Donate to Remove ads

Got a credit card? use our Credit Card & Finance Calculators

Thanks to SalvorHardin,Loup321,pje16,AsleepInYorkshire,swill453, for Donating to support the site

Vaccine Passports - legality

The home for all non-political Coronavirus (Covid-19) discussions on The Lemon Fool
Forum rules
This is the home for all non-political Coronavirus (Covid-19) discussions on The Lemon Fool
Itsallaguess
Lemon Half
Posts: 6896
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 1:16 pm
Has thanked: 3100 times
Been thanked: 5931 times

Re: Vaccine Passports - legality

#429212

Postby Itsallaguess » July 21st, 2021, 5:46 am

1nvest wrote:
Anti-vaxxers are apparently planning for illegal raves come September in the absence of being permitted to enter nightclubs/bars - spontaneous street parties (bring your own booze) that apparently should be a riot.


Well that might actually be the best answer to getting these guys on the path to infection-driven herd-immunity that's likely to be available...

I hope they're given whistles on the way in, and encouraged to share them around...

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

Hallucigenia
2 Lemon pips
Posts: 199
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 3:03 am
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 35 times

Re: Vaccine Passports - legality

#429389

Postby Hallucigenia » July 21st, 2021, 4:54 pm

I can't leave these hanging unanswered - SeagoonN, you really need to find better sources of information than whoever fed you this nonsense, they're just trying to manipulate you with propaganda.

SeagoonN wrote:I recently came across three items of legislation (two international, one national) which relate to vaccinations, compulsion and discrimination. They are:

1. The vaccines have not completed Phase 3 trials and are therefore de facto experimental. The Nuremberg Code 1947, created after World War II with regard to medical experimentation


They're not experimental and they have completed Phase 3 - back before Christmas. The Nuremberg Code does not apply here. For more details see

https://fullfact.org/health/nuremberg-code-covid/

SeagoonN wrote:2. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, of which the UK remains a member, passed Resolution 2361 on 27 January 2021, Paragraph 7.3.1 and 7.3.2 in which it was stated that member stages are urged to:


The key bit of this is "urged to" - it's not legally binding in any way. As France has proved. See

https://www.reuters.com/article/factche ... SL1N2LM1N1

SeagoonN wrote:3. The Equalities Act 2010 prohibits discrimination on the grounds of disability. There are many categories of this that would render a “vaccination passport” illegal on the grounds that an individual cannot be vaccinated owing to a health condition.

IANAL but it seems to me that the UK Government could have a problem with introducing any system that differentiates between those who have been vaccinated and those who have not.


The equalities argument gets complicated, but it's certainly not black and white. There are mitigations - you can't discriminate on age, but it's OK to ignore 60yo women when casting an actor to play Billy Elliot, and you must discriminate against under-18s when it comes to selling alcohol. And publicans have rather more control on who they allow in their pubs than the average business. More importantly, they have a pretty absolute duty of care for the health and safety of their staff. And that would probably count as a mitigation to allow "discrimination", it's not arbitrary but there is a "real" reason for it. Particularly if the passport scheme had some kind of flag proving that someone genuinely couldn't have the jab for medical reasons and so was exempt, in the same way that there's an exemption for the usual rules on having dogs in certain public places, for those who have a medical need for guide/assistance dogs. But those exemptions would not extend to people who refuse the jab because they think Bill Gates is going to implant 5G into them...

1nvest
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1314
Joined: May 31st, 2019, 7:55 pm
Has thanked: 143 times
Been thanked: 327 times

Re: Vaccine Passports - legality

#429396

Postby 1nvest » July 21st, 2021, 5:21 pm

Some simply don't care what junk they might inject/digest. Nice that there are so many lab rats willing to be tested upon for the mid to longer term implications from the vaccines, where the providers are all indemnified as well. Far less agreeable is that others are being coerced into also becoming lab rats. A president for discrimination laws also, where it would seem that the onus is transitioned over to having to openly share personal details with total strangers. Hmm! Can of worms. A very short sighted policy, for instance Covid deaths might seem insignificant if the vaccines are found to induce total blindness after five years in 100% of cases.

