Vaccine Passports - currently being considered in Scotland & Wales

[HSTEd]

No, they are saying that certain activities would be off limits.

And the list of activities that will be "off limits" is growing steadily - it is likely that by September essentially everything in life will be "off limits".

Which essentially means that it will either submit to the checkpoint society (where your ability to live depends on the state not revoking your socialisation permit) or remain in de-facto lockdown forever.

Constructive coercion is still coercion

 

[35B]

The difference is immense, and I'm sure you know it. Effectively having to take a pharmaceutical intervention which may ultimately require regular additional jabs, and with very small but nonetheless potential risks to your person is nothing like taking a driving test that you might only ever take once in your life. Not even close.


A strong argument for what? ID cards night have their potential uses in accessing free at the point of service public services, but we are taking about them potential being used for something as benine as going for a pint, or buying of loaf of bread. That you continue to dance around the issues with vague "against, maybe, maybe not" comments continue to convince me that you are try to say on thing but actually think the opposite.

Strong argument for opposing ID cards.

For the record, I’m not opposed to ID cards, and believe there to be a liberal case for them. I also recognise that there are downsides and that there are good liberal arguments against them.

 

[AlterEgo]

I thought the treatment was to protect the individual, not to prevent you passing it on

It is, but it also reduces transmission if you do have an infection.

The disease has not shut down the economy and ruined lives. That was a decision of government.

Mhm, yes.

I would suggest that the 'small sliver' of people against lockdowns are larger than you think. People need to work, learn and socialise - why do you think they are in denial?

I meant that there’s a small sliver of people against all of the things I stated, simultaneously. Those people don’t think COVID-19 should be mitigated by any mass social movement or lockdown, nor should they wear masks, nor should they have a vaccine, nor should businesses be closed. People who think all those things at once are in denial.

As for me, I felt the lockdowns were too severe, masks are oversold, but the vaccines are the escape route to allow us to throw off the rest.

 

[Annetts key]

Vaccination for COVID19 Corona virus is being done for multiple reasons.
To increase the protection for the individual.
To reduce the likelihood of transmission between human beings.
To reduce the workload on the NHS (from hospitals filling up with people infected with COVID19).
To allow us to get closer to normal life without lockdowns etc.

A vaccination is intended to ‘arm’ an individuals own immune system so that your body’s immune system is more ready to respond should you encounter a live COVID19 virus.

But like anything in life, nothing is 100%. So it may not stop you from being infected. If you are infected, it may not stop you from spreading the virus. And it may not stop you from becoming ill.

However, going on current available information, the vaccination is effective (within the defined parameters) of reducing the severity of any COVID19 illness if someone has had a double vaccination.

And if your body’s immune system is more ready to fight the COVID19 virus, it’s more likely that your immune system will be more effective at defending against it, both in intensity and speed. Hence there will be less virus in you, so reducing the likelihood of you spreading it.

And the name of the game, is to reduce the infection rate and the spread of the virus.

Now to the politics. Does the state have a right to force citizens to undergo medical treatment? Because that’s the issue that is really being talked about here.

I’ll leave you to continue to argue over this, because for me, I’ve already had my two COVID19 Corona virus injections. I decided that the benefits of the increased protection from the possibility of getting really ill from COVID19 Corona virus outweighed the possible side effects. I’ve been ill in the past and most definitely did not enjoy struggling to breathe EVERY breath for hours at a time (well over six hours). I never want to experience that ever again. For the same reason I have the seasonal flu vaccination each year and when travelling abroad, have the recommended vaccinations for the country I am travelling to.

But as I said earlier, I think the government should be using far more carrot than stick.

From the start, the majority view in the medical profession appeared to me, to be that people should be encouraged to voluntarily agree to being vaccinated. And that any talk of forced vaccination would not help. And I agree with this.

But the vaccination rates in this country are dropping off fast. And in recent figures, only around 70% of the adult population have been double vaccinated (sorry, I don’t have the latest actual figure). So the government are looking at what else can be done. I’m not sure that they have actually said, but I get the impression that the aim was for 95% of the adult population to be fully vaccinated (but I may be wrong on this).

The greater the number of people who are vaccinated, the sooner we can return to a more normal lifestyle.

So I ask again, what would you do to try to solve the issues caused by the COVID19 Corona virus?

Personally, I think the government should be going with far more positive encouragement and education system rather than a negative restriction system. But unfortunately politicians often reach for the stick rather than the carrot. Just look at today’s announcement of extending stop and search and having more visible ‘chain gangs’.

