Denmark mandatory Covid19 vaccine

[scamander]

Put aside vaxxer/antivaxxer hats for a little please. Does this bother anyone? Do people not have a choice? Are we losing our freedom before our very eyes?

'As well as enforcing quarantine measures, the law also allows the authorities to force people to be vaccinated, even though there is currently no vaccination for the virus'

www.google.com/amp/s/www.thelocal.dk/20200313/denmark-passes-far-reaching-emergency-coronavirus-law/amp

@knittingaddict this is not a ‘baseless, dangerous conspiracy theory’. It is a fact that this disease is mild for the vast majority of people. We are not ‘going for’ natural immunity - it’s just a fact that a large number of us have had the disease and now have immunity. It is a fact that this is contributing to herd immunity. If a significant proportion of the population are immune then mass vaccination is not necessary to reach the required level of herd immunity to reduce spread. It may be enough to vaccinate the more vulnerable, as is the case for some other diseases.

[quote bumbleymummy]@knittingaddict this is not a ‘baseless, dangerous conspiracy theory’. It is a fact that this disease is mild for the vast majority of people. We are not ‘going for’ natural immunity - it’s just a fact that a large number of us have had the disease and now have immunity. It is a fact that this is contributing to herd immunity. If a significant proportion of the population are immune then mass vaccination is not necessary to reach the required level of herd immunity to reduce spread. It may be enough to vaccinate the more vulnerable, as is the case for some other diseases.[/quote]
I agree with this.

Good for Denmark. They should do what they think is necessary to protect their population.
I think the UK government should follow their example, if herd immunity via vaccination is not reached on a voluntary basis. I suspect it will be though, by a considerable margin.

@bumbleymummy
Officially 1,589,301 ppl have had covid. Let's say -from the top of my head for argument's sake- that it's tenfold with asymptomatic cases. That leaves us with 15,89,3010. That is around 20% of the population.

So, in order to get 20% of natural immunity the following had happened:

• 60,000 ppl have had to die
• we don't know how many will have long-covid and will need support (nhs/financial)
• it took about 9 months.

[quote TheSunIsStillShining]@bumbleymummy
Officially 1,589,301 ppl have had covid. Let's say -from the top of my head for argument's sake- that it's tenfold with asymptomatic cases. That leaves us with 15,89,3010. That is around 20% of the population.

So, in order to get 20% of natural immunity the following had happened:

• 60,000 ppl have had to die
• we don't know how many will have long-covid and will need support (nhs/financial)
• it took about 9 months.[/quote]

Exactly.

I would have expected the natural herd immunity argument to have died a death now. Can't believe that it's still getting oxygen.

@TheSunIsStillShining yes, and (arguments about government decisions/ speed of response aside) those were pretty much unavoidable. The majority of deaths have been in the over 80s though - the very group that are priority for the vaccine. So if you take the more vulnerable groups out of the equation (because they’re vaccinated) then there will not be anywhere near the same numbers of deaths in the rest of the population even if they’re not vaccinated.

While it is true that a 20% of people previously infected is a good starting point as far as producing some immunity in the population it can't be relied on to fill any gap in low vaccination levels. Firstly, it won't be evenly spread throughout the population. Secondly, those people aren't necessarily going to be the same people who refuse vaccination, and lastly, no one knows how long naturally acquired immunity lasts for.

[quote bumbleymummy]@TheSunIsStillShining yes, and (arguments about government decisions/ speed of response aside) those were pretty much unavoidable. The majority of deaths have been in the over 80s though - the very group that are priority for the vaccine. So if you take the more vulnerable groups out of the equation (because they’re vaccinated) then there will not be anywhere near the same numbers of deaths in the rest of the population even if they’re not vaccinated.[/quote]
that is pure bs.
You can see from the attached pic that this is simply not true.
Around 19,000 people died below the age of 80. Please tell the families of those that it's not a big deal. That's almost 50% of NHS (not ONS) deaths reported due to covid.
(www.england.nhs.uk/statistics/statistical-work-areas/covid-19-daily-deaths/)

AND NO IT WAS NOT UNAVOIDABLE!!!!

