My Body, My Choice: Examining the Anti-Vax Argument

Source: Photobyphotoboy on Shutterstock

When discussing a person’s decision whether or not to get vaccinated, you are almost certain to hear them say “my body, my choice” at some point. It’s on anti-vax T-shirts, heard at protests, and according to the Los Angeles Times, now defines the anti-vax movement. But does the argument really work? Or is it just an excuse for selfish behavior?

The Logical Choice

When someone invokes the phrase “my body, my choice,” they are insinuating that they have (or should have) a legal right to do to their body whatever they want. While this is not technically true—it is illegal, for example, to put certain drugs into your body—generally, this is true when it comes to what you keep out of your body. But as a defense of the conclusion “I should not get vaccinated,” that you have a right to refuse to get vaccinated is not even relevant.

Now, don't get me wrong. If the discussion were about whether the government should force you to get vaccinated—then yes, appealing to your legal rights would be relevant. But that is not the issue here. The question is whether one should get vaccinated. Is it a rational decision? Is it morally right to refuse? Whether or not you have the legal right to refuse is a completely different issue. (Questions about what is rational and moral are different from questions about what is legal.) Bringing up your legal rights in a discussion about a decision’s morality or rationality commits the fallacy of “raising a red herring”–bringing up a seemingly related but irrelevant side issue to distract from the original argument.

Here is an example.

Suppose your friend Bob was given the choice to buy something he doesn’t want for $70,000 or accept something he does want for free—and then you found out that he bought what he explicitly didn’t want for $70,000. You say: “That was a stupid choice” Bob replies: “It’s my money, I can spend it how I want.” You would immediately recognize that his statement was irrelevant. Yes, it’s his money, and he is legally allowed to spend it how he wants; but that is not the issue. You weren’t arguing that he shouldn’t be legally allowed to buy what he bought for $70,000. Your point was that it was not wise to choose to spend that kind of money on something he didn’t want (especially when he could have what he wanted for free). The fact that he is legally allowed to make a stupid choice doesn’t make his choice rational.

The Rational Choice

In the same way, that someone is legally allowed to refuse vaccination doesn’t make doing so a rational choice. It might be legal to hit yourself with a hammer; that doesn’t mean it’s a good idea. And when faced with the choice of a free, safe, and effective vaccine, or the possibility of a $70,000 (or much more) hospital bill, the rational choice is clear.

Of course, people against vaccinating will say they have a right to determine the risk for themselves. Okay. But an incorrect determination of the risks can't justify a wrong choice. Cherry-picked stories about breakthrough infections, or people who didn’t take into account their previous allergic reactions before getting the vaccine, don't mean the vaccine is unsafe. Neither do the fake statistics and Facebook posts that say thousands have died from the vaccine.

The actual statistics are clear; the vaccine works, the vast majority of COVID disease and death is now among the unvaccinated, and it is more likely a person would have an adverse reaction to an over-the-counter drug than to the vaccine. Indeed, 150 people die every year from the active ingredient in Tylenol, and 3000 die each year from taking an aspirin a day. Nothing even close to those numbers applies to vaccines. Refusing the vaccine is not rational.

The Moral Choice

That one has the legal right to choose to refuse the vaccine doesn’t make that choice moral either. The vaccine protects you from infection and severe symptoms, but it also reduces the probability that you will pass it on to others. And protecting others from harm is always the moral thing to do, especially when it is safe, free, and easy.

Granted, the evidence suggests that those who have been vaccinated can still get infected, and if they do they can have a viral load (equivalent to an infected person) that entails they can pass it on to others (even though the vaccinated person’s symptoms will likely not be as severe). But the fact that can happen, does not mean that it is as likely to happen to a vaccinated person as it is to an unvaccinated person.

Ethics and Morality Essential Reads

Do People Everywhere Cheat?

Maybe We Need to Say Less About Ethics

And, indeed, the number of times such a thing has happened to a vaccinated person pales in comparison to how often it happens among the unvaccinated. Even with the Delta variant, getting the vaccine vastly reduces the probability that you will contract the virus, and lowers the probability that you will pass it on to others even more.

The idea that something has to guarantee a 100 percent success record to be “effective” employs what’s called the “All or Nothing” fallacy. A bulletproof vest doesn’t guarantee I won’t get harmed in a firefight; but if I am ever in one, you better believe I’d rather have one on.

What’s more, when a willingly unvaccinated person gets COVID and takes up a hospital bed, not only are they taxing an already exhausted nurse or doctor, but that one’s less bed for someone who needs one because they had a stroke or a heart attack—someone who didn’t willingly put themselves and others in harm’s way. A person’s choice to be unvaccinated doesn’t just affect them; and when it comes to the morality of a decision, how it affects others must be considered.

The Forward-Thinking Choice

But the fact that the vaccine protects you and others isn’t just about the here and now. As the virus spreads among the unvaccinated, the chances increase that it will mutate into additional variants. And the more variants there are, the more likely it is that one will be resistant to the vaccine. And if that happens, this whole thing starts all over again. Lockdowns, mask mandates, school closures—it will be a nightmare.

When the great mask debate was going on, people against the mask insisted that vaccines were the only way out of the pandemic. “Masks don’t help mitigate the spread; only vaccines can.” Not only was that a lie (masks can, do, and have hindered the spread of COVID), but now that the vaccine is here, and those same people are backtracking saying that the vaccine doesn’t work.

This kind of denial is not about being rational or moral, it’s not about defending the freedom of choice, or healthy living. It’s just about being anti-science. People against vaccinations see themselves as crusaders against the medical establishment. Whatever the establishment says, they will say the opposite. Ironically, for most, that conviction comes to a screeching halt when they get COVID and have to rush to the ER. All of a sudden, they want everything the medical establishment has to offer.

If they were consistent, they would stay home. But what they should do—and what you should do if you haven’t already—is choose to get vaccinated. Living in a society is a privilege that comes with obligations; one of those obligations is not actively making yourself a harm to others.

Copyright David Kyle Johnson, 2021