Whether or not to be injected with the coronavirus vaccine will always be an individual choice. It will never be mandatory because that would break stated and documented medical ethics based on international human rights laws around “informed consent”.
So those who don’t want the vaccine can just quietly turn away all offers. You don’t have to go down the route of unverifiable conspiracy theories about foetal parts in vaccines, or that Bill Gates wants to put a computer chip in it or to kill the whole world, to make your point. It’s a losing wicket, anyway, because it will just make you an easy target for those insisting that only “swivel-eyed, tin foil hat-wearing conspiracy theorists” are against vaccinations.
We don’t have to go there. Stick to basic principles which no-one can deny and that are verifiable. It is about the right to only take into our own bodies that which we choose to take in. It is a fundamental human right, enshrined in law. We make our own choices about our own bodies.
This is an extract from consent to treatment protocols of the NHS:
Consent to treatment means a person must give permission before they receive any type of medical treatment, test or examination.
This must be done on the basis of an explanation by a clinician.
Consent from a patient is needed regardless of the procedure, whether it’s a physical examination, organ donation or something else.
The principle of consent is an important part of medical ethics and international human rights law.
For consent to be valid, it must be voluntary and informed, and the person consenting must have the capacity to make the decision.
The meaning of these terms are:
voluntary – the decision to either consent or not to consent to treatment must be made by the person, and must not be influenced by pressure from medical staff, friends or family
informed – the person must be given all of the information about what the treatment involves, including the benefits and risks, whether there are reasonable alternative treatments, and what will happen if treatment does not go ahead
capacity – the person must be capable of giving consent, which means they understand the information given to them and can use it to make an informed decision
International human rights
But informed consent with any medical procedure such as a vaccination is not just the rule in the British NHS. It an international human right and here is an extract from the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights:
Article 6 – Consent 1. Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information. The consent should, where appropriate, be express and may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without disadvantage or prejudice.
Notice “without disadvantage or prejudice” which answers any worries about vaccinations being used as a Chinese-style social control measure. In other words, if shops stop you coming in because you are not vaccinated, or travel companies stop you flying, they will be breaking this law.
The powers-that-be know all this, of course. After all, they wrote these rules. So where they have made considerable investment in the production of a vaccine, there will also be considerable investment in getting us to be their consumers. They can’t make a law about it, so their efforts will come in the form of media and peer pressure, to the point of bullying and harrassment.
People you thought were your friends will suddenly turn around and accuse you of being selfish and responsible for the deaths of millions, unless you agree to be injected with the vaccine. However, if you voted for Brexit or Trump, you’re probably used to all that, and so it will be like water off a duck’s back.
Just politely point them in the direction of verifiable international human rights. They’re usually the sorts of people who never stop banging on about the rights and freedoms of others, so they won’t be able to argue with that.