Vaccine Passports - currently being considered in Scotland & Wales

[AlterEgo]

Hasn’t it been said that we have now reached herd immunity and that cases are dropping?

Surely this means that vaccine passports are dead on arrival and aren’t needed now?

If they still get passed then this was never about a virus.

Well yes, we have reached, or are approaching, herd immunity, because tens of millions of people did the proper, civic thing and got vaccinated.

 

[Bantamzen]

The system is only designed to work if you are registered with a GP - There will be a not insignificant group of younger people who are either not registered at all or registered where they lived several years ago (perhaps at Uni). When you try to log into a system and it fails that is a barrier and any friction can only stop people from engaging.

I was in this group myself, despite being 50 I hadn't used the NHS in over 25 years. So I had to register with a local GP, get my NHS number then book. And to be fair, even though my nearest GP insisted on it all being done by post, one slightly further away allowed online registration & ID verification which was sorted out in less than 2 hours, allowing me then to book both jabs.

So it may be slightly more complex than just people not being registered, it may be that the practices of some GPs makes registering more off-putting and convoluted.

Whilst all of this would be very troubling if true, it isn’t.

Thanks to public-key cryptography, the QR codes on vaccination passes can be digitally signed by the NHS in a way that is impossible to recreate (in a practical amount of time) but trivially easy to verify, with no need for any direct (or even indirect) access to NHS records. It’s the digital equivalent of an elaborate rubber stamp or embossed seal on a paper document.

No developer, at least no competent developer would say "impossible to recreate". OK so there's no link to the DBs, that does not mean they cannot be recreated. And besides a valid QR code can still be shared where venues do not ask for supporting ID, which many people do not carry all the time and is not a legal requirement.

The government has also published an app called NHS Pass Verifier which anyone wishing to verify a pass can use if they do not wish to develop their own method. The app uses a phone’s camera to scan the QR code and displays valid/invalid and the holder’s name and date of birth, no more information than a nightclub (or similar business) would already have access to when looking at or scanning someone’s ID in the way it does today.

Whilst some venues do ask for ID / name / DOB, many that could one day be required to use the codes don't. Even under venue check-in that data wasn't being shared. So thanks, you've added to the list of reasons why this is all a very bad idea.

 

[NorthKent1989]

Well yes, we have reached, or are approaching, herd immunity, because tens of millions of people did the proper, civic thing and got vaccinated.

So ergo no need for passports then if millions of people did the “proper and civic thing” and got vaccinated for a virus with a 99% survival rate and a average age death of 82, I’m correct in saying that

 

[AlterEgo]

So ergo no need for passports then if millions of people did the “proper and civic thing” and got vaccinated for a virus with a 99% survival rate and a average age death of 82, I’m correct in saying that

I agree, although you miss the fact that the hospitals had to be cleared for us even to get a result close to what you posted. I just wish the lightbulb would go on with some people that vaccines are the route out. Self-protection against the disease and a reduced transmission rate are civic duties which one should have an excellent reason to refuse to perform.

You could massively improve the quality of our beaches by preventing 90% of the people who currently dump litter on them from doing so. A lot of the vaccine refusers are making the point you're making, and looking rather like the remaining 10% of litter dumpers who turn around as they empty a bin liner of crap onto the sand and say "great to have a clean beach!" and roll out their towel to sunbathe.

 

[yorkie]

As a previous Conservative voter, it will be a long time before they get my vote again.

Not that there is much alternative in some places; a vote for Labour is a vote for an even more authoritarian party that wanted even harsher and longer lockdowns and restrictions and are utterly opposed to us enjoying the freedoms we currently have.

Hasn’t it been said that we have now reached herd immunity and that cases are dropping?

See my previous posts about endemic equilibrium.

I think that we are at a very high level of population immunity but it's not yet enough to avoid a lot more people getting the virus over the coming months.

However it doesn't really matter as the vast majority of people have immunity now and the vast majority of vulnerable people have very good immunity in the form of two doses of the vaccine.

Surely this means that vaccine passports are dead on arrival and aren’t needed now?

If they still get passed then this was never about a virus.

I don't think vaccine passports will have much of a useful lifespan if young people continue to get vaccinated and if population immunity continues to increase. The amount of hassle and resentment they will cause for such little benefit makes it not worthwhile in my opinion.

We need more people to get vaccinated but the current messaging is terrible and the threat of mandatory vaccine passports for domestic use isn't a sensible way to achieve that.

So ergo no need for passports then if millions of people did the “proper and civic thing” and got vaccinated for a virus with a 99% survival rate and a average age death of 82, I’m correct in saying that

True but this is only being achieved by people actually getting vaccinated.

The problem is we need to increase the level of vaccination further otherwise we re going to continue to have a lot more infections than would otherwise be the case, and a lot of infections in unvaccinated people dies create pressure for the NHS, even though only a tiny percentage need hospital treatment.

By refusing to get vaccinated, people are putting more power in the hands of the authoritarians who want us to be under restrictions, show vaccine passports everywhere we go, wear masks etc.

Every additional vaccination helps us to reject the demands of the authoritarians.

I hope I have convinced you to get vaccinated (if you have not already) but at the end of the day it is your choice and I don't agree with militant tactics to achieve this.

 

[NorthKent1989]

I agree, although you miss the fact that the hospitals had to be cleared for us even to get a result close to what you posted. I just wish the lightbulb would go on with some people that vaccines are the route out. Self-protection against the disease and a reduced transmission rate are civic duties which one should have an excellent reason to refuse to perform.

You could massively improve the quality of our beaches by preventing 90% of the people who currently dump litter on them from doing so. A lot of the vaccine refusers are making the point you're making, and looking rather like the remaining 10% of litter dumpers who turn around as they empty a bin liner of crap onto the sand and say "great to have a clean beach!" and roll out their towel to sunbathe.

