Compulsory vaccination for everyone is the only way to defeat COVID-19
By: Dr. Michael Lederman, Maxwell J. Mehlman and Dr. Stuart Youngner (USA TODAY)
A reasonable proposal that completely ignores a myriad of problems. The controlled tests are being conducted by the vaccine producers who are interested in hawking their magic formula for a profit. What's fact and what's marketing spin? How is this situation different than Boeing and the 737 MAX?
in the case of hydroxychloroquine and remdisivir, the much more expensive drug received rave reviews from non-practicing professionals based on unremarkable statistical results. How much of the 'reasonable' argument is being motivated by political and self serving considerations?
The expert non-practicing professionals have exhibited distinct biases; providing non-specific general information for public activities they seem to support while making very specific condemnations for public activities they seem to oppose. Why should the biased responses to specific questions engender public trust in 'reasonable' arguments?
The response of non-practicing professionals has not been unbiased, objective, or dispassionate so far. Guidance and recommendations have not been solely influenced by public health or safety. The so called facts have been carefully selected based on exigency of the moment; not according to a consistent strategy. When the expert policy makers are pressed for details the common response is 'I don't know, I can't answer the question'. The experts have often claimed they don't understand the question or lecture that the question isn't appropriate.
The public is being expected to accept a 'reasonable' argument surrounded by a cloud of fuzzy uncertainty. The public can tell when the experts are blowing smoke. Is compulsory vaccination really about protecting public health and safety - or - is this another 'reasonable' argument to protect the political backsides of non-practicing professionals?
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
To win the war against the novel coronavirus that has killed nearly 163,000 people in this country, the only answer is compulsory vaccination — for all of us.
And while the measures that will be necessary to defeat the coronavirus will seem draconian, even anti-American to some, we believe that there is no alternative. Simply put, getting vaccinated is going to be our patriotic duty.
The reason: When an effective vaccine is available for COVID-19, it will only defeat the pandemic if it is widely used, creating "herd immunity." It is important to note that during an epidemic, there is no threshold above which the protection conferred by herd immunity cannot be improved. Thus, the more people who are immunized, the lower the risk for all of us, including those who are not vaccinated.
Nor is there an alternative to vaccine-induced herd immunity in a pandemic. Relying on enough people becoming infected and then immune is dangerous, as exemplified by the Swedish experience where the COVID-19 mortality rate exceeds that of its more cautious neighbors.Broad induction of immunity in the population by immunization will be necessary to end this pandemic. In simple terms, a refusal to be vaccinated threatens the lives of others.
Disincentives for noncompliance
Here's what America must do when a vaccine is ready:
►Make vaccinations free and easily accessible.
►Exempt only those with medical contraindications to immunization. It is likely that more than one vaccine platform will prove effective (as was the case for polio vaccines) and, as a result, medical conditions that prohibit all COVID-19 vaccines will be rare.
►Do not honor religious objections. The major religions do not officially oppose vaccinations.
►Do not allow objections for personal preference, which violate the social contract.
How can government and society ensure compliance with protective vaccines?
Vaccine refusers could lose tax credits or be denied nonessential government benefits. Health insurers could levy higher premiums for those who by refusing immunization place themselves and others at risk, as is the case for smokers. Private businesses could refuse to employ or serve unvaccinated individuals. Schools could refuse to allow unimmunized children to attend classes. Public and commercial transit companies — airlines, trains and buses — could exclude refusers. Public and private auditoriums could require evidence of immunization for entry.
The only legal limitation on government or private action is that it not be discriminatory, and it's hard to see how discrimination would occur if vaccinations were free and accessible to all.
Immunization certification cards
How then should immunizations be documented? A registry of immunization will be needed with names entered after immunization is completed. Adequate immunization may require more than a single vaccination, and the durability of protection by different vaccines may vary and may require periodic booster immunizations. Thus, immunized persons will need to receive expiration date-stamped certification cards, which should be issued to all who are immunized in the country, whether here legally or not.
These measures might seem draconian and would be costly, but ensuring universal vaccination is a negligible sacrifice compared with the costs, deaths and social upheaval that a sustained pandemic is having on our country.
We acknowledge that the refusal to obey rules one considers unjust is an American tradition. But another cornerstone of the American tradition is that we come together when it's necessary. The best example of this was during the two world wars. Everyone contributed, no one was allowed to opt out merely because it conflicted with a sense of autonomy, and draft dodgers who refused to serve were subject to penalties.
True, conscientious objectors could refuse to use weapons for religious reasons, but they were obligated to help out in other ways, serving in noncombatant roles. There are no such alternatives for vaccination.
Dr. Michael Ledermanis professor of medicine at the Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine. Maxwell J. Mehlman is professor of law at the Case Western Reserve University School of Law. Dr. Stuart Youngner is professor of bioethics at the Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine.
Tags
Who is online
141 visitors
Who's serving the public and who's serving themselves? So far the truth tellers haven't been trustworthy.
The development of a vaccine will be a huge story on the day it arrives. It must be mandatory.
I love the idea of a registry of immunization.
I will gladly take an effective vaccine. Or several. I am sure most Americans, patriotic or otherwise, will do the same.
But the idea of yet another governmental registry of all citizens concerns me. The powers that be are already privy to all kinds of information about its citizens.
What has happened to our right to privacy and to simply be left alone.
It seems that even with the best of intentions, some schemes end up having unintended consequences.
The antivaxers are most likely already coming up with excuses not to get vaccinated.
The only problem with mandatory vaccinations is that - anti-vaxxer nuts notwithstanding - some vaccines are legitimately unsafe. That's why we do testing. Some of those bad side effects don't manifest for years. It usually takes years to release a new vaccine to the public (not counting vaccines with minor changes like the annual flu vaccine).
So, demanding that people submit to a vaccine so early in the process is pretty much unprecedented. You can have legitimate medical concerns that have nothing to do with religious objections or unfounded concerns about autism, for example.