Summary is a bit misleading. This is about the fourth vaccine shot (2nd booster if you will). Vaccines are still recommended (and free) in Denmark if you are not vaccinated yet. The fourth shot is offered to above-50 residents and below-50 residents in risk groups.

> It sounds like Danes over 50 can get a free vaccine, and those under are prohibited from getting one. Why can't we have a middle ground where young people can get a vaccine if they really want to (and e.g. pay for it themselves)? This mirrors the common thread in Covid policy where everything is either forbidden or compulsory.

Yeah. It's insane if they prohibit under-50s from getting the vaccine. There are more reasons to get vaccinated than just self-protection: pretty much the only reason I get boosted is to lower my risk of infection to prevent passing it to an immunocompromised parent.

It’s not insane, they explain their decision very logically.

“In addition, we recommend that relatives of persons at particularly higher risk accept the offer of vaccination to protect their relatives who are at particularly higher risk.” I think in this case you can get the vaccine

To be absolutely clear, it is only the second booster shot which is not offered to people under 50. The primary vaccine (two shots) and first booster is still offered and recommended to anyone over 18.

because it's a scientific /public healthcare question whether the vaccine makes sense or not and in Denmark healthcare isn't a 'choose your own adventure' book.

With medical questions there's not much middle ground. Either a treatment is indicated or not.

This is just plainly untrue. Doctors disagree all the time about medical questions.

that discourse is already reflected in the consensus on who to vaccinate which is presented to you on that site as far as Denmark goes. Doctors don't just wing it, they go by those very same research results.

Doctors may disagree about individual cases of disease, they don't disagree at all about who to vaccinate, they follow guidelines.

"Oh, there's broad consensus because everybody follows the same document" looks worse, not better, than there being disagreement.

Broad consensus based on the merits > Internal disagreement > broad consensus based on "guidelines".

the only way to judge whether a vaccine has merit is by evaluating population level statistics on its risks and benefits. You either match the profile or you don't. There's nothing any individual doctor can add, that's not how vaccinations work. On what basis is a physician supposed to reject a vaccine when it would be indicated by the data, they just feel like it?

I mean, yes, informed personal judgment - just like every other medical decision they do.

This again is untrue. Some individual doctors I've encountered are much more pro-vax than others.

Sweden does it that way (or at least my home region of Stockholm). 4th shot is only recommended for 65+ and 18+ with risk factors, but everyone 18+ can get it. It's free either way.