It should be a choice, sorry but you cannot tell people what to do, I may end up getting the jab, but I shan’t virtue signal with the old “civic duty” line.

But most aren’t vaccine refusers as you call them, most are weighing up the options and they should be allowed to do so, we still do have a choice in this country you know and I say, it’s virus with an average age death of 82, I wish that lightbulb would go up in people’s head and realise that band stop treating Covid like it’s the apocalypse.

Not that there is much alternative in some places; a vote for Labour is a vote for an even more authoritarian party that wanted even harsher and longer lockdowns and restrictions and are utterly opposed to us enjoying the freedoms we currently have.

See my previous posts about endemic equilibrium.

I think that we are at a very high level of population immunity but it's not yet enough to avoid a lot more people getting the virus over the coming months.

However it doesn't really matter as the vast majority of people have immunity now and the vast majority of vulnerable people have very good immunity in the form of two doses of the vaccine.


I don't think vaccine passports will have much of a useful lifespan if young people continue to get vaccinated and if population immunity continues to increase. The amount of hassle and resentment they will cause for such little benefit makes it not worthwhile in my opinion.

We need more people to get vaccinated but the current messaging is terrible and the threat of mandatory vaccine passports for domestic use isn't a sensible way to achieve that.


True but this is only being achieved by people actually getting vaccinated.

The problem is we need to increase the level of vaccination further otherwise we re going to continue to have a lot more infections than would otherwise be the case, and a lot of infections in unvaccinated people dies create pressure for the NHS, even though only a tiny percentage need hospital treatment.

By refusing to get vaccinated, people are putting more power in the hands of the authoritarians who want us to be under restrictions, show vaccine passports everywhere we go, wear masks etc.

Every additional vaccination helps us to reject the demands of the authoritarians.

I hope I have convinced you to get vaccinated (if you have not already) but at the end of the day it is your choice and I don't agree with militant tactics to achieve this.

I may end getting the jab and I encourage people who want it to get it, just like I’ll take into account those who do want to wait, it’s understandable that people do want to do that.

I think DVP’s will end up being rejected and will be dropped in time, even the Green pass scheme in Israel has been quietly dropped because it was getting unworkable and then reaction against them has been strong.

I feel Boris needs to take a less authoritarian approach to such matters, he’s only feeding The conspiracy theorists, the whole reason why there is even an anti vax movement is because of the government trying to make them
Mandatory or using coercion.

 

[MikeWM]

By refusing to get vaccinated, people are putting more power in the hands of the authoritarians who want us to be under restrictions, show vaccine passports everywhere we go, wear masks etc.

Every additional vaccination helps us to reject the demands of the authoritarians.

I have to say that I'm increasingly seeing this the other way around. Every time you give in to an abuser they want more from you, not less. This should be very apparent in the way we have been treated in the last 16 months. The only way to stop the abuse is to say no, clearly and firmly.

Of course, if on close assessment you believe that the vaccine is of benefit to you, you should take it, irrespective of the motives of those urging you to do so. Your own health is primary.

But if you don't believe it is of benefit, then doing so anyway just to please an abuser is very unlikely to help stop the abuse, it is likely to continue to make it worse.

 

[island]

And you expect that our NHS will come up with an offline only cryptographic verification system?
Or that it will be online only and create a mountain of data for check ins or the QR verifications to have more sellable or tracking data?

The NHS has no need to come up with one, it already exists and is used all around the world.

The app needs to connect online at first use to download the digital signatures but will happily work in aeroplane mode thereafter.

You are either paranoid or looking for irrational reasons to support your irrational fear.

No developer, at least no competent developer would say "impossible to recreate".

This isn’t a question of developers’ competence, it is a question of maths. Complex maths, yes, but the security of public-key cryptography isn’t something that there are multiple valid opinions about.

OK so there's no link to the DBs, that does not mean they cannot be recreated.

Sure, they can be recreated by scanning every vaccine pass in the country. Is anyone going to do that? No. Next question.

And besides a valid QR code can still be shared where venues do not ask for supporting ID, which many people do not carry all the time and is not a legal requirement.

As I said in my last post, ID is routinely requested at the entry to nightclubs and music festivals, and in many cases it is scanned onto an “ID SCAN” or similar terminal for verification of authenticity and to check that the holder isn’t barred etc.

I appreciate and understand you are against vaccine passports. I don’t especially care for them either, but they may turn out to be a necessary evil. However, like Kellyanne Conway, you are not entitled to use ”alternative facts” in your argument.

 

[yorkie]

I have to say that I'm increasingly seeing this the other way around. Every time you give in to an abuser they want more from you, not less. This should be very apparent in the way we have been treated in the last 16 months. The only way to stop the abuse is to say no, clearly and firmly.

I don't disagree, and I do unconditionally say "no" to authoritarian ideology related to Covid matters, but it's easier to make this argument as we increase population immunity.

Of course, if on close assessment you believe that the vaccine is of benefit to you, you should take it, irrespective of the motives of those urging you to do so. Your own health is primary.

I agree but the safety of vaccines is very high and there isn't much of a case to say that natural infection is better (except potentially in very young children).

But if you don't believe it is of benefit, then doing so anyway just to please an abuser is very unlikely to help stop the abuse, it is likely to continue to make it worse.

It's a combination of us all saying no to the lockdowns restrictions etc but also getting vaccinated. If no-one had got vaccinated , the reality is that we wouldn't have won over the hearts and minds of the majority of the public in regards to ending restrictions.

The authoritarians won't give up but this isn't about them; it's about winning the middle ground. The authoritarians know they are a minority but are trying to scare the majority.

So it's a very complex situation that isn't analogous to the scenario you describe.

