Grandstand. For two years now, the world has been facing a pandemic linked to SARS-CoV-2, responsible for the death of more than 5 million people.
For a year, vaccines have been available. They make it possible to considerably reduce the serious forms of the infection and thus to limit the use of measures to restrict social contacts, in particular confinements and curfews which have a massive economic and psychological impact on populations.
Absolute precautionary principle
Among the available vaccines, the most effective and best tolerated are derived from recent technology, based on messenger RNA. A small part of the population, and some rather marginal scientists, oppose the use of these vaccines because of the lack of hindsight on the long-term consequences of this new technology.
If, in absolute terms, this position is understandable – it would certainly be less risky not to receive a vaccine… if there were no Covid – the vast majority of scientists, the population and political decision-makers believes, on the contrary, that the risk-benefit ratio of vaccines must be assessed in the light of the current situation, and makes the reasonable assumption that the long-term risks and consequences of vaccines will be infinitely less than the risks and consequences of leaving people not vaccinated.
The argument of the absolute principle of precaution is therefore considered here as extreme and deleterious in the face of this scourge, and the supporters of this argument are considered irresponsible by this same majority.
For many decades now, another pandemic has been raging: that of tobacco addiction. She is responsible for more than 8 million dead per year (of which 75,000 in France). In recent years, nicotine substitutes have been available. They make it possible to limit the symptoms of withdrawal and to promote the long-term cessation of tobacco use, while avoiding its main risks, in particular those related to tars, as well as carbon monoxide and other combustion products.
Lack of hindsight
According to the widely recognized Cochrane International Scientific Consortiumthe most effective of these means of nicotine replacement are electronic cigarettes, or vapers.
Some scientists, however, refuse to promote the “vape” because of the lack of hindsight on the prolonged consequences of this new device, in the name of the same precautionary principle as that mentioned above.
You have 58.88% of this article left to read. The following is for subscribers only.