[ad_1]
■ Progress: Park Sang-yeon’s anchor
■ Cast: Jiyeol Yang / Lawyer, Danbi Choi / Lawyer
* The text below may differ from the actual content of the stream, so please check the stream for more accurate information.
◇ Anchor> Corona 19 vaccination starts this Friday, and yesterday the government announced the number of vaccines. You decided to inoculate 360,000 people first, right?
◆ The shortest proportion> 360,000 people have priority vaccination, but in the case of preferential vaccination, they are residents and workers of nursing hospitals, nursing facilities, mental health rehabilitation centers or hospitals treating corona patients 19. For residents and workers, I decided to vaccinate first the medical staff and residents who are the most vulnerable to the coronavirus. Like you said, the number of subjects is just under 360,000.
◇ Anchor> When I asked AstraZeneca primary vaccination subjects, the consent rate was 93.9%. Would you like to say that there is no reluctance in this regard?
◆ Yang Ji-yeol> This is a completely different aspect than what I was worried about. In fact, when that story came out, there were places like overseas that dropped 60%. First of all, there will be one thing that Koreans believe in and will follow the government’s guarantee of safety despite the controversy over the AstraZeneca vaccine because the trust that the government has in the government’s quarantine system is very high. Also, most of them are nursing hospital workers, but they suffered a lot of hardship in the latest coronavirus outbreak, even now. So, I had to constantly test once a week, and things like going out and meetings were much more restricted compared to other people in general, so I will risk these vaccine lawsuits. Also, I look forward to the fact that more people, nearly 100% of vaccines will be given after it is revealed that there is nothing to worry about a week or a month after the initial vaccination begins.
◇ Anchor> But I think you should also look the other way. It also means that about 6% of them still refuse to get vaccinated. Is there any underlying anxiety or something?
◆ Danbi Choi> There are experts who make a different analysis than Mr. Jiyeol Yang. Because this number is 93%, it is a very high number, but as this topic is speaking, it is the first dose. In the case of the first vaccination, there are no people over 65 years of age. However, in the case of AstraZeneca, the most controversial are the elderly and over 65 years, so the controversial parts have been omitted. Therefore, there are analysts who say that the consent rate will surely be higher. Therefore, 6% cannot be considered low. So when you’re targeting the general public, the rate of not getting the vaccine can go up, because there are predictions like this. Then we need to analyze what is the cause of these things that we say will refuse vaccination. Because if the number of vaccination refusals increases like this, the government expects the formation of group immunity in November, and about 90% of the population should be vaccinated together to develop group immunity, which can hinder group immunity. That is why it is said that the analysis of the cause is very important, and that is why, as you said, if you first gave the vaccine and said that there is no guarantee, the safety in the analysis of the cause and such anxiety will inevitably fall.
◇ Anchor> Vaccination is not mandatory. If you don’t want that much, you don’t have to be right, but if you decline vaccination this time, the opportunity will return in November. I will listen to the transcript of related content.
[정경실 / 코로나19 예방접종대응추진단 예방접종관리반장 : 접종 거부 시 후순위로 연기되는 부분은 전 국민의 1차 접종, 전 국민의 접종이 끝나는 11월 이후 접종을 받으시게 되는 것으로 생각하시면 될 것 같습니다.]◇ Anchor> What happens to people who work in nursing hospitals if they refuse vaccination?
◆ Yang Ji-yeol> As you said, it is not something that can be forced. Denial of vaccination alone cannot be sanctioned. However, in the case of nursing hospitals, don’t they do PCR all the time? It seems that the test should continue to be maintained, and it is said that it will not pose a real disadvantage, but at the hospital level, the work itself is reduced to direct contact with the elderly, or because cases such as minors can be contacted at the age of 65 years. Usually such things can happen in the field, but if the work environment is going to worsen to the extent that it becomes discriminatory, it will be one more complaint and it will be a social problem, so it seems unlikely that this will not happen . Generally, as is still practiced, if the infection spreads due to personal oversight, or if this happens, it may be subject to a claim for redress. In a different sense than now, it is not that you are subject to a claim for reimbursement, but that since you have not been vaccinated, you still have to take the risk.
[저작권자(c) YTN & YTN plus 무단전재 및 재배포 금지]