Hacker News Reader

The only people they would need to protect are other unvaccinated people who have made the choice to take whatever risk there is in going unvaccinated. The choice to not be vaccinated involves knowing that you may contact the virus from someone else and may become very ill or die. Attempting to protect someone by taking away their ability to make that choice is equivalent to removing the option to eat enough food to become obese.

View on HN

> Attempting to protect someone by taking away their ability to make that choice is equivalent to removing the option to eat enough food to become obese.

We do that to obese people already. It's called a diet. Some of them even go farther than mere "prescriptions" but with psychological tricks to keep people on track. Also, really, comparing obesity to COVID19 is an apples to oranges thing. Obesity is not even viral.

What you're missing is that in all these measures that seem so controversial (lockdowns, vaccination campaigns) preserving an individual's life/health is secondary to the main goal, a means to an end. The main goal is to not overwhelm the public healthcare infra.

No one cares if you want to go to a concert when you're ill but when that illness has the potential to strain public health resources, then that's a different story entirely.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com