Vaccine passports

Except those that can't take the vaccine for some reason, and children. What choice do they and/or their parents get.

What do we do next year, spend taxes on re-vaccinating everyone for free? If not how do poorer people pay for their own vaccinations? How do you fund and staff this effort?

Once those who want to be vaccinated are, I am failing to see that there is much risk above the standard winter flu. We read efficacy figures of 90% and that is just for symptomatic cases.

I am all for encouraging people to be vaccinated, not for limiting their lives because they don't want to be vaccinated, or simply cannot be.

Come up with a strategy for next year, what do we do about vaccinations then? How do we pay for it and how do we roll out a programme like that again without using too many overstretched NHS resources.
If people couldn't have the vaccine for medical reasons, kids, etc could have some sort of exemption. I agree there would have to be exceptions.

I don't see it as the thin edge of wedge with regards to civil liberties. If you had to flash a vaccine card or an exemption card to get in somewhere I wouldn't be too bothered - purely regarding vaccine though.

Some employers have already said they are going to require staff to have the vaccine.

Regarding the passport/card to get in to pubs etc, it's only a hypothetical debate anyway. I think it's highly unlikely to happen.
 
Proof of vaccination to gain entry to a venue is a bad idea, it punishes people for a life choice. No one has been wanting this for flu, whilst not as deadly it kills plenty of people.

We will have to learn to live with covid at some level as it is not likely to go away. We will be getting yearly vaccinations I suspect for those most vulnerable, whilst others will be left to either pay for their own vaccinations or do without, very similar to flu at the moment.

The government will not continue to use taxes and the time it will take to re-vaccinate the entire population every year, they don't even want to feed starving children so no hope of that happening. What would be the cost of vaccinating 65 million people every year in terms of staffing costs and the vaccine itself. It would have to be staffed completely outside the NHS as they just would not have the capacity to do this year on year.

I wonder how many people will still be calling for yearly, enforced vaccinations when they have to pay for it themselves. Not sure the virtue signalling will take them that far.

Then there are those who cannot be vaccinated, do we just exclude those.

It's a dumb idea.
Exactly this - people need to get a grip on reality here rather swallow the hysteria they see from the media. Covid is a mild to moderate infection for the majority who get it. There must be millions who don’t even know they had it.




🐔
 
Does it stop at vaccination status?
What other medical related statuses could be put on the passport?
 
Yes, categorically ONLY for Covid vaccine.

(That's what I've been discussing anyway).
Cool. They should put flu vaccination status on though the passport idea passes into law. Whilst flu isn't the same as covid it is still potentially deadly the older you get.
 
People are saying they have no problem with it and one or two actively supporting the idea and no one has addressed what happens next year and the year after. No one has addressed the fact that vaccinated or not it is likely you will be able to infect others or that once vaccinated you have little to worry about.

The governement have already got options on 2 new vaccines for next year. Are we all willing to pay for this either through taxation or out of their own pocket.

Does anyone believe the government will embark on mass vaccination programmes for every adult year after year for free.

No one is really addressing the myriad of issues with business insisting on vaccinations for entry.

I would probably not go to a bar that required vaccination despite being due to get mine next month.

I think it is ripe for abuse. Imagine next year that the vaccination programme is given to serco so the tories can enrich their donners.

Its a bad idea on several levels for several reasons
 
People are saying they have no problem with it and one or two actively supporting the idea and no one has addressed what happens next year and the year after. No one has addressed the fact that vaccinated or not it is likely you will be able to infect others or that once vaccinated you have little to worry about.

The governement have already got options on 2 new vaccines for next year. Are we all willing to pay for this either through taxation or out of their own pocket.

Does anyone believe the government will embark on mass vaccination programmes for every adult year after year for free.

No one is really addressing the myriad of issues with business insisting on vaccinations for entry.

I would probably not go to a bar that required vaccination despite being due to get mine next month.

I think it is ripe for abuse. Imagine next year that the vaccination programme is given to serco so the tories can enrich their donners.

Its a bad idea on several levels for several reasons
Edit: Re' transmission, there is early evidence suggesting that the vaccine reduces that, so your first point might not be quite right. Someone who hasn't been vaccinated is likely to be a higher transmission risk.

Regarding vaccinations in future, it's a LOAD cheaper to vaccinate everyone rather than forking out for furlough etc, so I reckon it will be free, yes.

For the purposes of this discussion I'm merely saying I won't have a problem with showing a vaccine card, (once I've had it), and should a venue require.

Edit2: In also assuming the system remains fair, and isn't corrupt. (Some of your questions suggest you think it will be otherwise)! (y):)
 
Last edited:
Edit: Re' transmission, there is early evidence suggesting that the vaccine reduces that, so your first point might not be quite right. Someone who hasn't been vaccinated is likely to be a higher transmission risk.

