More than 8,500 “likes” and 4,500 shares for fake news.
Sunday, May 22, a user wrote on Twitter that “citing more than 10,000 deaths and 1,000,000 adverse effects, the Italian court puts an end to the compulsory vaccination against Covid-19”.
No details or sources are provided, which does not prevent the message from being massively relayed.
And in particular by the actress Véronique Genest, known since the start of the pandemic for her antivax positions (which she defends herself from).
"Whatever the source, it would be wonderful if it were true," she even added, before deleting this second message.
And for good reason: this “information” is false.
Or at least, vastly over-interpreted.
This pirouette is performed by a professional disinformator, not to be repeated at home.
pic.twitter.com/hWRr5HU7J0
— Debunker des Etoiles (@DeBunKerEtoiles) May 23, 2022
As often, everything starts from a very real episode.
As in France, vaccination of caregivers is compulsory in Italy.
This means that all health professionals (but also hospital employees) who do not have an up-to-date vaccination schedule are suspended and cannot go to work.
This rule is to remain in effect until December 31.
But on April 28, a judge at the Padua court ordered the reinstatement of an unvaccinated nurse.
This is "the most appropriate precautionary measure to provisionally guarantee the right of the applicant pending a trial on the merits", reads the full decision.
A vaccinated person “can still be infected”
Clearly, this is a “provisional” measure which can be confirmed or reversed by another court, decrypts the L’indipendente site.
“It is roughly speaking a temporary reinstatement, with the obligation of tests at 48 or 72 hours, pending a final decision.
And that would only set precedent if a court confirmed the measure in second instance, ”adds Ugo di Luca, a Franco-Italian developer who is closely following the Covid pandemic on the other side of the Alps.
Many caregivers have protested their suspensions in court in recent months, and judges have issued widely varying decisions.
Constitutionally, questioning this vaccination obligation for caregivers seems difficult, analyzes for its part the specialized site Altalex.
Read alsoCovid-19: why does France, unlike England, maintain the vaccination obligation for caregivers?
Moreover, the judge of the court of Padua does not rely on the adverse effects of vaccination to justify his position.
On the other hand, he mentions the fact that a vaccinated person “can still be infected with the virus and can therefore infect others”.
This is because vaccines are not very protective against infection and transmission, especially after a while.
The effectiveness of three doses of the Pfizer/BioNTech vaccine against symptomatic infections even becomes almost nil after 4 to 5 months, according to the British health agency.
Under these conditions, compulsory vaccination does not appear to be a means "to achieve the desired goal, namely to preserve the health
(of caregivers and their patients)
", we can still read in the decision.
However, it should be remembered that vaccine protection against severe forms remains at good levels over time (around 70 to 80% after three months).