Written by: Jenn Drakes, Executive Contributor
Executive Contributors at Brainz Magazine are handpicked and invited to contribute because of their knowledge and valuable insight within their area of expertise.
“Don’t worry, be happy” is one of those clichés that is so much easier to say than do. Worrying is an ingrained human trait. As a human, you experience worry, and you do from a very young age. “Happy,” however, is the thing that gets dangled in front of us as we go through the journey of living our lives. “Happy” is what we are always trying to achieve – our desired end state, which can be a topic for another day. This article is about worry because it is fast becoming more relevant today than ever before.
Everywhere – at every bend and turn, worry can be seen in abundance – in every conversation, on faces, in actions, and in demeanors. In fact, it is in the very air we breathe. Why is that? Well, it seems a perfect storm is brewing. If you keep your eyes on your everyday routine, or you keep your focus on what others tell you to focus on, then more than likely you will miss the elements that are coming together to create that perfect storm. Moreover, when the storm finally passes, what once was will be gone. This is where you tilt your head, wondering if this article is trying to prevent or encourage worry. This article is aimed at neither of those things. Humans worry irrespective of economic standings, age, religion, or other factors. Making you aware of that enables you to pause for a moment and consider “What am I most worried about right now?”
Worry needs awareness because it is the precursor state that tends to get overlooked or swept aside. If ignored, it turns into something more. Merriam-Webster defines worry as “mental distress or agitation resulting from concern usually for something impending or anticipated.” Worry encompasses fear and anxiety and could lead to reactive responses that may not always be in one’s best interests. Right now, we are living out this particular circumstance. What do I mean by that?
Such circumstances appear to be the divide in relation to COVID-19 vaccinated and unvaccinated people. The fuel behind this divide is worry. The match is outside stimuli, massaging the worry into outright fear. The reactive response to that ignited fear is the willingness to give up freedoms and create, yet again, societal divides and second-class citizens. But what is the worry? Many pushing the divide are already vaccinated and, as such, are protected from COVID-19, right? If we are protected, then why worry about something we are protected from?
Those choosing to remain unvaccinated are not making that decision lightly. In fact, the many I have spoken with are well-articulated on their position to refrain from doing so. The divide is global and there are reasons to get vaccinated, but there are equally compelling and plentiful reasons to hold back. In speaking with those who are vaccinated and who support having a passport implemented, I discovered they believe their support will help reduce the COVID-19 case numbers. They have subscribed to the belief that there is a societal responsibility for everyone to partake in that effort. That viewpoint is not wrong, but the method to achieve this may very well be. Silence was the response received when I posed the following: “is taking the vaccine the only way to support that objective?” Well, is it?
Many of the COVID-19 vaccinated people also believe that unvaccinated individuals are more likely to spread the virus. Does sufficient data exist to substantiate this belief? From what I have read and understand, both vaccinated and unvaccinated people are contracting the Delta variant, albeit with different symptoms and recovery outcomes. For sure, some reports are saying that all new cases of COVID-19 are from those that had not been vaccinated. However, there is no publicity on where those people caught the virus. In fact, given the vaccines do not prevent vaccinated people from catching COVID-19 (it only prevents them from showing or having severe symptoms), it is fair to consider that those who are vaccinated may be probable carriers of the virus. This is what the CDC calls either “symptomatic breakthrough infections” or “asymptomatic breakthrough infections.” The former would be a vaccinated person that becomes infected with symptoms, while the latter is similar but without symptoms. As carriers, they could very well be passing the virus and its variants to others – vaccinated or not. From that perspective, unvaccinated individuals should be equally concerned about those who are vaccinated. However, as mentioned, this does not seem to be the case, and the strong concern over those who are unvaccinated appears to be one of the main factors in support of implementing a vaccine passport, enforcing vaccinated vs. unvaccinated divides.
Proper conversations lead to real understanding. I am fortunate to have been able to speak to many on both sides of this issue. In doing so, I found that each person was given the opportunity to see the perspective of the other. It is always fascinating when media downplays having proper conversations where there is more than one point-of-view to be heard. A proper conversation involves asking both participating parties “did you receive the vaccine?” and “why or why not?”. It is as simple as that. It should never be to push one’s own opinion and views on the other, no matter what side you might be on. You make your point backed by arguments, and the other makes their points backed by their arguments. In the end, either party should walk away with a new perspective that they can think on or act on.