 

[HST274]

weighing up the options

What options? Get a healthy injection or place yourself more at risk? The point is the vaccine isn't going to harm you unless you have a specific medical condition or allergic reaction.- anyone who believes that it will kill you or give you covid or put weird electronic chips in your blood is wrong. Almost all side effects are almost unnoticeable, others may involve headaches or nausea for one or two days. And if you take it to celebrate some weird sense of freedom then IMHO that is the same as not wearing a seatbelt for some weird freedom. Is covid more dangerous than a car crash- no. But can it kill- yes and it is more likely to kill you without a vaccine. At the same time yes it is a choice, that is good but if you make the choice to not take it then I don't care if you won't be able to go to a pub for a year, or fly to Greece with isolating, at the end of the day that is your choice and your loss. And also every single person who I know has had the vaccine- I am pretty sure they are not dead and they haven't started saying in a robotic voice 'I will now start voting tory, Boris is the best', they still dislike him as ever before.

But if you don't believe it is of benefit, then doing so anyway just to please an abuser is very unlikely to help stop the abuse, it is likely to continue to make it worse.

But it is of benefit. End of, deal with it. BUT. Let's suggest it doesn't give you anything, no protection, no safety like it or not our government has placed many restriction which can be bypassed with the vaccine- unless you believe it harms you surely you can see that as a reason to get it? And if you do believe it harms then I am sorry.

One final point as much as I support those pushing taking the vaccine, use of words like authoritarian and regime is ridiculous. I would invite you to spend a year in North Korea- oh wait you are literally not allowed in because they won't let you in, just as their citizens can't leave. That is a true authoritarian government and regime. We however can visit many countries even in covid. Even those unvaccinated can visit just face isolation-you can still go. And what about anti-lockdown protests- they may be shown in a bad light but they still exist and are allowed to gather in the first place. And lockdown? Lockdown was made to protect a group of vulnerable people who matter as much as you and is large enough to be worth shutting down the country, plus even a healthy 20 year old can be negatively impacted by the virus, potentially contracting long covid or even being hospitalised. And you whole argument about being forced to get the vaccine- YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE TO GET IT. In a true authoritarian government you would have been locked up by now or tied to a chair and jabbed up just like with being a pacifist in WW1 you would be locked up. And one final point, post 17th of May basically gave us a lot of freedoms- pub, cinemas and yes not night clubs but they were a hotspot- and maybe you lived in nightclubs or felt strangled by masks (which many people didn't wear and weren't penalised) but I felt 'free'. But that is an opinion.

Also just to be clear I would not agree with another lockdown now that most have been jabbed, but if there is another we know who to blame. Anyway that has been my rant, I will now wait five minutes to be torn apart.

 

[Bantamzen]

This isn’t a question of developers’ competence, it is a question of maths. Complex maths, yes, but the security of public-key cryptography isn’t something that there are multiple valid opinions about.

And guess what, hackers also know maths!!

Sure, they can be recreated by scanning every vaccine pass in the country. Is anyone going to do that? No. Next question.

They don't need to, surely you've figured out the big problem here by now?

As I said in my last post, ID is routinely requested at the entry to nightclubs and music festivals, and in many cases it is scanned onto an “ID SCAN” or similar terminal for verification of authenticity and to check that the holder isn’t barred etc.

Actually it isn't. Even though I'm in my 50s I still often go to many, and have yet to once be asked.

I appreciate and understand you are against vaccine passports. I don’t especially care for them either, but they may turn out to be a necessary evil. However, like Kellyanne Conway, you are not entitled to use ”alternative facts” in your argument.

A "necessary evil"? Hmmm, you are blinded by the tech and are ignoring a) the security implications, b) data protection issues & c) the fact that we might one day have to prove that your health fits a mandated profile or miss out on what are currently ordinary activities.

 

[35B]

Hasn’t it been said that we have now reached herd immunity and that cases are dropping?

Surely this means that vaccine passports are dead on arrival and aren’t needed now?

If they still get passed then this was never about a virus.

I'm not sure where the idea that we're already at herd immunity comes from - if the R0 of Delta is 6, then herd immunity would require 83% of the population to be immune. The maths are also more complicated, meaning that herd immunity for a disease at 83% only works if the disease is not already widespread because it's enough to stop the disease starting to spread any distance; with widespread infection, the levels required to stop it in its tracks are higher - I believe epidemiologists refer to this as overshoot.

And guess what, hackers also know maths!!


They don't need to, surely you've figured out the big problem here by now?


Actually it isn't. Even though I'm in my 50s I still often go to many, and have yet to once be asked.


A "necessary evil"? Hmmm, you are blinded by the tech and are ignoring a) the security implications, b) data protection issues & c) the fact that we might one day have to prove that your health fits a mandated profile or miss out on what are currently ordinary activities.

I work closely with IT security experts, and of all the things that worry them about data privacy, abuse of the QR codes along the lines you suggest is off the bottom of the scale. If the government wanted to join the dots on ID, there are much better ways than the vaccine passports for achieving that.

 

[NorthKent1989]

What options? Get a healthy injection or place yourself more at risk? The point is the vaccine isn't going to harm you unless you have a specific medical condition or allergic reaction.- anyone who believes that it will kill you or give you covid or put weird electronic chips in your blood is wrong. Almost all side effects are almost unnoticeable, others may involve headaches or nausea for one or two days. And if you take it to celebrate some weird sense of freedom then IMHO that is the same as not wearing a seatbelt for some weird freedom. Is covid more dangerous than a car crash- no. But can it kill- yes and it is more likely to kill you without a vaccine. At the same time yes it is a choice, that is good but if you make the choice to not take it then I don't care if you won't be able to go to a pub for a year, or fly to Greece with isolating, at the end of the day that is your choice and your loss. And also every single person who I know has had the vaccine- I am pretty sure they are not dead and they haven't started saying in a robotic voice 'I will now start voting tory, Boris is the best', they still dislike him as ever before.

