Prime
Why vaccines should not be mandatory
A man gets a Covid-19 jab from a UPDF soldier. PHOTO/FILE
What you need to know:
- Disclaimer from the author: This article is meant to stir a scientific debate on whether mandatory vaccination is feasible and is not a campaign against Covid- 19 vaccination.
Covid- 19 vaccine mandates have become a hotly contested issue. According to some scientists, mandating vaccines for every living and walking person is as of now not well thought. They argue that with lots of experience in dealing with patients who do not follow guidelines, it is better to win more bees with honey than fire.
Below are some reasons why we may need to re-think before passing mandatory Covid- 19 vaccination laws.
It may not be well grounded in science. It is essential that decisions during pandemics are science-driven. Definitely, people who choose not to get vaccinated are making a poor health decision at their own individual risk. However, they are unlikely to pose a public health threat to those already immune (have voluntarily taken the jab) but to themselves.
Would we be harsher to people making worse health choices to smoke tobacco in public or not to sleep under a mosquito net?
More than 100,000 Ugandans die annually from malaria, yet we don’t have mandatory public health requirements to save those lives. Let us encourage vaccination rather than activate personal liberty wars.
Secondly, the Covid- 19 vaccines have proved to be effective in reducing cases but are not yet proven to completely prevent one from acquiring the infection.
I wish that the Ministry of Health would also tell us more about people who are contracting Covid-19 even after getting a second jab. For instance, Her Majesty, the Queen of England was reported to have tested positive for Covid- 19 even after being vaccinated. Since, clinical trials were not powered sufficiently to detect such rare events, we would want to know more about why people acquire Covid- 19 even after getting the jab, before making blanket recommendations.
Researching these events is important when issuing broad laws about mandatory vaccination of entire populations including healthy children and youth who already have an infinitely small risk of dying from Covid- 19.
There are legal implications. Pro mandatory vaccination activists say everyone has a fundamental right to be protected from the spread of the disease which is why it may be prudent to forcefully vaccinate people to protect the population from an infectious disease.
Yet as already argued, one refusing to take the Covid- 19 jab may not imply a health risk to another who is already immune after voluntarily taking the jab.
On the other hand, those against mandatory vaccination argue that it is a total violation of human rights (violate one’s ability to determine medical treatments of their choice). Informed consent is a well-established principle in clinical practice.
Further, although clots after vaccination are very rare, what may happen of one is forced to take a jab and God-forbid dies of a clot? Thus rights from both view-points may not be absolute, and may require legal interpretation by the Constitutional Court. Against such backgrounds, mandatory vaccination has already met resistance in some countries such as Canada, Italy, Croatia and the Netherlands.
Rather than forcing the vaccine on people, or copying and pasting policies from else-where, policy makers should try to understand why people might be hesitant to take the jab, and focus efforts on changing minds.
Government imposed mandates feel inherently sinister, even when the intentions behind them are well-meaning which is why even the World Health Organization has cautioned against implementing Covid- 19 vaccine mandates.
Disclaimer from the author: This article is meant to stir a scientific debate on whether mandatory vaccination is feasible and is not a campaign against Covid- 19 vaccination.
Benjamin Mudope, Researcher Health Policies
