Thoughts on mandatory vaccination?

[IllGetTheNextRound]

I'm a healthcare professional and I've heard from both colleagues and patients that vaccinations should be mandatory.

This to me is concerning for a few reasons. One of the main reasons is that I think as a public health policy this is really problematic because we are mandating a healthcare intervention on an individual level which takes away their autonomy. And what about children? Compared to many other countries our vaccination uptake is generally excellent. Indeed there is definitely room for improvement, but I worry that mandating this would deter people who otherwise would consider it.

Having said that I'm very pro vaccination and I want as many people to be vaccinated as possible. I have educated many patients and advocated for greater uptake of childhood vaccinations.

If you're passionate about one side of the debate I'd love to hear your thoughts.

I've had two jabs and I'd possibly consider a booster but not until they decide whether or not the current one is effective for the next round of mutations. I am not bombarding my body with jabs every three months. I've had Covid and it was mild, pre jabs.

I will fight to the bloody death to preserve freedom to choose in this country. I have never been to any sort of protest in my life but the mere suggestion of compulsory administration of a mediocre jab against what can be a mild illness is a step way too far for me and virtually everyone I know, most of which have had two jabs already.

I would hope that anyone in my friend or family group would let me know asap if they see themselves as supportive of a draconian dictatorship so I can never give them the time of day ever again.

@Beachcomber

I didn't ignore it ollyollyoxenfree.

I said that the data emerging from VAERS in the US on adverse advents is very concerning.

So yes, millions of does have been given and we have (imperfect but interesting) data on that. We also have emerging data on vaccine waning, breakthrough infections and virus mutation. None of this data indicates that mandatory vaccination is justified. Far from it.

My first comment on this was:

Nope, definitely don't agree with it. Especially for the UK when we have good levels of vaccination. Austria etc are in an extremely difficult place with their current rates of vaccination, but making it mandatory isn't the way to go about it

Mandatory vaccination is unethical and IMO unenforcable. It's such an important conversation and anti-vaccine misinformation just detracts from the very valid points made.

Vaccines do not increase mutatation rate, they do not increase your risk of infection, the issues with assuming causality from yellow card/VAERS data has been discussed. The "informed informed consent" form from misinformation group PANDA is full of anti-vaccine & coronavirus false claims which I'm happy to elaborate on (but anyone reading the form should be able to spot this from a mile away...)

I grew up in a mandatory jabs to go to school place -- I find the covid vaccine mandates now fairly outrageous. I've started following Big Brother Watch on social media.

I'm not in favour of mandatory vaccination aka fine if you are not, but I'm quite in favour of vaccine passports and no entry to venues without vaccination

My reaction to this policy is to try very hard to refuse to ever enter any venues with that rule in operation. fwiw, I AM fully vaccinated. But still find the policy outrageous. Not many avenues of protest left. They can go bankrupt for all I care.

@Weepingash

I've had two jabs and I'd possibly consider a booster but not until they decide whether or not the current one is effective for the next round of mutations. I am not bombarding my body with jabs every three months. I've had Covid and it was mild, pre jabs.

I will fight to the bloody death to preserve freedom to choose in this country. I have never been to any sort of protest in my life but the mere suggestion of compulsory administration of a mediocre jab against what can be a mild illness is a step way too far for me and virtually everyone I know, most of which have had two jabs already.

I would hope that anyone in my friend or family group would let me know asap if they see themselves as supportive of a draconian dictatorship so I can never give them the time of day ever again.

Yeah!!! Go for it @Weepingash! I totally agree & would also find it very difficult to forgive anyone among my friends or family who supported this kind of ridiculous and discriminatory policy. I would have to question whether or not they had lost their minds!

No matter how hard the anti-vaccine groups try to push it, there is not increased risk of being vaccinated because you have had coronavirus.

But is there much benefit? Or indeed any?

I mean do we really know? I know that there are studies which show that antibody levels are boosted in recovered people who are subsequently vaccinated. But AFAIK there isn't data which tells us that those people actually benefit from vaccination in terms of re-infection rates and or severe illness rates.

Do we know if recovered people show a similar antibody increase / re-stimulation if they are naturally boosted by coming into contact with the virus in the wild? (In they way that happens with the chicken pox virus for example.)

