When will this shit end?

[Zoo Music Girl]

1 hour ago, gizmoman said:

Zero Covid can only be achieved by locking down permanently, that is clearly not feasible so why would anyone suggest it? When you say anti-vaxxer I assume you mean someone who doesn't want to take it but is happy for others to do so. If so it's quite possible to believe  that vaccines should be offered to the most vunerable and those less at risk can choose for themselves. As you say they are taking a gamble on Covid but for most people it isn't a serious issue (as far as we know at the moment, it's entirely possible you could have a mild disease but have unknown long term effects).

Your argument can be reversed, pro-vaxxers are for the most part zero-Coviders, they should be saying get vaccinated and then lets get back to normal, but they cannot accept any risks from Covid even after vaccination, they want to have continuous testing, passports, masks etc. instead of accepting that Covid is going to be with us and has to be lived with.  They are willing to change society completely to try to protect the small minority that cannot have the vaccine or for whom the vaccine isn't effective. This seems to be the way it's going, so the benefit of getting the vaccine is diminished, your life will be restricted whether you get the vax or not.

 

I'm not sure why you think people who are pro vaccine are also zero Covid proponents. Don't think there are any here that suggest that, maybe one or two at most.

I don't think zero Covid is possible at this point and I am very pro vaccine. I've had loads of vaccines so one more doesn't bother me at all as I believe in the science behind them. I don't think people should be forced to have them, though, and I'm not really a fan of vaccine passports for domestic settings. Makes total sense internationally though. But I've had the yellow fever vaccine so that's not a new one on me either.

[Chapple12345]

10 minutes ago, hodgey123 said:

I know that this has been done to death but have been reading a debate on another forum I browse where the vast majority of posters were in favour of a vaccine passport before everyone had been offered a vaccine. How can that possibly be defensible? Young people would be excluded from society through no fault of their own simply by virtue of the fact they had not yet had their turn, despite sacrificing an awful lot over the last year to protect older people who are at greater risk. It is extremely likely that a vaccine passport before everyone has been offered one will never happen but just thought it was quite wild how so many posters supported the idea.

Theyll only launch them once everyone has received a second dose so cant see it before the autumn, as you say it would create a great divide amongst generations 

15 minutes ago, zahidf said:

 

This is genuinely huge and a huge boost of optimism for us all 

[xxialac]

25 minutes ago, hodgey123 said:

I know that this has been done to death but have been reading a debate on another forum I browse where the vast majority of posters were in favour of a vaccine passport before everyone had been offered a vaccine. How can that possibly be defensible? Young people would be excluded from society through no fault of their own simply by virtue of the fact they had not yet had their turn, despite sacrificing an awful lot over the last year to protect older people who are at greater risk. It is extremely likely that a vaccine passport before everyone has been offered one will never happen but just thought it was quite wild how so many posters supported the idea.

Don't agree with this.

Yes, older people would be fortunate under this scenario, but really this proposal would be about INCLUDING them on the basis they happen to be safe - not about excluding others. Just because young people can't enjoy freedoms because it's not safe, it would be churlish to then in turn stop older people from enjoying theirs. Let them enjoy their lives.

And the idea that younger people have valiantly been "sacrificing a lot to protect" older people really is, with very few exceptions, a load of old guff. 

If you want to know about true sacrifices, they are the ones made year after year by young people's mums! 

Edited February 26, 2021 by xxialac

[gizmoman]

6 minutes ago, hodgey123 said:

I know that this has been done to death but have been reading a debate on another forum I browse where the vast majority of posters were in favour of a vaccine passport before everyone had been offered a vaccine. How can that possibly be defensible? Young people would be excluded from society through no fault of their own simply by virtue of the fact they had not yet had their turn, despite sacrificing an awful lot over the last year to protect older people who are at greater risk. It is extremely likely that a vaccine passport before everyone has been offered one will never happen but just thought it was quite wild how so many posters supported the idea.

Well, playing devil's advocate, the "passport" would confirm vaccine status or negative test, so it could be put into operation on that basis, those not yet vaccinated could get a test instead. This idea that the passport is the route to freedom though is totally wrong, it's a route to total control. If you agree to have the vaccine and the passport you are agreeing to a lifetime of having the government decide what vaccines you should have and when, they are already suggesting a 6 month booster for Covid, what if they decide the Flu vaccine is essential? the NHS are under pressure each winter, if everyone got the Flu shot that would reduce demand. If your "passport" isn't up to date you can't go anywhere. If any new threat comes along you could be forced to get any new vaccine whether you were convinced it had been tested enough or not. The people happy to have a passport are just desperate to get back to "normal", they haven't thought about the consequences.

