Coronavirus: Spain to keep registry of those who refuse Covid vaccine

If it could be mathematically proven that there is 0% risk of negative effects? Sure. Put a requirement for vaccination in the constitution. But the current RNA vaccines have not been tested at scale before, and empirical information about long-term effects is unknowable. Things are likely good based on current knowledge, but there is uncertainty.

Anyone who wishes to enact population-level policies in such a situation is making a statement about the likelihood of an "unknown unknown" that is unsupported by data. In the light of this, it is very ethically problematic to mandate anything at this point. That's even if you're open to de facto mandates regarding medical procedures in the first place.

Of course the consideration would be different if the disease had a 100% mortality rate, but such a situation would obviousy also affect people's decisions about whether to get vaccinated or not. You wouldn't see me presenting this argument of principles if that was the reality.

You can't determine with an equation at what point such policies would be palatable, but you can make comparisons to other dangerous activities that affect others. Smoking. Driving a car, or speeding. Drinking alcohol. (De facto) mandatory medical procedures seem excessive in the light of our current policies against such behavior.

One might make a different argument if the skepticism was so widespread that the vaccination program was ineffective, but let's revisit it if that happens.

I think some states started doing vaccine registers for schools and stuff. But if not and say you lose your proof and needed it for say going to another school or college, your option is to get a test if your immune, get it again or an exemption depending on the state... Like California only allows medical, while some states allow religious or personal exemptions.

Also I would argue it is more a business issue. These countries rely a lot on the hospitality and tourism industry and lack of herd immunity means the economy is severely hamstrung. So yeah, it is actually a matter of economic survival. For me it should be mandatory, but as far as i know Portuguese constitution does not allow it. Even for the lock down they needed to declare national emergency, because otherwise there would not be a legal basis for it. The only other time there was an emergency was when the country was on the verge of a civil war after the carnations revolution in the 70s.

In Portugal you used to have a vaccine card, which some institutions required you to provide. For example, health professionals are required the vaccine bulletin to apply for work.

Except for the case above, I am not aware any other case where the vaccine record is required for adults. I actually lost my card several years ago. I think they started digitalizing it though, but i do not think it contains old information, only newly taken vaccine shots.

I said adults, because for children there is a caveat, where there is a de facto enforcement unless exempted by a medical doctor, or home school (very rare). To apply to a school your child needs to have the OPs mentioned vaccines. If you do not you will be denied application. Every year it is checked. As there is mandatory education in Portugal the way around it is very hard.

This is such an important point !

History has many examples of how fatal and disabling diseases were conquered by medicine, giving billions of people healthy lives. Each of these victories is celebrated as human mastery of science, and dominion over its environment.

Fast forward to now, and there is a small but growing rejection of this idea, and instead the concept of individual liberty has become sacrosanct, to a point where it appears to be valued more than public health.

I dont think this is really the case.

I prefer to think that people have become accustomed to living comfortable long lives in excellent health and that people have forgotten how far we've come, and how we got here.

I haven't done empirical research, but most of the sentiment for freedom of choice seems to come from highly developed areas of the world, where people have lived with the expectation of good health and without fear of epidemics, for 2 or maybe 3 generations.

I have yet to read of any such sentiment in developing nations of Africa, Central America, and eastern Europe where they perhaps remain more aware of the dangers of disease spreading in a community.

There is an enormous difference in the personal sense of bodily violation between finding dildos in your checked luggage and being injected, against your will, with closed-source nucleotide chains that hack your own ribosomes.

Not to defend the TSA at all, but it's a much, much, more personal matter to have things done to our bodies than to our property.

I fear this minority will grow significantly as soon as only an extremely small minority of vaccinated people is allowed to eat at restaurants, enter an airplane or visit a concert. Please remember that the overwhelming majority of the population currently has no access to vaccination, and won't have access for months to come.

Please all, adopt the policy of commenting after downvoting! Sheesh.

We need to gather data to operate government (in this case healthcare), so there has to be a more realistic approach than "don't gather any data".

In places where yellow fever is endemic, for example, many countries require vaccination if you want to visit.

This only happens is most people are vaccinated, if a sizable portion of the population is not then the outbreak will just keep expanding and will not stop, with the consequences we are all aware of.

Since vaccination is never 100% effective, your choice increases the risk to people who are vaccinated, as well as those who have not yet been able to receive that vaccine, and those who cannot receive it for medical reasons.

1 )Not everyone can get vaccinated due to existing pathologies or simply being allergic to some components of the vaccine. For these people it's important to reach herd immunity as it's probably their only defense. Consequently, if people decide not to get vaccinated, reaching that threshold is harder and harder and it will force those who can't get the vaccine to live in segregation/fear.

2) The cost of a vaccine shot (both in terms of money and equipment/personnel needed) is orders of magnitude less than curing the disease. If you don't get vaccinated and you get said disease more healthcare resources need to be allocated to you. This will probably lead to increase taxes or budget cuts in other areas or, more worryingly, you could indirectly kill someone else with a curable disease because there were no resources to cure him/her.

most vaccines are 60-99% effective even if you're healthy and have been vaccinated you can still get sick if the disease is heavily present.

The average victim of COVID is aged over 70 with multiple comorbities, i.e. precisely those people that the youth demographic isn’t enthusiastic about sacrificing their lifestyle for. If you simply triage that demographic out of treatment, then suddenly there is no especial burden on the health system at all.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Externality

On carbon/pollution is much harder to show a direct cause and effect between one’s actions and harm done to another individual. But it seems logical to me that i when/if zero-carbon were to become a serious thing there should be some kind of enforcement framework around it (like smog inspections we have right now but hopefully more effective...)

You’re also assuming that everyone will take the vaccine at the same moment in time, which won’t be true. Also, some people won’t be vaccinated on a first moment such as pregnant women.

I think the whole point is responsibility, going to a concrete example: let’s say I have the chance and refuse to take the vaccine, then I pass covid to a pregnant women which comes to pass away. How wouldn’t that event not be 100% my responsibility?

It was changed from a felony to a misdemeanour.