Quote:
Originally Posted by Byte1
Ah, but also going along with your playing along with my analogy, if everyone is vaccinated, and only have a 90% efficacy, then everyone could still be vulnerable by those that may be carrying the virus that have been vaccinated. Your hypothetical suggests that "others may unknowingly be carrying" even though they are protected.
My suggestion is that it is not one person's responsibility to protect you. It is your responsibility to protect yourself. Otherwise, you are handicapped and reliant on others for your well being. 
My question remains, is everyone supposed to be punished/penalized for the faults of one? I know my answer, but others do not seem to see the fallacy of expecting others to be "my brother's keeper." |
A 90% or better chance that you are not carrying it added to the 90% chance that it will not adversely affect me is good enough for me. Take either of those away and additional measures are necessary.
"Not one's responsibility to protect you." I believe that argument has been tried with both HIV and measles with poor outcomes.
"Faults of one." It is hard to call it someone's fault for catching an invisible virus that they were unwittingly exposed to. If someone is a carrier of a disease, and right now everyone is a potential carrier, then society asks (and sometimes demands) that the carrier take precautions to protect the vulnerable that they come into contact with, and right now nearly everyone is vulnerable.
All this can change when two milestones are met: 1. everyone who desires to be vaccinated is vaccinated; and, 2. new infections drop to near zero. The first milestone is the 90/90 point and it is safe to assume both that you won't be exposed and that you won't die if you are. The second milestone is simply an indication that the 90/90 point has been attained.