Typical of the obnoxious, patronising response I expect from you. How dare you lecture me about "consequences" for not accepting a forced medical treatment. People like you are a danger to society as you enable this sort of fascist behaviour from the vile govermnent which is tightening its grip on this country ever more.
You absolutely have the right to decline a vaccination. That choice, like all others, comes with consequences. One of those consequences may be your personal risk, another may be that on public health grounds, government may mandate or permit some restrictions on where those who are unvaccinated - which is where I've given the example of childhood vaccinations, imposed because of the measles deaths caused by unvaccinated children.
Personally, I think vaccine passports for domestic use would be a waste of time and effort, and cause disproportionate grief for very little gain. But I struggle with the idea that a government seeking to manage public health is acting in the way you describe (I'll not get into the ahistorical and hysterical misuse of terminology).
I would say people live DavidB have the right to put themselves at risk for no real reason in the case of not accepting a medical procedure. The healthcare system will take care of them like it does to those who dare take risks in their lives that will lead to injuries, or smoke, or drink, e.t.c.
I thought that was the price we all pay for a modicum of freedom?
It is. But the point of vaccination, which we easily forget, is that it has a public health effect as well as a personal one.
Why did I not need to give proof of two negative tests taken three days apart when I visited the pub in October, November and December, when nobody was vaccinated?
Because the government hadn't got to the point of having testing available to that degree? Perhaps they should have, but I still feel that the reality is implausible.