Although it has to be said that sometimes a bit of both is needed.

So what positive encouragement measures or education measures do you think would help to increase the number of people getting vaccinated?

Is this a point of principle? People being afraid? People having been taken in by the anti-vaxx industry or some other reason?

And yes, of course there are people who for medical reasons should not or cannot be vaccinated.

 

[westv]

But the vaccination rates in this country are dropping off fast. And in recent figures, only around 70% of the adult population have been double vaccinated (sorry, I don’t have the latest actual figure). So the government are looking at what else can be done. I’m not sure that they have actually said, but I get the impression that the aim was for 95% of the adult population to be fully vaccinated (but I may be wrong on this).

Very roughly 90% of the adult population have been singled jabbed. I see no reason why all those people won't eventually be double jabbed. It's not something that will happen tomorrow though.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

But the vaccination rates in this country are dropping off fast. And in recent figures, only around 70% of the adult population have been double vaccinated (sorry, I don’t have the latest actual figure). So the government are looking at what else can be done. I’m not sure that they have actually said, but I get the impression that the aim was for 95% of the adult population to be fully vaccinated (but I may be wrong on this).

The greater the number of people who are vaccinated, the sooner we can return to a more normal lifestyle.

1st doses are at 88.8% and its likely majority of those will get there 2nd dose so we will be close to the 90% deemed necessary for herd immunity according to the pessimistic scientists although some have suggested a lower figure. This isn't about eradication but keeping numbers below the threshold that causes the healthcare system to be under strain. The issue we are experiencing currently, well a few weeks ago, is much higher levels of general prevalence, but that is continuing to wane, so probability of being re-infected is higher but as cases decline so does potential exposure.

All Gove is doing as have other members of cabinet is just keep the political pressure up to maximise vaccine penetration but they need to strike the right balance so as not to dissuade more people.

Also the 18-24 age group are now creeping ahead of 25-30 group on 1st dose.

 

[farleigh]

1st doses are at 88.8% and its likely majority of those will get there 2nd dose so we will be close to the 90% deemed necessary for herd immunity according to the pessimistic scientists although some have suggested a lower figure. This isn't about eradication but keeping numbers below the threshold that causes the healthcare system to be under strain. The issue we are experiencing currently, well a few weeks ago, is much higher levels of general prevalence, but that is continuing to wane, so probability of being re-infected is higher but as cases decline so does potential exposure.

All Gove is doing as have other members of cabinet is just keep the political pressure up to maximise vaccine penetration but they need to strike the right balance so as not to dissuade more people.

Also the 18-24 age group are now creeping ahead of 25-30 group on 1st dose.

First class stats

 

[DelayRepay]

1st doses are at 88.8% and its likely majority of those will get there 2nd dose so we will be close to the 90% deemed necessary for herd immunity according to the pessimistic scientists although some have suggested a lower figure.

But that does hide the fact that in some regions the rates are a lot lower. In London only 65.5% have had their first dose, and only 49% have had both. And this despite big campaigns with lots of walk in centres open across London over the last few weekends.

I don't think it's the overall rate that's worrying the Government leading to these threats. I think it's the fact we have hot spots (generally the big cities) which still have a very large number of unvaccinated people. I don't agree with using threats and blackmail to increase vaccine uptake, but I do agree that the low rates in some areas are a concern and something should be done to try to increase uptake.

 

[Bantamzen]

Strong argument for opposing ID cards.

For the record, I’m not opposed to ID cards, and believe there to be a liberal case for them. I also recognise that there are downsides and that there are good liberal arguments against them.

Actually I'd say the reverse. Prior to the pandemic there may have been a strong case for an ID system that could be used to access public services, to help reduce the concerns of fraud, misuse etc. However what we have seen in response to the pandemic leads me firmly to believe that we were right to bat back Blair's ID aspirations. Because there is little doubt that had it been adopted, there would by now have been an app / online service behind it, both of which would have been used to push forward vaccination passports. In fact it may well have been used to enforce the early restrictions in a way the French did, albeit with people submitting their travel permission requests by the app/website and then having to wait for it to be authorised. So I am very glad the scheme fell where it should have and didn't gain traction here.

