Will you take an approved COVID-19 vaccine?

is_that_so

seamus wrote: »

The same way that an employer can insist that an employee has a certain qualification even if the state doesn't.

It's a grey area. If an employer can justify that employees need to be vaccinated in order to be employed by them, then there's very little an employee can do to fight that. "Justify" being the operative word. If an employee is remote or just does regular office work, an employer will have difficulty justifying the need for vaccination. If an employee works with vulnerable individuals, in a crowded area and/or with considerable contact with the public, then it could be justified.

Think of it like the "No hat, no boots, no job" sign you see up outside building sites. If being unvaccinated is likely to present a risk to you, your co-workers or your clients, then an employer would be able to robustly argue for mandatory vaccination of their employees.

(Worth noting that it will be almost 100% driven by insurance companies and whether they think employer's liability is at risk for unvaccinated employees)

I don't see it as a sensible approach at all and there would be legal challenges. Some companies may field them but it would be very bad optics. Apart from coverage taking most of the year to get to herd immunity there is no guarantee a vaccine will protect everyone in the way we know a hard hat does.

What vaccines will do is reduce COVID to the nuisance level of a mild flu' for some people and there are no company policies for colds and flus. TBH we really need to get past the continuing paralysis that COVID seems to bring or there is really no point to a voluntary vaccination programme.

Geuze

tom1ie wrote: »

I will take it but I would like to know if I take the vaccine does this mean I now can’t spread the vaccine if I pick it up when restrictions are stopped.

This interests me as children under 16 won’t be allowed take the vaccine and I have two young kids, one of whom has low white blood cell counts.

So if I pick it up from going for a meal or the pub or gigs etc, could I still spread it after having the vaccine?
No one seems to be able to answer this!

The current vaccines do not prevent infection or transmission.

EDIT: the data so far doesn't confirm whether the vaccine prevents transmission

They trigger an immune response, so if you do get infected, you won't get as sick.


https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)32472-7/fulltext

Whether the vaccines prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2 or mainly just protect against illness is largely unknown too. If the latter, achieving herd immunity through immunisation becomes a difficult prospect. Pfizer and Moderna together project that there will be enough vaccine for 35 million individuals in 2020, and perhaps up to 1 billion in 2021. As a result, many millions of people at high risk of disease will not be immunised any time soon, necessitating the continued use of non-pharmaceutical interventions. There is a danger that the public might become complacent following the news of promising vaccines, but how much more difficult will it be to ensure adherence to guidance and restrictions when a vaccine is available to many but others remain unprotected? Vaccine hesitancy is also a clear threat to COVID-19 control. New data show that willingness to take a COVID-19 vaccine is far from universal. When even wearing a face mask can be painted as a political act rather than a public health measure, responsible leadership and careful public communications will be essential.

brisan

BryanMartin21 wrote: »

So you're not saying anything really with the first bit in bold.

On the second bit in bold, it's still quite coy what you are getting at but the takeaway from my reading is that you are still proposing mandatory vaccinations. Mandatory does not only mean they pin you down and force it into your body, it also refers to limiting your freedoms in society that you would otherwise enjoy if you had the vaccine.

If you go for a few pints you cannot drive a car immediately afterwards ,that's a restriction imposed on you by your choice
If you to the pub and drink tea you can drive immediately
If you want to drive a car you have to have a license
Are you forced to have a license ,no its your choice
If you choose not to have a license the consequences are that restrictions are put on your ability to drive
No one is forcing you to do anything but every choice we make has consequences
Its up to you weather you are prepared to accept them

As you said
Mandatory does not only mean they pin you down and force it into your body, it also refers to limiting your freedoms in society that you would otherwise enjoy if you had the vaccine.
Replace vaccine with driving license

eagle eye

brisan wrote:

If you go for a few pints you cannot drive a car immediately afterwards ,that's a restriction imposed on you by your choice If you to the pub and drink tea you can drive immediately If you want to drive a car you have to have a license Are you forced to have a license ,no its your choice If you choose not to have a license the consequences are that restrictions are put on your ability to drive No one is forcing you to do anything but every choice we make has consequences Its up to you weather you are prepared to accept them

Firstly you are talking about laws of the land and you are breaking them if you drive with alcohol in your system or without a license.
You can do both but if you get caught you'll be charged with a crime and if found guilty then sentenced appropriately.
There's no law to say you must take a vaccine. So you are not breaking any law if you don't.

brisan

eagle eye wrote: »

Firstly you are talking about laws of the land and you are breaking them if you drive with alcohol in your system or without a license.
You can do both but if you get caught you'll be charged with a crime and if found guilty then sentenced appropriately.
There's no law to say you must take a vaccine. So you are not breaking any law if you don't.

