Will you take an approved COVID-19 vaccine?

LeeroyJ.

Hasn't yellow fever vaccination been required for multiple countries for years now? I don't under why people here think countries won't apply the same rules to travelers with Covid.

titan18

MacDanger wrote: »

It's true that as more data becomes available, the risk decreases but with the huge numbers involved (sample size of ~22k in the Pfizer trial for example), the risk of side effects is extremely low.

As regards the piece in bold, that strikes me as an "I'm alright Jack" approach

If I interact with no one enough to get the virus (and I don't, I work from home, I'd say outside my parents and brother, I haven't been around anyone enough to be designated as a close contact since July). As it is, the only risk I have is from my family as they all work outdoors, so they're likely to affect me than I am to affect them. What's the need for me to get the vaccine then? It'd be kind of selfish to me to take it when there's others who interact with lots more people would be losing out on a dose as a result.

The Belly

LeeroyJ. wrote: »

Hasn't yellow fever vaccination been required for multiple countries for years now? I don't under why people here think countries won't apply the same rules to travelers with Covid.

They do and for good reason the death rate for those that catch it is 20% to 50%.

Plumbthedepths

melekalikimaka wrote: »

Are you sure you know how this works, there is only a few legal types of discrimination that is an issue, differentiating people based on vaccine is perfectly legal

Is it perfectly legal? Strange that as vaccination is not mandatory here, so it will be ok to refuse service to someone who has not had the Covid vaccine but it doesn't matter if they didn't have the MMR or Flu vaccine. I hope neither you or the other poster work in the legal profession.
Creating a situation where one vaccination requires proof and another doesn't is creating a new type of discrimination. I look forward to the first court cases.

ELM327

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Is it perfectly legal? Strange that as vaccination is not mandatory here, so it will be ok to refuse service to someone who has not had the Covid vaccine but it doesn't matter if they didn't have the MMR or Flu vaccine. I hope neither you or the other poster work in the legal profession.

I work currently as a risk analyst but have been a GDPR data controller for a not for profit in the recent past.


It is also perfectly legal to refuse service based on lack of flu vaccine btw, just no one does it as there hasn't been a global flu pandemic in 100+ years - and when there was, there were no vaccines.

Plumbthedepths

ELM327 wrote: »

I work currently as a risk analyst but have been a GDPR data controller for a not for profit in the recent past.


It is also perfectly legal to refuse service based on lack of flu vaccine btw, just no one does it as there hasn't been a global flu pandemic in 100+ years - and when there was, there were no vaccines.

Kindly back up your claim that it's legal to refuse service based on absence of flu vaccine.

josip

LeeroyJ. wrote: »

Hasn't yellow fever vaccination been required for multiple countries for years now? I don't under why people here think countries won't apply the same rules to travelers with Covid.

Germany for example will not make vaccination mandatory for its citizens

https://www.deutschland.de/en/topic/politics/corona-pandemic-compulsory-vaccination-in-germany

so I don't think it can/will mandate vaccination for people entering Germany from other countries.

ELM327

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Kindly back up your claim that it's legal to refuse service based on absence of flu vaccine.

I already have, earlier in the thread.



To reiterate here for the avoidance of doubt:

It's not on the list of recognised discrimination reasons.
Outside of the recognised list, you cannot legally be discriminated against.

I could legally own a shop and not allow any entry to people wearing a blue top. Once the rule is applied unilaterally and is not on the list of recognised grounds that I linked to on citizens information, it is legal.

Plumbthedepths

ELM327 wrote: »

I already have, earlier in the thread.



To reiterate here for the avoidance of doubt:

It's not on the list of recognised discrimination reasons.
Outside of the recognised list, you cannot legally be discriminated against.

I could legally own a shop and not allow any entry to people wearing a blue top. Once the rule is applied unilaterally and is not on the list of recognised grounds that I linked to on citizens information, it is legal.

No you haven't actually. If you wish to seek proof of vaccination off an individual what basis of law gives you the right to do so when vaccination is not mandatory. You have no legal basis to seek personal health information.
Your blue top analogy is enforcing a dress code.
Requiring evidence of one from of vaccination when others are not required is creating a new form of discrimination.

The Belly

ELM327 wrote: »

I work currently as a risk analyst but have been a GDPR data controller for a not for profit in the recent past.


It is also perfectly legal to refuse service based on lack of flu vaccine btw, just no one does it as there hasn't been a global flu pandemic in 100+ years - and when there was, there were no vaccines.

https://irishtechnews.ie/could-workplaces-bar-anti-vaxxer-employees/

3DataModem

Yeah. I need to travel for work on Quantas, so will take it and be among the 'clean'

ELM327

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

No you haven't actually. If you wish to seek proof of vaccination off an individual what basis of law gives you the right to do so when vaccination is not mandatory. You have no legal basis to seek personal health information.
Your blue top analogy is enforcing a dress code.

