Covid - coming out of Lockdown 3 - no politics, less opinion and more facts and information.

[boxbrownie]

5 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

Covid "passports", my take:

 

Whatever your political view of the principle, I think something like it will be unavoidable if we want to return to many of the activities we previously enjoyed within a reasonable timescale.

 

International travel is going to cease without one, whatever Parliament thinks or does about it. That is going to last years rather than months, and for some destinations is likely to be permanent, so sticking to ones principles or prejudices will have a personal cost.

 

Nightclubs, pubs, restaurants and yes, model railway shows may be permitted to resume activities but are arguably non-viable if social distancing requirements  remains at current levels. Covid passports might allow a relaxation of that within premises that enforce them rather sooner than will otherwise be the case.

 

If so, it's a price I'll be more than willing to pay.

 

John

And to me, a little bit of paper or certificate on ones phone is a piddly price to pay......unless of course there really is a microchip in the vaccine? 

[Reorte]

Purely on the practical side of the covid passport idea, what is it actually going to achieve, once the vast majority of adults have been vaccinated? Especially if medical exceptions to being vaccinated count (the virus doesn't care exactly what reason you had for not having a vaccine, whether it was due to genuine medical need or tinfoilhattery). It would be possible to make a stronger case for them if vaccination take-up was low but the UK's pretty good in that respect.

 

And I do wish that people would recognise that the ethical aspect of it isn't non-existent just because they don't happen to agree with it personally.

Edited April 7, 2021 by Reorte

[boxbrownie]

4 minutes ago, Reorte said:

Purely on the practical side of the covid passport idea, what is it actually going to achieve, once the vast majority of adults have been vaccinated? Especially if medical exceptions to being vaccinated count (the virus doesn't care exactly what reason you had for not having a vaccine, whether it was due to genuine medical need or tinfoilhattery). It would be possible to make a stronger case for them if vaccination take-up was low but the UK's pretty good in that respect.

 

And I do wish that people would recognise that the ethical aspect of it isn't non-existent just because they don't happen to agree with it personally.

I see it it as a purely intermediate step to full “open doors”.

[Reorte]

Just now, boxbrownie said:

I see it it as a purely intermediate step to full “open doors”.

 

Fair enough, but then it would make more sense to have it now, rather than by the point where there'll be very few unvaccinated.

[TheQ]

If we are to not have covid passports then I suppose we should get rid of driving licences..

They are after all More discriminatory,

Not every one has one,

 Many can't have one for Medical reasons eg severe epileptics or severe diabetics

The poor can't have a driving licence it's too expensive, whereas the jab iis free..

 

[boxbrownie]

1 minute ago, Reorte said:

 

Fair enough, but then it would make more sense to have it now, rather than by the point where there'll be very few unvaccinated.

But then the inevitable “it was done too early” would rear its head.....rather than the “it’s too late”.....

[Reorte]

1 minute ago, TheQ said:

If we are to not have covid passports then I suppose we should get rid of driving licences..

They are after all More discriminatory,

Not every one has one,

 Many can't have one for Medical reasons eg severe epileptics or severe diabetics

The poor can't have a driving licence it's too expensive, whereas the jab iis free..

 

Driving has always been a privilege though (even though in practical terms the world's reshaped itself around easy access to cars that it's not possible for a significant proportion to do without one).

[Andy Hayter]

1 hour ago, Reorte said:

Purely on the practical side of the covid passport idea, what is it actually going to achieve, once the vast majority of adults have been vaccinated?

 

I assume you subscribe to the herd immunity concept.  

 

Large levels of immunity in the population, whether by infection or vaccination, reduces the risk of unprotected people from getting the disease.  Reduces does not mean eliminates.

Herd immunity in an urban myth.

 

If you want proof look at Portugal and measles.  Portugal has one of the highest levels of vaccination against measles at 99% vaccinated (compare that with UK C19 vaccination at less that 50% at present when you include the whole population).  The measles vaccine is very effective and has better than 99% protection levels (compare with C19 vaccines that even the best achieve 95% effectiveness).  So despite this very high level of herd immunity at the end of 2018 and into 2019 there was an outbreak of measles impacting around 40 mainly adults near Oporto.  

 

So first, forget herd immunity it is a Government sound bite.  We will achieve herd immunity only once every single person has immunity.

 

AS for passports, what is it about some of us that fear a document?  It is un-British.  No it's not.  I have a UK issued vaccine certificate.  It was issued to show that I had received the yellow fever vaccine.  My liberties were not compromised by having such a certificate.

I also have a vaccine passport.  When I was posted from Germany to France, my company as part of its policy needed to ensure that all of my shots were up to date for the country I was being posted to.  So what vaccinations had I had and when?   That actually is a harder question than you might expect.  Where was my vaccination passport?  I don't have one, the UK don't do that.  Oh well you'll get one now.  And I got revaccinated for everything that I had ever been treated for before plus some new ones (for example measles, where I had had the disease but not the vaccine).  So I am in proud possession of a vaccine passport and when it eventually comes to be my time to get one of the Covid jabs I intend to ask if it can be updated with that vaccine as well.  It will not infringe on my liberties.  It may just ease international travel however.  It might even allow me into a an exhibition.