But it is of benefit. End of, deal with it. BUT. Let's suggest it doesn't give you anything, no protection, no safety like it or not our government has placed many restriction which can be bypassed with the vaccine- unless you believe it harms you surely you can see that as a reason to get it? And if you do believe it harms then I am sorry.

One final point as much as I support those pushing taking the vaccine, use of words like authoritarian and regime is ridiculous. I would invite you to spend a year in North Korea- oh wait you are literally not allowed in because they won't let you in, just as their citizens can't leave. That is a true authoritarian government and regime. We however can visit many countries even in covid. Even those unvaccinated can visit just face isolation-you can still go. And what about anti-lockdown protests- they may be shown in a bad light but they still exist and are allowed to gather in the first place. And lockdown? Lockdown was made to protect a group of vulnerable people who matter as much as you and is large enough to be worth shutting down the country, plus even a healthy 20 year old can be negatively impacted by the virus, potentially contracting long covid or even being hospitalised. And you whole argument about being forced to get the vaccine- YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE TO GET IT. In a true authoritarian government you would have been locked up by now or tied to a chair and jabbed up just like with being a pacifist in WW1 you would be locked up. And one final point, post 17th of May basically gave us a lot of freedoms- pub, cinemas and yes not night clubs but they were a hotspot- and maybe you lived in nightclubs or felt strangled by masks (which many people didn't wear and weren't penalised) but I felt 'free'. But that is an opinion.

Also just to be clear I would not agree with another lockdown now that most have been jabbed, but if there is another we know who to blame. Anyway that has been my rant, I will now wait five minutes to be torn apart.

Wow, a lot to unpick here, 18-30 year olds are the age group least effected by Covid, I’m fed up having to repeat this, but the young who have had Covid have a 99% survival rate and Covid has an average age death of 82, not bad for the most deadly virus in history.

And yes they are weighing up options, they are allowed to do that you know, why should a healthy person get a jab which has had some adverse effects just so you can feel safe, the jab doesn’t stop you getting Covid or passing it on, Covid is something you have to live with now, get used to it.

Ive had Covid and many others have had Covid and they’re still alive, so the idea that covid is more deadly than the flu at this point is frankly a hysterical thing to say.

And we may not be North Korea but we aren’t exactly far off from it, in case you didn’t realise the regime (and yes I will say the regime) wants to ban protesting and pass a bill in which you can get up to 10 years go doing so, DVP’s are the epitome of an authoritarian society, its coercion, it’s suing you can’t live a normal life until you take a jab.

Quite frankly I’m sick and tired of people trying to justify DVP’a with false equivalences.

I'm not sure where the idea that we're already at herd immunity comes from - if the R0 of Delta is 6, then herd immunity would require 83% of the population to be immune. The maths are also more complicated, meaning that herd immunity for a disease at 83% only works if the disease is not already widespread because it's enough to stop the disease starting to spread any distance; with widespread infection, the levels required to stop it in its tracks are higher - I believe epidemiologists refer to this as overshoot.

Well Covid cases are certainly dropping though, I know that disappoints a few people on here, but they are dropping so theres no need for authoritarian restrictions anymore.

 

[duncanp]

Oh well, that's a relief, the ever so reliable and trustworthy Grant Shapps, who seems to change his mind more often than his underpants, has said we won't need a vaccine passport to go into a shop or the pub.

What was that I heard about "..never believe anything until it is officially denied..."

The Government will not "go as far" as requiring vaccine passports for entry to shops or pubs, the Transport Secretary has said.

Asked on ITV's Good Morning Britain about concerns over vaccine passports being required for entry into certain places, Grant Shapps said: "I don't know why this is particularly controversial - nine out of 10 people have had their first vaccinations and are going on to have their second, so most people have already had their vaccinations anyway - and I'm talking about adults who have had their vaccinations anyway.

"So, for most people this doesn't matter one way or the other. It does protect not just your life but other people's lives when you get vaccinated, so of course, as a society, we should be encouraging it.

"We won't go as far as requiring it to enter a shop or the pub, we will for very close contact things like going to nightclubs - other countries are for international travel - so I think there is precious little reason not to be vaccinated, every good reason to be vaccinated. Why wouldn't we want to save lives? It's just obvious to me."

 

[35B]

Wow, a lot to unpick here, 18-30 year olds are the age group least effected by Covid, I’m fed up having to repeat this, but the young who have had Covid have a 99% survival rate and Covid has an average age death of 82, not bad for the most deadly virus in history.

And yes they are weighing up options, they are allowed to do that you know, why should a healthy person get a jab which has had some adverse effects just so you can feel safe, the jab doesn’t stop you getting Covid or passing it on, Covid is something you have to live with now, get used to it.

Ive had Covid and many others have had Covid and they’re still alive, so the idea that covid is more deadly than the flu at this point is frankly a hysterical thing to say.

And we may not be North Korea but we aren’t exactly far off from it, in case you didn’t realise the regime (and yes I will say the regime) wants to ban protesting and pass a bill in which you can get up to 10 years go doing so, DVP’s are the epitome of an authoritarian society, its coercion, it’s suing you can’t live a normal life until you take a jab.

Quite frankly I’m sick and tired of people trying to justify DVP’a with false equivalences.

And some of us are equally weary of the hysterical false equivalences in the other direction. There are issues with vaccine passports, there are issues with what the government is trying to do with public order legislation and on migration. But if you are comparing these measures, arguably authoritarian as they are, with truly totalitarian regimes like the famine ridden hell hole that is North Korea, then your moral radar needs some serious tuning. There is simply no comparison.

