Vaccine/Health Passports

[Mrr T]

JuanCarlosFandango said:

From a purely democratic point of view it would be an outrage to introduce such a policy without any mandate to do so. We dropped the idea of compulsory vaccinations in the late 19th century because the backlash was undermining trust in medicine in general and the medical profession has never clearly advocated such a policy. We let people make their own decisions for far more serious diseases which also have implications for others.

As recently as 2019 the idea was strongly resisted

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-49975717

If certain companies want to introduce this soft compulsion then they have the right to do so, but the government should not be facilitating this with vaccine passports. Let companies develop private versions if they wish and make it voluntary for those people who wish to use them.

It seems a large majority favour some sort of passport. On that basis I would suggest it's correct for the government to create a system. Companies and individuals can choose to use it or not.

[anonymous-user]

Nickgnome said:

CrutyRammers said:

citizensm1th said:

You guys do realise that in the UK this is going to be driven by industry don't you?

Travel companies will require it
Travel insurance companies will require it
Big venues that attract huge crowds will require it
All the government will do is provide a mechanism for people to prove to these industries that you have had a jab and where and when you had it.

Mostly it will be driven by two things companies appealing to the majority who will get vaccinated and the fear the companies will be sued by relatives of anyone catching covid say at the Cheltenham festival in future.

And just like vaccination no one will be forced to prove anything, it's your choice you just may have less other choices in life as a result.


If it is against your principles to have proof of vaccination well that's your choice and I for one will not be shedding any tears that you cannot do some of the things you used to do pre covid. Nor would I force anyone to go against their principles I will just enjoy the whole less brits abroad aspect.

Or maybe, since it's you who's worried, you stay at home and let everyone else crack on. You'll be safe from the unclean there.

Where does it say he is worried.

It does not!

Nor am I.

The lady doth protest too much, methinks

[Jasandjules]

What I find fascinating is people say I am going to get my vaccine because:

1. I want to go to the pub
2. I want to meet up with friends/family
3. I want to go on holiday
4. I want to go to concerts/events

What I don't see people saying is they want the vaccine to be safe from this virus....

[citizensm1th]

Jasandjules said:

What I find fascinating is people say I am going to get my vaccine because:

1. I want to go to the pub
2. I want to meet up with friends/family
3. I want to go on holiday
4. I want to go to concerts/events

What I don't see people saying is they want the vaccine to be safe from this virus....

Because unlike your previous comment to me I am not scared of covid I have worked through out supporting the medical suppliers in the UK.

But if a vaccine allows me to take my wife out to a nice restaurant then damn right il be having it

[jameswills]

timmymagic73 said:

At the risk of sticking my head above the parapet in these threads, I feel exactly the same as Ronald. I consider myself very fortunate to have an astonishingly good immune system, therefore at the moment I feel no compelling reason to be vaccinated.

Something all these threads that mention the topic of "reduced transmission" have in common is that everyone seems to forget that Covid has a relatively short period of transmissibility/infection. Without the vaccine someone is not going to be spending the rest of their life spreading infection to everyone else at every turn.

In the event I am exposed to the virus, or even the suspicion that I may have been exposed to the virus, I will gladly do my part with self isolation/testing. This fulfils my moral obligation as far as I am concerned, not having a mandatory government dictated jab in order to do everyday domestic things.

Well said, that’s my stance too.

[menousername]

Mrr T said:

JuanCarlosFandango said:

From a purely democratic point of view it would be an outrage to introduce such a policy without any mandate to do so. We dropped the idea of compulsory vaccinations in the late 19th century because the backlash was undermining trust in medicine in general and the medical profession has never clearly advocated such a policy. We let people make their own decisions for far more serious diseases which also have implications for others.

As recently as 2019 the idea was strongly resisted

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-49975717

If certain companies want to introduce this soft compulsion then they have the right to do so, but the government should not be facilitating this with vaccine passports. Let companies develop private versions if they wish and make it voluntary for those people who wish to use them.

It seems a large majority favour some sort of passport. On that basis I would suggest it's correct for the government to create a system. Companies and individuals can choose to use it or not.

Disagree - there seems to be a strong mistrust brewing.

The majority want to get back to normal. They do not want continued Govt interference.

The issue with the second point is that it appears the Govt are making it mandatory by proxy. So they can see “the people want it” or “businesses want it and we must save businesses”

[MikeT66]

Mrr T said:

JuanCarlosFandango said:

From a purely democratic point of view it would be an outrage to introduce such a policy without any mandate to do so. We dropped the idea of compulsory vaccinations in the late 19th century because the backlash was undermining trust in medicine in general and the medical profession has never clearly advocated such a policy. We let people make their own decisions for far more serious diseases which also have implications for others.

