I think I have stated my views clearly, if in doubt read them again.
What on earth do you mean by health issues enshrining personal freedom?
Maybe not worded that well.
This recent short look at making the vaccine mandatory by World Health Organisation looks at the ethical issues that States/ public authorities should evaluate before putting in place a mandatory policy for vaccination.
WHO definition of mandatory includes the making life difficult for those not vaccinated view. Which WHO rightly see as making vaccination mandatory in practice (your view)
WHO say individual liberty and personal autonomy are important when considering effect of mandate on them.
It's also imo taking a broad view. How mandatory vaccination could affect already oppressed or marginalised communities. Furthering inequality as unintended effect.
The doc is putting forward guidelines for those looking at mandatory vaccination.
WHO position is for persuasion and public health education. Not for mandatory vaccination.
One reason being that mandatory vaccination could undermine public trust in the authorities. It could be counterproductive.
Whole doc reads as saying that States/ institution (and people) shouldn't jump to decision that mandatory vaccination is a good thing or necessary.
Given the quick spread of the virus at start of pandemic a lot of measures had to brought in quickly without the usual democratic process.
It's now looking to me that the virus is here to stay for near future. Its something societies will have to learn to live with for X number of years.
So now it's time to take more seriously things like individual liberty and personal autonomy.
As James Meadway said in previous link I posted if this conversation doesn't start then it will be left with the anti Vax loons and far right.
Arguing for individual liberty doesn't imo mean one is being ridiculous.
I think the WHO paper realises this.