You have the legal right to request any information. Note, this does not confer a requirement for the person to respond.



Upon receiving the request, the person could refuse to answer, legally. However equally legally I could refuse them entry to my premises in line with a rule which is applied to everyone and not discriminatory.

ELM327

The Belly wrote: »

https://irishtechnews.ie/could-workplaces-bar-anti-vaxxer-employees/

The last bastion of well known and revered news outlets. Trustworthy to the last.

Plumbthedepths

ELM327 wrote: »

You have the legal right to request any information. Note, this does not confer a requirement for the person to respond.



Upon receiving the request, the person could refuse to answer, legally. However equally legally I could refuse them entry to my premises in line with a rule which is applied to everyone and not discriminatory.

I suspect if you have a business and decide to operate in the manner you purpose here, you will be out of business fairly soon and tied up in court by individuals who love easy money.
Take care.

josip

ELM327 wrote: »

The last bastion of well known and revered news outlets. Trustworthy to the last.

Another perspective from the Irish Medical Journal.
http://www.imj.ie/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Mandatory-Vaccination-for-Ireland-An-Informed-Intervention-or-a-Knee-Jerk-Reaction-1.pdf
But that publication will no doubt also be rubbished if it doesn't confirm the existing bias.

CalamariFritti

johnire wrote: »

So a question to the people who aren't getting the vaccine...... you do realise that your chances are contacting Covid will increase hugely once a vaccine programme commences and the restrictions and safeguards that are in place at the moment will be lifted permanently? Does this bother you?

No

plodder

josip wrote: »

Germany for example will not make vaccination mandatory for its citizens

https://www.deutschland.de/en/topic/politics/corona-pandemic-compulsory-vaccination-in-germany

so I don't think it can/will mandate vaccination for people entering Germany from other countries.

As the article says, it's effectively mandatory for its citizens. Children can't go to school without proof of measles vaccination.

Children have to show proof of vaccination against measles before they can be accepted into a day nursery, a kindergarten or a school. Since school attendance is compulsory in Germany, this rule is equivalent to a general vaccination obligation. People who are employed in children’s institutions or in medical facilities also have to be vaccinated.

You could say that Asian countries (or Aus or NZ) might allow visitors to avoid the two week quarantine if they can prove they are vaccinated. Is that mandatory? Not quite, but pretty close

LeeroyJ.

josip wrote: »

Germany for example will not make vaccination mandatory for its citizens

https://www.deutschland.de/en/topic/politics/corona-pandemic-compulsory-vaccination-in-germany

so I don't think it can/will mandate vaccination for people entering Germany from other countries.

2 things here,
1. It doesn't say it will not make vaccination mandatory, it says it being discussed and that the Government is opposed to it. That doesn't mean it won't be mandatory though. No decision has been made.

2. I'm not saying every country will mandate it, but I don't see why some/many (like New Zealand & Australia) wouldn't make it mandatory when Yellow Fever is already mandatory in many other countries.

grogi

johnire wrote: »

So a question to the people who aren't getting the vaccine...... you do realise that your chances are contacting Covid will increase hugely once a vaccine programme commences and the restrictions and safeguards that are in place at the moment will be lifted permanently? Does this bother you?

The restrictions will not be immediately lifted - that would allow the case number to sky rocket. The restrictions will be gradually lifted and maybe sometimes bring back, just to keep the number of cases at approximately same numbers as we have right now. Hence the chances of contracting will not increase.

grogi

LeeroyJ. wrote: »

2 things here,
1. It doesn't say it will not make vaccination mandatory, it says it being discussed and that the Government is opposed to it. That doesn't mean it won't be mandatory though. No decision has been made.

2. I'm not saying every country will mandate it, but I don't see why some/many (like New Zealand & Australia) wouldn't make it mandatory when Yellow Fever is already mandatory in many other countries.

No democratic country will make it compulsory, not at this stage for sure. They might reduce benefits if someone refused vaccination though.

LeeroyJ.

grogi wrote: »

No democratic country will make it compulsory, not at this stage. They might reduce benefits if someone refused vaccination though.

Not Mandatory for its own Citizens, I agree.
Mandatory for External visitors? I absolutely think most countries will.