I know some will still argue the "greater good" line at this point, but I would counter that forcing people to prove they are fit / worthy enough to travel, go to watch sports or music, go to the pub or even just shopping in far more damaging to society than the still very small risk that covid poses to the vast majority of us. We already know that SAGE admitted it wanted more restrictive measures, similar to those seen in China (a deeply authoritarian and oppressive regime) & admitted they were surprised just how far down that road they were able to get. That in itself should serve as fair warning the direction more measures & controls could lead us.

 

[Yew]

And the name of the game, is to reduce the infection rate and the spread of the virus.

I thought it was to stop the NHS being overwhelmed? Spread of a virus that doesn't hospitalise many people, because the vulnerable have been vaccinated, is not really an issue.

 

[NorthKent1989]

Actually I'd say the reverse. Prior to the pandemic there may have been a strong case for an ID system that could be used to access public services, to help reduce the concerns of fraud, misuse etc. However what we have seen in response to the pandemic leads me firmly to believe that we were right to bat back Blair's ID aspirations. Because there is little doubt that had it been adopted, there would by now have been an app / online service behind it, both of which would have been used to push forward vaccination passports. In fact it may well have been used to enforce the early restrictions in a way the French did, albeit with people submitting their travel permission requests by the app/website and then having to wait for it to be authorised. So I am very glad the scheme fell where it should have and didn't gain traction here.

I know some will still argue the "greater good" line at this point, but I would counter that forcing people to prove they are fit / worthy enough to travel, go to watch sports or music, go to the pub or even just shopping in far more damaging to society than the still very small risk that covid poses to the vast majority of us. We already know that SAGE admitted it wanted more restrictive measures, similar to those seen in China (a deeply authoritarian and oppressive regime) & admitted they were surprised just how far down that road they were able to get. That in itself should serve as fair warning the direction more measures & controls could lead us.

Watch it now…is that SAGE or Independent SAGE? There’s a difference you know

The fact that people are so willing to give up their freedoms for what is a respiratory virus is a little worrying.

 

[big_rig]

I thought it was to stop the NHS being overwhelmed? Spread of a virus that doesn't hospitalise many people, because the vulnerable have been vaccinated, is not really an issue.

I think with many dishonest actors (Pretend SAGE etc) the purpose of the vaccine programme and subsequent 'passporting' has morphed into becoming another protective shield for the neurotic. They are probably sick of sitting inside getting Waitrose deliveries but do not want to venture out anywhere there may be an un-vaccinated person, so life must be made as miserable as possible for the 11% or so of adults who have not taken it up yet (not me, I've had both now) in order for the neurotic to 'feel safe.' The same goes with vaccinating children, despite what the JVCI etc say of the merits of that.

 

[AlterEgo]

But that does hide the fact that in some regions the rates are a lot lower. In London only 65.5% have had their first dose, and only 49% have had both. And this despite big campaigns with lots of walk in centres open across London over the last few weekends.

I don't think it's the overall rate that's worrying the Government leading to these threats. I think it's the fact we have hot spots (generally the big cities) which still have a very large number of unvaccinated people. I don't agree with using threats and blackmail to increase vaccine uptake, but I do agree that the low rates in some areas are a concern and something should be done to try to increase uptake.

London’s big problem is that it has a very large transient population of people who come from the EU or on short term skilled work visas. I’ve had three letters almost weekly for three previous residents of my flat, all of whom have European names and two of whom I know for a fact have returned to Italy. The GP and NHS don’t know this though.

A lot of the “missing” percentages of people simply…aren’t in the country!

I thought it was to stop the NHS being overwhelmed? Spread of a virus that doesn't hospitalise many people, because the vulnerable have been vaccinated, is not really an issue.

The main concern is variants which could escape the vaccines - which become more likely if you allow a large pool of infections, even if asymptomatic.

 

[Bantamzen]

Watch it now…is that SAGE or Independent SAGE? There’s a difference you know

The fact that people are so willing to give up their freedoms for what is a respiratory virus is a little worrying.

It was the SAGE sage, not the faux SAGE. The reason that people are seemingly so willing to give up their freedoms is because they (SAGE) and their pet politicians have managed to convince people that merely coming within 2 metres of someone carrying the virus, or someone they think might be carrying the virus is an instant death sentence either for themselves, or someone else. So many people are now terrified of dying or feeling guilt for someone else who may or may not die.

