Showing posts with label vaccine. Show all posts
Showing posts with label vaccine. Show all posts

Friday, May 07, 2021

Vaccine Mandate Musings

Should vaccine passports, or vaccination itself, be mandatory? I can only share my opinions, which are conflicted. Here are my thoughts:

Because of federal medical privacy laws, vaccine passports would have to be issued only on request of the patient/person waiving such privacy, so disclosure is in one sense inherently controlled by the individual and would be voluntary. Additionally, the state and the CDC are routinely notified of your COVID-19 vaccination, so it is not hidden from them; governments already know if you’ve been vaccinated. Another argument is that apps can track your location, but of course location tracking can be disabled for any app or phone, and mandates can also limit tracking to when the app is opened. Many people post their vaccine status on social media and then inconsistently worry about privacy after sharing it with massive companies that have access to their personal data.

Private companies can already mandate vaccines, including medical and nursing home staff, or college campuses (which now offer remote classes), and require masks and distancing unless such private company requirements are banned by law. Some people may want to show these verifiable proofs and find them useful; for example to travel overseas without needing quarantines or invasive testing.  

There are also issues of whether to restrict private companies from offering incentives for people to show vaccination proof to open cruises, concerts, airline or restaurant seating, etc. A government mandate prohibiting private businesses from doing things that are perceived as helping their sales recover faster and protect public health can also be perceived as anti-capitalist and anti-libertarian. The protection of public health often conflicts with normal civil rights in troubled times; both are mandates of governments. In this case, the government in prohibiting private businesses from using customer safety as a competitive selling point is different from a government mandating essential safety practices. This is actually the opposite of asserting a state mandate to protect public health; by legislating a government monopoly on whether/how to do that, rather than trusting the private sector, as most conservatives would normally prefer. 

As businesspeople, if you felt safer during an epidemic or pandemic by requiring masking and distancing, would you want the state prohibiting you from doing what makes you feel safer or from doing what makes your customers feel safer? In Illinois, the state has said it won’t require a vaccine passport, but did not prohibit local governments or private businesses from doing so, and Chicago may require them short-term for concerts and full restaurant capacity so businesses can reopen faster while protecting public health and safety. Is a business offering incentives discriminating against ineligible customers, or is it a justifiable practice; similar to offering private events or other perks for preferred customers?

I know this is more nuanced than social media and news outlets present the issues to us, but there are both plusses and minuses to government mandates and vaccine passports/proof, and winners and losers. 

It also doesn’t address the issue of some people who can’t get vaccinated: the young, people with autoimmune diseases or other medical conditions, those who have had serious reactions to previous vaccines; even pregnancy is an unknown safety factor. Vaccine mandates without reasonable exemptions are going to harm some people; maybe far fewer than might get seriously ill or die from the disease if everyone was unvaccinated, but they would needlessly sacrifice some people for the perceived greater good instead of fine-tuning to make vaccinations even safer. Vaccines aren’t perfect; why pretend that they are?

My problem with routine vaccinations is that there is no willingness or incentive to track a minority that may be harmed by vaccines in order to make them safer by identifying people or traits that are unsuitable for a particular vaccine. The ingredients are also a problem for some; including mercury and aluminum, preservatives, allergens, and other chemicals. Why is there no good study on the safety of the complete vaccination program of some 16 vaccines; some with additional boosters? Why are vaccine critics quickly attacked as anti-science, rather than honestly assessing their claims? Why are calls to fine-tune the vaccination program to make it even safer quickly shut down as anti-vaxxers? I appreciate the elimination of TB, smallpox, measles, etc. But why ignore a minority for whom some vaccines - or some ingredients - may be contraindicated to reduce the criticism? 

Sorry, but I seem to have more questions than answers. 


Tuesday, October 27, 2009

How Nutrition Affects Swine Flu (Influenza) and Immunity

Why are the Public Health authorities silent on the role of nutrition to protect us during an official national health emergency? Do they not know, or simply not care? Is either answer acceptable to citizens concerned about their health and wanting to get practical/real/fair/impartial information that we can utilize to help protect our families? Here's what the experts are not telling us:

  • Did you know that if you had the seasonal flu vaccine last year it may make you more vulnerable to the swine flu this year? Vaccines create antibodies that actually make you more susceptible to other organisms, like viruses and bacteria. (Four Canadian studies reported by CBC News, 9/23/09)
  • Did you know that side effects of vaccines can be minimized if there are adequate levels of vitamin D in the person? (Epidemic influenza and vitamin D. Epidemiol Infect. 2006 Dec;134(6):1129-40. Review.)
  • Did you know that a lack of vitamin D makes people far more likely to have respiratory infections? (On the epidemiology of influenza. Virol J. 2008 Feb 25;5:29. Review.) Did you know that the virus itself can become less aggressive and less prone to mutating into more dangerous forms if a person has adequate levels of nutrients, especially antioxidants? (Host nutritional status: the neglected virulence factor. Trends Microbiol. 2004 Sep;12(9):417-23. Review.)
  • Did you know that antioxidants, like selenium, not only reduce our vulnerability to getting influenza but also reduce the chances that it will progress into pneumonia! (Host nutritional status: the neglected virulence factor. Trends Microbiol. 2004 Sep;12(9):417-23. Review.)

Saturday, January 03, 2009

What's in Your Vaccine?

This link takes you to the website of the the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/additives.htm "Common substances found in vaccines include: Aluminum gels or salts of aluminum which are added as adjuvants to help the vaccine stimulate a better response to the vaccine. Adjuvants help promote an earlier, more potent response, and more persistent immune response to the vaccine. Antibiotics which are added to some vaccines to prevent the growth of germs (bacteria) during production and storage of the vaccine. Egg protein is found in influenza and yellow fever vaccines, which are prepared using chicken eggs. Ordinarily, persons who are able to eat eggs or egg products safely can receive these vaccines. Formaldehyde is used to inactivate bacterial products for toxoid vaccines, (these are vaccines that use an inactive bacterial toxin to produce immunity.) It is also used to kill unwanted viruses and bacteria that might contaminate the vaccine during production. Monosodium glutamate (MSG) and 2-phenoxy-ethanol which are used as stabilizers in a few vaccines to help the vaccine remain unchanged when the vaccine is exposed to heat, light, acidity, or humidity. Thimerosal is a mercury-containing preservative that is added to vials of vaccine that contain more than one dose to prevent contamination and growth of potentially harmful bacteria."