2022年5月28日土曜日

ワクチン接種推進の元凶たる本の勇者たちが政治家への責任転換の用意を始める


 The unintended consequences of COVID-19 vaccine policy: why mandates, passports and restrictions may cause more harm than good

  1. Kevin Bardosh1,2,
  2. Alex de Figueiredo3,
  3. Rachel Gur-Arie4,5,
  4. Euzebiusz Jamrozik5,6,
  5. James Doidge7,8,
  6. Trudo Lemmens9,
  7. Salmaan Keshavjee10,
  8. Janice E Graham11,
  9. Stefan Baral12
  1. Correspondence to Dr Kevin Bardosh; bardosh_kevin@hotmail.com

Abstract

Vaccination policies have shifted dramatically during COVID-19 with the rapid emergence of population-wide vaccine mandates, domestic vaccine passports and differential restrictions based on vaccination status. While these policies have prompted ethical, scientific, practical, legal and political debate, there has been limited evaluation of their potential unintended consequences. Here, we outline a comprehensive set of hypotheses for why these policies may ultimately be counterproductive and harmful. Our framework considers four domains: (1) behavioural psychology, (2) politics and law, (3) socioeconomics, and (4) the integrity of science and public health. While current vaccines appear to have had a significant impact on decreasing COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality burdens, we argue that current mandatory vaccine policies are scientifically questionable and are likely to cause more societal harm than good. Restricting people’s access to work, education, public transport and social life based on COVID-19 vaccination status impinges on human rights, promotes stigma and social polarisation, and adversely affects health and well-being. Current policies may lead to a widening of health and economic inequalities, detrimental long-term impacts on trust in government and scientific institutions, and reduce the uptake of future public health measures, including COVID-19 vaccines as well as routine immunisations. Mandating vaccination is one of the most powerful interventions in public health and should be used sparingly and carefully to uphold ethical norms and trust in institutions. We argue that current COVID-19 vaccine policies should be re-evaluated in light of the negative consequences that we outline. Leveraging empowering strategies based on trust and public consultation, and improving healthcare services and infrastructure, represent a more sustainable approach to optimising COVID-19 vaccination programmes and, more broadly, the health and well-being of the public.


Summary box

  • Mandatory COVID-19 vaccine policies have been used around the world during the COVID-19 pandemic to increase vaccination rates. But these policies have provoked considerable social and political resistance, suggesting that they have unintended harmful consequences and may not be ethical, scientifically justified, and effective.

  • We outline a comprehensive set of hypotheses for why current COVID-19 vaccine policies may prove to be both counterproductive and damaging to public health. Our framework synthesizes insights from behavioural psychology (reactance, cognitive dissonance, stigma, and distrust), politics and law (effects on civil liberties, polarization, and global governance), socio-economics (effects on inequality, health system capacity and social wellbeing) and the integrity of science and public health (the erosion of public health ethics and regulatory oversight).

  • Our analysis strongly suggests that mandatory COVID-19 vaccine policies have had damaging effects on public trust, vaccine confidence, political polarization, human rights, inequities and social wellbeing. We question the effectiveness and consequences of coercive vaccination policy in pandemic response and urge the research community and policymakers to return to non-discriminatory, trust-based public health approaches.


Conclusion

The adoption of new vaccination policies has provoked backlash, resistance and polarisation. It is important to emphasise that these policies are not viewed as ‘incentives’ or ‘nudges’ by substantial proportions of populations25–28 41 45 especially in marginalised, underserved or low COVID-19-risk groups. Denying individuals education, livelihoods, medical care or social life unless they get vaccinated—especially in light of the limitations with the current vaccines—is arguably in tension with constitutional and bioethical principles, especially in liberal democracies.30–33 While public support consolidated behind these policies in many countries, we should acknowledge that ethical frameworks were designed to ensure that rights and liberties are respected even during public health emergencies.

Vaccination policies can be an important tool in the promotion of the right to health, but they need to be proportionate and designed to achieve a clearly defined goal. Some of those supporting current restrictions based on vaccination status116 seem to accept too easily that these measures are indeed proportionate; that they are not more restrictive than necessary; that they are effective in preventing transmission and protecting the healthcare system from collapse; and that there are no options available other than punitive mandates, passports and segregated restrictions. As illustrated above, we believe that current vaccine policies have failed on these fronts and are no longer fit for purpose.

We encourage social and behavioural scientists, bioethicists, epidemiologists, legal scholars, and others to assess the benefits and harms of COVID-19 vaccination policies, along with wider open multidisciplinary discussion and debate. Empirical assessments may or may not validate the concerns presented in this paper—but their generation is critical in engagement with politicians, scientists, and organisations to reconsider current policies affecting those who remain unvaccinated as well as those who vaccinated due to threats and pressure. COVID-19 will not be the last public health emergency and it remains critical that we understand the reasons these approaches were adopted and provide robust evidence to improve future policymaking in times of health emergencies.135 If not, the proclivity for mandates, passports, restrictions, fines and punishments is likely to become an accepted policy response for the next pandemic irrespective of whether such policies are truly effective, ethical and socially harmful.

