When I hear about problems with vaccines which the military services require members to take, I get pretty squeamish. I've had to take my fair share of vaccinations and immunizations prior to deployment overseas, but I never thought too hard about whether or not they were safe. I figured that the Navy had a much better handle on their safety than I did, and they had no interest in losing me. So if I was told to get a shot, I got a shot (well, except for the flu shot, but avoidance is different from refusal).
Apparently, some troops have had adverse reactions to the anthrax vaccination. Based on the overall numbers, though, it would seem that the vaccine is, on the whole, safe for those who take it. And it's not unheard of for the military to over-emphasize some aspect of safety from health risks, such as the flu shot, or the sometimes ridiculous attitudes toward severe sunburns.
Nonetheless, had I been ordered to undergo the six-shot anthrax regimen, I'm quite sure I would have done it. That's the nature of military service. It can't really be otherwise.
And while I sympathize with some military folks who feel it would unnecessarily jeopardize their health, they're not really in a position to judge that. I have an immediate, negative reaction when I hear them say something like this:
"I have a kid to take care of," said [Airman Jessica] Horjus, 23, the mother of a 2-year-old, who lives with her daughter in military housing at Seymour Johnson Air Force Base in Goldsboro, N.C. "The Air Force can always fill my slot with someone else, but who's going to fill the mommy slot?"
Her refusal had an unsurprising result.
When a January order came for Horjus to get the vaccine before deploying to a Kuwait air base about 30 miles from Iraq, the soldier with commendations and Good Conduct Medals declined. Her commander demoted her and cut her pay in half, to less than $800 a month. In February, she declined a second and third order.
...
"There is no evidence that stockpiles of anthrax exist in Iraq or with Al Qaeda in Afghanistan or elsewhere," Horjus wrote in a memo to the base's appellate authority. "As a single mother, I cannot afford to unnecessarily risk my long-term health on a highly-reactive vaccine that supposedly protects against a threat that cannot be found."
We should be glad that we have no less an authority than Airman Horjus to evaluate the threat of being attacked with anthrax by insurgent forces in Iraq, or by Al Qaeda in Afghanistan.
Snarkiness aside, this is not the outlook and attitude that a military servicemember can have. The military just can't work that way. You can use your head, fight for changes that you feel are necessary, but when the order comes down, you obey it. You can't pick and choose.
The Post article has a parting story:
At Fort Campbell, Ky., Army Sgt. Richard Norris, 27, is awaiting punishment for refusing the shots. When his unit of the 101st Airborne Division left for Iraq in February 2003, Norris was sent anyway, with no vaccine -- and no questions asked.
He returned in December to find himself still flagged as "punishment pending," a status that has "put my whole career basically on pause.
"I've served my country for seven years," said Norris, a Seventh-Day Adventist who tried unsuccessfully to get a religious exemption from the vaccine program. "Refusing this vaccine is the first bad thing I've ever done. It wasn't even necessary to have this vaccine, and still I'm going to be punished.
And if you can't figure that one out, then you're not cut out for military service anyway, Sergeant.
Update: It didn't occur to me while I was writing this post originally, but this is what Sgt. Mom was talking about when she said that some military folks are unclear on the concept of military service. It's a marvelous post, so you should go read it if you haven't already.