[eFestivals]

Terrible story about a guy threatening to bomb UK hospitals in the first wave.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/26/man-convicted-after-threats-to-bomb-uk-hospital-during-pandemic?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

Scariest bit of all?

Quote

As a result of Brexit, Germany now has no extradition treaty with the UK.

 

[gizmoman]

8 minutes ago, Zoo Music Girl said:

I'm not sure why you think people who are pro vaccine are also zero Covid proponents. Don't think there are any here that suggest that, maybe one or two at most.

I don't think zero Covid is possible at this point and I am very pro vaccine. I've had loads of vaccines so one more doesn't bother me at all as I believe in the science behind them. I don't think people should be forced to have them, though, and I'm not really a fan of vaccine passports for domestic settings. Makes total sense internationally though. But I've had the yellow fever vaccine so that's not a new one on me either.

Many on here are pro vaccine passports and the reasons they give are pretty much the zero-covid arguments, (you have to protect everyone), that isn't really possible unless you restrict people forever.

[zahidf]

15 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

Many on here are pro vaccine passports and the reasons they give are pretty much the zero-covid arguments, (you have to protect everyone), that isn't really possible unless you restrict people forever.

You are Ian Brown and I'd like my five pounds

 

[efcfanwirral]

37 minutes ago, hodgey123 said:

I know that this has been done to death but have been reading a debate on another forum I browse where the vast majority of posters were in favour of a vaccine passport before everyone had been offered a vaccine. How can that possibly be defensible? Young people would be excluded from society through no fault of their own simply by virtue of the fact they had not yet had their turn, despite sacrificing an awful lot over the last year to protect older people who are at greater risk. It is extremely likely that a vaccine passport before everyone has been offered one will never happen but just thought it was quite wild how so many posters supported the idea.

 

23 minutes ago, xxialac said:

Don't agree with this.

Yes, older people would be fortunate under this scenario, but really this proposal would be about INCLUDING them on the basis they happen to be safe - not about excluding others. Just because young people can't enjoy freedoms because it's not safe, it would be churlish to then in turn stop older people from enjoying theirs. Let them enjoy their lives.

And the idea that younger people have valiantly been "sacrificing a lot to protect" older people really is, with very few exceptions, a load of old guff. 

If you want to know about true sacrifices, they are the ones made year after year by young people's mums! 

I personally am against vaccine passports as a concept, but taking that away in the world where they exist the only thing I'd have against them happening now would be if the government were to withdraw support and make businesses open to just those vaccinated. But because that isn't how hospitality and events work it can't happen 

Morally I don't see the problem BUT it brings forward the idea that the vaccine is for yourself, which isn't the case (quite the opposite imo) and would maybe stop people getting it 

Edited February 26, 2021 by efcfanwirral

[steviewevie]

1 minute ago, efcfanwirral said:

 

I personally am against vaccine passports as a concept, but taking that away in the world where they exist the only thing I'd have against them happening now would be if the government were to withdraw support and make businesses open to just those vaccinated. But because that isn't how hospitality and events work it can't happen 

Morally I don't see the problem BUT it brings forward the idea that the vaccine is for yourself, which isn't the case (quite the opposite imo)  

I'm against them too, but feels inevitable to help certain events and businesses to survive.

[steviewevie]

Belgium

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/feb/26/belgium-slow-to-distribute-oxford-vaccine-doses-as-covid-cases-rise

[Fuzzy Afro]

27 minutes ago, xxialac said:

Don't agree with this.

Yes, older people would be fortunate under this scenario, but really this proposal would be about INCLUDING them on the basis they happen to be safe - not about excluding others. Just because young people can't enjoy freedoms because it's not safe, it would be churlish to then in turn stop older people from enjoying theirs. Let them enjoy their lives.

And the idea that younger people have valiantly been "sacrificing a lot to protect" older people really is, with very few exceptions, a load of old guff. 

If you want to know about true sacrifices, they are the ones made year after year by young people's mums! 

 

41 minutes ago, hodgey123 said:

I know that this has been done to death but have been reading a debate on another forum I browse where the vast majority of posters were in favour of a vaccine passport before everyone had been offered a vaccine. How can that possibly be defensible? Young people would be excluded from society through no fault of their own simply by virtue of the fact they had not yet had their turn, despite sacrificing an awful lot over the last year to protect older people who are at greater risk. It is extremely likely that a vaccine passport before everyone has been offered one will never happen but just thought it was quite wild how so many posters supported the idea.

The way around this is to replace the vaccine passport with a covid status passport. You can either present proof of vaccination or a negative lateral flow test. That way no one is excluded based on not being vaccinated yet. 

