Will you vaccinate with Conoravirus vaccine when one is available?

[CityRail]

According to reports, coronavirus vaccine is entering its final phase of testing and very soon we will have millions of coronavirus vaccine to be rolled out, hopefully from September.

By then, should a coronavirus vaccine is available, will you vaccinate it?

Personally speaking, as a 30 year old young person, I will not vaccinate myself with Coronavirus, because:

1. It is just a small flu for young people, we won't die;
2. The vaccine is rushed and I cannot guarantee if I vaccinate myself, I will be immune to Coronavirus and not get killed by the vaccine;
3. The coronavirus vaccine is just a step to reopen our borders so that we can travel overseas again.

I am not anti-vaxier, however I only think that Coronavirus vaccine is just a political ticket for politicians to explain to the public that they can now open the international borders again and ease off travel bubbles.

What do you think?

 

[Gremlin]

There is a vaccine for tuberculosis but AFAIK there's no requirement for an Aussie citizen to have it before being allowed to travel. Or the flu vaccine - which is possibly more topical (given you could return with the flu and infect many others).

Australia has limited powers to prevent people from leaving, i wonder if they would extend that to include a CV vaccine?

As I said, speculation on my behalf. My thinking though is that neither TB nor the flu has caused Australia to close its borders, nor driven a 10% fall in GDP in six months. If there's a vaccine available, but not yet supplied in sufficient volumes to create herd immunity in Australia and international travel is ramping up again, then that will be a time of heightened risk of a secondary outbreak with both a health and economic cost to be paid. One way to mitigate would be to require travellers to be vaccinated, both outbound citizens and inbound non-citizens.

 

[Toula92122]

Coronavirus Vaccine Tracker (Published 2022)

A look at all the vaccines that have reached trials in humans.

www.nytimes.com

Well as this site says they are hoping for something early next year. However it needs to be remembered that even if they do get approval it's not like turning on the tap and having all the doses needed to vaccinate the world. I'd say they will sell it to the highest bidder so if it's a US country I would imagine they will get first dibs. So how do you outlaw people leaving or returning to Oz if they have not been able to access the vaccination? Does this become something that those with more economic means get first?

 

[Steady]

Coronavirus Vaccine Tracker (Published 2022)

A look at all the vaccines that have reached trials in humans.

www.nytimes.com

Does this become something that those with more economic means get first?

I hope so, we wouldn’t want the 400m people on the African continent Living on USD $1.90 / day getting it first

 

[DC3]

.... Does this become something that those with more economic means get first?

When the vax becomes available, then it would effectively become part of the cost of my travels.

Edited

 

[Toula92122]

But what if you can't get access to it because it's deemed your desire to holiday overseas is not that high on the list?

 

[DC3]

But what if you can't get access to it because it's deemed your desire to holiday overseas is not that high on the list?

Patience Grasshopper.

 

[lovetravellingoz]

Would be interesting if made an entry requirement for citizens. It would mean you cannot enter the country if you may have Covid

Choice to return could well be please choose your preferred option (option has to be selected before boarding plane to fly to Australia):

• Option A: 14 day quarantine at your cost. Say $2000 - 5000 (depends if it is at the full cost). If there is a medical reason cost may be waived.
• Option B: Show a vaccination certificate and go on your way
• Option C: Vaccinate on landing with 2-3 day quarantine (to allow time for vaccine to work). Cost may or may not be charged.

 

[CityRail]

There is a vaccine for tuberculosis but AFAIK there's no requirement for an Aussie citizen to have it before being allowed to travel. Or the flu vaccine - which is possibly more topical (given you could return with the flu and infect many others).

The problem is you cannot force people to vaccinate to enter or leave the country, as I think the initial stage of Coronavirus vaccine is scarce, I don't think it can be widely available to many people which I believe we should start vaccinate with high risk group (the elderly) first before to younger people etc, which the risk of death from contracting the virus is going to be quite low.

 

[p--and--t]

The problem is you cannot force people to vaccinate to enter or leave the country

Under bio-security laws they can certainly make it one of the options. i.e. vaccinate or pay for 14 days in a hotel on return at your own expense

What makes you think they can't?

