There are two theories about Scott Morrison: too smart by half, or not that smart at all. In a prime minister, during a pandemic, either is less than we need.
So it doesn’t matter why Morrison decided to set the hares running on mandatory vaccination for COVID-19; what matters is that he did, and now we can all enjoy many months of mindless stupidity reminiscent of the climate wars.
The PM, perhaps over-excited by the ease with which his announcement of an agreement (which doesn’t exist) to secure the COVID-19 vaccine (which hopefully will exist) had drawn the media’s focus away from his aged care debacle, went the extra mile and said that he’d be making the vaccination “as mandatory as possible”.
Later the same day, to really underline his credibility, Morrison said the exact opposite: nobody will be forced to be vaccinated for COVID-19. No doubt his earlier statement had been trending poorly in QAnon Facebook groups, hence the precipitous retreat. The damage, however, had been done.
Pauline Hanson, sniffing an opportunity to be angry on breakfast television, was out of her sarcophagus at full speed, declaring to the world that she wouldn’t be getting vaccinated, due to some incoherent mix of conspiracy theories she picked up on Reddit.
We know what happens next: the anti-vaxx story line, already quite a fave with the media, will be blessed with limitless airtime for months to come.
The legal position is straightforward. The government could force us all to be vaccinated. Vaccination is one of the many things that can be imposed on Australians, by force if necessary, in the circumstances that have been declared with respect to COVID-19, under the Biosecurity Act. Fact is, the authorities can under that law do absolutely anything in the name of public health at the moment, short of shooting us.
However, that is not going to happen, and it’s worth exploring why. Bearing in mind that vaccination is ineffective in defeating a communicable disease unless almost everyone submits.
There is no history of mandatory vaccination in Australia (Indigenous people aside — there’s definitely a history of not asking them first). There has been, however, a traditionally strong culture of voluntary compliance. The immunisation rate among five-year-olds, for all the standard jabs we get as kids, sits at just under the targeted 95%. Famously, polio was eradicated in Australia by vaccination (we were declared polio free in 2000), as was small pox in the entire world by 1977.
Conventionally, there has been little difficulty for governments in convincing populations that vaccination is in their personal interests, making the wider rationale of “doing it for everyone” largely a feel-good add-on rather than an actual motivator.
In recent years, the anti-vaxx movement has grown out of its tiny anti-establishment roots, mainly in the US, tying itself to the broader personal sovereignty cause which is currently fighting an end-times war against face masks.
To date in Australia it’s been only an annoyance, having no material effect on immunisation rates. COVID-19, however, promises to provide a lightning rod for the lunatics. Hanson’s early grab for the amoral leadership of the no-to-COVID-vaccine tribe tells us that.
There is a legitimate question to be asked, about the intersection of human rights – specifically, the right of governance over our own bodies – and the imperatives of public health. Under Australian law, there’s no debate at all, because we have no such legally protected right and the government’s power to forcibly vaccinate us against COVID-19 would be upheld by the courts as a matter of course.
It seems highly unlikely the government would force the vaccine on conscientious objectors. This group already includes senior religious leaders who have ethical concerns about a vaccine developed using cells from electively aborted foetuses, as is the Oxford University vaccine announced in the government’s “deal” last week.
That’s not to say that there are no limits to the power. The authorities vested with the powers to declare public health emergencies and add diseases to the schedule of mass death threats, which then trigger the extraordinary powers to do whatever’s necessary (as in wartime), have to exercise those powers with rationality, reason and honesty. The law of necessary means isn’t an open ticket to capriciousness.
None of that will be seriously tested in COVID-19, because there’s no legitimate argument to be had about the reality of its threat or the necessity of rolling out a vaccine as soon as that exists.
Nevertheless, arguments will be raised and loudly championed on Facebook, then loyally amplified out of all proportion by the mainstream media. These will include Pauline’s theory that most of the people who’ve died from COVID-19 actually didn’t, the inevitable “the vaccine isn’t safe” claims she’s already flagged, not to mention Bill Gates, 5G and the “pizzagate” paedophile cannibal ring.
The medical authorities are hoping that that stays at its normal level of background noise. As National Centre for Immunisation Research and Surveillance chair Professor Kristine Macartney said, “we know that disinformation isn’t listened to by the majority of the Australian people”.
We can take the Australian population’s overwhelming compliance with COVID-19 safety rules and restrictions as evidence that she’s right. However, it would really help if Scott Morrison didn’t say another word, because what he’s said on the subject so far has already done plenty of harm.
I really despair of any rational discussion about vaccination. You seem to have on the one hand the group, which Michael appears to be a member, who blindly accept that vaccines are the only effective preventive measure against bacteria and viruses, and must be safe, effective and economic because, well, their vaccines, and vaccines are science, so that must be true, because it is. Or you have your typical person, painted as an ANTIVAXXER, who has no brain and believes in any number of conspiracy theories.