1nvest
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1314
Joined: May 31st, 2019, 7:55 pm
Has thanked: 143 times
Been thanked: 327 times

Re: Vaccine Passports - legality

#429399

Postby 1nvest » July 21st, 2021, 5:30 pm

How will the passport evolve? Will clearly have to bear photo/age ...etc. identification. And how might the data stored be extended over time? No entry to any social events if you didn't vote Tory perhaps? Odd how in another era those most likely to run down the Chinese tier system suddenly have turned around to not only welcome it, but coerce others into adopting it asap.

Hallucigenia
2 Lemon pips
Posts: 199
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 3:03 am
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 35 times

Re: Vaccine Passports - legality

#429412

Postby Hallucigenia » July 21st, 2021, 6:27 pm

1nvest wrote:Nice that there are so many lab rats willing to be tested upon for the mid to longer term implications from the vaccines...for instance Covid deaths might seem insignificant if the vaccines are found to induce total blindness after five years in 100% of cases.


https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/the ... -a-vaccine
As for concerns about the long-term safety of these jabs, the honest answer is that we are still waiting, but this isn't a reason to cause concern. If you look at every vaccine developed, you see a clear pattern. Side effects are overwhelmingly short-term (if you want a typical account, see here). This is, after all, built into how vaccines work: one or two doses promote short-term immune responses that primes us for later.

The flu jab is a case in point here: you probably don't even think twice about this when you get your injection. Let's be honest, who has scoured the evidence for flu jabs? I haven't. It is such a non-event, my major question is rather 'Do I do it during the week or the Friday and risk ruining the weekend?'. I expect to feel a bit rough for two days, moan to my wife then get on with life. There is no reason to think that the Covid vaccine should be any different.


You're just fearmongering with no basis in fact.

1nvest wrote:How will the passport evolve? Will clearly have to bear photo/age ...etc. identification.


Why? I have a yellow fever vaccination passport that doesn't need a photo, it works on a principle that
a) you're kinda stupid going to a place with a deadly disease without a jab and
b) you're trusted not to cheat, but there's punishment if you get found out

So no, it's not "clear" that a vaccine passport has to have a photo.

92.5% of adults already have some kind of "official" photo ID - driving licence, passport, Oyster photocard etc, and this government has judged that's enough to be pushing on with requiring such a "passport" to vote.

9873210
Lemon Slice
Posts: 341
Joined: December 9th, 2016, 6:44 am
Has thanked: 90 times
Been thanked: 87 times

Re: Vaccine Passports - legality

#429417

Postby 9873210 » July 21st, 2021, 6:57 pm

1nvest wrote: for instance Covid deaths might seem insignificant if the vaccines are found to induce total blindness after five years in 100% of cases.

The avoided Covid deaths might seem insignificant if the vaccine is found to prevent Alzheimer's or confer immortality.

U962
Posts: 4
Joined: June 16th, 2021, 6:25 pm
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Vaccine Passports - legality

#429422

Postby U962 » July 21st, 2021, 7:25 pm

Hallucigenia wrote:The flu jab is a case in point here: you probably don't even think twice about this when you get your injection. Let's be honest, who has scoured the evidence for flu jabs? I haven't. It is such a non-event, my major question is rather 'Do I do it during the week or the Friday and risk ruining the weekend?'. I expect to feel a bit rough for two days, moan to my wife then get on with life. There is no reason to think that the Covid vaccine should be any different


You are correct in that I don't spend any time at all researching the evidence for flu jabs - I already know that on balance they are a pile of crap unless you are already vulnerable so I don't touch them with a bargepole. You are also correct in that for me the cv19 jab will be the same - in that I won't be touching that with a bargepole either.

Mind you when there WAS a problem with the flu jabs and Narcolepsy as a side effect our government spent the next 10 years hotly denying there was any link - well they would wouldn't they the lying scum, until the courts ordered them to pay up in 2017.
(Not approved to post link so you can go and find the guardian article yourselves from 9 Feb 2017 - ministers loose fight to prevent payout)

Oh yes and the worry of some possible long term as yet unknown side effect is the precise reason AZ gave for requiring full legal immunity from any liability over their vax.
See AZ executive interview with Reuters and Ruud Dubber at
(not approved to post links - so go and find it yourself
So you might think it fear mongering - but AZ certainly don't.

