Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

HoneyBun21222 t1_j3wvjnd wrote

Reply to comment by NativeSon508 in Covid vaccine clinic at Worcester Public Library with $75 incentive by [deleted]

Thank you for bringing this up! It does seem odd but when you break down the logic it makes a lot of sense.

Vaccines keep the public from being severely ill, and prevent hospitals from being overrun. In preventing people from getting so sick they have to be hospitalized, so purely from a financial standpoint it is cost saving to not only offer the vaccines for free but also pay people to get them.

It also prevents complete healthcare system collapse. Many patients have had necessary care for non-covid issues delayed, and some have become severely ill or died as a result of lack of care due to complete overwhelm on the healthcare system by the pandemic. The more people we can prevent from being hospitalized with covid, the more healthcare is available for everyone.

It's kind of similar to how insurance companies sometimes give financial incentives to people for having annual physicals or getting a gym membership. Preventative medicine saves money.

It saddens me that we have a for-profit healthcare system. But, in the context of preventative medicine, it is advantageous from a public health as well as a financial perspective to offer this sort of incentive.

I hope that explanation makes sense!

16

NativeSon508 t1_j3xgcag wrote

I dunno. I completely agree w the theory of vax and their place in a healthy population but you can barely get an apple when donating blood but get vaxxed and get paid? There’s so many double standards and hypocrisy surrounding Covid that paying people to get vaxxed just doesnt sit well w me.

−4

HoneyBun21222 t1_j3xisea wrote

I completely hear where you're coming from with the comparison to blood donations. I agree those should be compensated.

I think one differences is that getting a vaccine also protects the person getting it AND is good for public health, whereas donating blood is not giving any health benefit to the person donating and ONLY is good for public health.

So, from and ethical standpoint, paying for blood donations is a little more complicated. In my opinion that should be more compensated, not less, but there's some ethical muddiness nto offering a financial incentive for a medical procedure that doesn't have the direct benefit to the individual.

There's also the cost. It's cost effective to offer this incentive, whereas to pay people to donate blood products would increase the cost of a medical treatment that's already really expensive, without the indirect cost-saving benefit that vaccines have.

But again, I hear you and agree that the premise of not compensating people who donate blood is problematic. Without direct benefit to the individual, I see even more reason to compensate people instead of less.

9

NativeSon508 t1_j3xkulo wrote

I appreciate the civil discussion and I’m w you on the muddy ethics of comping people for blood and the like. Do I think they should? Yes on one hand, no on the other. Eh. I really don’t have an answer.

−1