But the truth is more complex. Michael is just plain wrong when he says nearly all the population needs to be vaccinated for it to be effective. What percentage of the population need to be vaccinated will depend on the R0 for the pathogen, the degree to which there is natural immunity in the community, and the effectiveness of the vaccine. For measles, with a very high R0, you do need most of the population to be vaccinated even if there is a reasonably high natural immunity. As far as we can see about COVID-19 it’s R0 is quite low, so a much lower proportion of the population needs to be vaccinated. On the other side of the coin a vaccine that is not highly effective, ie. like flu vaccine where for a significant proportion of vaccinated people it doesn’t work, would suggest you need to vaccinated a lot greater proportion of the population for the vaccination program to work. I’ve seen one estimate that if an effective vaccine is developed for COVID 19 only strong 60% of the population would need to be vaccinated. One also seen it suggested that a COVID vaccine might only work for several months, requiring frequent re-vaccinations for it to be effective. There are just lots of unknowns at this time.
More importantly, vaccination programs are just one of the tools available to combat a pandemic. Sure vaccination programs have extremely large commercial profit driven enterprises, Big Pharma, pushing them. The question is whether there is a bias towards vaccines against other measures, which may be both cheaper and more effective, because of commercial pressures. For example, would maintaining international border quarantine, physical distancing, hand washing and mask wearing, or other measures achieve better results for less cost? It could be like clean potable water and sewers instead of typhoid and cholera vaccines, or mosquito nets and mosquito control instead of the non-existent malaria vaccine. It may be that with COVID the best approach might be a combination of measures, for example vaccines for people that work or live in high risk areas, such as security guards, public transport operators etc, and other measures for people say in less densely populated areas.
And then we have the sceptics who suggest that somehow a Russian or Chinese developed vaccine would be unsafe and ineffective. And yet a vaccine developed by a Western Big Pharma company with serious record of fines for misconduct and bribing officials, seeking Immunity from legal action, would never falsify research and testing results, nor make mistakes,errors and shortcuts in the haste of the current pandemic.
So the question whether a mandatory vaccination program is necessary is moot, because there is a paucity of information. This should raise very serious concerns for everyone involved in vaccination programs because it brings vaccination into disrepute. And this is one of the reasons why Morrison should be condemned for his vaccination dead cat aimed at directing attention away from his failures which are federal responsibilities on border protection, quarantine and aged care.
And now to the conspiracy theories. I would have thought one of the principles that ought to underpin any move to make vaccination mandatory is that the public benefit clearly and unequivocally outweighs the loss of personal body autonomy, it would be in effect a state sanctioned assault on a person after all. In the absence of information, the commercial interests at stake, the personnel connections between Morrison’s office and the Big Pharma company in question, and that company’s record in unethical and unlawful practices, it seems to me that that is where journalistic interests should be going, not just chanting a mindless dumb anti-science chant: vaccination good, antivaxxers mad.
Yeah, that we are debating this at all when we don’t even have it ready and tested is a bit much.
AMA isn’t supporting no jab no pay for the covid vaccine, nor enforcement under the biosecurity act to force it on people, because they don’t have the same confidence in the safety as they normally would.
Imagine the backlash should the vaccine come out, not be a magical anti covid potion and also give a non trivial amount of people serious side effects?
It could also be completely safe, but is anyone actually willing to take that bet and make it mandatory for millions of people? To make the government own every injection and the results?
Basically medicine as culture war. Morrison and Hanson virtue signalling at us full force and over what? A vaccine we don’t have yet? What a world.
Thanks for adding a note of rationality into a discussion that seems to have degenerated into name-calling rather than informed debate. There are valid reasons for unease about the axiom of vaccine as panacea, and I look forward to competent journalism about these. The recently released data by the CDC in the USA regarding the extent of infection of vaccinated people, and increasing advice about the need for mask-wearing by vaccinated people to slow infection spread are examples that deserve more comment, instead of increasing barbs that anyone interested in actual data about the effects or efficacy of vaccines is – by definition – “stupid”.
Michael – your two options re Morrison’s intelligence are not only not mutually exclusive, but arguably entirely consistent. People who are too smart by half are often not smart at all. Morrison is your archetype.
Another one of your articles that panders to the hysterical pro vax, pro mask, pro lockdown, pro anything marxist commentators here on cky. I have noticed regularly that your articles are fearful to upset the comments section in case they give you a bad wrap. Grow some b-lls and do some real research and study Prof Udi Qimrom dept of Microbiology and Immunology Tel Aviv University and see what he says re covid/vaccines and those occultic subjection masks.
Are those bulls kosher?
Bad rap.
I’m no expert (not even close) on immunology/virology/epidemiology, but I do agree with Professor Qimron’s observations about the perils of fear and hysteria. We are very much in that zone at the moment.
