Ronald Bailey, (libertarian) Reason's science editor, makes the case for vaccines:
Vaccines are among the most effective health care innovations ever devised. A November 2013 New England Journal of Medicine article, drawing on the University of Pittsburgh's Project Tycho database of infectious disease statistics since 1888, concluded that vaccinations since 1924 have prevented 103 million cases of polio, measles, rubella, mumps, hepatitis A, diphtheria, and pertussis. They have played a substantial role in greatly reducing death and hospitalization rates, as well as the sheer unpleasantness of being hobbled by disease.
It would seem that forced vaccination incontrovertibly violates libertarian principles:
- even if there are good preventive reasons for being vaccinated, shouldn't I be the one who decides whether to take the risk for myself? Use persuasion, not force. State paternalism suggests that you don't own your own body.
- vaccines don't guarantee you won't get the disease.
- some people can't tolerate vaccines for health reasons. In fact, some have claimed (dubiously) that vaccines can cause harm, like autism. (See Reider's comments, above citation, on other vaccine injuries).
However, your decision not to vaccinate affects not just your own health, but in the case of a contagion, you can spread the disease to other people, including those who cannot vaccinate for reasons of body tolerance. There's a related construct called herd immunity; in essence, provided a large enough proportion of people are protected (e.g., through vaccination), the incidents of the related contagion can be minimized to near-zero. If a sufficient number of people are not protected, i.e., opt out of vaccination, as others point out freeloading off the vaccinated, there is no herd immunity, endangering those who cannot be vaccinated.
Let me quote how measles, no longer endemic in the US, resurrected recently:
U.S. measles cases have surged to a 25-year high of 704, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported April 29. The record-breaking number of cases largely stems from an outbreak in Washington, which officials now say is over, and ongoing outbreaks in New York City and New York state. The vast majority of the cases, 88 percent, originated in close-knit communities that have low rates of vaccination, according to the CDC. And 503 of the 704 cases were in those who have not been vaccinated.
It's one thing if you quarantine if and when you are infected, it's another thing when you spread the disease in public, which I regard as a violation of the non-aggression principle. If and when I join a community, I'm engaging in a voluntary association, and part of the agreement is to do my part in maintaining public health safety; that price includes preventive care in reducing the spread of contagions, particularly when vaccines contribute to herd immunity. And certainly the community has a right to self-defense.
I learned the lesson of quarantine the hard way growing up, no doubt getting exposed to childhood diseases like measles and mumps at public school (kindergarten/primary school). My Dad took my younger siblings out to see some Disney cartoon movie while Mom stayed home with me; it broke my heart being left out, although I understood the reason why I had to stay home.
So what sparked this rant? Over the weekend FEE posted a post against forced immunizations and linked to it on Facebook. To be honest, I can't remember the last time FEE published a piece that I disagreed with (I could probably count them on one hand), but I posted a critical opinion (for the post and relevant comment thread, see here). I got the usual wolf pack response, mocking my "Statism". Some argued that aggression requires intent; no doubt, for instance, that many asymptomatic individuals of COVID-19 don't know they have it, but they can spread the disease. (Of course, COVID-19 isn't relevant to the current discussion because there are no vaccines and we have limited diagnostic testing.) Walter Block, probably the dean of contemporary libertarians, has responded to the general concept of the objection to forced vaccinations, noting that Typhoid Mary was an asymptomatic carrier of the disease who was in a state of denial she had the disease. I'm not going to summarize Block's highly technical responses to the challenges to his position posed by other libertarians, but I encourage interested readers to review Block's post. I'll simply point out a relevant excerpt:
See the Reason multi-party debate article cited at the start of this post for other perspectives. Lew Rockwell's website also lists multiple posts against forced vaccination. And a simple Google query on vaccines and libertarian will reveal diversified opinions on the topic.Assume that if you don't get a vaccination, you'll contract a dreadful disease and then become contagious. You'll infect me and I'll die. Then, I think, the libertarian law would force you to become inoculated, otherwise you would be violating the non aggression axiom, or non aggression principle (NAP). Your refusal to get vaccinated makes you, in effect, a murderer. On the other hand, if you don't get vaccinated, and if only you will be harmed, then it would be inappropriate for the law to force you to do this.
My position, in short, is, assuming the individual is able to tolerate vaccinations, vaccines are an effective method of reinforcing herd immunity against known diseases; the justification of a minimal State includes the safeguarding of public health and safety and relevant protective measures of isolation and vaccination against the spread of contagion. Of the various applications of force by the State, compulsion of vaccination is one of the most legitimate ones, with a modest cost to the individual. As always, I would prefer voluntary compliance; others who become infected must accept the price not only of harm to their own health but forced isolation from others.
