That’s a question posed in a WSJ opinion piece by a medical ethics prof and a lawyer…
The essence of their argument:
The central canon of medical ethics is the free and informed consent of the research subject.
The current trio of vaccines are operating under emergency use authorizations, not full approval.
Courts have ruled that, in such situations, group members cannot be coerced into “serving as guinea pigs for experimental drugs”.
Never before have colleges insisted that students or employees receive an experimental vaccine as a condition of attendance or employment.
I think the authors make a compelling case … and, they deftly handle the usual counter-arguments.
============
But, elementary schools require pediatric vaccinations.
True, but those vaccines are fully approved for use (i.e. not experimental) … and justified as directly protecting the recipient students from infection and significant health risks.
But, data consistently shows that “for those under 30, the risks of serious morbidity and mortality are close to zero … and. that the vaccines pose “an excess risk for heart inflammation”
=============
But, vaccinating college students protects against transmission to potentially vulnerable groups, both directly and by building herd immunity.
A person may freely choose to accept medical risks for the benefit of others, as when one donates a kidney for transplant.
Those who make such sacrifices for others must truly be volunteers, not conscripts drafted by college administrators.
==============
But, faculty and staff will resist resuming classes unless they feel safer.
Yeah, but they have the opportunity to protect themselves by getting vaccinated.
The burden need not be shifted to students … especially those who are low risk, especially if they are covid survivors with natural immunity.
==============
The entire WSJ article is worth reading:
College students aren’t guinea pigs.
The Homa Files 
Leave a Reply