Regarding vaccinations in future, it's a LOAD cheaper to vaccinate everyone rather than forking out for furlough etc, so I reckon it will be free, yes.

For the purposes of this discussion I'm merely saying I won't have a problem with showing a vaccine card, (once I've had it), and should a venue require.

Edit2: In also assuming the system remains fair, and isn't corrupt. (Some of your questions suggest you think it will be otherwise)! (y):)
I think it's open to corruption both by government and fraudsters yes. It would be one of my worries.

I am not sure it will be free next year for everyone. Prolly the over 55's will be free in the same way as the flu vaccine is. I can't see mass closing down of life next year, providing the vulnerable are vaccinated.

As I said earlier I know that the government have already got an option on 2 new vaccinations, 10 million doses each as I recall, assuming the pass the necesary trials. They haven't as yet got options on enough doses to do everyone. They may well do so, but haven't yet.
 
You could surely use the same civil liberties argument against regular passports. ie why should I have to pay for a passport with a photo of my face on it just so I can go on holiday, it’s an outrage, people will know where I am.

I don’t think there will be an official vaccine passport but as others have said, some countries will demand that you‘ve had a vaccine before entering, in the same way that you need yellow fever jabs to travel to exotic countries in order to protect yourself and their health services.

As for domestic venues, I’ve got a couple of festivals booked this year and I’d feel more comfortable if everyone there has been vaccinated, especially in view of my wife’s health. I think venues will make up their own set of rules to protect their staff and customer, which is their prerogative.
Except with that argument one example is the choice of injecting something into your bloodstream, and the other is taking a picture of your face...
 
When you watch films like minority report do you say to yourself I don't get the problem here?
The problem with Minority Report was the minority report itself. The fact that the future wasn't fixed.

If you could somehow prove the future was fixed then the Pre-Crime Unit would be able to continue without an issue.

Even with the minority report you could still have officers on hand to make an arrest the instant a murder occurred (which would probably be worse than the former situation).

The actual solution would have been to not put the potential murderers on ice. A fine (to cover the policing costs) and a slap on the wrist followed by anger management and something like the sex offenders register would have worked in most cases. They were usually crimes of passion rather than pre-meditated murders (in the film at least - I did read the story years ago and it's a lot different but I can't remember the detail).

For anyone that's bothered to read this far there's also a 10 edisode Minority Report TV series available on Virgin through Fox TV which is decent. They didn't seem to know whether they were making a single season thriller e.g. Homeland, or a long running detective drama (with the quirky side-kick) but it was a fun watch.


---minor edit---
The ACTUAL problem in the film was that the authorities KNEW about the minority report and kept quiet about it. Had they made it public, people would have been able to make an informed choice. Which is why we should be seeking transparency around Covid and the vaccines and the awarding of contracts etc.
 
Last edited:
I refused the Flu Vaccine - quite a few people I know have been ill after it - it might save my life to take it but the chance of me dying of flu in my 50s are probably 1 in 500,000 and the same for most people I mix with. So it doesn't seem worth until I am over 75 etc.

For Covid death at present its probably a 1 in 10,000 chance so I will probably take it. I also want to help others in case I am ever a carrier and I want society to start opening up in April.

The issues with me with vaccines and some other medicines and treatments are side effects. The Covid vaccines are very new so some negative side effects may not have come out yet. And the Covid ones still don't give full protection.
 
Imagine saying pre-covid that you 18 year olds were not allowed in pubs unless theyd had the flu jab. Absurd.

Imagine saying pre-covid that 17 year olds were not allowed in pubs unless they'd managed to get hold of fake ID. Absurd.

We have rules in place to protect vulnerable people from themselves. It's how society is able to function in social groups vastly larger than the ones we evolved to be a part of.

The only issue should be around timing the post-lockdown re-opening so that no-one is excluded purely because they've not had a chance to be vaccinated.
 
Flu isn't an issue anymore, we've cured that. Something do with social distancing apparently...
And this is why people with no real knowledge, and no desire to find out the truth, should be given an equal voice on anything, when compared to subject experts in the name of 'balance' (looking at you BBC).

Flu is still an issue. We haven't cured it.

Due to the fact it is far less virulent than Covid, the measures that are in place to curb Covid have had a huge knock-on effect in controlling flu.

This isn't magic (no pun intended). It was not only predicted, but the mechanisms as to why were explained many, many months ago by people that actually understand viruses.
 
What do we do next year, spend taxes on re-vaccinating everyone for free?

