To find these headlines on the bbc website disturbing?

[malificent7]

So apparently the unvaccinated will be treated " differently."
I have both jabs, I agree with vaccination and think some reasons against vaccination are unscientific but I think it is very disturbing that our bodily autonomy and right to choose is being eroded.
Ok...I get that pregnant and elderly people should not be protected but if they are double jabbed what is the problem with coming into contact with the unvaccinated?
One of my closest mates had an extreme reaction to the vaccine...I had no issues at all but I dont feel comfortable with this.
I am no conspiracy theorist either.

It’s not disturbing it makes sense that’s why it’s from august to give chance more people to be double vaccinated.
Why won’t the majority be double vaccinated by then ? People aren’t waiting as long as 12 weeks now .

if someone at work has tested positive and you're contacted by Test & Trace - your employer and colleagues will know if you're unvaccinated as you will have to self-isolate.

And? If you have made a decision - own it. Why do you care if people know if you're vaccinated or not? Are you embarrassed by your choice?

The double vaccinated are deemed to present a different and reduced level of risk and are therefore going to be subject to reduced levels of restriction.

I don't see what's so problematic here. Time to respond on a practical level, not an emotive one.

But it is completely and utterly acceptable to force ,low paid mainly female , carers to have the vaccine, despite many of them having no other viable alternative to employment, and yet to voice this you get all the do gooders (who have the choice to be vaccinated) yelling that you are a murderer.

Well if the evidence suggests having vaccinations not only protects yourself but others and offers a reduced chance of catching the virus, a reduced chance of dying, a reduced chance of transmission to others and reduced symptoms then the people that have it are obviously able to do more (work with vulnerable people, travel to other countries). That's fair given they have done their bit for the community. The ones that can but won't just aren't being rewarded for helping others.

I do find it slightly unfair that it's coming in from the 16th August as over 18s will not have had their second jab by then

Many over 18s will have had both by then. My 25 year old daughter will be entitled to get second on the 12th August, and we are in an area that's relatively behind on vaccinations.

What would be fairer? To penalise everyone that is double vaccinated by making them wait longer?

This is a very good point

And? If you have made a decision - own it. Why do you care if people know if you're vaccinated or not? Are you embarrassed by your choice? Own your choice and what comes with it.

It's a choice to be vaccinated or not and choices have consequences. I can't see the issue really.

This is very confusing.

I thought that being vaccinated doesn't stop you catching, carrying and transmitting the virus. The data available is based on it reducing the likelihood that you will become hospitalised if you catch COVID.

So why the different rules? The vaccinated (me included) can still spread the disease. We're still a risk to the unvaccinated and vulnerable.

@Whichjab

But it is completely and utterly acceptable to force ,low paid mainly female , carers to have the vaccine, despite many of them having no other viable alternative to employment, and yet to voice this you get all the do gooders (who have the choice to be vaccinated) yelling that you are a murderer.

Your choice of words - 'do gooders' - people that are vaccinated which means the numbers of deaths are falling, less hospitalisations, society can open up again etc etc..... seriously are you for real! I am very glad that there are so many 'do gooders' in society then!

Grow up are you 12?

This is helpful and I think I'm less confused now!

www.theguardian.com/theobserver/commentisfree/2021/may/02/vaccinated-people-less-likely-to-pass-covid-on

I think your objection to double vaccinated being treated differently to unvaccinated is ridiculous. The CV and CEV have been treated differently from the beginning. The disabled, markedly the learning disabled were originally told they would not be treated in hospital if they got Covid, presumably because they weren’t worth the oxygen. None of this has been fair, but I can assure you if you CHOOSE to be in a less safe group of course you will be treated differently. I’d rather you didn’t cut my hair, be my dentist or Dr or teach my children, because you are more likely to Costco it and spread it.

@MilkTwoSugarsThanks

if someone at work has tested positive and you're contacted by Test & Trace - your employer and colleagues will know if you're unvaccinated as you will have to self-isolate.

And? If you have made a decision - own it. Why do you care if people know if you're vaccinated or not? Are you embarrassed by your choice?

They're loud enough when they're on their keyboards on MN. Might be a bit more shifty about it when they realise the implications.

It's all a bit Brexit referendum really.

It's absolutely chilling and sets a dangerous precedent. We are crossing a crossroads that there is no turning back from

if someone at work has tested positive and you're contacted by Test & Trace - your employer and colleagues will know if you're unvaccinated as you will have to self-isolate.

