That " Vaccine " Question !

 It seems that we are just days away from the first vaccinations against the coronavirus becoming available for public distribution.  The aim of world government will be to get a mass inoculation underway to stop the spread of this disease and bring the economy back to normal.

Developing a vaccine has been a rush job and because of the urgency the testing that applies to all new drugs has been modified and the drugs that have emerged offers a modified protection rate.  Just where and how that protection may fail has not been explained in terms the public can understand.

Most sensible people will cheerfully take the jab and receive the protection that is promised, but it is inevitable that an anti-vaccine movement will emerge.   The power of social media will come into play and the same unfounded claims will probably be made that are stopping many parents from protecting their children from childhood diseases that are often fatal.

Perhaps the first big question is whether public inoculation is optional or whether it can be legally demanded.  Initially, there is the expectation of a rush on centres and we will probably have some form of priority applied.  Heading the list will be aid workers and the elderly, offering protection to both the people likely to come into contact with the disease and those most likely to become its victims.

The big test will come when we move to mass inoculation by way of walk in centres available to the public.  It is essential that we record accurate information on who has received the vaccine because the coronavirus will linger in many parts of the world for years to come and overseas travel may require vaccine status to be listed on travellers passports.

Asking for proof of identity details will slow the process when the aim is to achieve herd protection in the early stages of the vaccine programme, but that information will be essential if we are to eradicate this disease from Australia.  Unless the Australian population is fully protected we are unlikely to receive any inward tourists or migrants who do not offer proof that they have been vaccinated.

This rush to develop a vaccine has pushed the civil liberties issue into the background and yet it provokes a lively debate across most sections of Australia.  We have people who avoid using the local water supply because it contains fluoride and yet some parts of the country have natural fluoride in the water that protects the teeth of citizens.

Usually, adding fluoride to protect teeth is decided by a local referendum, but some people refuse to accept a majority verdict and that same right of refusal is claimed by the rebels who refuse to have children vaccinated.  In many cases they are convinced that other dreaded medical conditions are a direct result of the vaccines and no amount of medical proof will change that conviction.

It is inevitable that this coronavirus vaccine will fall short of total herd immunity because of those who will decline the vaccine.   This is a civil liberties issue.  We can tolerate a small percentage of dissenters within a herd mentality grouping, but that may not be possible if future disease outbreaks result in mass fatalities.

Perhaps an opportune time to decided whether vaccinations are optional - or a requirement for holding citizenship in this country  !