1nvest
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1314
Joined: May 31st, 2019, 7:55 pm
Has thanked: 143 times
Been thanked: 327 times

Re: Vaccine Passports - legality

#429423

Postby 1nvest » July 21st, 2021, 7:34 pm

Hallucigenia wrote:Why? I have a yellow fever vaccination passport that doesn't need a photo,

So no, it's not "clear" that a vaccine passport has to have a photo.

If so many anti-vaxxers will just 'borrow' a copy of a valid QR code in order to gain entry to a nightclub/bar/whatever. The fake Covid certificate market is already quite prevalent.

Waste of vaccines to have Jack whose already been vaccinated to pose as John whose a anti-vaxxer in order to have another pair of jabs just so that John gets a formal tick of having been jabbed.

The flu jab is a case in point here: you probably don't even think twice about this when you get your injection

Never given it a second thought as I've never had one.

vagrantbrain
Lemon Slice
Posts: 250
Joined: November 17th, 2016, 7:12 pm
Has thanked: 87 times
Been thanked: 101 times

Re: Vaccine Passports - legality

#429426

Postby vagrantbrain » July 21st, 2021, 7:46 pm

U962 wrote:
Hallucigenia wrote:The flu jab is a case in point here: you probably don't even think twice about this when you get your injection. Let's be honest, who has scoured the evidence for flu jabs? I haven't. It is such a non-event, my major question is rather 'Do I do it during the week or the Friday and risk ruining the weekend?'. I expect to feel a bit rough for two days, moan to my wife then get on with life. There is no reason to think that the Covid vaccine should be any different


You are correct in that I don't spend any time at all researching the evidence for flu jabs - I already know that on balance they are a pile of crap unless you are already vulnerable so I don't touch them with a bargepole. You are also correct in that for me the cv19 jab will be the same - in that I won't be touching that with a bargepole either.

Mind you when there WAS a problem with the flu jabs and Narcolepsy as a side effect our government spent the next 10 years hotly denying there was any link - well they would wouldn't they the lying scum, until the courts ordered them to pay up in 2017.
(Not approved to post link so you can go and find the guardian article yourselves from 9 Feb 2017 - ministers loose fight to prevent payout)

Oh yes and the worry of some possible long term as yet unknown side effect is the precise reason AZ gave for requiring full legal immunity from any liability over their vax.
See AZ executive interview with Reuters and Ruud Dubber at
(not approved to post links - so go and find it yourself
So you might think it fear mongering - but AZ certainly don't.


Business is about managing risks. The government wanted the vaccine asap so some of the development risk was transferred to the gov't as part of the agreement, i'm not seeing anything other than astute commercial management there. It doesn't mean they're hiding something or that they're expecting serious side effects. I work on nuclear reactors and some of the liabilities for clean up after an accident are owned by the government - doesn't mean the reactors are unsafe and about to blow up.

1nvest
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1314
Joined: May 31st, 2019, 7:55 pm
Has thanked: 143 times
Been thanked: 327 times

Re: Vaccine Passports - legality

#429472

Postby 1nvest » July 22nd, 2021, 12:13 am

vagrantbrain wrote:
U962 wrote:
Hallucigenia wrote:The flu jab is a case in point here: you probably don't even think twice about this when you get your injection. Let's be honest, who has scoured the evidence for flu jabs? I haven't. It is such a non-event, my major question is rather 'Do I do it during the week or the Friday and risk ruining the weekend?'. I expect to feel a bit rough for two days, moan to my wife then get on with life. There is no reason to think that the Covid vaccine should be any different


You are correct in that I don't spend any time at all researching the evidence for flu jabs - I already know that on balance they are a pile of crap unless you are already vulnerable so I don't touch them with a bargepole. You are also correct in that for me the cv19 jab will be the same - in that I won't be touching that with a bargepole either.

Mind you when there WAS a problem with the flu jabs and Narcolepsy as a side effect our government spent the next 10 years hotly denying there was any link - well they would wouldn't they the lying scum, until the courts ordered them to pay up in 2017.
(Not approved to post link so you can go and find the guardian article yourselves from 9 Feb 2017 - ministers loose fight to prevent payout)

Oh yes and the worry of some possible long term as yet unknown side effect is the precise reason AZ gave for requiring full legal immunity from any liability over their vax.
See AZ executive interview with Reuters and Ruud Dubber at
(not approved to post links - so go and find it yourself
So you might think it fear mongering - but AZ certainly don't.