As for the efficacy of vaccines, they do work well but not perfectly, and in a very small minority of cases, they have side effects. Every sensible analysis done has shown that the risk/benefit ratio strongly favours taking the vaccine, even for those in the 18-30 group. Hell, even the fact that JCVI have not recommended it for 12-17 year olds is to do with them needing more data for that group before they can approve it based on the narrow criteria they employ.

You blather on about herd immunity as though it's the answer to why we don't need to do anything, yet you by the views you put forward choose yourself and encourage others to act as free riders on something where the benefit is both personal and to the population at large. There's a lot that @yorkie and I disagree strongly on in this area, but I completely agree with him that the success of the vaccination programmes here and elsewhere is our key to getting back to a pre-2020 way of living.

 

[MikeWM]

I agree but the safety of vaccines is very high and there isn't much of a case to say that natural infection is better (except potentially in very young children).

I'm not sure that's going to turn out to be the case, else why are we discussing booster shots in the next few months? Compare those who had SARS-1 still having immunity to SARS-2 after a couple of decades, which is pretty good immunity.

See for example
https://www.hartgroup.org/natural-vs-vaccine-immunity/

Because all parts of a virus are involved in a natural infection, there is a higher probability that those people who have acquired immunity will be protected against many future variants of the virus given the percentage similarity in the sequences. Indeed this is supported by the fact that those individuals who carry immunity to other coronaviruses seem to have efficient cross-immunity to SARS-CoV-2 So, while it is true that vaccination and infection both elicit immune responses, the exact nature of this response in each case is very different. An effective immune response depends upon quick recognition of a pathogen, a rapid response and creation of a long-term memory of the infection. The comprehensive recognition of naturally acquired immunity is qualitatively superior and will be more flexible and diverse to cope with future, related viruses.

which makes perfect sense to me. I'd have to see some pretty convincing evidence to persuade me that this was wrong.

Of course you may well argue from a comfort point of view that it is better to have a vaccination than the disease, which is most cases will probably turn out to be true! But I have absolutely no idea from a medical point of view why for example we are insisting on vaccinating people who have already had the disease, it makes zero sense.

It's a combination of us all saying no to the lockdowns restrictions etc but also getting vaccinated. If no-one had got vaccinated , the reality is that we wouldn't have won over the hearts and minds of the majority of the public in regards to ending restrictions.

The authoritarians won't give up but this isn't about them; it's about winning the middle ground. The authoritarians know they are a minority but are trying to scare the majority.

So it's a very complex situation that isn't analogous to the scenario you describe.

But we're going to hit 90% of adults with one dose, and only a few % points below that for the second - and significantly higher than that in the groups that are actually in danger from the disease. If this was really just about protecting people from a disease then this seems a very good time to say 'that went surprisingly well, time to get on with getting back to normal now.' Instead we see an ever-more-shrill and ever-more-desperate ramping up of propaganda against the small minority that haven't 'done what they were told to do'. Why?

I also refer Israel and Iceland and some of the 'blue' states of the USA, which have similar high vaccine uptake to the UK and yet have recently reintroduced restrictions such as masks and/or distancing. I'm really not convinced that high vaccine uptake is being particularly successful at stopping these authoritarians.

In any event, whatever the level of uptake, there appears no logical argument for vaccine passports, as the vaccines do not prevent infection and do not prevent onward transmission. (Compared to the fact that there *is* some logical argument for 'testing passports' - as abhorrent as they would also be, at least they make some tiny degree of sense). See for example

https://www.hartgroup.org/vaccination-prevents-transmission-myth/

The principle defence against a respiratory virus actually takes place in the mucosal membranes of the respiratory tract, and the high proportion of those with some degree of natural immunity fight off SARS-CoV-2 there, preventing it replicating significantly in the bloodstream. Therefore, it is not actually surprising that a vaccine which works mainly in the circulatory system has little effect on stopping what starts as a respiratory infection. If that is the case, it is illogical to expect any reduction in transmission.

...

Whether or not the vaccine reduces the severity of disease remains an open question, although Israel has concerns that this is also waning. If that is the sole benefit of the vaccines which has survived transition from the clinical trial scenario to the real world, any discrimination or coercion of any form aimed at those who choose not to be vaccinated is completely unsustainable.

 

[AlterEgo]

It should be a choice, sorry but you cannot tell people what to do, I may end up getting the jab, but I shan’t virtue signal with the old “civic duty” line.

But most aren’t vaccine refusers as you call them, most are weighing up the options and they should be allowed to do so,

The vaccine has been in circulation now for 8 months. I had mine in March and May. I think there has been ample time for most people to come to a conclusion, privately. It is not a very difficult choice to make for the vast majority of people; the risk of proper harm is so low as to be inconsiderable, on the level of deciding whether or not a 100 mile car journey with the potential to save one stranger's health or life is worth the personal risk to you. If we are being honest, most of the vaccine refusers (and you are one, having refused to get it) are making their decision based on a lack of trust in government and as a way of exercising some personal control, having had a lot of personal choice ripped away over the last 18 months. I understand this reaction having been very frustrated with lockdown and the incompetence of the government too, but at this stage, with a clear exit route through a vaccinated population, this self-centred stance can no longer be respected.

You can claim that saying vaccine acceptance as a civic duty is a virtue signal, but it is not hugely different to giving blood. One does this for the benefit of other people and promote blood-giving as a morally responsible thing, partly in the hope that if more people do it, it may lead to better protection for everyone (including oneself!).

we still do have a choice in this country you know and I say, it’s virus with an average age death of 82, I wish that lightbulb would go up in people’s head and realise that band stop treating Covid like it’s the apocalypse.