[gizmoman]

8 minutes ago, zahidf said:

You are Ian Brown and I'd like my five pounds

 

I'm not Ian, my singing is even worse!. That thread has some good stuff in it though, turns out the chinese vaccines a "proper" vaccine not the mRna type, don't know if that's been mentioned here.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-55212787

[Fuzzy Afro]

34 minutes ago, xxialac said:

Don't agree with this.

Yes, older people would be fortunate under this scenario, but really this proposal would be about INCLUDING them on the basis they happen to be safe - not about excluding others. Just because young people can't enjoy freedoms because it's not safe, it would be churlish to then in turn stop older people from enjoying theirs. Let them enjoy their lives.

And the idea that younger people have valiantly been "sacrificing a lot to protect" older people really is, with very few exceptions, a load of old guff. 

If you want to know about true sacrifices, they are the ones made year after year by young people's mums! 

Ok, boomer 

Edited February 26, 2021 by Fuzzy Afro

[gizmoman]

Everything you need to know about health ID passports is in this thread.

[efcfanwirral]

4 minutes ago, gizmoman said:

Everything you need to know about health ID passports is in this thread.

I'm with you but posting twitter accounts like that is just going to turn people off from it all 

[efcfanwirral]

 

It's extremely depressing that this comment is 100% correct. Even with AZ doing it at cost the others aren't. 

[xxialac]

25 minutes ago, Fuzzy Afro said:

Ok, boomer 

Genius! You got any other comedy material of this quality?

[efcfanwirral]

38 minutes ago, zahidf said:

You are Ian Brown and I'd like my five pounds

 

 

While i agree with him, once I inevitably drop my anti vaccine passport views for an easier life it looks like I'll be getting a different and hopefully better headliner at my local festival the Neighborhood Weekender this year (when they move to September) 

[Chapple12345]

 

Excellent news 

[efcfanwirral]

7 minutes ago, Chapple12345 said:

 

Excellent news 

Amazing stuff - i was worried it wasn't coming but that should give some security even if it ends up that these events happen next year 

[gizmoman]

16 minutes ago, efcfanwirral said:

I'm with you but posting twitter accounts like that is just going to turn people off from it all 

? That thread is a series of links to the organisations promoting the ID passports, it's entirely factual. If people are turned off by the truth it says more about their mindset than mine.

[zahidf]

Ha ha ha ha ha 

[hodgey123]

1 hour ago, xxialac said:

Don't agree with this.

Yes, older people would be fortunate under this scenario, but really this proposal would be about INCLUDING them on the basis they happen to be safe - not about excluding others. Just because young people can't enjoy freedoms because it's not safe, it would be churlish to then in turn stop older people from enjoying theirs. Let them enjoy their lives.

And the idea that younger people have valiantly been "sacrificing a lot to protect" older people really is, with very few exceptions, a load of old guff. 

If you want to know about true sacrifices, they are the ones made year after year by young people's mums! 

Why is it a load of old guff that young people have sacrificed a lot? They are the generation least at risk with most to lose (social restrictions, more likely to be on furlough, less likely to have outdoor space etc.) and we were all lectured beforehand about ‘Blitz spirit’ and all in it together. The vaccine passport would be another example of the older generation pulling the ladder up behind them, like affordable housing perhaps 

[zahidf]

Tbh a good compromise would be for a vaccine passport to apply with one dose. 

[Fuzzy Afro]

20 minutes ago, xxialac said:

Genius! You got any other comedy material of this quality?

I'll take your comment at face value, then, and dissect why it's such a ridiculous comment.

For over 11 months and counting, under 30's in the UK have spent large periods of time legally banned from socialising with their friends, millions have lost work and been plunged into poverty, millions have missed out on significant life events and rites of passage including weddings, going to university for the first time, graduations and many, many more. Some have been split apart from their families or significant other. All of this is in the name of suppressing the spread of a virus which poses no discernible risk to under 30's and very little risk even to their parents. They're essentially being forced to do this to protect people two generations older than them.

Data shows that they have done so impeccably well. Given how non-existent the enforcement is, there is no explanation for this other than pure altruism, which is all the more impressive when those being protected by this altruism are the generation who turn out in their millions who turn out to fuck us over every election. If Covid-19 mainly affected younger people like Spanish flu did, there's no way you'd get the boomers staying home to suppress the spread.

The younger generations are now being deprioritised for the vaccine, and rightly so, because as I said, they're not at risk. It then follows that the only reason to prevent them entering public venues when they reopen is to stop them spreading the virus, in which case a negative LFT would be sufficient.