies due to oversight?

 

[brihard]

Hmm...here were the first few comments.

"He really wants to go back to the Civil War doesn't he."
"Compared to our policy of mandatory flu vaccinations for the CAF, it does seem like an oversight."
"Not sure when 'conservative' became 'regressive' but here we are."

So is the CAF a regressive organization stuck in 19th century policies due to oversight?

Sorry, the first quote was FSTO and I missed that one, thanks. The rest of his reply was quite a bit more rational. The second quote was factually incorrect but didn’t portray the U.S. decision as anything worse than an ‘oversight’… The mild language we would expect from Brad (when not discussing trains). The third quote was Pete’s that I already referred.

QV’s cited this thread as an example of “the extreme critical bias”; I challenged that as over the top. I saw one thing that could be cited as an example; I missed a second that you pointed out. By and large the thread has been pretty calm and rational on this.

If you want to say QV was correct over two individual examples out of the thread to that point, ok. I just disagree and think it’s painting the general political sentiments here with too broad a brush. Anyway, nothing turns on that.

To answer your question to me: no I do not believe CAF is ‘regressive’ nor ‘stuck in the 19th century’. Personally I’f be fine if flu immunization was a DAG requirement, but that’s for much, much smarter people than I to decide. As is often the case, a number of policy choices could fall within ‘reasonable’; the U.S. has moved from one of those to another.

I do think the U.S. under the current administration is seeing ideology inappropriately impact military policy. That, I think, is the main point underpinning this thread writ large.

 

[Oldgateboatdriver]

Maybe next this guy will cut fruit and other sources of vitamin C from the menu, so sailors can experience the joy of scurvy like it's the age of sail again.

Or cover it off with lime juice .... so USN sailors become the next generation of "limeys".