So? You've chosen not to get vaccinated, therefore you self-isolate. If you've made that choice then why be ashamed of it?

Some fair points from both sides but the phrasing is poor. At least it's transparent I suppose.

I thought that being vaccinated doesn't stop you catching, carrying and transmitting the virus. The data available is based on it reducing the likelihood that you will become hospitalised if you catch COVID.

Being double vaccinated vastly reduces the chance of being infected. If you are unlucky enough to catch it despite vaccination then you are also less likely to infect others and become severely ill.

Why wait till 16th August though? This could start sooner, surely?

When we had a very bad measles outbreak in NZ, unvaccinated children were required to be kept home from school, for their own safety, and to try to minimise the extent of the outbreak. It was their parents' choice whether they were vaccinated or not. It was the Government's and the schools' choice as to what they wished to do in the face of a very severe outbreak.

There was much wailing and gnashing of teeth from parents' who had chosen for whatever reason not to vaccinate, and it's amazing how many rabid anti-vaxxers suddenly decided that actually the immunisation wasn't that bad, in the face of having to home school their kids for an unspecified time.

@SunnySideDownBriefly

This is very confusing.

I thought that being vaccinated doesn't stop you catching, carrying and transmitting the virus. The data available is based on it reducing the likelihood that you will become hospitalised if you catch COVID.

So why the different rules? The vaccinated (me included) can still spread the disease. We're still a risk to the unvaccinated and vulnerable.

Well you thought wrong. Did you think that a fully vaccinated person can catch and transmit covid at the same level as an unvaccinated person? There is ample evidence to show that the vaccine greatly reduces the risk of catching and transmitting covide as well as making people less unwell.

There is still a risk, but it is vastly reduced when mixing with vaccinated people rather than the unvaccinated ones. That's what this decision is based on.

I can't believe that the "it doesn't stop transmission" arguement is still going strong on here.

@Honey12346

It's absolutely chilling and sets a dangerous precedent. We are crossing a crossroads that there is no turning back from

Seriously.

Where were you when learning disabled individuals were not treated for covid due to their disability. I find that 'CHILLING'.

If a perfectly fit and healthy person ignores the evidence and decides not to vaccinate for the good of society then they don't get a few of the benefits - eg foreign countries letting them in, having to isolate since they are more likely to spread it around etc - you are not being sent to slaughter - it's not exactly 'chilling'.

It's a club that members can participate in some benefits because they bothered to help out/reduce deaths/reduce hospitalisations/reduce transmissions etc. No biggy - you do you and run along with your choice.

@Geamhradh

What the health secretary is saying now? That those who are double vaccinated won't have to follow the rules that nobody is going to have to follow after the 19th?

There'll still be restrictions/rules on foreign travel. Even if we don't have our own rules in the UK, other countries will have theirs as to who they let in.

Re employment, there are already jobs that require immunisations, such as Hep B for certain healthcare workers.

Just because there aren't any "umbrella" rules/regulations for everyone in the UK doesn't mean there won't be rules for certain occupations/events etc.

I still went ahead with my AZ jab when it was the height of the drama over blood clots. I did it to protect others. I had already had Covid and was quite sick with it. I was quite sick after both jabs, but I did it.

It is only right that they differentiate between those who have been double jabbed and those not prepared to do it, People who are CEV should be made an exception and more things should be done to protect them. If they don't then the booster jabs won't be taken up. If I am no better off than an anti-vaxxer then I am not prepared to put myself at risk of having another covid shot. I fended off covid once, and am confident I can do it again.

@mbosnz

When we had a very bad measles outbreak in NZ, unvaccinated children were required to be kept home from school, for their own safety, and to try to minimise the extent of the outbreak. It was their parents' choice whether they were vaccinated or not. It was the Government's and the schools' choice as to what they wished to do in the face of a very severe outbreak.

There was much wailing and gnashing of teeth from parents' who had chosen for whatever reason not to vaccinate, and it's amazing how many rabid anti-vaxxers suddenly decided that actually the immunisation wasn't that bad, in the face of having to home school their kids for an unspecified time.

That's a great comparison.

@Honey12346

It's absolutely chilling and sets a dangerous precedent. We are crossing a crossroads that there is no turning back from

No it really isn't "chilling" at all. It's perfectly common sense.