5 ms·

What percentage of the population needs to be vulnerable for the entire population to be forcibly inconvenienced for their needs? When is it the responsibility

What percentage of the population needs to be vulnerable for the entire population to be forcibly inconvenienced for their needs? When is it the responsibility of the vulnerable to protect themselves vs forcing society at large to protect the vulnerable? Certainly there is some threshold, considering that we didn't shut down society in the past for the tiny percentage of bubbleboys with no immune system. To call people sociopathic is to close your mind and not see the real gray areas. So to ask again, what percentage of society needs to be vulnerable in order for it to be ethical to coerce everyone to do something?

vinay427 6y ago
> Certainly there is some threshold, considering that we didn't shut down society in the past for the tiny percentage of bubbleboys with no immune system. Well, thankfully we haven't done this today either. This virus appears to affect more than just those that die from it, and that group of victims already includes more than a "tiny percentage of bubbleboys."
tempestn 6y ago
The virus kills on the order of 1% of people who contract it, and can cause serious illness or death even for healthy people, so anyone who is able to get the vaccine should get the vaccine. It's not like you're being asked to give up an organ or something; you're being asked to protect yourself, and protect those unfortunate enough not to be able to get the vaccine themselves as well. Rather than quibbling over percentages, why not ask yourself what ethical foundation a healthy person could have to not get the vaccine once it's been proven safe and effective.