 

If we want life to return to something like the old normal, we need to get vaccinated and to have proof of such.

 

 

[Rods_of_Revolution]

So how many lives will these 'vaccine passports' save? I haven't even seen an estimate. It seems like quite an important piece of information to have before arguing for/against.
 

 

[AY Mod]

2 minutes ago, Rods_of_Revolution said:

So how many lives will these 'vaccine passports' save?

 

How many lives have been lost due to ignorance/disregard/selfishness? We don't know but the answer can at least be *some*. If 'certification of status' can reduce the impact of those contributors then that'll do for me.

[hayfield]

1 hour ago, Reorte said:

Purely on the practical side of the covid passport idea, what is it actually going to achieve, once the vast majority of adults have been vaccinated? Especially if medical exceptions to being vaccinated count (the virus doesn't care exactly what reason you had for not having a vaccine, whether it was due to genuine medical need or tinfoilhattery). It would be possible to make a stronger case for them if vaccination take-up was low but the UK's pretty good in that respect.

 

And I do wish that people would recognise that the ethical aspect of it isn't non-existent just because they don't happen to agree with it personally.

 

Its fine having ethical thoughts and aspirations, that is of course if the ethics are correct. But when it comes to mixing with others, especially when in a nursing/caring situation or just mixing with vulnerable people, the personal ethics arguments are secondary to others needs !!

[Andy Hayter]

5 minutes ago, Rods_of_Revolution said:

So how many lives will these 'vaccine passports' save? I haven't even seen an estimate. It seems like quite an important piece of information to have before arguing for/against.
 

 

 

None.

 

Vaccinations save lives.

 

Passports are enabling documents.

 

My UK passport enables me to travel (largely) unhindered around the world.

My vaccine passport will likewise enable me to go places.

[MJI]

As someone who hates the idea of ID cards and the like.

 

I KNOW who I am so why does random twerp need to know?

 

I would like a certificate I can wave and show than I have been jabbed, it is an enabling document, not a snooping document.

[Reorte]

13 minutes ago, Andy Hayter said:

 

I assume you subscribe to the herd immunity concept.  

 

Large levels of immunity in the population, whether by infection or vaccination, reduces the risk of unprotected people from getting the disease.  Reduces does not mean eliminates.

Herd immunity in an urban myth.

In which case we'll never be free of it anyway, so it brings us back to "what's the actual point?" Either vaccination works or it doesn't, and it certainly seems to work, so the only argument I can see for them requires the vaccination programme to be ongoing.

 

 

Quote

AS for passports, what is it about some of us that fear a document?  It is un-British.  No it's not.  I have a UK issued vaccine certificate.  It was issued to show that I had received the yellow fever vaccine. 

And you were expected to show it to go about ordinary everyday activities within this country?

[Jonboy]

Personally I don’t have an issue with a passport if it is a short term show and proceed (similar to a driving licence being used as ID in a pub). 
 

I would be less keen if private companies were to have to record the details and keep them on file etc etc.
I am always uneasy about the vast levels of information and data some organisations want and how it could be (mis)used in the future. This is especially the case with medical records for me personally.

[hayfield]

7 minutes ago, Rods_of_Revolution said:

So how many lives will these 'vaccine passports' save? I haven't even seen an estimate. It seems like quite an important piece of information to have before arguing for/against.
 

 

 Or turn it on its head. 

 

How many lives have been lost or completely changed by the actions of very selfish people who have knowingly broken the infection/social distancing rules !! Its how your interaction with others adversely affects them.  Anything that might reduce infections and or make people feel safer is worth doing

[Reorte]

4 minutes ago, hayfield said:

 

Its fine having ethical thoughts and aspirations, that is of course if the ethics are correct. But when it comes to mixing with others, especially when in a nursing/caring situation or just mixing with vulnerable people, the personal ethics arguments are secondary to others needs !!

No, they're just all different components of it, depending upon the level of risk at a particular time and place. Even then it should be remembered that the solution may be a "least bad" situation rather than "this makes it perfectly OK."

 

No ethics are "correct", although some are almost universally shared.

[Dunsignalling]

8 minutes ago, Rods_of_Revolution said:

So how many lives will these 'vaccine passports' save? I haven't even seen an estimate. It seems like quite an important piece of information to have before arguing for/against.
 

 

At best it would be just that, an estimate. One thing that is certain is that restricting access to certain facilities on the basis of vaccination/testing won't result in a greater level of infection than doing nothing.

 

Better to impose it then back it off if the drawbacks exceed the benefits than to leave it alone and discover in hindsight that it could have saved lives and/or livelihoods.

