The Government of Quebec officially announces the gradual withdrawal of the vaccine passport, until its complete disappearance on March 14. But is it a good idea? The views of the experts we spoke to differ.
• Read also: The vaccine passport lifted everywhere on March 14: here are the dates to remember
• Read also: Joël Lightbound, the Liberal MP who attacks Trudeau and his government
“The context of the pandemic having evolved in a favorable way, we must start preparing to live with the virus. […]For the moment, we have a margin of maneuver which allows us to envisage a return to a more normal life”, affirmed the Minister of Health, Christian Dubé, to explain the decision of the government.
After reaching out to those who have not been vaccinated by recently canceling the “health contribution” to preserve social peace, the government is therefore taking a step further and announcing that the vaccination passport will no longer be required in supermarkets or in supermarkets. SAQ and SQDC stores tomorrow. Places of worship and places where funerals are held will follow on February 21. It will then be completely removed for all locations and activities on March 14.
But is it a good idea?
“Yes, it becomes relentless” – Nimâ Machouf
For epidemiologist Nimâ Machouf, the observation is clear: at 85% of doubly vaccinated in Quebec, the vaccine passport has contributed to making the vaccination campaign a success to be celebrated, but it is time to move on. .
“Vaccination is the best weapon we have against the virus and the passport has been a good incentive, but here it becomes relentless. It’s just not practical to impose it anymore,” she says.
Mme Machouf believes that everything has been done to convince those who hesitated to get vaccinated. The others, who are refractory to the vaccine, will never make an appointment, she believes.
“There are still about 5% of people who are really anti-vaccine. They’re a burden, but it’s not worth tearing up in the public square for them. It is not worth the energy that the government is deploying to force this tiny minority to be vaccinated.
She notes that, among the non-vaccinated, there are people who protect themselves otherwise, who are therefore not a danger, in addition to vulnerable people.
“Some of these people are deprived mentally, socially, in terms of organization or otherwise. They are not in the same reality. They are not the ones who represent the people we are trying to convince to be vaccinated with the vaccine passport, ”she argues.
Omicron is a game changer
Mme Machouf also recalls that one of the objectives of the vaccine passport was to protect the population by curbing the spread of the virus. Unfortunately, the arrival of the much more contagious Omicron variant has upset plans.
This reality means that the number of cases reported between December and today would be largely underestimated. While the government reports only 500,000 infections for this period, Nimâ Machouf estimates that the real number of infections would rather be “around three million”, or almost seven times more.
Photo: AFP
Since many of these infections affected people who were doubly vaccinated, they obtained a third immunization by contracting the virus, which is enough to postpone a third dose of vaccine, she says.
“We are going to waste millions of vaccines and all the necessary resources just to vaccinate them so that they have their passports [si le gouvernement l’étend à trois doses pour tout le monde]? We could save these vaccines for later.”
Joel Lemay / QMI Agency
She also recalls that the mask, required in the vast majority of businesses where the vaccine passport is in place, is sufficient for public places to be safe.
“Its imposition should not depend on the social climate” – Vardit Ravitsky
For his part, Vardit Ravitsky, president of the International Bioethics Association and professor at the School of Public Health at the University of Montreal and at Harvard Medical School, recalls that the purpose of the vaccine passport is to protect the health system.
“Ultimately he is there to ensure that if you have a car accident and need a ventilator that you have access to them, instead of them being occupied by COVID patients who are not vaccinated. “, she says.
For her, in order to justify the withdrawal of the vaccine passport, it would have been necessary to wait for the health system to show “that it is no longer fragile and that it is capable of sustaining the pace”.
Photo QMI Agency, Joël Lemay
And the social climate?
“The ethical justification of the vaccine passport does not depend on the social climate and especially not on the noise made by a small violent minority which tries to influence the social climate for reasons which are not themselves ethical. We have to stop giving them so much attention, ”she says.
Mme Ravitsky ends by recalling that the vaccine passport has always been a temporary measure that was imposed by necessity and not by choice. There is no point in forcing things, according to her.
“What are we going to do if we see a spike in cases and, at the same time, a variant as dangerous as Delta and as contagious as Omicron surfaces?” she asks.