Would a mandate on an experimental vaccine approved for emergency use only even past legal muster?

Fauci expects ‘flood’ of vaccine mandates once FDA gives jabs full approval

The country’s top infectious disease expert Dr Anthony Fauci predicts businesses and schools will rush to impose vaccine mandates as soon as the Food and Drug Administration gives its full approval of the Covid-19 shots.

In an interview with USA Today’s editorial board, Dr Fauci said FDA approval would embolden private organisations and educational institutions to require staff, customers and students to get the jabs.

“They can say, ‘If you want to come to this college or this university, you’ve got to get vaccinated. If you want to work in this plant, you have to get vaccinated. If you want to work in this enterprise, you’ve got to get vaccinated. If you want to work in this hospital, you’ve got to get vaccinated.

Contrary to popular belief, neither or our vaccines are actually fully FDA approved. Fauci himself is not sure when or if a full Federal approval will be coming. Some say the FDA will fully approve of the vaccines within the next month or so, while others believe that it is still a ways away.

Of course, like many other things, bringing up a lack of FDA approval is grounds for being censored for "misinformation" and such. After all, most people are not smart or interested enough to understand the nuances. Some people are led to believe (by their noses as they usually are) that the vaccines are fully approved because they are allowed to get them. Ahem. People are stupid.

Dr Fauci predicted vaccine mandates would not be issued at a federal level.

The FDA issued emergency use authorisation for the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines in December, allowing state and federal authorities to begin mass vaccination programmes for anyone age 18 or older. But it has since faced criticism for being slow to grant full approval for the vaccines, despite clinical trials overwhelmingly proving the vaccines are safe and effective.

The delay has been blamed by some lawmakers for causing vaccine hesitancy.

Imagine if someone had suggested at the beginning of the Trump administration that President Trump would be pushing for a Federal mandate for all American to take a vaccine or drug that was not fully tested and had not been given full FDA approval.  Heads would have exploded and every Democrat and liberal would be fighting tooth and nail any such mandate. 

To be clear the issue with the full approval likely has little or nothing to do with the effectiveness of the drug and most everything to do with studying the side effects.  We are currently aware of serious side effects that have left millions sick and some even hospitalized. I personally know of several people who were out on their feet after the second dose, and just last week my niece had to call 911 and ended up in the ER after she was suffering from a serious shortage of breath the day after. More recently there have been medical professionals questioning whether or not the vaccines are actually leading to death. These are obviously the sorts of things that the FDA has to fully vet before they can provide a full approval.

What we will need is an official disclosure of the side effects to be fully informed.  You hear them at the end of every drug commercial. Taking drug XYZ can lead to serious side effects up to and including rash, headaches, hair loss, blood in your urine, death. You know the drill. The full reason the FDA provides a full approval with a full disclosure of the side effects are so people can make a fully informed decision. You might even (gasp) hear that voice over suggest that you talk to your doctor without even mentioning asking your Government.

Without the full approval we are not really making a fully informed medical decision. 

So what if it is determined that these drugs might cause hospitalization or even death. I think it's a pretty safe bet that the former is factually true even if the latter is still in question.  Would it be right to force people who might be more medically prone to those effects to risk that in order to participate in society? Would it be right to make people who are more at risk from the side effects than the virus itself to take the drug to go to work or school? Would it be right to force people with natural antibodies (which are medically more effective than the vaccine in preventing the spread) to take a vaccine just to function in life? 

What would be the point in providing the information if our Government was going to make us take the drug regardless? The very concept the Government deciding for you whether or not the risks are better than the reward is chilling. 

Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty or safety - Ben Franklin