[fitkoh]

I think it would be very difficult for the medical profession to ignore their "calling" of trying to save every one from the virus.  Even though common sense says so.  We already have it ingrained in the medical profession  to cure the weak, some times at the expense of the strong. Babies that have defects even before they are born are being treated to survive as long as possible with all kinds of drugs and procedures. So maybe nature is taking its revenge on that.  But human nature still wants to protect its weaker members as somehow it's teaching its medical profession that it is the ethically correct thing to do?

For me again the over population of the world is a major factor in its self-destruction.  The more people per square mile, if anti-biotics are abused, the greater the sum total effect in lowering "herd immunity". Yet have you heard any stronger measures to "halt" the population explosion other than family planning suggestions?  Again a case of medical and human ethics which seems to be getting to be a threat to the survival of the human species?

For me, where ethics are concerned, I think it's important to present decisions with as much information as possible, and allow people to make those decisions without too much external influence. Share your theories, share your facts, and also share the things you disagree with; and once you've given all relevant information you should accept whatever decision is made. It's very hard to sway someone who has made up their mind, and usually only serves to make conflict. Not everyone was meant to walk the same path. What is bad for you may be good for your neighbor. Let your neighbor walk their path even if you don't like it. Unless you are in immediate danger of bodily harm or loss of property, we should be willing to live and let live. If you don't like how someone lives, stay away from them. The world is a very big place.

Imagine if each bottle of antibiotics came with a warning, much like a pack of cigarettes: "WARNING: Antibiotics may atrophy the auto immune response." Instead they tell you "Take only as prescribed by your doctor" or "Do not take with alcohol" - which are valuable notices, but unbalanced in that they don't present the alternate perspective. I wonder if others get pharmaceutical commercials like we do here in the US: possible side effects are always mentioned as quickly as possible, often incomprehensible, printed in the smallest font possible. Why does the medical establishment want to hide the negative side effects? If anything, these should be advertised ahead of any possible benefit, in the loudest voice and largest text possible... not hidden and obscured. Give people the information they need to make a informed decision; don't hide information so they make a choice that benefits you. I consider it blatant deception, and I don't like it.

Rather than insisting that everyone be vaccinated because "that's the only way" we'll ever get herd immunity, give people the choice. People in high risk categories such as elderly and people with immune disorders may wisely choose the vaccine - while people interested in maintaining a healthy and resilient immune system may risk defeating it naturally. Rather than issuing a mask mandate, make a mask request, and allow the citizens to choose if they want to require masks in their businesses, and allow customers to choose which businesses to shop at.

We have lost so much choice since the start of this pandemic. In my locality, a year ago, it was illegal to wear a mask in public, and seen as suspicious behavior for criminals. Now it's illegal to not wear a mask. Silly. Just plain silly.