Novak Djokovic, who missed out Australian Open because of his stance on Covid-19 vaccines, says he is not exactly against vaccines as such but strongly favors “freedom to choose what you put into your body”. So much that the world's number one men's tennis player is willing to let his chances at Wimbledon and French Open go rather than get a shot. But is it a question of personal freedom and individual rights when (a) the vaccines have proved their efficacy and there’s no scientific argument against them, and (b) the infectious nature of the pandemic implies some collective responsibilities as well?

“I was never against vaccination, but I’ve always supported the freedom to choose what you put in your body,” he told the BBC in a long interview this week: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-60354068 He confirmed that he’d had vaccines in childhood and does not want to be associated with the anti-wax movement.

Yet, he sticks to his own stance on vaccines, even after it led to his deportation from Australia last month. Djokovic has won 20 grand slam titles, and being forced out of the Australian Open, he let his chief competitor, Rafael Nadal, make history winning the 21st grand slam title. Still, he is prepared to skip even Wimbledon and the French Open but won’t change his stance on the vaccine. Even a Covid-19 infection twice failed to change his mind: https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/02/15/novak-djokovic-covid-vaccine-tournaments/

Is this rational, logical? He doesn’t want to sound irrational. He says he’s keeping his mind open about the possibility of being vaccinated, “because we are all trying to find collectively, a best possible solution to end Covid”: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0014zdm

But in that case, why not consider the data over more than a year now? Before the vaccines were developed and during early stages of their introduction, there was skepticism and even conspiracy theories, but now more than 10 billion shots have been administered worldwide: https://ourworldindata.org/, we have seen their benefits outweigh side effects, they have saved lives: https://www.ecdc.europa.eu/en/news-events/who-ecdc-nearly-half-million-lives-saved-covid-19-vaccination

A vaccine-skeptic, if rational, would have at least changed their arguments after a year. Plus, there’s question of duty too, to stop the spread and save others.