As recently as 2019 the idea was strongly resisted

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-49975717

If certain companies want to introduce this soft compulsion then they have the right to do so, but the government should not be facilitating this with vaccine passports. Let companies develop private versions if they wish and make it voluntary for those people who wish to use them.

It seems a large majority favour some sort of passport. On that basis I would suggest it's correct for the government to create a system. Companies and individuals can choose to use it or not.

I'm not convinced that 'the majority' do want this, in truth. I know what the YouGov polls say, but I don't know anyone at work (100+ people, perhaps) that has said that this would be acceptable. The problem is there is no mandate for the government to do this without serious debate. Which leads us to the current political landscape - largely bereft of honour, backbone and morals. Labour would love that (as Tonker mentioned, Blair is a great champion, which probably tells you all you need to know) and there's possibly be enough support from whipped Tories and a limp Liberal party; look at how little pushback there has been so far from the 'opposition' parties. That said, I still do not think it is not enough for the government to push this.

[menousername]

citizensm1th said:

Because unlike your previous comment to me I am not scared of covid I have worked through out supporting the medical suppliers in the UK.

But if a vaccine allows me to take my wife out to a nice restaurant then damn right il be having it

Goal posts will be moved by then. “Have you had your six monthly booster, sir”?

The life you think you will get back will be gone.

[JuanCarlosFandango]

Mrr T said:

It seems a large majority favour some sort of passport. On that basis I would suggest it's correct for the government to create a system. Companies and individuals can choose to use it or not.

I seem to remember you being less enthusiastic about the will of the majority on major policy decisions a couple of years ago.

We actually have elections to determine what people want the government to do and not do. What people seem to want on the basis of opinion polls and newspaper editorials is not the same thing.

If people want it then they'll get it through and probably better for having a wider debate about it.

[citizensm1th]

menousername said:

citizensm1th said:

Because unlike your previous comment to me I am not scared of covid I have worked through out supporting the medical suppliers in the UK.

But if a vaccine allows me to take my wife out to a nice restaurant then damn right il be having it

Goal posts will be moved by then. “Have you had your six monthly booster, sir”?

The life you think you will get back will be gone.

If I need to have a booster jab then il have one, I don't see the problem.

[jameswills]

citizensm1th said:

You may even get a two teir approach from some of the larger venues say for instance Silverstone for the F1 if you can prove you have been jabbed and have had a recent covid test you can buy a swanky grandstand pass and enjoy the day muzzle free. But if you do not wish to you can go and stand in the field over there but you must keep a social distance and wear a mask all day.

It is very likely to be the other way round. As shown through lockdown, it has least affected those more affluent and have more influence. Same will happen with travel and restrictions regarding vaccination. You are under the impression that this is a one time thing, you’ll be needing extra vaccines every year or so, possibly even more than that once the door is open to discriminate so easily on health issues. The rich can get their jabs privately at a cost, they will afford more freedoms, the poorer people will have to wait their turn, as they are for the current round of vaccines.

I don’t think it’s going to play out quite like how you think it is.

[768]

Mrr T said:

It seems a large majority favour some sort of passport. On that basis I would suggest it's correct for the government to create a system. Companies and individuals can choose to use it or not.

What's the source of that? It sounds like it's not the poll that said only the vaccinated should travel by plane and just sneaked a majority?

I'm not sure that supports the case for vaccine passports.

[anonymous-user]

citizensm1th said:

menousername said:

citizensm1th said:

Because unlike your previous comment to me I am not scared of covid I have worked through out supporting the medical suppliers in the UK.

But if a vaccine allows me to take my wife out to a nice restaurant then damn right il be having it

Goal posts will be moved by then. “Have you had your six monthly booster, sir”?

The life you think you will get back will be gone.

If I need to have a booster jab then il have one, I don't see the problem.

Good citizen

[Nickgnome]

JuanCarlosFandango said:

From a purely democratic point of view it would be an outrage to introduce such a policy without any mandate to do so. We dropped the idea of compulsory vaccinations in the late 19th century because the backlash was undermining trust in medicine in general and the medical profession has never clearly advocated such a policy. We let people make their own decisions for far more serious diseases which also have implications for others.

As recently as 2019 the idea was strongly resisted

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-49975717

If certain companies want to introduce this soft compulsion then they have the right to do so, but the government should not be facilitating this with vaccine passports. Let companies develop private versions if they wish and make it voluntary for those people who wish to use them.