 

John

[Reorte]

8 minutes ago, hayfield said:

 Or turn it on its head. 

 

How many lives have been lost or completely changed by the actions of very selfish people who have knowingly broken the infection/social distancing rules !! Its how your interaction with others adversely affects them.  Anything that might reduce infections and or make people feel safer is worth doing

As long as it does provide a meaningful reduction of an otherwise unacceptably high risk there's a case that can be made. But also there's a line at which it's not going to wash even though the risk isn't zero, which is why we don't carry them for other diseases.

 

For those OK with the idea, what's your exit condition?

 

What bothers me (apart from the question about just how they'll actually achieve much) is not understanding the concerns. Understanding the concerns but believing they're very much outweighed by the benefits I can understand, but not understanding why it bothers some people (and worse still sneering at them - not that I'm accusing anyone here of doing that) is always a worry.

Edited April 7, 2021 by Reorte

[Andy Hayter]

6 minutes ago, Reorte said:

In which case we'll never be free of it anyway, so it brings us back to "what's the actual point?" Either vaccination works or it doesn't, and it certainly seems to work, so the only argument I can see for them requires the vaccination programme to be ongoing.

 

 

And you were expected to show it to go about ordinary everyday activities within this country?

 

 

You are displaying a very black and white attitude to this.  Vaccines clearly do work.  They are just not 100% effective.  That is not to say hat they won't save probably millions of lives.

 

AS for the last statement I was under the impression that showing a vaccine passport for ordinary everyday activities was expressly excluded in the PM's statement.  Don't fly kites when there is no wind.

[Rods_of_Revolution]

17 minutes ago, AY Mod said:

How many lives have been lost due to ignorance/disregard/selfishness? We don't know but the answer can at least be *some*. If 'certification of status' can reduce the impact of those contributors then that'll do for me.

 

'Some' is not good enough, it also may not be the case, as there are a lot of sociadynamics involved. There should be proper trials that confirm the efficacy of such a policy, with performance measurable in some way. For example, will such a scheme cause those more likely to carry Coronavirus (unvaccinated) to socialise together more than they would have otherwise? What is the impact of this on the spread of the virus to the community at large? We don't know.

Edited April 7, 2021 by Rods_of_Revolution

[Rods_of_Revolution]

What's worse for community transmission, one unvaccinated person mixing with 30 vaccinated people, or 10 unvaccinated people socialising together because they can't go to the pub?

 

It's questions like these that need to be addressed.

[Reorte]

4 minutes ago, Andy Hayter said:

You are displaying a very black and white attitude to this.  Vaccines clearly do work.  They are just not 100% effective.  That is not to say hat they won't save probably millions of lives.

Indeed, and the vaccination programme is something to be proud of.

 

Quote

AS for the last statement I was under the impression that showing a vaccine passport for ordinary everyday activities was expressly excluded in the PM's statement.  Don't fly kites when there is no wind.

Ah, might've changed since I heard then - I thought the possibility of requiring them to go in to a restaurant or stadium was still a possibility. I've no problem with the idea for entering another country. Better make sure it's just that situation we're talking about, we may have been talking a little cross-purposes.

[hayfield]

8 minutes ago, Reorte said:

As long as it does provide a meaningful reduction of an otherwise unacceptably high risk there's a case that can be made. But also there's a line at which it's not going to wash even though the risk isn't zero, which is why we don't carry them for other diseases.

 

For those OK with the idea, what's your exit condition?

 

What bothers me (apart from the question about just how they'll actually achieve much) is not understanding the concerns. Understanding the concerns but believing they're very much outweighed by the benefits I can understand, but not understanding why it bothers some people (and worse still sneering at them - not that I'm accusing anyone here of doing that) is always a worry.

 

I have two past work colleagues who are very much anti vaccine. That is their prerogative and providing this does not affect others then obviously its fine.

 

However when we interact with others we have a moral (and I guess a legal) responsibly not to pass on covid infections especially to those who are most vulnerable.

 

If having a passport which allows us to engage safely with others is a small price to pay to get back to normality, if anyone does not want to engage in this facility then keep away from those who do. Its a free world where we have to respect others wishes

[Dunsignalling]

4 minutes ago, Rods_of_Revolution said:

 

'Some' is not good enough, it also may not be the case, as there are a lot of sociadynamics involved. There should be proper trials that confirm the efficacy of such a policy, with performance measurable in some way. For example, will such a scheme cause those more likely to carry Coronavirus (unvaccinated) to socialise together more than they would have otherwise? What is the impact of this on the spread of the virus to the community at large? We don't know.

Trouble is, once people start travelling around more freely, the only trial that would be meaningful would be a national one.

 

On current knowledge, the vaccine should stop death and serious illness among those who take it. There will come a point where the refuseniks will have to accept the consequences of their decision.

 

John