ByTheSea2019

There's a big difference between compulsory vaccination which might not be legally possible because of consitutional issues and business owners simply making it a condition of entry to their individual premises. If the latter became common practice, it might effectively become essential in order to live normally. There's no law that says I need to own a mobile phone or have a bank account, but realisitcally, I couldn't function without either.

josip

plodder wrote: »

As the article says, it's effectively mandatory for its citizens. Children can't go to school without proof of measles vaccination.

Apologies, I had assumed people would read the article rather than glance through it, so I didn't think it was necessary to explain what it said in simple terms.
Although the measles vaccination is mandatory in Germany this is because:

Measles is one of the most infectious diseases there is. On average, someone with measles will infect 12 to 18 other persons.

whereas,

In contrast, individuals with corona virus will infect an average of two to three people.

as a result of which

The Federal Government is opposed to compulsory vaccination against corona. Its argument is based on citizens’ civil liberties.

Harry Palmr

I'll take it and will probably be in the second tranche when it becomes available.

As for the antivaxers, hopefully the rest of us will do the heavy lifting so you don't need to

But I also hope international travel and entrance to medical facilities is banned for anyone who hasn't been vaccinated.

CalamariFritti

I dont understand why people get so riled up and militant with regards to someone having concerns over the vaccines.

As far as I understand the vaccines will get rolled out on phased basis. Like medical staff first. Then risk groups. Then grouped by ages descending. Something like that.

By the time it arrives at Joe Soap's door the whole thing will be a non issue because Joe Soap is virtually at zero risk as it is and the others are already vaccinated.

So whats the big deal if Susie says ye I will but I'd like to see how it works out with side effects first? It's going to work out that way anyway.

Some people just seem to have a big horn for forcing others to do something.

Same with the masks really. Although at least I will acknowledge once you buy into the masks thing you will buy into that we-protect-each-other-through-masks mantra and at least it kinda makes sense that way. But with the vaccines it really doesnt. Someone who doesn't get vaccinated doesnt endanger anyone else. Or only if you're prepared for some serious mental and statistical gymnastics.

And just for the record. I probably will take it when its my turn. Would I take it if I was supposed to go first? Not so sure tbh and I dont think I'll be alone in that.

johnire

I think you're completely wrong. Let me assure you I'm not going to be held to ransom by people who decide not to take the vaccine. The whole point of a vaccine is to protect people and to allow life to return to normal. Of course the restrictions won't be lifted straight away but they will all be gone eventually. I'm certainly not going to spend the rest of my life socially distancing or wearing a mask just because a group of people for their own reasons decide not to take the vaccine. You've got to accept the consequences of that.

grogi wrote: »

The restrictions will not be immediately lifted - that would allow the case number to sky rocket. The restrictions will be gradually lifted and maybe sometimes bring back, just to keep the number of cases at approximately same numbers as we have right now. Hence the chances of contracting will not increase.

AssetBacked2

touts wrote: »

Absolutely. Sign me up.

But if you don't want to take it fine. It's just there should be ongoing Level 5 lockdown for anyone who doesn't take it until we are 6 months without a case. No pubs, restaurants etc. Only essential shopping. Masks in public areas. No overseas travel. In fact no travel outside your county. No access to sporting facilities (either as a spectator or a participant). No Cinemas, Theaters etc. No access to public transportation.

Level 0 for the rest of us.

If you don't believe in science you don't get to experience th benefits of a lifestyle whose foundation is science.

:rolleyes:

Dripping in self-righteousness. By all means take it, but don't be so smug, dramatic and hyperbolic.

josip

LeeroyJ. wrote: »

Not Mandatory for its own Citizens, I agree.
Mandatory for External visitors? I absolutely think most countries will.

Will EU countries be allowed to differentiate between their own citizens and citizens of other EU countries?
Does Freedom of Movement apply in this case?

plodder

josip wrote: »

Apologies, I had assumed people would read the article rather than glance through it, so I didn't think it was necessary to explain what it said in simple terms.
Although the measles vaccination is mandatory in Germany this is because:



whereas,



as a result of which

Okay, fair enough. You didn't specifically mention Covid 19.

For what it's worth, I don't think Covid 19 vaccines should be mandatory to the extent of not allowing children go to school (which is hardly being contemplated anyway), but I don't have an issue with it being effectively mandatory in some contexts, eg travel to some countries, or working in a hospital.

As the article also says, if the level of voluntary vaccination is high enough then clearly there is no need to make it compulsory.

LeeroyJ.

josip wrote: »

Will EU countries be allowed to differentiate between their own citizens and citizens of other EU countries?
Does Freedom of Movement apply in this case?

It's very likely the EU will adopt an EU wide policy to either make it mandatory or not. I do however think even EU countries/the EU will make it mandatory to external visitors if they adopt it or not.