1nvest wrote:But to force people into having to take the jab?! What if there are issues down the road, mass commonality rather than the diversity of individuals being left to make their own choice.
These things are never black and white, the answer will vary depending on the balance of risks. If we were vaccinating against Ebola then it would make sense to be cautious and only vax the people who were likely to go to west Africa. If we were vaccinating against a relatively minor ailment like athlete's foot, you would wait a long time to see if there were any long-term complications. I'm not saying we should take vaccines willy-nilly.
But the balance of risks is different for Covid. It's not like Ebola, you are pretty much certain to be exposed to it if you go about your normal life in the UK. And the result of being infected is far more serious than athlete's foot. There's probably been too much focus on deaths, we should perhaps look at it more like polio as something that causes serious long-term disability in a lot of people, (and by the way also kills some of them). I've got long Covid and it's not nice, although I've got a pretty mild version. Even stuff like the loss of smell has effects you wouldn't think about, like I'm not safe in the kitchen because I can't smell gas or burning.
And Covid is very transmissible, which means it can transmit even in populations where there is high levels of immunity. It looks like that unconstrained, delta has an R approaching 6. If immunisation (by jab or infection) is 100% effective, then herd immunity comes when 1-(1/R), 83% are immunised. Since it's not 100% effective then you're probably looking at needing 85-90% of the total population immunised (including all kids). Since there's a chunk of people who can't be vaccinated for various reasons and who rely entirely on the rest of the population being jabbed, then delta means we're near or at the limit where we just don't have the luxury of people opting out of jabs.
We're at war with this thing, and during wartime governments can do all sorts of things that wouldn't normally be doable, like conscription. About half the British soldiers in WWI were conscripts, and if they faced the same risk as the average for the whole army then they had around a 8.5-9% chance of death and an additional 19% risk of injury. But they still went to the trenches, to do their bit for their country.
Whereas you're not prepared to do your bit for your country, because of a 1 in a million risk?