THE Department of Health (DOH) announced it will enforce a “brand agnostic policy” and require local governments not to announce the brand of vaccine it will administer. This move was triggered by incidents in Manila and Parañaque cities where many people trooped to Pfizer-made vaccine inoculations.
But the bigger problem is not brand rejection among the people, but vaccine hesitancy in general. The biggest are low stock and slow roll out. Thus, informed choice cannot be substituted with a “take-it-or-leave-it’ policy” that in effect violates a person’s right to informed consent in matters related to his health.
Yes, not informing people of which vaccines are to be injected into them denies them the right of informed consent. It also violates their right to choose — not the right to choose the vaccine but the right to be vaccinated or not. It is immoral, illegal and unjust.
Denying people of informed consent and the right to choose is not the way to get more people vaccinated. The more that people will reject because the intent is to force them, give them no choice.
True, a lot of people still have misconceptions about getting the COVID-19 vaccine, influencing their and their family’s decision not to get vaccinated at all. But instead of enforcing a policy of not naming the brand of COVID-19 vaccine to give to the people, DOH should embark on an extensive education drive to inform the populace of the importance of getting vaccinated, no matter the brand.
Vaccine agnosticism will not work without vaccine advocacy. We have to educate before we inoculate. Sadly, much still needs to be done in this area. There is only one vaccine against fake news and that is truth told in a convincing manner.