I tend to agree with you on the matter of vaccination compulsion. However I do not believe this has been suggested.

It would be difficult to let business arrange vaccination passporting. Surely we could not have a multitude of systems going?

This may well be driven my the risk of litigation.

I think I recall prosecutions of persons in relation to HIV. Could this be similar if Long Covid is proven to be life damaging for some?

I admit it is early days yet so the outcomes are unclear.

[JuanCarlosFandango]

I wonder more generally how many people who are happy to turn the country upside down and introduce sweeping restrictions on personal liberty to slightly prolong the lives of elderly people were quite happy to ignore a referendum result a couple of years ago because the most enthusiastic voting group would soon be dead.

[citizensm1th]

jameswills said:

citizensm1th said:

You may even get a two teir approach from some of the larger venues say for instance Silverstone for the F1 if you can prove you have been jabbed and have had a recent covid test you can buy a swanky grandstand pass and enjoy the day muzzle free. But if you do not wish to you can go and stand in the field over there but you must keep a social distance and wear a mask all day.

It is very likely to be the other way round. As shown through lockdown, it has least affected those more affluent and have more influence. Same will happen with travel and restrictions regarding vaccination. You are under the impression that this is a one time thing, you’ll be needing extra vaccines every year or so, possibly even more than that once the door is open to discriminate so easily on health issues. The rich can get their jabs privately at a cost, they will afford more freedoms, the poorer people will have to wait their turn, as they are for the current round of vaccines.

I don’t think it’s going to play out quite like how you think it is.

It will play out just like the annual flu jab.

As you may tell from my forum name I really really do not like our current government and I would love to turn this into a rich vs poor argument but it just isn't.

Honestly the level of paranoid thinking on this issue is staggering

[anonymous-user]

Nickgnome said:

This may well be driven my the risk of litigation.

How is anyone going to prove they caught Covid at a particular business, let alone that the offending business had failed in its duty of care?

It's a nonsense argument.

Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 24th February 13:30

[JuanCarlosFandango]

Nickgnome said:

I tend to agree with you on the matter of vaccination compulsion. However I do not believe this has been suggested.

It would be difficult to let business arrange vaccination passporting. Surely we could not have a multitude of systems going?

This may well be driven my the risk of litigation.

I think I recall prosecutions of persons in relation to HIV. Could this be similar if Long Covid is proven to be life damaging for some?

I admit it is early days yet so the outcomes are unclear.

As far as I know (which is not comprehensive) you can be prosecuted for recklessly spreading it, and this is opposed by some AIDS groups as it leads to stigma and secrecy. But that's having unprotected sex with someone and giving them an incurable disease when you knew you had it. The sentence is up to 5 years.

https://www.tht.org.uk/hiv-and-sexual-health/livin...

Governments actually moved pretty quickly to reduce stigma and discrimination against AIDS sufferers early on and we don't have AIDS passports, regular testing or travel restrictions.

Covid is a cold which the vast majority of people will survive just fine and can apparently be spread by me brushing past someone in a supermarket. An interesting comparison but not a direct one.

Would anyone have supported prosecuting people for "recklessly" spreading a cold 18 months ago?

[jameswills]

citizensm1th said:

It will play out just like the annual flu jab.

As you may tell from my forum name I really really do not like our current government and I would love to turn this into a rich vs poor argument but it just isn't.

Honestly the level of paranoid thinking on this issue is staggering

There are no restrictions at all on anyone regarding the flu jab, it’s just a personal choice for your own personal well-being if you think it is necessary. No problem on the Covid jab on that level, absolutely not. But when you start implementing effectively a tiered society based on who or hasn’t had the vaccination, it is exactly how it will pan out.

[Darth Paul]

citizensm1th said:

menousername said:

citizensm1th said:

Because unlike your previous comment to me I am not scared of covid I have worked through out supporting the medical suppliers in the UK.

But if a vaccine allows me to take my wife out to a nice restaurant then damn right il be having it

Goal posts will be moved by then. “Have you had your six monthly booster, sir”?

The life you think you will get back will be gone.

If I need to have a booster jab then il have one, I don't see the problem.

Think about the logistics of that. It’s taken us 3 months to do 15 million people, will probably be at least 8 months before they’ve offered everyone else a jab and that’s commandeering community centres, town halls, old buses, stadiums, etc to get that volume done. Now you try and keep the entire population topped up with a booster every 6, even 12 months in normal GP practices Not going to happen. GPs complain they are stretched as it is.