(FYI: Australia does not have a bill of rights)

Edit: specifically in the bio-security act border entry requirements

"(ii) evidence that the individual has received a specified vaccination or other prophylaxis within a specified previous period; "

 

[GoldCanyon340]

Choice to return could well be please choose your preferred option (option has to be selected before boarding plane to fly to Australia):

• Option A: 14 day quarantine at your cost. Say $2000 - 5000 (depends if it is at the full cost). If there is a medical reason cost may be waived.
• Option B: Show a vaccination certificate and go on your way
• Option C: Vaccinate on landing with 2-3 day quarantine (to allow time for vaccine to work). Cost may or may not be charged.

Or Option D: no mandatory vaccination and go on your way like an adult

 

[Archphoto]

A colleague made enquiries last Thursday regarding travel for business in the coming months and was informed that they would be permitted to leave, however, upon their return, they would "foot the entire bill of their required 14-day quarantine in a hotel of the Dept's choice." This includes their hotel bill (at a "reduced" rate) and all meals - x3 persons (the team) and currently, this is not the least bit viable.

Prior to 2019, I *never* had a flu shot, didn't see the need as the majority of my year was spent overseas, and I rarely saw winter. I moved back to AUS and last year was the first time I had a flu jab; I've had the flu 2x before and it did knock me around, so I figured $20 wasn't going to kill me.

Mandatory vaccinations when travelling overseas from Australia were mandatory in 1977 and your destination/s dictated what you had to have (including any stopovers on the way, even if you remained on the tarmac!). This was the only time I have been required/forced to be vaccinated - I flew to the UK, Europe and Hong Kong with my parents for the holiday of a lifetime. One was a regular injection (against typhus maybe?) and I have a massive reminder of the other: a smallpox vaccination that has left me with a 10cm keloid scar (kinda looks like Thailand actually) that extends from the top of my left shoulder, and down my upper arm to the beginning of the upper bicep. Note though, this scar has expanded in size as I've aged, originally it was no bigger than a 5c piece.

If it were mandatory to have the C-19 vaccination for me to travel, I'd be more than willing to have it, however, definitely not this year - I don't feel confident that *any* country is capable of creating one that is safe for a vast majority of the population, as currently, it appears to only be a certain demographic being used as guinea pigs, and not those who are most vulnerable.

If it were offered in a similar fashion as the flu vaccination every year, I'd also have no qualms about getting jabbed - I may not be travelling at the time, but who knows what unvaccinated visitors are bringing to our shores in the future.

To each their own, but for me, it's a no-brainer: I want to travel, and if having a Covid-19 vaccination means I can do so, I'll be lining up to get the jab.

 

[lovetravellingoz]

Or Option D: no mandatory vaccination and go on your way like an adult

You mean like the adult fruit picker that flew to Queensland even though he know he was living with a Covid 19 person and so most likely would be infected too.

Or the adult's that do not vaccinate their kids as they are happy to rely on everyone else to do the right thing.

 

[drron]

Under bio-security laws they can certainly make it one of the options. i.e. vaccinate or pay for 14 days in a hotel on return at your own expense

What makes you think they can't?

(FYI: Australia does not have a bill of rights)

But if we are only allowed to leave Australia when the bio-security emergency ends then surely they can't enforce it under bio-security laws.

 

[lovetravellingoz]

Would it simply be a case of, if has not already been done, to act under the existing Biosecurity Act of 2015 and list Covid19 as a Listed Human Disease, and then to draft up a Control Guideline such as we have for Ebola, Measles etc where one of the measures imposed is to be vaccinated to either depart or arrive in Australia unless a 14 day quarantine is undertaken?



Human Biosecurity Control Orders
Under the Biosecurity Act 2015, travellers who are identified as having, or being suspected of having a Listed Human Disease, and who do not comply with recommended public health measures may be placed under a Human Biosecurity Control Order (HBCO). A number of measures can be imposed under an HBCO to manage the risk presented by the individual, including isolation, a requirement to undergo treatment, and restricting international travel.

 

[p--and--t]

But if we are only allowed to leave Australia when the bio-security emergency ends then surely they can't enforce it under bio-security laws.

The Bio-security Act 2015 of some ~700 pages is in force at all times.

Amongst a heap of different sections in the act, It allows all sorts of measures and determinations to be put in place against individuals regardless of the current declared emergency associated with Covid.

https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2020C00127

44 Entry requirements

(1) This section applies for the purpose of preventing a listed human disease from entering, or establishing itself or spreading in, Australian territory or a part of Australian territory.