Or please convince me that it's not a big deal that as I am vulnerable my child is off school, I don't have a job and won't have one in the foreseeable future. My life -and millions like me: working age, but underlying health issues- is not a big deal. We'll be vaccinated... yeah, somewhere around the 6th group. Maybe next year this time. But yeah, carry on with this herd immunity bollocks because you'll be fine and nothing else is of any importance.

Whilst I may have some minor concerns about side effects that are too rare to be picked up in the clinical trials they are absolutely dwarved by the fact that my quality of life is reduced every single day by this damn virus. That’s before I even consider the consequences of actually getting the disease! The benefits of having it seem to be so huge, both for myself and to protect others, that any risks would have to be considerable to cancel that out. Not wanting the vaccine is fine, expecting everyone else will have it so that you can have all the benefits with no risk is really quite selfish. No need to justify that to anyone but yourself, some people will have good reasons to decline and really it’s none of anyone else’s business

@TheSunIsStillShining Firstly, I did not say the deaths were 'no big deal'. What I am saying is not BS at all. Your attached pic shows quite clearly that the majority of deaths were in the over 80 group which is exactly what I said. It is why they are among the top priority group for the vaccine. People in the 60-79 group (with the next highest fatalities) will also have priority as will those with underlying conditions. I am not saying anything controversial when I point out that the majority of people who have died from covid have been older or have had underlying conditions - that is why they are being offered the vaccine first. When you take these higher risk people out of the equation by vaccinating them, the fatalities will decrease. While all the higher risk people are being vaccinated the rest of us will continue to contract the disease and gain immunity through natural infection and whether you or @knittingaddict like it or not, that will be contributing to overall herd immunity. This means that it would not be necessary to vaccinate the entire population in order to reach the herd immunity threshold required to reduce spread (expected to be in the region of 50-65% of the population iirc).

I'm not really sure what point you are trying to make about you not being offered the vaccine until the 6th group. The people who will be offered the vaccine before you are considered more vulnerable, the rest of us will still be waiting to be offered it after you.

@feelingverylazytoday no one knows how long immunity from the vaccine will last either - or how effective it will be in the general population - but it isn't stopping people from suggesting that everyone should have it.

@BungleandGeorge

Not wanting the vaccine is fine, expecting everyone else will have it so that you can have all the benefits with no risk is really quite selfish.

But some people are not expecting others to have it first, they are are just wary of new vaccines and do not want to be coerced into vaccination

@knittingaddict

But what I understand @bumbleymummy is saying is simply that if you have acquired immunity because you have been infected you do not need to have a vaccine.

Are you suggesting that somebody who is immune should be forced to be vaccinated anyway?

[quote trulydelicious]@BungleandGeorge

Not wanting the vaccine is fine, expecting everyone else will have it so that you can have all the benefits with no risk is really quite selfish.

But some people are not expecting others to have it first, they are are just wary of new vaccines and do not want to be coerced into vaccination[/quote]
As I said it’s a matter of individual conscience, I support choice. Plenty of people have voiced the opinion to me that they don’t want to go first, or that they’re a low risk etc. there’s plenty of people hoping everything will go back to normal without them having to do anything.

@JS87

However, if enough people refuse the vaccines then we will be left with restrictions and effects on the economy for much longer than if everyone was vaccinated.

If we want to prevent this, scientists should focus on developing safe and effective vaccines. If they are bog-standard, so be it. They may not end up covered in glory and make companies rich in the process, but the public would not be so resistant to vaccination.

@CountFosco

We'll have to wait and see which vaccine has the perfect combination of cheap, low dose, easy to distribute, high protection, effective in the over 65s, etc etc.

It appears that this ‘perfect combination’ is often heavily biased towards marketability and profit (as you would expect from a commercial product rather than medicine) and that’s what may be driving people away

@JS87

I don’t think it is a good thing that society has become so critical of everything that scientists say.

The expectation by some experts that society should blindly accept anything they say is rather infantile, even more so in this day and age. People can thankfully read and have a brain to form their own opinions. Scientists have been responsible for invaluable advances but they have also made mistakes. And it’s fine, we are human.