I’m old enough to have grown up with the non disposable/boil ’em again needles/syringes/vaccines in Australia..i’ve had plenty of jabs..I don’t remember many. if any, anti-vaxxers around .No Marxists much on the ground either, pushing/plunging the vaccines..When/how on earth did the anti-vax idiocy start in Australia ? It’s bizarrely laughable that it even gets a look in, or a mention, on the radar. I didn’t even come across it when my children were growing up..Decades of working in & around schools, and hardly an anti-science nutter crossed my path..
I read an article by Prof Udi Qimron entitled ‘History Will Judge the Hysteria’. He mentioned the benefits of ‘chains of immunity’ and ‘an appropriate immunity depth’. But he doesn’t mention at all the fact that the length and strength of ‘immunity’ gained by being infected is unknown. He’s in favour of developing ‘herd immunity’, which is a fantasy. Researchers had already posited the prospect of immunity possibly lasting no more than 3 or 4 months, based on anti-bodies found in recovered infectees. Today, there are reports of the first definite case of a Hong Kong man being infected for a second time, four months after the first infection, with a new strain of the virus. I suggest you do some ‘real research’ and read about this. Meanwhile, Qimron’s presumed optimism regarding ‘immunity’ and complete neglect of lasting health effects in survivors make his piece practically worthless.
So you are an immunology/virology/epidemiology expert, mr chilly ( andrew ) winds?…and Prof Udi Qimron knows nothing. I’ll just give him a quick call and let him know the new Australian virologist/immunologist expert, mr chilly winds, said herd immunity is a fantasy. Me thinks you blow too much wind.
I wonder what comes after andrew?..hmm, not sure. Probably come to me shortly.
Compulsory treatment is nothing new in this country – TB during the 50/60, chlorine & fluoride in water, folic acid in bread.
Considering the damage many people do to their bodies just ingesting most of the “food” in the supermarkets their capacity to make a sound judgment on their health is suspect, to put it mildly.
I’m more concerned about the alleged efficacy -, in a previous life, on the front line with the public, my colleagues were heavied to have annual ‘flu shots.
These rarely seemed to be much benefit,to judge from the number who still came down with it.
I declined the generous offers/threats (to overtime & promotion) but then I’ve never had ‘flu or any other ailment in 50+yrs of global travelling, living in the Third World or dealing with the Australian public.
Just lucky, I guess.
Personally, I do so much awful crap to my body that I figure medicos are at least going to have more respect for it and more benevolent intent than me.
Well the TB was pretty much justified on the clear and unequivocal evidence of public benefit over individual liberty. I’m not so convinced on fluoride and folic acid as mandatory because you don’t have to ingest them, though the public benefit versus costs is also pretty unequivocal. I share your scepticism on the flu vaccine, but it is notorious as having a low effectiveness. Some interesting research may come out as a result of COVID as flu morbidity and mortality has fallen dramatically…. perhaps as the result of hand washing, physical distancing, working and educating at home and mask wearing rather than vaccination.
I think in terms of breaching people’s rights to bodily autonomy from ‘mandatory’ medical procedures without true consent we would be better to look at obstetric violence in hospital maternity care and of the coercion, bullying and categorising of many elder people as ‘impulsive behaviour’ and therefore incompetent, as far greater wrongs.
It’s a bit difficult for most people to refrain from ingesting bread & water.
Like USAF Brigadier General Jack D. Ripper I protect my precious bodily fluids by only drinking pure grain alcohol.
Ha ha…. yes and no. It’s only commercially made bread and government supplied tap water. Wheat, and other grass seed, flour is not required to have folic acid added. Sure, you have to make an effort to avoid it, but you can. But I’m not sure there is any evidence of harm, so why make that effort? Ditto for water and fluoride. Although, there your choice, is either bottled water from unethical corporations or tank water from your roof which is likely to exceed Australian standards for heavy metals (or giardia if that’s a concern to you). Again, I’m not convinced there is a downside to fluoride. I’m also not sure about the booze. At least for beer you do get vitamin B supplementation, maybe not for ethanol and methanol from grain fermentation though, except for blindness! Again the much bigger wrong is the private snake oil merchants, for example all the infant formula adverts claiming benefits from omega 3 oil additives when the evidence is they make no difference to the evidence proved bad outcomes from using infant formula in lieu of human mothers’ milk. Ditto for all the bovine dairy formulas for colic or fussy babies or, FFS, pregnant women.
The Oxford vaccine is made with cells derived from one aborted foetus some time in the past, which now consists of a replicating cell line, not from recently aborted foetuses.
i really can’t see the ethical concerns of the senior religious leaders. The cell line is going to exist regardless of whether it’s used to make a vaccine or not. It’s not as if they’re aborting foetuses for the sole purpose of making the vaccine.
Perhaps someone who thinks it’s ethically tainted can explain it to me?