Business is about managing risks. The government wanted the vaccine asap so some of the development risk was transferred to the gov't as part of the agreement, i'm not seeing anything other than astute commercial management there. It doesn't mean they're hiding something or that they're expecting serious side effects. I work on nuclear reactors and some of the liabilities for clean up after an accident are owned by the government - doesn't mean the reactors are unsafe and about to blow up.

Sometimes stuff unexpectedly hits fans ...
Fukushima Daiichi
Chernobyl
A new form of reactor hastily developed and built within months might just have overlooked something so blindingly obvious after the event.
Marie Curie used to carry radium around in her pockets.
in 1940, scientists realised that DDT was an effective pesticide and could kill the insects that spread diseases, such as mosquitoes that carried malaria. It seemed perfect - it was cheap, easy to use, and seemed to have no side effects whatsoever on humans. Used massively/broadly, but subsequently identified as causing liver damage including liver cancer, nervous system damage, birth defects, and other reproductive harm.

1nvest
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1314
Joined: May 31st, 2019, 7:55 pm
Has thanked: 143 times
Been thanked: 327 times

Re: Vaccine Passports - legality

#429488

Postby 1nvest » July 22nd, 2021, 3:02 am

SeagoonN wrote:I recently came across three items of legislation (two international, one national) which relate to vaccinations, compulsion and discrimination. They are:

1. The vaccines have not completed Phase 3 trials and are therefore de facto experimental. The Nuremberg Code 1947, created after World War II with regard to medical experimentation, states that:

The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved, as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision.

2. The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, of which the UK remains a member, passed Resolution 2361 on 27 January 2021, Paragraph 7.3.1 and 7.3.2 in which it was stated that member stages are urged to:

Ensure that citizens are informed that the vaccination is NOT mandatory and that no one is politically, socially, or otherwise pressured to get themselves vaccinated, if they do not wish to do so themselves.
Ensure that no one is discriminated against for not having been vaccinated, due to possible health risks or not wanting to be vaccinated.


3. The Equalities Act 2010 prohibits discrimination on the grounds of disability. There are many categories of this that would render a “vaccination passport” illegal on the grounds that an individual cannot be vaccinated owing to a health condition.

IANAL but it seems to me that the UK Government could have a problem with introducing any system that differentiates between those who have been vaccinated and those who have not.

Does anyone know how the Government would be able to introduce their so-called "passport" scheme without falling foul of any of the above legislation?

Neddy (just curious).

Any legislation that dramatically affects civil liberties has a need for vigilance to ensure the State does not overstep its boundaries. Changes include such wording as 'proportionate' which is subjective. A police officer could lock you up for 24 hours for instance, and may even get that extended to 48 hours if they opined you might be infectious and they deemed that to be proportionate. As does the Act support restriction of movement, activities and contacts. Such 'proportionate' measures are being applied in a manner to force individuals into having to accept the vaccine or otherwise lose their free movement/activities/contacts. Flip of a coin as to whether a Court might decide whether such practices were proportionate or not. As such lawfully the state could breach civil liberties and at least get away with that for quite a while. The answer for those who opine such law to breach their liberties are likely better served by other pathways such as faking compliance - which in turn will likely induce even greater controls/measures that leads down a very undesirable pathway.

vagrantbrain
Lemon Slice
Posts: 250
Joined: November 17th, 2016, 7:12 pm
Has thanked: 87 times
Been thanked: 101 times

Re: Vaccine Passports - legality

#429524

Postby vagrantbrain » July 22nd, 2021, 9:10 am

1nvest wrote:
vagrantbrain wrote:
U962 wrote:
You are correct in that I don't spend any time at all researching the evidence for flu jabs - I already know that on balance they are a pile of crap unless you are already vulnerable so I don't touch them with a bargepole. You are also correct in that for me the cv19 jab will be the same - in that I won't be touching that with a bargepole either.