While not all-encompassing, those that took the vaccine had reasons prominently related to…
Not wishing to catch the virus;
A desire to see and interact with loved ones; especially elderly family members;
A need to travel;
Following the masses;
Curbing work concerns.
In these discussions, the underlying theme was worry turned into fear, and with that came a need to deal with that reality.
Again, while not all encompassing, those that did not take the vaccine also had prominent reasons related to:
Personal health lifestyle doctrines;
Opting-in on the democratic right to choose;
Opting-out on partaking in what some considered a “clinical trial”;
Concerns about unknown side-effects;
Medical record privacy contradictions;
Religious beliefs;
Possible impacts to female reproduction – pregnancies in-progress and pending;
Other information that can be overwhelming to validate, especially if found online.
In these discussions, the underlying theme was about being fully informed to make a decision. Just like those who are vaccinated, some unvaccinated people are worried, while others are scared. Who wouldn’t be if one heard that there could be potential unknown side-effects? Whether true or not, something like that can make someone very uneasy. However, the fears suffered by vaccinated people and unvaccinated people are for different reasons or, rather, have different motivations. Those who are vaccinated seem to have been motivated by emotions and feeling pressured into returning to normalcy. Meanwhile, unvaccinated people seem to be motivated by distrust and caution; hesitant in taking a leap of faith that could impact the future health of themselves and pending generations. Many admire those that took the leap, but do not wish to follow. What was interesting, based on my personal observations, was that the divide had little to do with general anti-vaccination sentiments.
The decision not to consume the vaccines was based on a fundamental belief in having a right to make that choice. In September, the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (JCCF) in Ontario, Canada issued a legal warning letter to the Ontario Government. From here on, JCCF’s position on this issue will be used to assess the validity of people holding firm on their right to make a personal decision on whether to take the COVID-19 vaccines (specifically, the mRNA ones). The JCCF letter demanded that the vaccine passport “be immediately revoked,” citing legal action would be taken if the Ontario Government failed to halt its “unconstitutional discrimination against those who have decided against receiving the experimental vaccines.”
Let’s get a perspective on why JCCF purposely selected and used such strong words. Implementing the vaccine passport would mean that those that are unable to show proof of full vaccination by either the double-dose vaccines (Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna, and/or AstraZeneca) or single-dose vaccine (Janssen by Johnson & Johnson) would be denied access to a variety of businesses and organisations in the private, public, and not-for-profit sectors. Examples of this would be the inability to sit in at restaurants, cafes, and bars (take-out is fine, though); inability to access gyms, movie theaters, public events such as concerts or festivals, etc. Essentially, if it is something that takes place indoors and/or will have many people in close proximity to each other, and is non-essential, then it will more than likely require proof of vaccination. JCCF indicated that those not having that proof, by their democratic choice, have worry forced upon them in relation to potential job loss, inability to worship, as well as the inability to access other spaces like restaurants and gyms. The governmental push for vaccination has no provision for exemptions due to religion and creed, a right afforded to Canadians by their Charter and Human Rights Act.
Additionally, the JCCF called out the fact that the vaccine shots are new and have no long-term safety profile. Furthermore, the associated clinical trials will apparently not be completed until 2023; substantiating the supposed experimental nature of the undertaking. Although, JCCF was fighting for Ontarians, its message was inclusive of all those touched by the pressure to conform. For sure, countries carry their own laws affecting their citizens, but many who believe themselves to be under democratic rule must question at what point they unknowingly lost their democratic freedoms.
The JCCF cited many rights…
The right of informed consent provided under the privacy laws;
The right to be equal before the law;
The right to liberty and security of the person;
The right to bodily autonomy;
The right to decide what medical procedure to accept or reject;
The right to decide who sees or does not see your medical record;
The right to be fully informed on the side effects of vaccines;
Etc.
