While listening to a local news report yesterday I heard something that really made me stop and wonder what the world is coming to. The reporter was interviewing a fire chief concerning the level of protection concerning covid-19 required by firemen in his department. The specific question was whether or not they were all getting vaccinated, but the answer turned out to be much broader than that. The answer brought up very concerning implications for the heath and safety of the community. His answer was that not only was the decision to get vaccinated or not a personal choice, but so is the use of other protective measures such as masking/distancing/sanitation. His position is that whether or not first responders want to take precautions against spreading communicable disease is the personal choice of the individual. What immediately sprang to mind upon hearing this was the example of “typhoid Mary.” Mary became famous a little over 100 years ago for being the first known case of an asymptomatic infected person accidentally (and unknowingly) spreading a deadly infectious disease throughout a community. In her case she “only” infected 53 people with a horrible disease, “only” three of whom died. The importance of her lesson was how deadly and dangerous the situation is when there are asymptomatic people with highly contagious deadly diseases in daily contact with those who are at risk. I can’t imagine a situation that is more ripe for this kind of problem than the situation where first responders are asymptotically infected while doing their job.

First responders are highly likely to be exposed to infected persons because that is their job – they respond when people are in distress. Therefore, the opportunity for first responders to become exposed to a disease such as covid is extremely high. In fact it is so high for some other diseases that being vaccinated is a job requirement, not a personal option. The same situation applies to other jobs such as teaching in public schools – vaccinations for certain diseases are mandatory. In addition to a high risk of them to be exposed and infected, there is also an extremely high risk of an asymptomatic responder infecting the “patient” because of the necessary extremely close proximity in many cases involving serious illness or injury (such as when helping at an automobile accident). The nature of the job is to work very hard (lots of heavy breathing, lots of shouting to communicate in the chaos of an event, etc.) in extremely close quarters with serious ill or injured persons whose immunity might be very low because of their condition. It is practically impossible to maintain any “social distancing” or to effectively wear face masks during typical events unless there is a clear and present danger to the fireman, at which point they do have the option to wear highly protective masks with supplied air – but this is seldom done except in situations where there are known respiratory hazards (such as smoke or chemicals). The “mental model” is all about protecting the first responders from the environment or disease from the person being helped, there is little or not consideration about protecting that person from the first responder.

I recently happened to observe a group of first responders in their “time off” mode of interacting with each other and their non-responder friends. They were taking absolutely zero measures to protect each other by wearing masks, distancing, or in any other observable actions. I assume that this is a direct response to the fact that they are regularly forced into the untenable situation of having to perform vital duties that radically violate all proposed safety protocols of masking, distance, avoiding contact, sanitizing after every potential encounter, etc. I can understand a point of view of since it is impossible to avoid the risk when doing the job involving the unknown public, there is little point in taking those precautions when dealing with colleagues and friends in social situations. I get that point of view – they are almost certainly going to be exposed during “work”, so why take so many difficult actions when relaxing during off hours?

This sets up a situation that is exactly why first responders should be mandated to be vaccinated ASAP. They present a grave danger to the public because of the nature of their job if they become carriers (asymptomatic or otherwise) of the virus. The point isn’t whether they are “brave enough” (or proud enough) to be willing to expose themselves and their family to the disease, it is that THEY are the danger to those that they so heroically serve. The risk being decided upon by the fire chief is not about whether the responders will get the disease, it is about whether they will spread it. In my opinion, the “choice” before the individual firemen shouldn’t be whether or not they want to be vaccinated (and do all of the other appropriate precautionary measures, including being tested on a very regular basis), it is whether or not they want to act as firemen for the duration of this pandemic. I agree that there is a personal choice to be made, but it is not whether or not to be vaccinated, it is whether or not you want the job.

By the way, it is my additional opinion that everyone should have a similar choice about complying with the protective measures of social distancing, hand washing, masking, etc. If they don’t want to do that, then they should be willing to stay out of all public places (quarantine themselves from the general public), and be willing to turn down any medical services associated with covid infection. That would make it a truly personal decision about how they want to deal with the risks, but those decisions would not impact the rest of the public that do not wish to be exposed because of someone else’s personal decision. Perhaps the results of being caught violating the rules and regulations with regard to masking and other this is just a citation, a citation that prevents that person from receiving medical attention or other public assistance associated with having the disease – thus freeing up the medical staff and facilities those of us that do not wish to die from the disease. As it is they are insisting upon having their cake and eating it too. They want their “freedom” but then expect the rest of us to pay the price associated with their choice. I think they should pay for their choices by accepting the natural results that come from them. (This is slightly “tongue in cheek” along the lines of Jonathan Swift’s1729 essay the “modest proposal” for solving the devastating food shortage in Ireland – it is likely to be an unpopular solution but it does seem to offer a fair criteria for making the choice of ignoring the public impacts of the current pandemic.)