This is something that Laurence Fox and other extremist narcissists go on about all the time and I urge right-thinking people to reject it as nonsense. Firstly, as I said earlier, the reason it is mostly killing frail and elderly people is because we were able to bring the NHS to a place where it could properly triage people in some crude way. This means that in general, only the most vulnerable were killed, and people who were marginally vulnerable mostly survived a very severe illness. The virus has ripped through not just elderly people but also seriously disabled people whom we have a moral responsibility to protect as a society.

People like Fox are libertarians but who never follow through their premise to its natural conclusion. They argue for essentially unlimited personal freedom. Well, I am afraid that if you believe that, you cannot argue against private business owners refusing you access to their services because you didn't get a safe free vaccine and spent the time vacillating on a train forum that it wasn't worth the effort.

I do not like the government's approach to vaccine "encouragement" through making us all have to jump through additional hoops, but we would not need vaccine passports if everyone who was able to have a vaccine actually went to have one.

 

[MikeWM]

But it is of benefit. End of, deal with it. BUT. Let's suggest it doesn't give you anything, no protection, no safety like it or not our government has placed many restriction which can be bypassed with the vaccine- unless you believe it harms you surely you can see that as a reason to get it? And if you do believe it harms then I am sorry.

Any medical procedure or any medicinal product has the potential for side-effects. As individuals we are required to weigh the benefits of the procedure against the risks as part of 'informed consent' in deciding whether to proceed or not.

 

[brad465]

Not that there is much alternative in some places; a vote for Labour is a vote for an even more authoritarian party that wanted even harsher and longer lockdowns and restrictions and are utterly opposed to us enjoying the freedoms we currently have.

While not a major party these days, the Lib Dems have provided some opposition, including on vaccine passports.


Elsewhere one of the clubs that announced it was introducing covid passes as already dropped them, as reported here in the BBC live feed:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-58023048

A leading club night organiser has dropped a requirement for customers to show an NHS Covid pass on the door.

Ultimate Power initially told people they needed an NHS Covid pass to prove their vaccination, test or immunity status at venues.

It had said that, for its "initial London and Manchester events, we are requesting Covid passes at point of entry to our clubs".

The passes are on England's NHS app, which is separate from the NHS Covid-19 app in England and Wales.

But after the BBC reported the entry requirement on Thursday night, Ultimate Power - a third-party which organises club nights at venues including the O2 Ritz in Manchester and London's Electric Ballroom - amended its website.

The Lib Dems have called for ministers to scrap the passes for good - or at least allow MPs to debate them in Parliament.

Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman Alistair Carmichael accused ministers of committing to the passports "by stealth".

"We now have a new ID card snuck onto our phones without even as much as a whisper from the government," he said.

 

[NorthKent1989]

And some of us are equally weary of the hysterical false equivalences in the other direction. There are issues with vaccine passports, there are issues with what the government is trying to do with public order legislation and on migration. But if you are comparing these measures, arguably authoritarian as they are, with truly totalitarian regimes like the famine ridden hell hole that is North Korea, then your moral radar needs some serious tuning. There is simply no comparison.

As for the efficacy of vaccines, they do work well but not perfectly, and in a very small minority of cases, they have side effects. Every sensible analysis done has shown that the risk/benefit ratio strongly favours taking the vaccine, even for those in the 18-30 group. Hell, even the fact that JCVI have not recommended it for 12-17 year olds is to do with them needing more data for that group before they can approve it based on the narrow criteria they employ.

You blather on about herd immunity as though it's the answer to why we don't need to do anything, yet you by the views you put forward choose yourself and encourage others to act as free riders on something where the benefit is both personal and to the population at large. There's a lot that @yorkie and I disagree strongly on in this area, but I completely agree with him that the success of the vaccination programmes here and elsewhere is our key to getting back to a pre-2020 way of living.

So raising issues on how lockdowns have played havoc on people’s mental health and financial issues is hysterical is it? Because that’s all the majority of us have done, we’re not Covid deniers, I always suspected that locktavists gave little care about mental health and things aside from Covid.

I’m sorry but most of us have a right to be frustrated, all you’ve blathered on about are cases, and you’ve always find excuses as to why it’s too soon to open up, as you say if you agree that @yorkie has a valid point that the vaccination programme is so successful the you should be by now all for opening up, but sure enough you’ll find an excuse as to why Christmas should be cancelled.

So you think dictating to what people should put into their bodies is a sign that we’re better than North Korea then is it? You think it’s acceptable that the government has a right to create a two tier society then and that’s still freedom is it? You’re one to talk about false equivalences that’s pretty much all you’ve done in the last few posts, just because we aren’t famine ridden doesn’t mean we aren’t any better than North Korea.

The vaccine has been in circulation now for 8 months. I had mine in March and May. I think there has been ample time for most people to come to a conclusion, privately. It is not a very difficult choice to make for the vast majority of people; the risk of proper harm is so low as to be inconsiderable, on the level of deciding whether or not a 100 mile car journey with the potential to save one stranger's health or life is worth the personal risk to you. If we are being honest, most of the vaccine refusers (and you are one, having refused to get it) are making their decision based on a lack of trust in government and as a way of exercising some personal control, having had a lot of personal choice ripped away over the last 18 months. I understand this reaction having been very frustrated with lockdown and the incompetence of the government too, but at this stage, with a clear exit route through a vaccinated population, this self-centred stance can no longer be respected.

You can claim that saying vaccine acceptance as a civic duty is a virtue signal, but it is not hugely different to giving blood. One does this for the benefit of other people and promote blood-giving as a morally responsible thing, partly in the hope that if more people do it, it may lead to better protection for everyone (including oneself!).


This is something that Laurence Fox and other extremist narcissists go on about all the time and I urge right-thinking people to reject it as nonsense. Firstly, as I said earlier, the reason it is mostly killing frail and elderly people is because we were able to bring the NHS to a place where it could properly triage people in some crude way. This means that in general, only the most vulnerable were killed, and people who were marginally vulnerable mostly survived a very severe illness. The virus has ripped through not just elderly people but also seriously disabled people whom we have a moral responsibility to protect as a society.

