Those who have not been vaccinated cannot contact patients

by Antonio Panti

July 06

Dear Director,
Yesterday a very questionable thesis appeared on QS. Dr. Piccarelli says: “Having accepted to impose an unfair discriminatory measure on colleagues (suspension for refusing vaccination) provoked legitimate opposition to part of the class: the orders would bear much more responsibility if they did so. Do not stop the outrageous defeat of the profession.”

The colleague believes that if the association had defended the “legitimate” anti-vaccination position of some “qualified and expert” doctors, it could have helped stem the decline or even defeat of the medical profession. The staffing shortage is said to have exploded with these shutdowns (actually less than 10%) which could have had a huge impact on deaths from Covid.

The colleague regrets that the matter did not open up a high-level discussion on critical issues that have emerged with the pandemic and with the vaccination campaign so that “if a nurse makes an alternative hire for general medicine or bioengineers and physicists, programmers will manage a diversion high Technique For the clinic, what fate awaits medicine? “

The colleague, who even boasts of his credentials in the field of bioethics, defies noticing: Can a clinician, from an ethical and scientific point of view, ignore clinical risks and reduce the protection of patients to a personal idea? Moreover, everything can be said against modern science except that there has been no high-level international debate. The results are published everywhere and the most important scientific bodies themselves have announced.

The real problem is far from that. This government decision was treated very poorly by giving the side more than justified criticism: the vaccination record left a bad impression. It was quite clear to entrust the NHS with the punishment envisaged for health staff who hate the vaccine because the obligation to vaccinate is nothing more than a service fee. Those who are not vaccinated cannot maintain contact with patients and will be subject to the penalty provided.

It is a simple professional medicine procedure and has nothing to do with the orders. Whereas orders had to contain information and be judged on a disciplinary level those doctors who advise against vaccination and endanger the health of their patients. In short, with this improvised and improvised action, the orders were prevented from doing their job, defending the citizen by professional ethics.

Vaccines are one of the great achievements of social medicine like water purification or food hygiene and one cannot defend doctors who are reluctant to vaccinate unless the scientific character of medical practice is questioned. Years ago, judging from the document of the Confederation of Monks, a great debate began that led to the law of compulsory vaccination in schools.

A high moment of the profession fulfilled its mission: to protect the health of individuals and society. At this point, between war and pestilence, there is no shortage of ideas for moral contemplation which, in the face of such false defenses of secret liberty, seems urgent.

Antonio Panti

06 July 2022
© All Rights Reserved

Other articles in Letters to the Editor








Online newspaper
health information.

QS Edizioni srl
VAT number 12298601001

via Boncompagni, 16
00187 – Rome

via Vittore Carpaccio, 18
00147 Rome (RM)

site manager

Cesar Vasari

managing editor
Francesco Maria Avito

Ernesto Rodriguez

Copyright 2013 © QS Edizioni srl. All rights reserved
– VAT number 12298601001
– Registration in ROC n. 23387
Registration at the Court of Rome n. 115/3013 on 05/22/2013

All rights reserved.
privacy policy

Leave a Comment