Mind you when there WAS a problem with the flu jabs and Narcolepsy as a side effect our government spent the next 10 years hotly denying there was any link - well they would wouldn't they the lying scum, until the courts ordered them to pay up in 2017.
(Not approved to post link so you can go and find the guardian article yourselves from 9 Feb 2017 - ministers loose fight to prevent payout)

Oh yes and the worry of some possible long term as yet unknown side effect is the precise reason AZ gave for requiring full legal immunity from any liability over their vax.
See AZ executive interview with Reuters and Ruud Dubber at
(not approved to post links - so go and find it yourself
So you might think it fear mongering - but AZ certainly don't.


Business is about managing risks. The government wanted the vaccine asap so some of the development risk was transferred to the gov't as part of the agreement, i'm not seeing anything other than astute commercial management there. It doesn't mean they're hiding something or that they're expecting serious side effects. I work on nuclear reactors and some of the liabilities for clean up after an accident are owned by the government - doesn't mean the reactors are unsafe and about to blow up.

Sometimes stuff unexpectedly hits fans ...
Fukushima Daiichi
Chernobyl
A new form of reactor hastily developed and built within months might just have overlooked something so blindingly obvious after the event.
Marie Curie used to carry radium around in her pockets.
in 1940, scientists realised that DDT was an effective pesticide and could kill the insects that spread diseases, such as mosquitoes that carried malaria. It seemed perfect - it was cheap, easy to use, and seemed to have no side effects whatsoever on humans. Used massively/broadly, but subsequently identified as causing liver damage including liver cancer, nervous system damage, birth defects, and other reproductive harm.


Not wishing to be pedantic, but neither Chernobyl or Fukushima were act-of-god events but the products of systemic negligence and incompetence. The other examples are spot on though as long terms effects can take time to be visible - the difference is that none of them were known about and deliberately covered up as the poster seems to be implying about the AZ vaccine.

servodude
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 3364
Joined: November 8th, 2016, 5:56 am
Has thanked: 1312 times
Been thanked: 975 times

Re: Vaccine Passports - legality

#429549

Postby servodude » July 22nd, 2021, 10:21 am

vagrantbrain wrote:The other examples are spot on though as long terms effects can take time to be visible - the difference is that none of them were known about and deliberately covered up as the poster seems to be implying about the AZ vaccine


They have also informed the procedures through which subsequent drugs, medical devices, chemicals and processes are regulated and approved
- you wouldn't get the likes of Thalidomide recklessly approved these days (well not in most rational locales that apply the precautionary principle to these things)

-sd

Hallucigenia
2 Lemon pips
Posts: 199
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 3:03 am
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 35 times

Re: Vaccine Passports - legality

#429557

Postby Hallucigenia » July 22nd, 2021, 10:44 am

U962 wrote:You are correct in that I don't spend any time at all researching the evidence for flu jabs - I already know


If you're not interested in evidence then it's not worth debating. Without evidence you'll believe anything,you'll that Red Bull gives you wings. Without evidence you're susceptible to religion, marketing and propaganda - which one are you reading?

U962 wrote:Mind you when there WAS a problem with the flu jabs and Narcolepsy as a side effect our government spent the next 10 years hotly denying there was any link


Is the narcolepsy thing the best you can do? It was a 1 in 50,000 effect,that was picked up within a few months. If anything like that was happening with the Covid jabs, you would have 40,000 people with the symptom.

Of course everyone wants to minimise risks, but there is no risk-free option in an environment where SARS2 is endemic. Government policy is for everyone in the UK to acquire immunity by infection or vaccination. So it's your choice - either to get vaccinated or to get infected, which will you choose?

Bear in mind that infection comes with a 1 in 100 risk of dying, and a 1 in 10 risk of long Covid. If you're looking for uncertainty, look at how little we know about long Covid. I've got a mild case, and even that is not much fun. Don't be like these people :

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk ... i-21096680
"Glenn had his worries and reasons for not having the jabs...but he did say to the nurses before going into an induced coma he wished he had"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-57643577
"A Covid-19 vaccine refuser "stared death in the eyes" as he lay gasping for breath in hospital after catching the virus...The father of two said declining his vaccination invite in February was "the biggest mistake" of his life."