What if become law ?
Some employers will ask you to submit to random drug tests
That's not the law of the land ,but if you do not you can be fired
Everything and nothing is a possibility

eagle eye

brisan wrote:

What if become law ?

I doubt it ever will.

brisan wrote:

Some employers will ask you to submit to random drug tests That's not the law of the land ,but if you do not you can be fired Everything and nothing is a possibility

Can they still do this without a good reason? I thought gdpr had a major affect on that?

brisan

eagle eye wrote: »

I doubt it ever will.

Can they still do this without a good reason? I thought gdpr had a major affect on that?

You doubt it ,you do not know and either do I but its a possibility
This time last year if you were told you could not leave your county except for certain reasons would you have believed it
Random drug testing is still in a lot of employment contracts

seamus

The driving comparison is not a good one. Even though you can't drive without a licence (or with a few beers on you), you have other options. Your freedom of movement isn't being curtailed.

If employer-mandated vaccinations make it functionally impossible for someone to get a job within a reasonable distance of home, then that is curtailing someone's basic freedoms.

This is academic anyway. It won't be mandatory at a national level, and the number of employers who mandate it will be mostly limited to those involving at-risk groups or involving a lot of travel.

brisan

seamus wrote: »

The driving comparison is not a good one. Even though you can't drive without a licence (or with a few beers on you), you have other options. Your freedom of movement isn't being curtailed.

If employer-mandated vaccinations make it functionally impossible for someone to get a job within a reasonable distance of home, then that is curtailing someone's basic freedoms.

This is academic anyway. It won't be mandatory at a national level, and the number of employers who mandate it will be mostly limited to those involving at-risk groups or involving a lot of travel.

You will still have options
You will be able to find work in sectors that do not require you to be vaccinated
You will be able to listen to CDs or podcasts instead of going to a concert
You will be able to holiday in Ireland instead of travelling abroad
Again I am not saying restrictions will be or should be brought in for those refusing a vaccination
I am saying if those restrictions are brought in then you have a choice to make
The piece in bold
Are you 100% sure on that

seamus

brisan wrote: »

Are you 100% sure on that

Absolutely 100%. It's a violation of the ECHR.

brisan

seamus wrote: »

Absolutely 100%. It's a violation of the ECHR.

I agree
However do you think it will become mandatory(or increasingly difficult to gain access to ) in certain sections of society
I don't know but its a possibility and I can see a certain logic in it
Weather I agree is immaterial

average_runner

brisan wrote: »

I agree
However do you think it will become mandatory(or increasingly difficult to gain access to ) in certain sections of society
I don't know but its a possibility and I can see a certain logic in it
Weather I agree is immaterial

It wont be mandatory, but your options in life could be limited if you make the wrong choice.
Same for everything in life, if you have a criminal record, alot of jobs off the table

runawaybishop

seamus wrote: »

Absolutely 100%. It's a violation of the ECHR.

Citation needed. Both Spain and France have said mandatory vaccination would not be in violation of their laws.

schmoo2k

runawaybishop wrote: »

Citation needed. Both Spain and France have said mandatory vaccination would not be in violation of their laws.

Realistically its not going to happen, as it will never be mandatory while there are supply shortages and by the time there is enough for everyone the number of hospital admissions due to Covid will be tiny so the primary concern will be gone.

I am sure there will be some restrictions for non vaccinated folks (like nursing homes and some countries), but they will be very much the exception.

It is fun to "what if" though...

John_Rambo

When the vaccine arrives I can see most of the "I won't be taking it" crew availing of the vaccine. (allergy sufferers aside of course)

It's like the anti mask crew. Full of hard man guff on the internet but actually wear the masks when they're in shops.

Plumbthedepths

John_Rambo wrote: »

When the vaccine arrives I can see most of the "I won't be taking it" crew availing of the vaccine. (allergy sufferers aside of course)

It's like the anti mask crew. Full of hard man guff on the internet but actually wear the masks when they're in shops.

Masks are mandatory , vaccination isn't. Just saying.

brisan

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Masks are mandatory , vaccination isn't. Just saying.

Only mandatory in certain settings
The same way proof of vaccination may be mandatory in certain settings

John_Rambo

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Masks are mandatory , vaccination isn't. Just saying.

