I don’t know how to begin to describe this.
"Pastrana received his first dose of the vaccine on Oct. 29, 2021. He immediately experienced an anaphylactic reaction, including hives, swelling of the lips and other symptoms that persisted for weeks.
He was treated in an emergency room (ER), and later seen by a doctor with the FDNY who attributed Pastrana’s symptoms to the COVID-19 vaccine. The symptoms persisted and were intermittently severe, causing Pastrana to return to the ER multiple times and take time off work.
Despite his injury, the FDNY doctor refused to grant Pastrana a medical exemption for the second shot unless he could present an allergy test proving he was allergic to the vaccine."
Firefighter Pastrana then got the second shot and suffered permanent heart damage, wrecking his health and ending his career.
Yet he still lost his case against his employer, even though the vaccine harms are not being disputed.
Anaphylactic reactions to vaccines are known. I thought it was one of the things that got you medical exemptions. Common sense says that this is likely to repeat.
Yet…
“The judge ruled that it was rational for the FDNY to require an allergy test to avoid arbitrarily granting or denying medical exemptions. He also said it would have been reasonable for the city to deny Pastrana an accommodation even after an allergy test if it thought that decision would better serve public health and safety.”
One vaccination - that is unproven, and only has emergency authorisation - in a very high risk case is of public benefit?
The other arguments or reasons used are imbecilic. The whole story reads like a bad dream - or rather two, intertwined. The health system employer and the judge are as scary as the vaccines.