 

[MikeWM]

Actually I'd say the reverse. Prior to the pandemic there may have been a strong case for an ID system that could be used to access public services, to help reduce the concerns of fraud, misuse etc. However what we have seen in response to the pandemic leads me firmly to believe that we were right to bat back Blair's ID aspirations. Because there is little doubt that had it been adopted, there would by now have been an app / online service behind it, both of which would have been used to push forward vaccination passports. In fact it may well have been used to enforce the early restrictions in a way the French did, albeit with people submitting their travel permission requests by the app/website and then having to wait for it to be authorised. So I am very glad the scheme fell where it should have and didn't gain traction here.

At the time of Blair's ID cards, those of us who were opposed tried to get across the argument that while having to produce ID on demand (as in France, for example) wasn't a desirable development, the *real* issue was the database behind it and what it may be used for in the future. Indeed, the No2ID campaign's strapline was 'no to the database state'. And the reason for opposing that are all the reasons that are now rearing their ugly head once again - government tracking of everything you do, and government permission being required to do things that previously you could do freely.

 

[NorthKent1989]

At the time of Blair's ID cards, those of us who were opposed tried to get across the argument that while having to produce ID on demand (as in France, for example) wasn't a desirable development, the *real* issue was the database behind it and what it may be used for in the future. Indeed, the No2ID campaign's strapline was 'no to the database state'. And the reason for opposing that are all the reasons that are now rearing their ugly head once again - government tracking of everything you do, and government permission being required to do things that previously you could do freely.

And enough people opposed and voted Blair’s ID cards down at the time and it looks set that vaccine passports will be given the same treatment with any luck.

It was the SAGE sage, not the faux SAGE. The reason that people are seemingly so willing to give up their freedoms is because they (SAGE) and their pet politicians have managed to convince people that merely coming within 2 metres of someone carrying the virus, or someone they think might be carrying the virus is an instant death sentence either for themselves, or someone else. So many people are now terrified of dying or feeling guilt for someone else who may or may not die.

Yet these same people would have previously had no issue coughing or sneezing without a tissue on a packed train or bus.

Or worse still never even washed their hands after finishing in the loo!

The main concern is variants which could escape the vaccines - which become more likely if you allow a large pool of infections, even if asymptomatic.

Even if this is the case there is no reason to put further restrictions on our lives.

Treating perfectly healthy people like they have a disease also creates a lot of paranoid people, like those who would rather get creamed by a car than heavens forbid walk by someone.

 

[MikeWM]

And enough people opposed and voted Blair’s ID cards down at the time and it looks set that vaccine passports will be given the same treatment with any luck.

It required a change of government though. I'm not at all sure that this time a change of government is likely, or would help, given Starmer's wibblyness on the issue.

 

[Yew]

London’s big problem is that it has a very large transient population of people who come from the EU or on short term skilled work visas. I’ve had three letters almost weekly for three previous residents of my flat, all of whom have European names and two of whom I know for a fact have returned to Italy. The GP and NHS don’t know this though.

A lot of the “missing” percentages of people simply…aren’t in the country!


The main concern is variants which could escape the vaccines - which become more likely if you allow a large pool of infections, even if asymptomatic.

Has any vaccine in history been “defeated” by variants?

 

[jumble]

As I said earlier, the definition of coercion works at the level of the basic truism that being limited in what we can do by law is a form of coercion.

Without commenting on the merits of this policy in particular, I’m struggling to see why mandatory vaccination is different in kind from laws that put conditions on whether we can drive, or buy alcohol, or any of the other constraints that law puts upon us. And likewise I don’t see what’s different about having to prove age (also something quite personal) to proving whether I’ve had a particular vaccination.

Does proving your age have a risk of damaging your health or killing you ? NO
Does having a vaccine have a risk of damaging your health or killing you ? YES
I am astonished that you think they are equivalent and therefore cannot take anything you say seriously

 

[island]

Seeing as you’ve chosen the pedantic route with the first paragraph, should I remind you that in France they are proposing DVP’s to get to the supermarket?

No, they aren’t.

What’s actually being planned is that to visit shopping centres, you will need either a vaccine pass, a recent negative test (including from the public health system), or a positive test 11-180 days ago.

France has no plans to make access to food shops conditional on presentation of any of the above.

 

[NorthKent1989]

No, they aren’t.

What’s actually being planned is that to visit shopping centres, you will need either a vaccine pass, a recent negative test (including from the public health system), or a positive test 11-180 days ago.

France has no plans to make access to food shops conditional on presentation of any of the above.

