They're young, fit, healthy and subject to frequent medical testing. They're also millionaires with access to private medical care. They have little to fear personally.
99 percent of them will see no consequence from not having it and thats just the way it is.
Also to get jabbed now would risk short term side effects of which there are many and that are common, rendering them unable to play or train.
Its also more difficult to submit to a known risk(having the vaccine, irrespective of how tiny that risk is) than it is to leave it up to chance (their estimation of the chances of suffering from covid caught in the wild). I think this is a big factor that people often overlook.
Hesitancy amongst the young and healthy is no great mystery. Its just not that much of a big deal for young people. No matter how many single cases of otherwise healthy people dying they wish to cherry pick and publish in the Guardian.
We have seen legitimate scientists and government advisors question the idea of vaccinating children on a risk benefit basis. In some cases suggesting they might be better off just catching it.
I do not think it is entirely faulty logic on the side of those marginally older than that to question the benefit, though you may be able to pull the stats and show some marginal benefit to a 20 year old getting jabbed. They might be wrong in their estimations of relative risk, but the line of enquiry is not absurd enough to dismiss them simply as idiots. The risk to a 20 year old dying is, according to that tool they made:
| COVID associated death | 0.0001% | 1 in 1000000 |
| COVID associated hospital admission | 0.0028% | 1 in 35714 |
Meahwhile, i recently pointed out the potential for cancer as a side effect to something my doctor advised, less than a 1 in 2000 risk he said. Dismissed my concerns. Described it as "very small". Not a problem. Negligible
So whats 1 in 35,714, of merely being admitted to hospital, or 1 in 1,000,000 of dying!? And this is presumably an average 20 year old, opposed to an athlete under the conditions i described above.
Even if you can show them that the risk from the vaccine is smaller (which I am sure it is. first page google result for Astraa Zeneca blood clots says 411 cases, 71 dead, 47.5 million doses), as i said above, actively choosing to take on that known risk is an entirely different proposition to a 1 in a million chance of dying from an encounter "in the wild". And this must be considered.
So yeah, i agree they should probably have been vaccinated, if only to get it out of the way over the summer and increase their resistance during the season.
But its a bit mad having a pop and dismissing them as idiots. Dont they know theres a 0.0028% chance of them being admitted to hospital!!
Now the greater good argument is there, of course, but i would suggest you are the idiots if you honestly expect that alone to move them to action.
?
