I saw this post on a friend’s timeline on Facebook:
I had previously decided not to respond through social media, but rather through this blog, however, I had had a drink and my devil got the better of me. This is what I wrote:
I have just seen this and cannot believe that anyone would make this post. People appear to be so quick to surrender their freedom of self-determination. Celebrating a vaccine that does not work, that the companies producing it have put the price up for, and for which they are now preparing people for booster shots (because it does not work), does not seem like an act of loyalty; no wage is worth surrendering your freedom of choice, least of all when it is your body that they are demand(ing) is put on the line!
Let me start with some points of clarification:
First, does the vaccines work? Here in the UK, the government, through the Department of Health, are stating that even people who have been vaccinated can still contract and transmit Covid-19. In defence they are claiming that it ‘might’ stop those who do become infected from developing serious symptoms. It is already accepted that between 60 to 70% of those who have contracted the virus experience either no or very slight symptoms. Of those who do fall ill over 90% recover. The mortality rate is less than 3% of those who test positive. It is not known how many of the 7% who developed serious symptoms but survived where vaccinated before contracting the virus.
If the vaccines worked then it would be logical to assume that infection rates would fall, but they have in fact risen. Coincidently, the mortality rate has stayed approximately the same.
Second, on August 1st, 2021, The Financial Times reported that both Pfizer and Moderna raised the price of the Covid vaccine to the EU, the first by 25% and the latter by 10%.
Third, in Britain, the Public Health Act 1984 specifically states that members of the public should not be compelled to undergo any mandatory medical treatment, including vaccinations. The current government appear intent on removing this piece of legislature, however.
In addition to the points above I am worried by another consideration that I find reflected in some of the responses to my post on Facebook, which I will quote here:
1. I am damn proud that my employer believes in science.
2. You want your job, then get down to the doctor and get the shot.
3. Hopefully soon all international travel and entry to all museums, clubs, shops and social venues will be back to normal for those who are vaccinated and completely forbidden to those who choose not to be vaccinated (with exemptions for the tiny minority who might have genuine health reasons for not getting vaccinated). The vaccines work spectacularly well by the way.
I infer from the first two responses that the freedom to choose was not considered important, I suppose that is their choice. Neither appear to see coercion as a problem. I do, however. If the evidence proved conclusively that a vaccine would protect against a deadly virus then yes, I can see the importance of having it, but Covid-19 is not a deadly virus and, as already stated above, the vaccines do not appear to work. I have more chance of developing cancer, 1 in 2 according to the latest figures, and more chance of dying from it; it has a 50% mortality rate. Almost as many people die from the combined figures for smoking and alcohol abuse annually as have died from Covid-19.
As it happens, I am in the 60 to 70% of people who contracted Covid-19 and suffered only slight symptoms; I thought I had a cold. Having been exposed to a virus that was admirably dealt with by my own immune system I do not see the point exposing myself to a vaccine that does not appear to offer any better form of protection.
However, it is the third response that worries me the most. The first two seem to accept coercion, this one wants to actively use it to remove personal freedoms from individuals who are making a contrary choice to themselves. They are proposing draconian measures that benefit the group with which they identify and consciously discriminate against those who do not belong to it. I wonder how those exemptions ‘for the tiny minority who might have genuine health reasons for not getting vaccinated’ are going to be recorded and displayed; with a symbol on their jackets perhaps? How long before that measure is extended to those who have exercised their freedom of choice by not to having a vaccine that does not appear to work? Jane Elliott’s Blue Eyes/ Brown Eyes experiment was intended to be an educational lesson on how discrimination works, not a template for its use on a much greater social canvas, but I see that happening more and more.