My pro-vaxxer friends have been a lot nicer to me since they started testing positive for Covid.
I’m calling my vaccinated friends ‘pro-vaxxer’, by the way, just so they can see how it feels to have a quirky-sounding label applied to them based on their personal choices about how to withstand a pandemic.
Meanwhile, I’m most certainly not going to call myself an anti-vaxxer because I’ve had dozens of vaccines, just not this one.
I don’t need a label that’s become a term of abuse and was used by an MP while condemning people who don’t want the vaccine as the sorts of scoundrels who might launch a physical attack on him. It was rather as though this chap was boiling up to proposing an amendment to the anti-terror laws to include anti-vaccine campaigners as proscribed organisations, as though random collections of citizens who don’t want new technology injected into them within a year of it being made are somehow as dangerous as Isis or the IRA.
As far as I’m concerned, I’m the norm. I’m the rational one. I’m the one taking a logical position.
I’m the one who’s decided to wait and see what the research says about how much protection this new vaccine gives you.
All those who continue to want the full mRNA experience, three jabs and counting, with no information forthcoming about how many more might be needed, and how long or short a time each one covers you for, they are the ones who need labelling. Jabs. Even the word is annoying me.
Wasn’t John Prescott called two jabs after punching a voter? Imagine how frustrating it will be in a few years’ time, when you’ve had so many jabs you can’t even remember how many but your vaccine passport is coming up as out of date every time you try to go somewhere, and even though you’ve got 17 jabs recorded on it you suspect you missed a few somewhere along the line.
Comments
Join the debate for just £1 a month
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for £3.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just £1 a monthAlready a subscriber? Log in