Coronavirus - how should the majority respond to the vaccine refuseniks when one becomes available

raetsel

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 5, 2017
Messages
11,591

A recent UK survey, the results of which have been published in the Guardian, shows that around as many as one in six people would definitely refuse to be vaccinated if or when one becomes available. A similar number are undecided.
That is their right of course, but the rest of us who will get vaccinated also have rights and as no vaccine is ever fully effective the anti-vaxers pose a significant risk to some of us. I certainly think private businesses could take a lead on this and devise ways of incentivising the doubters, because until everyone feels safe in social situations once again many businesses e.g. hospitality will continue to suffer losses. I'd certainly pay more for flight tickets from an airline which insisted on getting proof from passengers that they had been inoculated before letting them on the flight.
This approach would be controversial of course but in my opinion would be entirely justified.
 


ruserious

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 3, 2011
Messages
29,857
The government need to control the agenda and not give space for lunatics to spread their falsehoods. I’ve seen a lot of seemingly educated, retirement aged gentlemen on social media professing how Bill Gates is developing a vaccine to microchip us all. If that is the line of thought circulating in the recently retired aged groups, I’m all for increasing the pension age.
 

rainmaker

Administrator
Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Messages
26,017

A recent UK survey, the results of which have been published in the Guardian, shows that around as many as one in six people would definitely refuse to be vaccinated if or when one becomes available. A similar number are undecided.
That is their right of course, but the rest of us who will get vaccinated also have rights and as no vaccine is ever fully effective the anti-vaxers pose a significant risk to some of us. I certainly think private businesses could take a lead on this and devise ways of incentivising the doubters, because until everyone feels safe in social situations once again many businesses e.g. hospitality will continue to suffer losses. I'd certainly pay more for flight tickets from an airline which insisted on getting proof from passengers that they had been inoculated before letting them on the flight.
This approach would be controversial of course but in my opinion would be entirely justified.
I think the consequences for health are so grave that drastic action would be required.

The minority have a right to refuse to be vaccinated.

However places like schools and businesses also have a right to protect their staff and service users & should therefore be able to exclude & even dismiss workers (or pupils in the case of schools) who have refused vaccination.

The idea that the entire staff of a workplace should be placed at risk because 'Bob' or 'Karen' believe Bill Gates is trying to control their minds is unthinkable.
 

Cdebru

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 4, 2006
Messages
6,646
I think the consequences for health are so grave that drastic action would be required.

The minority have a right to refuse to be vaccinated.

However places like schools and businesses also have a right to protect their staff and service users & should therefore be able to exclude & even dismiss workers (or pupils in the case of schools) who have refused vaccination.

The idea that the entire staff of a workplace should be placed at risk because 'Bob' or 'Karen' believe Bill Gates is trying to control their minds is unthinkable.
What about people who have already been infected ?

Other than that I agree people should not be allowed to piggy back on others taking the vaccine.
 

Kevin Parlon

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 4, 2008
Messages
13,096
Twitter
Deiscirt
What about people who have already been infected ?
Good Question. I guess some sort of a pass or record will be necessary and without one, one should not be granted access to things like hospitals, schools, libraries etc. Any publicly funded enclosed space.
 

Splodge

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 24, 2019
Messages
4,694
What about people who have already been infected ?

Other than that I agree people should not be allowed to piggy back on others taking the vaccine.
Is there any proof they can’t get it again?
 

petaljam

Moderator
Joined
Nov 23, 2012
Messages
33,911
Is there any proof they can’t get it again?
There are various antibody tests, and it seems likely that people who test positive for antibodies have some level of immunity.

The questions at the moment are how long those antibodies last. And why some people seem not to develop antibodies at all, which is concerning.
 

raetsel

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 5, 2017
Messages
11,591
The government need to control the agenda and not give space for lunatics to spread their falsehoods. I’ve seen a lot of seemingly educated, retirement aged gentlemen on social media professing how Bill Gates is developing a vaccine to microchip us all. If that is the line of thought circulating in the recently retired aged groups, I’m all for increasing the pension age.

Bill Gates turns 65 later this year so he's actually in that age group himself. However the real problem from anti-vaxxers comes from younger age groups.
It's never wise to pigeon hole one particular demographic based on anecdotal stuff.
 

raetsel

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 5, 2017
Messages
11,591
I think the consequences for health are so grave that drastic action would be required.

The minority have a right to refuse to be vaccinated.

However places like schools and businesses also have a right to protect their staff and service users & should therefore be able to exclude & even dismiss workers (or pupils in the case of schools) who have refused vaccination.

