• Nik282000@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Care for an illness that for which a person refused (by choice, not for legitimate medical reason) the vaccine should not be covered by public healthcare.

    • rastapam@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 hours ago

      Disagree. I understand the sentiment, but would you deny cancer care for a smoker? Diabetes care for someone who is obese? Casts for someone who fell out of a tree? We can’t start denying heath care based on someone’s poor life choices.

      • Nik282000@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        37 minutes ago

        would you deny cancer care for a smoker

        It already happens. Friend of mine (Ontario) had to quit smoking and stay off before he could get treatment for his lungs. There was a women (also Ontario) who recently was denied liver treatment because she refused to quit drinking. Many surgeries are also be denied to overweight people until they get down to some target weight.

        Climbing a tree, while not the safest activity, is a recreational risk that only harms youself. Refusing a vaccine that is meant to protect you and your community, because you did your research on Facebook, is a willfully ignorant act that poses a risk to you and MANY other people. People are too stupid to make their own decisions in regard to public health.