A 23yo nurse who had been tweeting "Do. Not. Get. It. It's not safe" :
https://www.theadvocate.com/acadiana/ne ... 02e90.html

Hallucigenia
2 Lemon pips
Posts: 199
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 3:03 am
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 35 times

Re: Vaccine Passports - legality

#429559

Postby Hallucigenia » July 22nd, 2021, 10:45 am

1nvest wrote:
Hallucigenia wrote:Why? I have a yellow fever vaccination passport that doesn't need a photo,

So no, it's not "clear" that a vaccine passport has to have a photo.

If so many anti-vaxxers will just 'borrow' a copy of a valid QR code in order to gain entry to a nightclub/bar/whatever. The fake Covid certificate market is already quite prevalent.


So is burglary, it doesn't make it right.

Faking official documents puts you in the same category as illegal immigrants. Do you think illegal immigrants should be welcomed and given all the privileges of being in this country, or should they be punished and kicked out?

1nvest
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 1314
Joined: May 31st, 2019, 7:55 pm
Has thanked: 143 times
Been thanked: 327 times

Re: Vaccine Passports - legality

#429618

Postby 1nvest » July 22nd, 2021, 12:35 pm

Hallucigenia wrote:
U962 wrote:You are correct in that I don't spend any time at all researching the evidence for flu jabs - I already know


If you're not interested in evidence then it's not worth debating. Without evidence you'll believe anything,you'll that Red Bull gives you wings. Without evidence you're susceptible to religion, marketing and propaganda - which one are you reading?

U962 wrote:Mind you when there WAS a problem with the flu jabs and Narcolepsy as a side effect our government spent the next 10 years hotly denying there was any link


Is the narcolepsy thing the best you can do? It was a 1 in 50,000 effect,that was picked up within a few months. If anything like that was happening with the Covid jabs, you would have 40,000 people with the symptom.

Of course everyone wants to minimise risks, but there is no risk-free option in an environment where SARS2 is endemic. Government policy is for everyone in the UK to acquire immunity by infection or vaccination. So it's your choice - either to get vaccinated or to get infected, which will you choose?

Bear in mind that infection comes with a 1 in 100 risk of dying, and a 1 in 10 risk of long Covid. If you're looking for uncertainty, look at how little we know about long Covid. I've got a mild case, and even that is not much fun. Don't be like these people :

https://www.manchestereveningnews.co.uk ... i-21096680
"Glenn had his worries and reasons for not having the jabs...but he did say to the nurses before going into an induced coma he wished he had"

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-57643577
"A Covid-19 vaccine refuser "stared death in the eyes" as he lay gasping for breath in hospital after catching the virus...The father of two said declining his vaccination invite in February was "the biggest mistake" of his life."

A 23yo nurse who had been tweeting "Do. Not. Get. It. It's not safe" :
https://www.theadvocate.com/acadiana/ne ... 02e90.html


But to force people into having to take the jab?! What if there are issues down the road, mass commonality rather than the diversity of individuals being left to make their own choice.

One of my two sons has had it (well only the first dose so far), the other refuses. If I were to insist he had it and there were issues down the road my dictatorship would have led him into a position that I would have induced that left to his own devices he would have avoided. If instead he contracted and died from Covid then at least it was his own choice to have taken on that risk.

Hallucigenia
2 Lemon pips
Posts: 199
Joined: November 5th, 2016, 3:03 am
Has thanked: 4 times
Been thanked: 35 times

Re: Vaccine Passports - legality

#429686

Postby Hallucigenia » July 22nd, 2021, 3:49 pm

1nvest wrote:But to force people into having to take the jab?! What if there are issues down the road, mass commonality rather than the diversity of individuals being left to make their own choice.


These things are never black and white, the answer will vary depending on the balance of risks. If we were vaccinating against Ebola then it would make sense to be cautious and only vax the people who were likely to go to west Africa. If we were vaccinating against a relatively minor ailment like athlete's foot, you would wait a long time to see if there were any long-term complications. I'm not saying we should take vaccines willy-nilly.