People like Fox are libertarians but who never follow through their premise to its natural conclusion. They argue for essentially unlimited personal freedom. Well, I am afraid that if you believe that, you cannot argue against private business owners refusing you access to their services because you didn't get a safe free vaccine and spent the time vacillating on a train forum that it wasn't worth the effort.

I do not like the government's approach to vaccine "encouragement" through making us all have to jump through additional hoops, but we would not need vaccine passports if everyone who was able to have a vaccine actually went to have one.

First of all before brand people as “vaccine refusers” you may want read that I have decided to get the jab at some point, go up a few posts and you’ll see it clear as day, there is more to say that you are an authoritarian locktavist than I am a vaccine refuser, I just belipersonal choice

Also the term vaccine refusers, no most people aren’t vaccine refusers, I know that suits your world view but the world isn’t as black and white as that I’m afraid, sorry to shatter that illusion for you.

We don’t need vaccine passports at all, Covid is something we have to get on with now.

you say we have a moral obligation to protect disabled people, that’s true, we also have a moral obligation to protect people’s mental health and those who are in dire situations with their finances, something which many on here don’t care about.

 

[35B]

I'm not sure that's going to turn out to be the case, else why are we discussing booster shots in the next few months? Compare those who had SARS-1 still having immunity to SARS-2 after a couple of decades, which is pretty good immunity.

See for example
https://www.hartgroup.org/natural-vs-vaccine-immunity/


which makes perfect sense to me. I'd have to see some pretty convincing evidence to persuade me that this was wrong.

Of course you may well argue from a comfort point of view that it is better to have a vaccination than the disease, which is most cases will probably turn out to be true! But I have absolutely no idea from a medical point of view why for example we are insisting on vaccinating people who have already had the disease, it makes zero sense.



But we're going to hit 90% of adults with one dose, and only a few % points below that for the second - and significantly higher than that in the groups that are actually in danger from the disease. If this was really just about protecting people from a disease then this seems a very good time to say 'that went surprisingly well, time to get on with getting back to normal now.' Instead we see an ever-more-shrill and ever-more-desperate ramping up of propaganda against the small minority that haven't 'done what they were told to do'. Why?

I also refer Israel and Iceland and some of the 'blue' states of the USA, which have similar high vaccine uptake to the UK and yet have recently reintroduced restrictions such as masks and/or distancing. I'm really not convinced that high vaccine uptake is being particularly successful at stopping these authoritarians.

In any event, whatever the level of uptake, there appears no logical argument for vaccine passports, as the vaccines do not prevent infection and do not prevent onward transmission. (Compared to the fact that there *is* some logical argument for 'testing passports' - as abhorrent as they would also be, at least they make some tiny degree of sense). See for example

https://www.hartgroup.org/vaccination-prevents-transmission-myth/

I will just say that I regard that site as a peddlar of disinformation and lies. It is clearly closely linked to a variety of disinformation campaigns, and I would check the time before accepting one of their spokespeople's word for the time.

 

[HST274]

Any medical procedure or any medicinal product has the potential for side-effects. As individuals we are required to weigh the benefits of the procedure against the risks as part of 'informed consent' in deciding whether to proceed or not.

And the benefits outweigh the risks surely. Covid can result in bedridden hacking coughs and high fever, surely better than a dull headache or tiny lump on the shoulder. Plus all the side effects are there, documented and all the worse ones are highly unlikely and some are more likely to be caught if you actually catch covid. I am sorry but I believe more people won't get it because of misguided beliefs or a weird idea that they are automatically fine because they are younger than 82. Those who consider every single side effect compared to benefits and don't get it will be few.

 

[MikeWM]

I will just say that I regard that site as a peddlar of disinformation and lies. It is clearly closely linked to a variety of disinformation campaigns, and I would check the time before accepting one of their spokespeople's word for the time.

Ah, messenger-shooting. How productive.

Do you have anything to say about the actual points that were made?

And the benefits outweigh the risks surely. Covid can result in bedridden hacking coughs and high fever, surely better than a dull headache or tiny lump on the shoulder. Plus all the side effects are there, documented and all the worse ones are highly unlikely and some are more likely to be caught if you actually catch covid. I am sorry but I believe more people won't get it because of misguided beliefs or a weird idea that they are automatically fine because they are younger than 82. Those who consider every single side effect compared to benefits and don't get it will be few.

I personally know two people who had severe side-effects from the vaccine and are requiring on-going medical care as a result. Others have posted their experiences on this forum. The data in the yellow card system and VAERS is there for anyone to see.

And those are the potential short-term effects. No-one knows the long-term effects yet. Will ADE happen, for example, in some people? If we're unlucky and it happens in a lot of people then we're going to be in serious trouble. All previous attempts at making coronavirus vaccines hit a brick wall because of the ADE issue. Have they managed to successfully avoid that this time? In all of the available vaccines?

All matters to be taken into consideration as part of 'informed consent'. My decision, based on the above, my own medical history and my ethical concerns regarding the method of manfacture and testing of the vaccines, is that it was unwise for me to take a vaccine at this point. I would rather like that decision to be respected and the government to stop trying to coerce me into changing my mind.

 

[35B]

So raising issues on how lockdowns have played havoc on people’s mental health and financial issues is hysterical is it? Because that’s all the majority of us have done, we’re not Covid deniers, I always suspected that locktavists gave little care about mental health and things aside from Covid.

I’m sorry but most of us have a right to be frustrated, all you’ve blathered on about are cases, and you’ve always find excuses as to why it’s too soon to open up, as you say if you agree that @yorkie has a valid point that the vaccination programme is so successful the you should be by now all for opening up, but sure enough you’ll find an excuse as to why Christmas should be cancelled.