I know, and it's a good point. However, the anti-maskers seem to be very vocal on the internet but I never see them in shops. I think when it comes down to it a lot of the anti-vaccine crew will quietly get the vaccine after a few weeks of hiding in their bedrooms and seeing how the sucessful leaders of society get on hauling the country back to normal.

boege

Proof of vaccination will not mean anything in regard to travel. The approved vaccines have not proven to prevent vaccinated people from being infected and becoming a carrier. The government are assuming that vaccinated people can still be carriers. This was why the proposed 'buddy-system' for elderly homes was rejected.

Vaccines help the body defend itself when it gets infected. Once a sufficient amount of a population is immunised then it can open up, as the population will be largely unaffected by the virus.

In summary, travel restrictions into a country will remain in place until that country reaches herd immunity through a nation-wide immunisation programme.

Finally, if you don't receive the vaccine then you are very exposed once the county opens up. My expectation is that once the country opens up, those against taking the vaccine will quickly change their minds and the government knows this. For this reason they do not need to make it compulsory and even the WHO are advising countries not to do so. Expect a massive marketing campaign though.

schmoo2k

brisan wrote: »

Only mandatory in certain settings
The same way proof of vaccination may be mandatory in certain settings

Where is it mandatory?

brisan

schmoo2k wrote: »

Where is it mandatory?

Shops, certain places of employment (mine ) public transport
Surely you have left your house the last few months

brisan

boege wrote: »

Proof of vaccination will not mean anything in regard to travel. The approved vaccines have not proven to prevent vaccinated people from being infected and becoming a carrier. The government are assuming that vaccinated people can still be carriers. This was why the proposed 'buddy-system' for elderly homes was rejected.

Vaccines help the body defend itself when it gets infected. Once a sufficient amount of a population is immunised then it can open up, as the population will be largely unaffected by the virus.

In summary, travel restrictions into a country will remain in place until that country reaches herd immunity through a nation-wide immunisation programme.

Finally, if you don't receive the vaccine then you are very exposed once the county opens up. My expectation is that once the country opens up, those against taking the vaccine will quickly change their minds and the government knows this. For this reason they do not need to make it compulsory and even the WHO are advising countries not to do so. Expect a massive marketing campaign though.

A lot of very definitive black and white statements there
Have you any evidence to back them up

schmoo2k

brisan wrote: »

Shops, certain places of employment (mine ) public transport
Surely you have left your house the last few months

Thought you were talking about vaccines!

brisan

schmoo2k wrote: »

Thought you were talking about vaccines!

Did you read the post you replied to ?

radiotrickster

brisan wrote: »

Shops, certain places of employment (mine ) public transport
Surely you have left your house the last few months

When you start working in some (possibly all) healthcare settings, they ask for proof of vaccinations you received as a child. They could add the Covid vaccine to the list in the coming months/years.

It’s been rumoured where I am that they won’t stop current healthcare staff from working if they don’t get the vaccine, but they can tell them they’re not allowed interact with patients. So porters have to only move trolleys/equipment/blood samples, admin staff can’t sit clinics, etc.

schmoo2k

brisan wrote: »

Did you read the post you replied to ?

I did - but not the post you were replying to.

is_that_so

brisan wrote: »

A lot of very definitive black and white statements there
Have you any evidence to back them up

It's more of a train of thought, one that looks logical enough to me, but judging by this one you don't accept.

Charles Babbage

boege wrote: »

Proof of vaccination will not mean anything in regard to travel. The approved vaccines have not proven to prevent vaccinated people from being infected and becoming a carrier. The government are assuming that vaccinated people can still be carriers. This was why the proposed 'buddy-system' for elderly homes was rejected.
.

The ability of the vaccine to prevent infection is unknown at present and governments are rightly still assuming that iit does not. But the likelihood is that one or other of these vaccines will greatly reduce infection which is why everyone should get it.

is_that_so

Charles Babbage wrote: »

The ability of the vaccine to prevent infection is unknown at present and governments are rightly still assuming that it does not. But the likelihood is that one or other of these vaccines will greatly reduce infection which is why everyone should get it.

The primary aim should be to persuade enough people to take it, some will never do so.

plodder

Here's a good article in the New York Times about whether vaccines will generate immunity or simply prevent severe disease. The gist is they should reduce viral load and the ability to spread, but the concern is that intra-muscular vaccines are not likely to be as effective in that regard as future mucosal sprays. Data will be available in "several weeks".

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/08/health/covid-vaccine-mask.html