But the balance of risks is different for Covid. It's not like Ebola, you are pretty much certain to be exposed to it if you go about your normal life in the UK. And the result of being infected is far more serious than athlete's foot. There's probably been too much focus on deaths, we should perhaps look at it more like polio as something that causes serious long-term disability in a lot of people, (and by the way also kills some of them). I've got long Covid and it's not nice, although I've got a pretty mild version. Even stuff like the loss of smell has effects you wouldn't think about, like I'm not safe in the kitchen because I can't smell gas or burning.

And Covid is very transmissible, which means it can transmit even in populations where there is high levels of immunity. It looks like that unconstrained, delta has an R approaching 6. If immunisation (by jab or infection) is 100% effective, then herd immunity comes when 1-(1/R), 83% are immunised. Since it's not 100% effective then you're probably looking at needing 85-90% of the total population immunised (including all kids). Since there's a chunk of people who can't be vaccinated for various reasons and who rely entirely on the rest of the population being jabbed, then delta means we're near or at the limit where we just don't have the luxury of people opting out of jabs.

We're at war with this thing, and during wartime governments can do all sorts of things that wouldn't normally be doable, like conscription. About half the British soldiers in WWI were conscripts, and if they faced the same risk as the average for the whole army then they had around a 8.5-9% chance of death and an additional 19% risk of injury. But they still went to the trenches, to do their bit for their country.

Whereas you're not prepared to do your bit for your country, because of a 1 in a million risk?

zico
Lemon Quarter
Posts: 2456
Joined: November 4th, 2016, 12:12 pm
Has thanked: 707 times
Been thanked: 736 times

Re: Vaccine Passports - legality

#429688

Postby zico » July 22nd, 2021, 4:06 pm

Sad story from USA from a doctor


She said: ‘One of the last things they do before they’re intubated is beg me for the vaccine. I hold their hand and tell them that I’m sorry, but it’s too late.

‘A few days later when I call time of death, I hug their family members and I tell them the best way to honor their loved one is to go get vaccinated and encourage everyone they know to do the same. They cry.

‘And they tell me they didn’t know. They thought it was a hoax. They thought it was political.

‘They thought because they had a certain blood type or a certain skin color they wouldn’t get as sick. They thought it was “just the flu”.

‘But they were wrong. And they wish they could go back. But they can’t. So they thank me and they go get the vaccine.

‘And I go back to my office, write their death note, and say a small prayer that this loss will save more lives.’


https://metro.co.uk/2021/07/21/doctor-t ... -14968174/

onthemove
Lemon Slice
Posts: 366
Joined: June 24th, 2017, 4:03 pm
Has thanked: 445 times
Been thanked: 304 times

Re: Vaccine Passports - legality

#429697

Postby onthemove » July 22nd, 2021, 4:21 pm

1nvest wrote:But to force people into having to take the jab?! What if there are issues down the road, mass commonality rather than the diversity of individuals being left to make their own choice.


I don't agree with forcing people to have the vaccine, and I don't agree with indirect force either - e.g. barring people from public gatherings, etc ... though compulsion for health care professionals, I'm on the fence on.

But that said, I wouldn't use 'issues down the road' as a reason - I'd just stick to democratic choice, human rights, etc, that we shouldn't be forced. It shouldn't require people to justify their decision.

Whilst you couldn't absolutely rule it out, I think that risk of long term issues is being hugely overstated.

Look at it this way... the AZ viral vector platform has been under development and testing for several years. It's only the covid-specific section that is new.... they basically inserted a section of the sars-cov-2 genetic structure into the existing vaccine vector.

So if those covid specific genetic sections could cause long term issues down the road, then so could encountering the same genetic sequences from catching covid itself.

And with it seeming inevitable that covid is going to be widespread even with the vaccines, not having the vaccine isn't really going to avoid the risk.

murraypaul
Lemon Slice
Posts: 335
Joined: April 9th, 2021, 5:54 pm
Has thanked: 21 times
Been thanked: 102 times

Re: Vaccine Passports - legality

#429741

Postby murraypaul » July 22nd, 2021, 6:40 pm

1nvest wrote:But to force people into having to take the jab?! What if there are issues down the road, mass commonality rather than the diversity of individuals being left to make their own choice.


Who is forcing you to take it?


Return to “Coronavirus Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Watis and 3 guests