So you think dictating to what people should put into their bodies is a sign that we’re better than North Korea then is it? You think it’s acceptable that the government has a right to create a two tier society then and that’s still freedom is it? You’re one to talk about false equivalences that’s pretty much all you’ve done in the last few posts, just because we aren’t famine ridden doesn’t mean we aren’t any better than North Korea.

I completely accept that lockdown has played havoc with all sorts of things, including some peoples' finances and mental health; the point is unarguable, and discussion about the consequences of anti-Covid measures can only be on the grounds of relative harm - where our views obviously differ fundamentally.

You then go on to challenge me about what I've written; you obviously haven't actually read a lot of what I've written given that I've explicitly said that I welcome the current relaxation of restrictions and also that I believe it necessary. The evidence of harm from Covid is that it does far more damage than flu, both in the deaths it causes and the impact on some patients. You repeat the mantra that Covid only kills 0.2% of sufferers, yet ignore other effects or the evidence of the last year of the impact that "only" 0.2% has.

Finally, North Korea. You raised the comparison, I suggest that you actually try to articulate the similarities in the real world. Let's start by the existence of this forum, and our ability to have this conversation without being killed, and our extended families sentenced to long stretches in concentration camps. Whatever the issues with this government, the comparison of them with genuinely authoritarian and totalitarian regimes is simply not credible.

 

[bramling]

I have to say that I'm increasingly seeing this the other way around. Every time you give in to an abuser they want more from you, not less. This should be very apparent in the way we have been treated in the last 16 months. The only way to stop the abuse is to say no, clearly and firmly.

Of course, if on close assessment you believe that the vaccine is of benefit to you, you should take it, irrespective of the motives of those urging you to do so. Your own health is primary.

But if you don't believe it is of benefit, then doing so anyway just to please an abuser is very unlikely to help stop the abuse, it is likely to continue to make it worse.

I find the above more persuasive than the “civic duty” argument. I think you’re quite right that the more people submit to things, the more will be demanded - we’ve seen a lot of this over the past 18 months.

For me, I’ll take the vaccine when I’m ready, and if people aren’t happy with that they they can do one!

 

[35B]

Ah, messenger-shooting. How productive.

Do you have anything to say about the actual points that were made?

No - and I don't propose to waste my time on a group that has been set up with the deliberate purpose of spreading lies and disinformation. You may find The HART Files: Inside the Group Trying to Smuggle Anti-Vaccine Myths into Westminster an educative read; quoting the introduction:

Chat records and other documents obtained by Logically show that a U.K. group of lockdown-skeptic political activists and health professionals have been coordinating efforts to lobby MPs and gain political and media influence, with an aim to “wrestle control back from SAGE.”

Logically reviewed hundreds of documents and tens of thousands of messages sent between members of HART (Health Advisory and Recovery Team) which go as far back as January, prior to the group’s official launch. The documents, including briefing bulletins that were sent to MPs, are outwardly polished in their presentation so as to appear legitimate, but the chat logs reveal a deeper connection to disinformation narratives commonly encountered on alternative news sites.

 

[kristiang85]

No - and I don't propose to waste my time on a group that has been set up with the deliberate purpose of spreading lies and disinformation. You may find The HART Files: Inside the Group Trying to Smuggle Anti-Vaccine Myths into Westminster an educative read; quoting the introduction:

But who decides that HART's findings are "disinformation"?

A famous example of "fact checking" changing was at one point saying the virus originated from a lab leak in China was "disinformation"; now it is a mainstream theory.

Considering how wrong SAGE have been on many things, when are they going to be classed as "disinformation"?

 

[NorthKent1989]

I find the above more persuasive than the “civic duty” argument. I think you’re quite right that the more people submit to things, the more will be demanded - we’ve seen a lot of this over the past 18 months.

For me, I’ll take the vaccine when I’m ready, and if people aren’t happy with that they they can do one!

Its almost as if you don’t have a choice any more and if one decides to take the time to consider taking the vaccine or not the you’re branded a “vaccine refuser” a term coined by their glorious leader

 

[43066]

This is something that Laurence Fox and other extremist narcissists go on about all the time and I urge right-thinking people to reject it as nonsense. Firstly, as I said earlier, the reason it is mostly killing frail and elderly people is because we were able to bring the NHS to a place where it could properly triage people in some crude way. This means that in general, only the most vulnerable were killed, and people who were marginally vulnerable mostly survived a very severe illness. The virus has ripped through not just elderly people but also seriously disabled people whom we have a moral responsibility to protect as a society.

It’s not nonsense at all. It’s a fact that Covid has an average age of death in the 80s. It’s also a fact that the NHS’ own failings at infection control and extreme negligence in discharging Covid positive patients back into care homes in the early stages have led to many thousands more deaths than would have otherwise been the case. That doesn’t change the fact that Covid is a minor respiratory infection for the vast majority of people who catch it!

For me, I’ll take the vaccine when I’m ready, and if people aren’t happy with that they they can do one!

Agreed. The more I’m “encouraged” to have the vaccine, the less inclined I am to actually get it.

 

[bramling]

Its almost as if you don’t have a choice any more and if one decides to take the time to consider taking the vaccine or not the you’re branded a “vaccine refuser” a term coined by their glorious leader

The thing is, unlike masks no one knows who is vaccinated and who isn’t.

I get sick of the whole “vaccine refuser” stuff. Those who are hesitating on the vaccine have, in my experience, given the matter a *lot* of thought, and have taken the trouble to research and investigate the pros and cons.

Unlike much of the population they’re more likely to be aware of the *actual* Covid mortality stats, rather than the hysterical ones.