I'm not trying to argue that the risk for adverse events is higher in recovered people than it is in covid naive people. Although I suppose it could be as the data on myocarditis indicates that the risk is higher on the 2nd dose of vaccine (compared to the 1st) which surely begs the question of the risk in previously infected people...

I'm arguing that huge numbers of people in all likelihood do not need to be vaccinated and that the risk benefit ratio for them does not justify mandatory vaccination.

I'm also if the vaccines have not been tested on previously infected people. Seems very remiss to me. Were the manufacturers just keeping their fingers crossed that these new vaccines for a new virus would work out OK for the millions of previously infected people?

@MistressoftheDarkSide oh me too, I literally just texted DH saying today is the day I became a Brexiteer and I was full-on anti-Brexit.
I owe a big apology to all the people I spent years thinking were idiots - they clearly had the EU's number better than I did.

@Battenburg77 the Austria news floored me as well. The problem is that one country goes there and then it normalises it. I would desperately like to think that it's not something that would happen in the UK but I honestly don't know any more.

@ollyollyoxenfree

Xposts!

I misunderstood you and didn't realise that you were referring to your position on mandatory vaccination. My apologies. I totally agree with you that it is unethical. I just happen to think that it is also unjustified by current data.

But is there much benefit? Or indeed any?I mean do we really know? I know that there are studies which show that antibody levels are boosted in recovered people who are subsequently vaccinated. But AFAIK there isn't data which tells us that those people actually benefit from vaccination in terms of re-infection rates and or severe illness rates.

Yes, there are several studies which have been linked across multiple threads now, demonstrating vaccination in cohorts of previously infected people decreases risk of reinfection and severe illness, in comparison to their unvaccinated peers.

I'm also shock if the vaccines have not been tested on previously infected people. Seems very remiss to me. Were the manufacturers just keeping their fingers crossed that these new vaccines for a new virus would work out OK for the millions of previously infected people

You keep saying this - but I as have explained, these people were just not included in original trials. Including previously infected people in trials aimed at establishing efficacy would cause substantial bias - you'd be making vaccines look a lot more effective than they actually are.

We have rolled out billions of doses, during high rates of coronavirus, thus allowing us to establish there is not a risk of ADE (which I'm guessing you're implying) or other adverse consequences. This was also tested in pre-clinical studies.

@Beachcomber

[quote Beachcomber]@ollyollyoxenfree

Xposts!

I misunderstood you and didn't realise that you were referring to your position on mandatory vaccination. My apologies. I totally agree with you that it is unethical. I just happen to think that it is also unjustified by current data.[/quote]
I fully agree it isn't justified by the data :)

Even in the hypothetical impossible scenario of 100% efficacy and 0% risk I don't think vaccines should be mandated. As I said, there needs to be better focus of public engagement and information campaigns, rather than trying to force it on people.

But we substantially do disagree on your other claims!

I don't understand this

Including people with previous immunity is also not helpful as it will artificially increase vaccine efficacy

If you included them in both arms of the study, why would it increase it? I can see it would complicate things, but I would have thought - if anything - it would risk decreasing the number of people catching the disease - which was already tiny - and reducing the chances of demonstrating statistical significance, rather than increasing it?

The main drawback would be you would need even more massive studies and it would be hard to ensure prior infected people were randomised properly between both arms.

Upside would be solid safety data on risk of vaccination post infection, which we do not have right now.

@morticiamarkle

I think you underestimate the issues involved in trying to include people with a previous infection (very much not equivalent to the gen pop, especially in the early days of the pandemic) in the primary clinical trials aimed at establishing efficacy to allow emergency licensing of the vaccines. The priority was establishing safety and whether they worked in order to get the roll out going as quickly as possible.

There have since been several studies looking at reinfection rates in vaccinated versus unvaccinated populations - this is not something that has been ignored

@Beachcomber - I don't know what you're on about. Of course previously infected people can't be included in the initial studies, that would invalidate results. Since then however, there have been plenty of studies to assess the likelihood of reinfection for those who were vaccinated and those who weren't; they consistently show that reinfection risk is low but higher for elderly and reduces from vaccination. Therefore vaccines have benefit to those who've been previously infected. healthfeedback.org/infection-induced-immunity-versus-vaccine-induced-immunity-weighing-the-benefits-and-risks/

We are going to see large numbers of care staff leave the profession, (well industry, its not a profession, we don't value carers, dog walkers earn far more and no one calls that a profession)

All because of mandatory CV vaccinations, yet they aren't forced to have any Hep or Flu vaccinations.... stupid idea.

