The Olympic vaccine debate: should athletes jump the queue?

Are the Tokyo 2021 Olympic Games still likely to go ahead? In comments that have stirred controversy around the globe, long-serving member of the IOC Dick Pound has suggested that it is likely if athletes are essentially able to jump the vaccine queue and receive their jabs ahead of time.

Speaking to Sky News, he said: “In Canada where we might have 300 or 400 hundred athletes – to take 300 or 400 vaccines out of several million in order to have Canada represented at an international event of this stature, character and level – I don’t think there would be any kind of a public outcry about that.

“It’s a decision for each country to make and there will be people saying they are jumping the queue but I think that is the most realistic way of it going ahead.”

The suggestion has received a generally negative reaction, but could Mr Pound be right?

It was reported that the British Olympic Association is in talks with the Government to secure Covid jabs before July, although it was keen to stress that any deals wouldn’t come at the expense of vulnerable and elderly people not receiving their vaccines.

There will come a time, hopefully in late spring/summer ahead of the Olympic Games when the athletes can be vaccinated

– Andy Anson

Its chief executive Andy Anson said he was operating on the assumption the Games are going ahead, and said of his athletes: “They won’t get priority access now because I think everyone – athletes included – would agree that the priority is the people who need it most; the frontline workers, the elderly, those with health issues and that’s the first wave of vaccination.

“There will come a time, hopefully in late spring/summer ahead of the Olympic Games when the athletes can be vaccinated. But we’ll do that when it’s appropriate and when the government feels it’s appropriate. We will be having conversations with government, but more about when the time is right.”

Australian Olympic swimmer Cate Campbell argued that athletes should get the jab if it is required for the Games to go ahead.

Although she didn’t push for athletes to be at the top of the queue, Campbell said: “If it’s a prerequisite, then I think we should get some sort of priority. If it’s not a prerequisite, we should be able to choose whether we get it before or after the Olympics. They are preparing for the Games as if there were no vaccine and whether or not athletes are vaccinated, I still think they would be able to compete.

“It’s a tough one. I think athletes have sacrificed a lot to represent Australia and if we look back on the year, I think we can appreciate how much sport brings to Australia. It’s part of our culture and our identity. In that case, I think that if it is a prerequisite to compete, then athletes should be able to get access to the vaccine.

“Frontline healthcare workers obviously have to be at the front of the queue because they are exposed to this all the time. So I’m not saying we go in front of anyone like that or the high-risk or elderly. But if we require the vaccine to do our job, I’d hope that would be made available before the Games. Working from home isn’t an option.”

At the moment, the IOC has not publicly sought priority from governments to vaccinate athletes, but it has encouraged national Olympic bodies to explore the possibility. Neither the IOC nor Tokyo officials have indicated that vaccination will be mandatory for those attending (although it has suggested athletes get the vaccination as a “demonstration of solidarity”) and, if that continues to be the case, the debate over whether athletes should receive the jab early will continue to rage.

Depending on how it’s handled, vaccinating athletes early could be a strong story or an optics disaster. As Mr Pound suggests, it will make a minimal practical difference in terms of vaccine rollout, and athletes could be held up as role models, demonstrating the vaccine’s safety.

The story could also be framed as necessary, given that Olympians are at increased risk of infection by competing at all. And it may be said that the Olympics should be ahead, generating a feeling of global uplift after a very dark period, and vaccines are a small price to pay.

The government vaccinating athletes will go down poorly if it has failed to vaccinate the vulnerable too

There would definitely be backlash, however, with ultra-fit Olympians in the low-risk demographic and therefore down the pecking order. No matter how it was framed, it would be seen by some as queue-jumping, and would likely not go down too well in countries where vaccination efforts are off to a slower start.

Germany, for example, is in an election year, and its slow vaccine record is likely to be a major campaigning issue – the government vaccinating athletes will go down poorly if it has failed to vaccinate the vulnerable too.

There is also a question of side effects, and whether a vaccine could potentially affect performance – even fractional tweaks could be the difference between a gold medal and going home empty-handed. WADA, the World Anti-Doping Agency, said it was continuing studies on the multiple vaccines, although it currently does not believe that any of them contravene anti-doping rules. Many athletes said they wanted more information ahead of any injection, and that they would consult leading sports doctors first.

It’s an interesting dilemma, and I can’t claim to offer a definitive answer. I don’t think athletes should jump the queue ahead of the most vulnerable but, if those groups (which make up a majority of deaths) are vaccinated, I see no reason why athletes shouldn’t be the first of the remaining low-risk groups to get the jab.

I’m still very unsure about whether the Olympics will go ahead at all but, if they do, protecting athletes seems a reasonable step to me.