(2) The Health Minister may determine one or more requirements for individuals who are entering Australian territory at a landing place or port in accordance with Division 2 or 3 of Part 4 of Chapter 4.

Note: An individual who fails to comply with a requirement may contravene a civil penalty provision (see section 46).

(3) A determination made under subsection (2) is a legislative instrument, but section 42 (disallowance) of the Legislation Act 2003 does not apply to the instrument.

Where requirements apply

(4) The determination must specify where the requirements apply.

Kinds of determinations that may be specified

(5) Without limiting subsection (2), the determination may specify:

(a) requirements for all individuals, or classes of individuals; and

(b) specific requirements in relation to specified listed human diseases; and

(c) general requirements in relation to listed human diseases generally; and

(d) requirements relating to the manner in which an individual must comply with a requirement.

(6) Without limiting subsection (2), the determination may specify one or more of the following requirements:

(a) a requirement for an individual to provide either:

(i) a declaration as to whether the individual has received a specified vaccination or other prophylaxis within a specified previous period; or

(ii) evidence that the individual has received a specified vaccination or other prophylaxis within a specified previous period;

(b) a requirement for an individual to complete a questionnaire on his or her health, which may include confirmation of whether the individual is undergoing or has undergone specified treatment within a specified previous period;

(c) a requirement for an individual to provide a declaration in relation to a specified listed human disease;

(d) a requirement for an individual to provide a declaration or evidence of where the individual has been before entering Australian territory;

(e) a requirement for an individual to be screened (whether by requiring the individual to be screened by equipment, by providing a declaration, or in any other way).

Note 1: An officer has certain powers in relation to an individual who fails to comply with a requirement in subsection (6) (see section 60 (imposing a human biosecurity control order on an individual)).

Note 2: A person may commit an offence or contravene a civil penalty provision if the person provides false or misleading information or documents (see sections 137.1 and 137.2 of the Criminal Code and sections 532 and 533 of this Act).

Note 3: This section is not subject to the privilege against self‑incrimination (see section 635).

(7) A determination must not specify as a requirement a biosecurity measure described in Subdivision B of Division 3 of Part 3 (biosecurity measures that may be included in a human biosecurity control order).

 

[Himeno]

The problem is you cannot force people to vaccinate to enter or leave the country, as I think the initial stage of Coronavirus vaccine is scarce, I don't think it can be widely available to many people which I believe we should start vaccinate with high risk group (the elderly) first before to younger people etc, which the risk of death from contracting the virus is going to be quite low.

A number of companies around the world are producing promising Covid-19 vaccines already, taking the risk that the candidate vaccine they are producing will clear trials, so that they will have a large stockpile ready to go when it gets approved.

 

[CityRail]

Yet having said that there's been reports that Coronavirus vaccine may only reduce the severity of the disease, not to prevent it:

The first COVID-19 vaccines may not prevent infection with coronavirus

Desperation for a way to keep economies from collapsing under the weight of COVID-19 could mean settling for a vaccine that prevents people from getting really sick or dying but doesn't stop them from catching the coronavirus.

www.smh.com.au

Do you think this is enough for us to resume travel without a preventative vaccine, but a vaccine which reduces the severity of the disease?

 

[p--and--t]

Yet having said that there's been reports that Coronavirus vaccine may only reduce the severity of the disease, not to prevent it:

The first COVID-19 vaccines may not prevent infection with coronavirus

Desperation for a way to keep economies from collapsing under the weight of COVID-19 could mean settling for a vaccine that prevents people from getting really sick or dying but doesn't stop them from catching the coronavirus.

www.smh.com.au

Do you think this is enough for us to resume travel without a preventative vaccine, but a vaccine which reduces the severity of the disease?

A valid point you raise. If the infection rate in the community is not decreased by those infected and immunity not gained by the vaccine then the risk of another another pandemic remains.

Doesn't give much comfort we won't go through all this again, just less lives lost.

 

[Pushka]

Which is why a better treatment is on the needs lost.

 

[CityRail]

Which is why a better treatment is on the needs lost.

Somewhat I am hoping through the race for a vaccine we will be able to find a cure to reduce the severity of the disease to existing patients to just a flu, and we can just live with it.

Then we can buy more time to prepare a vaccine which will prevent this disease altogether.