If current policies are to continue, public health-associated bureaucracies and society will have to increase coercion to address current and future resistance and, in the process, come to leverage strategies more consistent with policing than public health. We may also see political forces double down and use people who have chosen not to get vaccinated as a collective, psychological and political tool to scapegoat and reinforce a false notion of safety among vaccinated people as they yearn to resume social and economic life. Policymakers should reflect on the necessity of enforcing what is essentially a new two-tier, segregated social system and how this will affect different social groups now and into the future—behaviourally, politically and socioeconomically—as well as the impact of such policies on the integrity of science and public health itself.

There are other options to address the pandemic and it is not too late to return to non-coercive public health measures, including pro-social language and community leadership for vaccination, especially to protect high-risk groups.7 Future investments in public health capacity, especially health providers who build relationships of trust working in communities, will be essential to engage in positive reforms. Improving data transparency, media independence and broad public debate and scrutiny about COVID-19 vaccine policies will also be essential to maintain population trust, help people better understand the risks and benefits of the continued use of current vaccines, and to inform research on improvements and future policies.

https://gh.bmj.com/content/7/5/e008684


なあに、もうすぐ勇者どもが隠し通せないぐらいのペースで死に始める。

ワクチンを自ら接種したアフォな推進派の本の勇者も政治家も医療関係者など権威主義者どもはほぼ全員死ぬ

そして

真のレイシスト=権威主義者=ナチス 

が滅び、

ワクチン接種を拒否した陰謀論者、

即ち、

非権威主義者が生き残る(爆wwwwwww 

8 件のコメント:

匿名 さんのコメント...

ざまぁぁぁぁぁぁぁぁぁぁぁぁぁぁぁ!!!!!!!!!!!wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

匿名 さんのコメント...

で、でたーwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

俺は悪くねぇ!!wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

https://dic.pixiv.net/a/%E4%BF%BA%E3%81%AF%E6%82%AA%E3%81%8F%E3%81%AD%E3%81%87%21

匿名 さんのコメント...

ワクチン勇者の皆様が急速に大量に★になられると世の中混乱しそうですね。
どこからか権威主義者が湧いてきて★になった空席を埋めていかなければいいですが。
アフリカはワクチン接種率低いし、出生率がめちゃくちゃ高いから 食糧危機くらいではびくともしないような。
そんなアフリカから 英語で高等教育受けた非権威主義のブラックがディアスポラとなって世界中に溢れ出したら 確かにブラックの地位は上がりそうな。
ついでに ウクライナと韓国の出生率が異様に低いのに驚いた。これならワクなどしなくてもそのうち自然消滅しそう。
人口抑制は教育という洗脳道具を使ってそれなりの時間かけてやるのが良さげ。中国は一人っ子政策やりすぎてふたりっ子政策に戻したみたいに効果あるし。
日本も百年前は 十人兄弟などそれ程珍しくもなかったけど、今や人口減少に転じてる。

匿名 さんのコメント...

まぁ急に人類の数が半分になった所で、
隕石が落ちた訳でもなければ地球に生物がすめない環境になったわけでもなし、
進撃の巨人やらマヴラブのような人類を捕食する謎生物が大量にいるわけでもなし、
ほっときゃヤリまくって食料あるだけ食って勝手に増えますからwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww
急に増えたら増えたで教育やら家庭環境へ目が行き届かなくってつかえねー生産性のないヴァカが増えちゃいますからねwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww
適度に少ない方が地球環境のリソースの無駄使いがなくていいんすよwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

匿名 さんのコメント...

大勝利!大勝利!大勝利!大勝利!大勝利!大勝利!大勝利!大勝利!大勝利!大勝利!大勝利!大勝利!
wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

匿名 さんのコメント...

研究者って頭悪いっすね、ある意味wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

先の展開が読めないっていうかwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

だからビジネスに向かないんすけどねwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

匿名 さんのコメント...

> 研究者って頭悪いっすね、ある意味wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww
>
> 先の展開が読めないっていうかwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

研究者がトンチンカンなのは何故なのか?
理由は割と簡単で

専  門  性  が  高  す  ぎ  る

これに尽きるんですな
専門家は必要なようで専門性が行き過ぎると専門家同士で争いが始まって元々1つの分野が分離してしまうんですねーw
大日本帝国のHENTAI技術と同じで飛行機作ってるはずなのにエンジン作ってる奴、機体作ってる奴、翼作ってる奴、
その他諸々で主張しあって開発が頓挫してしまうみたいな話な訳ですwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwこれは現代ニポンの製品開発その他諸々でも全く同じ事が言えますねwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww
更にカネを管理するお役所気質な財務やら、コンプライアンス破る事は絶対に許さないマン法務やら、予算はケチるけど性能の低下や他社に敗北する事は絶対に許さないオエライサンまでJoinして計画カタストロフ一直線になる訳ですwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww
これを防ぐには優秀なマネージャーやジェネラルが必要な訳ですが、エクストリーム飛び降り選手権が日常茶飯事の中間管理職にそんな人材は日本にはおらん訳ですwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww
海外でもあんまりいないと思いますけどねwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww
反GOD精神の人間は基本面倒事は下へ下へ丸投げして知らん顔なんでwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

匿名 さんのコメント...

シリコンバレー研究者年収億ワクチン未接種という現実。

コメントを投稿