It's an outrageous suggestion. Regardless of how safe or effective, it's the thin end of a terrifying wedge that we should all be very afraid of where it ends. It wouldn't stop at vaccines once you start handing over bodily autonomy like that. It also stokes anti-vax sentiment. Whenever it's been discussed before, the medical groups have always been very clear that voluntary vaccination is much more effective - once you start with compulsion the balance of trust is ruined. Voluntary has been working very well in this country compared to others even with compulsion.

They'd be better off educating people about the risks and benefits, and being completely transparent. AZ with this cuffufle about how effective it actually is haven't exactly started on the right foot on this in my opinion

as you would expect from a commercial product rather than medicine

Medicines ARE commercial products. Where do you think companies like AstraZeneca and Pfizer make most of their money?

We’re fortunate with these vaccines that governments have been so willing to provide funding and order lots in advance, so we’re not reliant on vaccines only getting developed when they’re profitable. Ebola was around for decades killing poor people in Africa, didn’t get a vaccine until an outbreak hit Western countries and people started getting worried.

[quote trulydelicious]@JS87

I don’t think it is a good thing that society has become so critical of everything that scientists say.

The expectation by some experts that society should blindly accept anything they say is rather infantile, even more so in this day and age. People can thankfully read and have a brain to form their own opinions. Scientists have been responsible for invaluable advances but they have also made mistakes. And it’s fine, we are human.[/quote]
Do you think most people have the mathematical and scientific skills to do this properly? You can show anything given the opportunity, that’s why peer review exists

[quote trulydelicious]@JS87

I don’t think it is a good thing that society has become so critical of everything that scientists say.

The expectation by some experts that society should blindly accept anything they say is rather infantile, even more so in this day and age. People can thankfully read and have a brain to form their own opinions. Scientists have been responsible for invaluable advances but they have also made mistakes. And it’s fine, we are human.[/quote]
Unfortunately most people really don’t have the knowledge to understand the science. If people are unwilling to trust anything that people more knowledgeable than themselves say then humanity is doomed.
I agree that people should use their brains and do their own research but that involves reading peer reviewed science rather than MN and SM and having a good understanding of statistics. Unfortunately a significant majority went no further than gcse in maths and know very little if any statistics.

[quote trulydelicious]@JS87

However, if enough people refuse the vaccines then we will be left with restrictions and effects on the economy for much longer than if everyone was vaccinated.

If we want to prevent this, scientists should focus on developing safe and effective vaccines. If they are bog-standard, so be it. They may not end up covered in glory and make companies rich in the process, but the public would not be so resistant to vaccination.[/quote]
Scientists are developing safe and effective vaccines. There are plenty of “bog standard” vaccines in trials, it’s just that mRNA vaccines were quicker to develop so trials read out first. We need vaccines as quickly as possible so that the worlds economy can recover.

My above post isn’t meant to mean that mRNA isn’t safe or effective by the way. It is one of the safe and effective vaccines being developed. We also don’t know the consequences of giving attenuated Coronavirus so just because that strategy has been used for other viruses it doesn’t mean it would necessarily be safer than mRNA in this instance.

By the way to be clear after 9 days of constant protest - massive crowds of people banging pots and pans outside Parliament (weirdly not reported very much except in the Spectator) the Danish government has done a u-turn on its plans for mandatory vaxxing so great news in my opinion.

"It's an outrageous suggestion. Regardless of how safe or effective, it's the thin end of a terrifying wedge that we should all be very afraid of where it ends. It wouldn't stop at vaccines once you start handing over bodily autonomy like that. It also stokes anti-vax sentiment."

Yes exactly. A young friend has just recently started medical school. In the first week they were told about consent. Apparently a lot of the students were shocked. Someone said "But what if someone has a std, refuses treatment and passes it on to their poor wife/husband/partner/casual shag". The lecturer "Yes you can explain that to the patient but you cannot force them to have treatment." Apparently a lot of the students were horrified but consent is essential. A lot of our health decisions can affect others but once you start forcing medical treatment (including vaccines) on unwilling people you are on the way to totalitarianism.