The divides exist even with the reality that the effects of vaccination are time-boxed. How long the vaccines last have been met with responses that make it clear that it is a matter of trial and error, and, of course, with that means constant monitoring to be sure of findings. Remember the ‘EXPERIMENTAL” word used by JCCF? Whether you agree with the term or not, it was clearly not used in jest. Especially given the following CDC response to the question “How long does protection from a COVID-19 vaccine last?”:
“It’s not yet known how long COVID-19 vaccine protection lasts. Recent studies show that protection against the virus may decrease over time. This reduction in protection has led CDC to recommend certain groups of people get a booster shot. Some people who received Pfizer Vaccine or Moderna Vaccine should get a booster shot at least 6 months after completing their initial vaccination series. Anyone 18 years and older who received a J&J/Janssen Vaccine should get booster shot at least 2 months after their vaccine.”
Did any of us get our shots knowing the time limitations? Even in presenting a passport, without knowing the duration of protection, is the passport really protecting anyone? So, when unvaccinated people appeal for information to help them make their decisions, can we really slight them in any way for that? What more still remains to be learnt? Pressuring people to comply in the face of these unknowns is questionable. Grasping power to enforce irrational measures are fear-based reactions, and ones that suggest vaccinated people made the right decision. Although this could indeed be the case, there are still many questions to be answered before we can claim that it is the undeniable truth. However, whether right or wrong, vaccinated or unvaccinated, it does not matter because that is not the fundamentally issue. The fundamental issue revolves around making a very personal choice and having the right to make that choice.
Someone once said to me “Dictatorship went out in the 20th century for a reason.” Depending upon where you are located in the world, this statement could be debated, but on the North American side of the globe, we prided ourselves on our democratic system and the freedoms it provided. This debate opens the flood gates to seeing dictatorship returning to North America in this century. If it does, what have we learnt? How will higher education have served us? All of us have been hit with unprecedented circumstances, but do those circumstances warrant the loss of treasured freedoms? The loss of the fundamental principles around democracy and living in a democratic society? Do those circumstances warrant a gut reaction to segregate and marginalise a portion of society who chose to consider their bodies, their religion, their beliefs, and proactively manage their own fears with research, a demand to be informed, and hesitancy to act?
As previously mentioned, this debate has nothing to do with vaccination or non-vaccination. It has everything to do with our right to choose when and under what comfort level (based on how much information and subject to what personal pressures) we will make personal health choices.
The bigger question is how much power do we wish our governments to have over us?Scrutinising our money is one thing. Prescribing what goes in our bodies is a whole different level of power. Earlier in the article, I mentioned a perfect storm brewing. A perfect storm forms from several negative, unusual, and sometimes unforeseen and unpredictable factors coming together. That is exactly where we are right now, and this storm, if left unchecked, will arrive with unprecedented power, saying “here is the medical care you get,” “here are the drugs you must take,” or “here are the privileges or services you are allowed.”
Are any of us really willing to have our fears erode the freedoms so many lost their lives to preserve? Now is the time to think differently, act differently, structure differently, and achieve different, but greater outcomes. I think you will be amazed at what that will look like down the road…
Jenn Drakes is an author, Life Strategist, and one of THE ACCELERATORS - a team of business-savvy coaches who work with SMBs (small-to-medium businesses) to propel them forward. In addition to reading this article, take in one of the Employ to Innovate shows for insights on a number of relevant topics, or schedule a call to discuss your growth needs – personal or professional.
Jenn Drakes, Executive Contributor Brainz Magazine
Jenn is a mom, serial entrepreneur, and life advocate who hosts the podcast Arrays of Living. She is also the creator and co-host of the Get Awesome Show, author of the book Aladdin Carpets - Change your Perspective, Change your Life.
In addition to Brainz Magazine, she is also a Featured Author on Plumose.co for her poetry and stories and Contributing Author on Boss Ladies Mindset.
Jenn is a hidden gem in a desert of gems, and everyone who discovers her is forever changed by her personality and presence. Over the years of working with youths and young adults, she was crowned The Original Goddess to acknowledge the shared feeling that "Jenn is wise beyond her years. I find her to be almost an "old soul" type of spirit." Her voice and writings are powerful, impactful, and life-changing because they trigger thought and promote tantalizing, intelligent conversations.
Today, she uses that wisdom to shatter glass ceilings and power up the purpose she believes everyone holds within. A belief that is foundationally based on all of us being born with a gift and a responsibility to use and share that gift to achieve sustainable happiness. Her mission is to improve how people feel about themselves and empower their sense of self-worth to achieve more personally and professionally than they imagined.
SOURCES:
CDC (Delta Variant): https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/variants/delta-variant.html
