I did not want to be inoculated with the new corona vaccine if possible.
Since I could not go abroad (i.e., could not enter the destination country) without being vaccinated, I had no choice but to get the second dose last November. If I did not have to travel abroad, I would not have taken the vaccine even now.
Since the effect of the vaccine attenuates over time, it seems that additional inoculations are necessary to maintain the effect. Therefore, the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare promotes booster vaccinations 6 months after vaccination.
My problem is that the vaccine that is being administered is an mRNA vaccine, which has not yet been evaluated to determine how it affects the human body, and that it is a vaccine for an early new type of corona (Wuhan corona).
The effectiveness of the Omicron strain is questionable since it is the one currently prevalent. The MHLW website states that the strain is "reported to be effective according to the U.K. Department of Health and Security and the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. However, there is no mention of what the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare (MHLW) thinks about it.
It seems to me that the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare is taking a precautionary approach, saying that it is not responsible for any problems that may arise later on.
I believe in the power of the body's natural immune function, so I do not think a third vaccine is necessary under the current circumstances (few infected people with serious symptoms).
However, the Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare seems to think differently.
For example, the response is different for those who have been vaccinated for the third time when they return or enter Japan from overseas and for those who have not.
Suppose a person returns home from the Philippines who has not received the third dose of inoculation is required to stay at home for seven days after returning home. On the other hand, those who have received the third dose of inoculation do not have to stay at home. (In both cases, negative testimony within 72 hours of departure from the country is required.)
It makes no sense why there is a difference between two and three doses of the vaccine, since the neutralizing antibodies should have been produced if two doses had been given. For example, if the second dose of vaccine had not been administered for a short time, the effect would have persisted.
Furthermore, as a camphor for the depressed tourism business, a campaign called "prefectural residents' discount" is being offered, but the condition for using this campaign is that proof of three vaccinations or negative proof is required.
The cost of the test to obtain a negative certificate and the issuance of the certificate will cost 20,000 to 40,000 yen.
No one is likely to spend that much to take advantage of the "prefectural residents' discount. In other words, this is a discriminatory campaign that requires three vaccinations to be used.
In view of these developments, it appears that the national and local governments are eager to have the public receive three vaccinations at any cost.
It is understandable if the Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare (MHLW) is so eager and convinced that vaccination is absolutely necessary from the viewpoint of protecting the health of the people. However, the number of people who have died from the new corona is not large. Since the outbreak began, 29,000 people have died. Moreover, this figure does not include those who died as a direct result of the new corona. A significant number of the deaths include people who were also infected with the new strain of corona when they were examined.
The number of deaths during the same period is thought to be around 4 million, so even if these 29,000 deaths were caused by the new corona, they would represent only 0.725% of all deaths.
That does not mean that a third vaccination is necessary at all costs.
On the contrary, it seems more like a rush to dispose of a large surplus of vaccines than for the health and safety of the public.
My wife is anxiously awaiting the delivery of her vaccination voucher. I think the reason is that she will need it when she returns from the Philippines.
I will hold off on the mRNA vaccine because I still have a distrust of it.
We are planning to go to Cebu in September. If people who have not had their third vaccination are still required to stay at home during that time, I may have to give up my trip to Cebu, unfortunately.
Now I just hope it doesn't come to that.
