Edgar, 21, is studying medicine and decided in September of this year to intentionally contract Corona: “I asked this person to spit into a glass. I added some water to dilute and drank the glass. ” His plan worked – five days later he tested positive for Corona.
This approach is not recommended, both from a medical and a legal point of view. An infection can have a potentially severe course and a mild course can lead to long covid. From a legal point of view, it is particularly tricky for the person who infects others: according to the Criminal Code, they can face up to five years imprisonment.
Intentional infections for a Covid certificate are lively discussed in the SRF community. Above all, medical student Edgar is exposed to harsh criticism.
It’s nice when medical students show publicly that they are not suitable for the profession.
SRF user David Scherrer asks himself: “And someone like that studies medicine?” Alex Flück writes: “As a doctor, I am of the opinion that this young man should be expelled from his studies: Anyone who has so little scientific and above all ethical and moral understanding is out of place in patient care.”
The same verdict comes from user Michel Koller: “It’s nice when medical students show publicly that they are not suitable for the profession.” Edgar’s rationale for self-infecting is that he couldn’t afford the paid tests at the time. User Cynthia Meister does not understand this reason, as the vaccine is free and safe. At best, she could understand the procedure if the situation in the hospitals were not so critical, but: “In this way, he not only endangers himself, but also others who are dependent on a place if he had a difficult course.”
Understanding of self-infection
Much larger discussions among SRF commentators, however, arise when it comes to the question of whether deliberate infection with Corona should generally be condemned or not. For example, Denise Casagrande from the SRF community writes: “What absurd ideas do certain people – for selfish motives – come up with and are able to implement?”. SRF user Bernhard Haeuser replies: “The motives may be difficult to understand, but are they therefore selfish?”
Self-infection compared to vaccination actually only shows that one is not able to assess the risk properly. No more and no less.
User Peter Mächler also sees it similarly: «Since vaccination is not the panacea for me, I understand such exercises. Pressure creates counter pressure. Need makes inventive. I am not surprised.” However, Mark Keller from the community immediately contradicts this: «Since vaccination is not the only solution, should one take an x-times higher risk? What a strange logic. “
A lack of confidence in the vaccination as a reason for self-infection does not apply to SRF user Thomas Spirig as a reason: “Self-infection compared to vaccination actually only shows that you are not able to assess the risk properly. No more and no less.”