Yes. If that's required to keep the situation under control then that's precisely what the NHS is for.

If we only need to cover over 55's then we do that.

If we need to cover everyone, we do that.

It's actually sensible medically, socially AND financially - we can estimate the costs and set up the provision far more easily than if we wait until there's another outbreak and a return to lockdown.
 
I honestly despair that the supposed left leaning people on this board are so swift to jump to the 'if it saves a life' defence of complete and utter Draconian life. Shame on you frankly.

You show your selfishness whilst signalling it's all about saving others.

You honestly don't give a **** about the generations below you whose lives you so flippantly toy with.
Dunno where to start with this one. It's advocating a position that's almost 180 degrees from anything a 'left-leaning' person should hold.

It's more Libertarian than anything, and we all know the old joke of "I want to be a Libertarian when I grow up, Mother" "You'll have to choose one or the other, darling".

I want the best for society. There will always be individuals that fall through the cracks but for the most part, having as many safety nets as possible is a good thing.

One of those safety nets is vaccinations.

Until the MMR Vaccine Scandal (1998), no-one gave vaccines a second thought. It was the socially responsible thing to do and everyone just got on with it.

After the Thalidomide issues came to light, people started to look elsewhere for similar unintended consequences and for a long list of reasons autism and MMR were linked.

Parents then had to make a decision about their children's health whilst another scandal (BSE/CJD) was also rumbling on in the background. Perfect Storm.

It took a long time for medical science to discredit the MMR autism link even though the experts were almost unanimous. The fact that it appealed to emotion and caught the zeitgeist due to those other scandals meant that it took on a life of it's own and we now have Anti-Vaxxers almost as a political movement (especially in the US where, guess what, they're all Libertarians).

It's selfish NOT to get vaccinated* (against all sorts, not just Covid).

As an aside we'll probably end up with the COvid jab just being a part of the usual cycle of jabs given to kids. It's only because it's a new virus causing a pandemic that we are having to vaccinate the whole population en masse. The generations to come will wonder what all the fuss was about. The current younger generation will welcome getting back to relative normality once everyone has been done.


*if you CAN'T be vaccinated for any reason then obviously this doesn't apply, however, one of the reasons you need enough vaccinations to achieve herd-immunity is to protect those that CAN'T have the vaccine. It's the whole point and is literally the least selfish thing you can do.
 
@Scrote none of my comment has anything to do with not taking a vaccine, I personally have every intention of taking it. The comments are about needing vaccine passports to go to the cinema / clothes shop etc. So nothing you wrote has anything to do with my comment.

On a side note as a fan of minority report I read a really cool slant on the film that makes it a much more Philip K d*ck ending.

 
The comments are about needing vaccine passports to go to the cinema / clothes shop etc. So nothing you wrote has anything to do with my comment.
Your comment was about the 'save a life' defence being used to allow a draconian rule-set being applied.

As the only way out of that rule-set is everyone* being vaccinated AND with the left-leaning posters prescribing vaccination, the only reading of your post is that you think vaccination itself brings the negative affects you envisage.

If a passport is required for the cinema then it's not the vaccination that prevents you from attending, it's your choice not to have it - which is bundled up with your choice not to go to the cinema.

There are far less important things where 'not really a choice' applies and no-one seems to kick up much of a fuss. I can't get a home ticket at Sunderland vs Boro due to my postcode - is that fair? Or is it just a sensible precaution from Sunderland's safety officer?

If you don't have the vaccination you are still making a choice.

If your argument is purely based on the six-month period whereby over 50s are vaccinated and under 50s are catching up then we can agree to disagree. Personally I can manage another few months if it means there won't be another lockdown next Christmas.

*who can...
 
So you're entire approach is to build a straw man and attack that rather then what is actually said. Now twice implying that it's about the vaccine not the use of 'vaccine passports' for access to the pub. Have a good one mate you win I'm out.
 
Yes. If that's required to keep the situation under control then that's precisely what the NHS is for.

If we only need to cover over 55's then we do that.

If we need to cover everyone, we do that.

It's actually sensible medically, socially AND financially - we can estimate the costs and set up the provision far more easily than if we wait until there's another outbreak and a return to lockdown.
This doesn't address any of my points really scrote. It only says you are happy to pay, through tax for a yearly vaccination programme. It says nothing about people who can't be vaccinated, people who perhaps will not be vaccinated next year based on risk do we exclude those from parts of society. If we want to vaccinate everyone next year how do we do that? Use volunteers and the army, because that isn't a long term solution? We could expand the NHS but that isn't going to happen for next year. No practical solutions. People just voicing knee jerk opinions in the name of saving lives.
 
Back
Top