The idea that the entire staff of a workplace should be placed at risk because 'Bob' or 'Karen' believe Bill Gates is trying to control their minds is unthinkable.
It's a good point but whether employers can legally change the terms and conditions of existing staff facilitating it without specific legislation is debatable.
Considering the high stakes involved I can see this becoming a very contentious issue in the next few years. The unvaccinated run the risk of acquiring a sort of leper status.
 

silverharp

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
18,912
I wouldn't let my kids take a brand new vaccine , and personally would have mixed feeling about it as I wouldn't consider myself in a high risk group. Anyone over 60 should be encouraged to take it and younger people with health issues, health and care workers.
Will be interesting to see how this winter plays out, by the time the vaccine is generally available there will be a level of community immunity so the virus isnt a likely to spread as fast.
 

raetsel

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 5, 2017
Messages
11,591
Give the number of previously approved drugs now withdrawn or banned for serious side effects people should have the right to choose...
Drugs are a somewhat different issue. I don't recall a vaccine ever being withdrawn from use. The benefits of vaccines far outweigh the risk. People should have the right to choose not to be vaccinated and nobody would dispute that. However I'm sure that you'll also recognise that those who do should have the right to avoid being in the presence of the unvaccinated, certainly in an indoor environment. (See New York Times link below.) The question here is how do we accommodate those competing rights and how far do we take it?



More than 239 scientists from 32 countries are now warning that airborne transmission of the virus indoors should be taken more seriously and are calling on the World Health Organization to revise its recommendations, which they say underestimate the dangers of transmission by tiny, viral particles that linger in the air indoors.
Our colleague Donald G. McNeil Jr., who covers science for The Times, told The Daily podcast that when people talk or laugh, they create an “invisible mist” or a “droplet cloud” of tiny particles that floats around near their head. That fog can hold enough virus to transmit the disease; walking into it is akin to someone “spitting on your face.”
 

greencharade

Well-known member
Joined
May 10, 2019
Messages
766
I reserve the right not to be in the presence of the recently Covid19 vacinated as they may be subject to mental confusion.
 

between the bridges

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 21, 2011
Messages
46,145
Drugs are a somewhat different issue. I don't recall a vaccine ever being withdrawn from use. The benefits of vaccines far outweigh the risk. People should have the right to choose not to be vaccinated and nobody would dispute that. However I'm sure that you'll also recognise that those who do should have the right to avoid being in the presence of the unvaccinated, certainly in an indoor environment. (See New York Times link below.) The question here is how do we accommodate those competing rights and how far do we take it?


can't do links at mo but Google vaccination gone wrong, anyway even successful vaccination can range from 10%-90% success rate. Personally I qualify for flu jab every year I stopped a few years ago and have had less than when had the jab. I'm not into conspiracy theories merely against the lack of choice and punishment for exercising that right...
 

Cdebru

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 4, 2006
Messages
6,646
Is there any proof they can’t get it again?
Is there any evidence they can ? And if they can how exactly will a vaccine work ?



Maybe have a sit down and think this one out.
 

Cdebru

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 4, 2006
Messages
6,646
There are various antibody tests, and it seems likely that people who test positive for antibodies have some level of immunity.

The questions at the moment are how long those antibodies last. And why some people seem not to develop antibodies at all, which is concerning.
It is not concerning at all, from the literature I have read they appear to have fought it off with T cells so never required antibodies,which also have memory so likely have some level of immunity as well.

Just to note again if antibodies don't offer some kind of immunity all the other questions are mute as there will be no vaccine, since that is what a vaccine does, stimulate your immune system to create antibodies in the same way as actually having the virus does just without the symptoms.
 

petaljam

Moderator
Joined
Nov 23, 2012
Messages
33,911
It is not concerning at all, from the literature I have read they appear to have fought it off with T cells so never required antibodies,which also have memory so likely have some level of immunity as well.

Just to note again if antibodies don't offer some kind of immunity all the other questions are mute as there will be no vaccine, since that is what a vaccine does, stimulate your immune system to create antibodies in the same way as actually having the virus does just without the symptoms.
I'm not sure what you mean by "it's not concerning" - at the very least it means that there probably won't be a test to identify who has had Covid in the past. It also means we don't know whether or how long someone will maintain a useful level of immunity after their first bout and raises the question of the likely reaction to subsequent Coronavirus infections.

I find all that somewhat concerning.
 

raetsel

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 5, 2017
Messages
11,591
can't do links at mo but Google vaccination gone wrong, anyway even successful vaccination can range from 10%-90% success rate. Personally I qualify for flu jab every year I stopped a few years ago and have had less than when had the jab. I'm not into conspiracy theories merely against the lack of choice and punishment for exercising that right...
I get the flu vaccine every year with no problems. The flu vaccine has a 70% success rate.
As far as I'm concerned it's not about punishment, it's about choices. I like foreign travel a lot and it's what the lion's share of my disposable income goes on annually. But it is too risky at the moment. I'm hoping that with the availability of a vaccine we can get back to normal.
If in the future one airline demands proof of a vaccine and another doesn't, then I will pay more if necessary for the one that does.
 

Cdebru

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 4, 2006
Messages
6,646
I'm not sure what you mean by "it's not concerning" - at the very least it means that there probably won't be a test to identify who has had Covid in the past. It also means we don't know whether or how long someone will maintain a useful level of immunity after their first bout and raises the question of the likely reaction to subsequent Coronavirus infections.

I find all that somewhat concerning.
We can identify the T cell, tests up to now have been looking for antibodies, this is positive in that we now know there are more ways to wars this off than just antibodies which may impact on the development of vaccines, and how long any immunity will last from infection or vaccine only time will tell.
 


New Threads

Most Replies

Top Bottom