Even in the hypothetical impossible scenario of 100% efficacy and 0% risk I don't think vaccines should be mandated. As I said, there needs to be better focus of public engagement and information campaigns, rather than trying to force it on people.

I really agree with this @Ollyollyoxenfree and I think it's the only way to reach anybody who is vaccine hesitant and actually have a hope of changing their minds. I feel scarred by the lockdowns - I never thought I would live in a country where you were effectively banned from leaving your house and sitting on a bench and (without trying to sound dramatic!) I don't know if I will ever feel totally free again. It still upsets me now and I am struggling to regain any trust in the government as a result. The more I hear of mandated vaccines/vaccine passports etc. the further into fight mode I am pushed and the less likely I am to ever consider it. The more open and honest the government are about the benefits and the possible side-effects of the vaccine, and the more freedom of choice they promote, the more I will consider listening to them again.

I've swung between vaccine hesitant and vaccine averse due to the fact I had a bad reaction as a child and several other experiences, medically related which leaves me reduced faith in the system. I have been incredibly unlucky as in those experiences are rare, but they have had massive negative impacts on myself, the trajectory of my life and on those around me, and having had Covid, while unvaccinated which was no way as bad as flu in my teenage years, I accept in this instance I was probably lucky.

DP is vaccinated. We caught it from a double vaccinated person. Our outcomes were similar - a week of cold symptoms and tiredness. MIL, mid 70s, bedbound stage of dementia in a care home, has tested positive twice, both asymptomatic and the second time post vaccine. Again, very lucky.

So although I accept this is "anecdata" if people are having these experiences you can understand where vaccine hesitancy can come from.

And no, the data does not support mandatory vaccines, and the trajectory of their implantation could open the door to a host of other "for the greater good" dictates. This is a hill I am willing to die on.

Yes, there are several studies which have been linked across multiple threads now, demonstrating vaccination in cohorts of previously infected people decreases risk of reinfection and severe illness, in comparison to their unvaccinated peers.

I wasn't aware of solid studies showing that people actually benefit from vaccination in terms of re-infection rates and or severe illness rates.

I don't mean "risk of reinfection". I mean actual reinfection and illness in a way that impacts the person enough to justify vaccination. I'll certainly have a look for that. I know of the Kentucky study but it isn't very good!

And I'm glad that we agree on something (being against mandatory vaccination). I think in these difficult times finding common ground is important no matter what our position is

Why do people insist passports are the way to go? You can spread a virus that you don't have.

Can't spread a virus you don't have

I have to say though, it’s quite refreshing to see the Pro-vaxxers and Anti covid-vaxxers majority agreeing on this!

I know of the Kentucky study but it isn't very good!

What issues do you have with the methods used in the CDC study based on populations in Kentucky? @Beachcomber

@SD1978 yes, that's the right approach. Construction workers need a hard hat, healthcare workers need a vaccination.

I find it a little odd that a post ago you weren't aware of any research looking at reinfection rates in those vaccinated versus unvaccinated, but now you suddenly have, alongside with having read a paper and critically assessed the methods & interpretation of results, concluding that it's "not very good"....

I didn't say that I wasn't aware of any research looking at reinfection rates.

I said "I wasn't aware of solid studies showing that (recovered) people actually benefit from vaccination in terms of re-infection rates and or severe illness rates".

I read the Kentucky study weeks ago. It's a retrospective data study which clearly states its limitations in the discussion. It does not show that recovered people need to be vaccinated and it does not show that they benefit from vaccination in terms of severity of illness. It may not even show that vaccinated people were less likely to be reinfected than unvaccinated people as the testing was on a voluntary basis and the data is retrospective. It's a weak study.

@Bexxe

I have to say though, it’s quite refreshing to see the Pro-vaxxers and Anti covid-vaxxers majority agreeing on this!

Yes!