That’s good news but why have a pass to a shopping centre at all? Makes all seem that this is not absolutely a virus but how much the government can control the masses

Does proving your age have a risk of damaging your health or killing you ? NO
Does having a vaccine have a risk of damaging your health or killing you ? YES
I am astonished that you think they are equivalent and therefore cannot take anything you say seriously

What’s more astonishing is that they actually believe that those comparisons justifies creating a two tier society effectively

 

[MikeWM]

France has no plans to make access to food shops conditional on presentation of any of the above.

What is the position on supermarkets (or indeed other food shops) in shopping centers? I can think of quite a lot of these in the UK.

As for 'no plans', there have been 'no plans' for an awful lot of things over the past 18 months that have then happened.

Macron said as recently ago as April when it was proposed for large events (rather like the current situation in the UK) 'The health pass will never be a right of access that differentiates people. It should not be compulsory for access to everyday places such as restaurants, theatres and cinemas, or for visiting friends. However, in places where crowds gather, such as stadiums, festivals, fairs or exhibitions, it would be absurd not to use it'

Yet here we are.

 

[Annetts key]

Does proving your age have a risk of damaging your health or killing you ? NO
Does having a vaccine have a risk of damaging your health or killing you ? YES
I am astonished that you think they are equivalent and therefore cannot take anything you say seriously

If you include mental health, the answer you give about age may be a different answer…

What’s more astonishing is that they actually believe that those comparisons justifies creating a two tier society effectively

Err, we already have a two tier society. Based on money and power. And part of the aim of those on the right is to maintain this.

 

[NorthKent1989]

If you include mental health, the answer you give about age may be a different answer…


Err, we already have a two tier society. Based on money and power. And part of the aim of those on the right is to maintain this.

Again with the false equivalences, has anyone justified the widening gap between rich and poor? No they haven’t so stay on track please.

And does a class system justify excluding those who don’t feel they need the vaccine for whatever reason? Again no it doesn’t, we should be ending divisions not creating more and creating segregation where there needn’t be any! How on Earth do you think that what you just said makes any sense?

By the way a persons finances can change overnight, but being excluded from shops or venues based on a personal health choice seems pretty permanent to me and a doorway to other forms of worse segregation.

Seems to me there’s a fair amount of left wing people who are in favour of DVP’s I guess they’re right wing too now then?

 

[MikeWM]

Seems to me there’s a fair amount of left wing people who are in favour of DVP’s I guess they’re right wing too now then?

It's definitely not a left-right issue. Those most opposed in Parliament are the 'hard' left (the Corbynites), the 'hard' right (mostly the ex-ERG lot), and the Liberal Democrats, wherever we put those nowadays. Remarkably like the opposition to ID cards was 15 years ago, in fact.

 

[NorthKent1989]

It's definitely not a left-right issue. Those most opposed in Parliament are the 'hard' left (the Corbynites), the 'hard' right (mostly the ex-ERG lot), and the Liberal Democrats, wherever we put those nowadays. Remarkably like the opposition to ID cards was 15 years ago, in fact.

I agree with this, Covid isn’t a left/right issue it’s a libertarian/authoritarian issue.

 

[MikeWM]

I note that in the USA the CDC have changed their guidelines and recommended masks indoors again, even for fully vaccinated people.

Their 'reasoning', such as it is, is that 'Delta' can be spread by vaccinated people as well as the unvaccinated, and they say there is evidence that the viral load in infected people is the same whether vaccinated or not.

Which seems the general sort of nonsense that the CDC likes to come out with, not least because they really love masks for some reason - but what's the argument for vaccine passports again?

 

[Annetts key]

The point I was trying to make, is that do you really think those with money and/or power will be denied entry to somewhere that normal folk have to produce a “vaccine passport”?
They can afford the time and money to get tested whenever they like. It is also possible to get a COVID19 vaccination privately.

 

[NorthKent1989]

The point I was trying to make, is that do you really think those with money and/or power will be denied entry to somewhere that normal folk have to produce a “vaccine passport”?
They can afford the time and money to get tested whenever they like. It is also possible to get a COVID19 vaccination privately.

Sounds to me you’re voicing what many would have deemed “tin foil” 18 months ago and what many don’t want to see either.

Prince Harry didn’t have to quarantine with the masses, he got to go to Frogmore Cottage, one rule for us another for them

 

[AlterEgo]

Prince Harry didn’t have to quarantine with the masses, he got to go to Frogmore Cottage, one rule for us another for them

Um, he didn't have to quarantine.

He had to self-isolate, at home, as per everyone else arriving from the United States. He followed the same rules as everyone else.