This is I believe exactly what we need to understand... I figure we should be learning from the immunisation roll-out experience and then working out ongoing best practice as we go forward.Isn't there some debate as to whether it reduces/eliminates your transmisibility?
Or whether it just stops you alone suffering, and nothing more?
So if it is established to enable the world to get this virus under control (even with some manageable/bearable side effects) then I would think we’ll have some more certainty as we go.
I don’t believe this is about altruism either. By the time we factor in the devastating social and extraordinary economic costs of Covid how can we not get that doing everything possible to get this virus under control ASAP is our most important current imperative.
Given the loss of life and devastating impacts on health systems and the absolutely crippling costs to countries, to business and employment I won’t be surprised if the immunisation (if proved effective) may just become a matter of compliance or that people with immunisation certificates get different restriction guidelines in a lockdown.
I’d certainly imagine possible variable tiers of measures and restrictions for health guidelines with different self isolation requirements, potential limitations on workplace participation, even varying general movement and travel during lockdowns might even logically factor in between the various immunised and non-immunised populations.
I don’t believe as we go forwards and get a proper more measured understanding of the efficacy of Covid immunisation that personal choice will necessarily always be an option that won’t come with it also with some sizeable constraints. These may become important factors in whether people get immunised or not. It’s a moving target.
Last edited: