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.

If we are not going to differentiate between the vaccinated and the unvaccinated then we would be naive to the point of stupidity.
What would be the point in this massive vaccination push which has been administered by selecting different age groups based on heightened risk to protect the most vulnerable fastest?
Everything about the way we are trying to stop this virus is based on Identifying differences. Number of people who are worse affected because of medical conditions, age, weight, pregnancy status, ethnicity, even the temperatures where they live.
To role out an international vaccination programme and then make absolutely no changes in movement allowed between the vaccinated and unvaccinated would be nonsensical.
You have a right to not be vaccinated but at this point in time you cannot move as freely in the population or travel with as much freedom outside your own country as vaccinated people. That is exactly as it should be.
If you choose not be vaccinated that is your choice but you cannot then jeopardise a global initiative because it offends your sensibilities.

What, like govt denying people the ability to work or see their family?

I think you missed out: a) for only ten days, and b) in order to reduce the spread of a disease which you've chosen not to vaccinate yourself against, unlike the majority.

@MargaretThatcherMilkSnatcher How can you prove it? I’m interested as had it back in March 2020, want too ill, but since then I’ve developed mcas and react badly to all kinds of things. I’m also undergoing ivf for the second time next month. I don’t want the vaccine until my body has calmed down, I feel I hopefully should have some protection?

@Takingabreakagain

lockdownsceptics.org/2021/07/06/as-evidence-grows-that-vaccines-do-not-protect-against-infection-the-case-for-granting-privileges-to-the-vaccinated-collapses/ I think this article sets it out well. As the vaccines don't stop transmission a vaccinated person can still pass on the virus to other people. Therefore why should they have special treatment and be allowed to behave differently when actually they are in the same position as an unvaccinated person. The protection from the jab is to yourself through getting less severe symptoms - it's of no benefit to other people.

A link starting with "lockdown sceptics"? No thanks.

The wilfully unvaccinated don't like the fact that there may be a growing incentive to take the vaccination. They're in a minority and need to accept that if they aren't prepared to reduce overall risk they won't get some of the reduction of restrictions the double vaccinated will be able to access.

@Honey12346

This is from the govt website. Now can someone please give me a coherent response as to why I should not be given my pre march 2020 rights back for making a personal choice not to risk these side effects (which include death)?

You can make a personal choice but it doesn't mean you are free from consequences of it. No one is denying you the choice to not get the vaccine. The amount of vaccines administered and the amount of deaths from them is incredibly low in that chart. There are reactions to anything, just crack open a packet of penicillin and see the risks on that. It's not unusual to suffer side effects from a drug/vaccine, the majority are just mild.

@warmfluffytowels

This is from the govt website. Now can someone please give me a coherent response as to why I should not be given my pre march 2020 rights back for making a personal choice not to risk these side effects (which include death)?

Why should you have the right to spread a dangerous disease about the place that could kill me when there's a vaccine available to reduce the risk?

Everything has side effects. Even paracetamol can kill.

Why did I have the right to do this every single year of my life with the flu?

No one gets their rights taken away for not taking paracetamol.

@AliceLivesHere yes because calling someone 12 is a mature comeback

I refer to 'do gooders' as the protected yet vocal group of people that wish to set rules for other people that will not effect them.
As it is, I agree with vaccination, I just feel very uncomfortable that it is going to be mandatory for an underpaid and under represented section of society, the section that quite literally are meant to clean up the shit of others, a section that has barely any unionisation, a section that can not afford to not work/take a break/move areas. A section where the majority are there for necessity rather than vocation.

@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?

To be honest, I know exactly who has and hasn’t been vaccinated in our office, mainly because the ones that haven’t can’t seem to wait to tell me.

@warmfluffytowels

People shouldn't be pressured into getting a medical treatment so that they can get special privileges.

It's not about getting special privileges, it's about keeping people safe. The government isn't saying "you must have the vaccine" they're saying "it's your choice, but private businesses (airplanes, concert venues, shops, sports stadiums etc.) don't have to admit you if they don't want to.

Choosing not to vaccinate isn't a protected status.

Many countries already require certain vaccines as a condition of entry - Hep A, Hep B and Yellow Fever, to name a few. COVID-19 will just be another vaccine on the list.

The problem here is Warm, you are displaying too much sensibility to a group wishing to see none.

@snowballer

What, like govt denying people the ability to work or see their family?

I think you missed out: a) for only ten days, and b) in order to reduce the spread of a disease which you've chosen not to vaccinate yourself against, unlike the majority.

I'm talking about the lockdown

@LuaDipa, they can't wait to tell you on here either.

Why did I have the right to do this every single year of my life with the flu?

Because flu hasn't reached pandemic levels since the 1920's. I'm assuming that your freedoms were not curtailed then because you, presumably, weren't yet born

I think it's excellent and am very much in favour of it. It's a choice, and should be a choice, and if you choose not to get it then the consequences are yours.

Most - not all, obviously - of those choosing not to get the vaccine seem very loudly in favour of this new era of personal responsibility as far as mask wearing and social distancing is concerned but not so much when it comes to this.

I am really curious about places which are opening up to those who have had Covid. I did but I no longer have antibodies (though I'm vaccinated so it's a moot point for me, really). Is there going to be a cut off point?

@GiantWingedWaspMoth

Why did I have the right to do this every single year of my life with the flu?

Because flu hasn't reached pandemic levels since the 1920's. I'm assuming that your freedoms were not curtailed then because you, presumably, weren't yet born

It seems fair to me. I would have probably liked to see the option to remove restrictions for people who have the right level of antibodies due to catching Covid, but I don't know how easy it is to access antibodies tests.

I do feel sorry for people who can't have the vaccine due to medical reasons (DM is one of them) but the truth is, for them nothing will change. They are not having extra restrictions imposed on them, just having the current restrictions still in place, and hopefully at some point they will be lifted completely. Which still sucks, but I can't see how keeping the restrictions for everyone would make their life any better.

@sailmeaway

The best chance for all of us, as a community, is to have everyone who can get vaccinated to do so, and give us the herd immunity that we need to open up for everyone. I have no sympathy for those who choose not to get the jab for non-medical reasons. If they don't get to go to events, or the pub or wherever then that's their choice.

^This

I'm talking about the lockdown

Oh. Because of course ignoring it all and letting 650,000+ people die instead of the already too high 150,000+ wouldn't be at all insane would it.

[quote Whichjab]@AliceLivesHere yes because calling someone 12 is a mature comeback

I refer to 'do gooders' as the protected yet vocal group of people that wish to set rules for other people that will not effect them.
As it is, I agree with vaccination, I just feel very uncomfortable that it is going to be mandatory for an underpaid and under represented section of society, the section that quite literally are meant to clean up the shit of others, a section that has barely any unionisation, a section that can not afford to not work/take a break/move areas. A section where the majority are there for necessity rather than vocation.[/quote]
You are correct, it is not a mature comeback and I apologise. I shouldn't have sunk to the same level as using 'do gooders' as a descriptive - I'm sorry.

The 'rules' that you say are being set do affect everyone - covid affects society which is everyone. I wish covid didn't come along and kill/hospitalise or affect people; but it did. Societies all over the world have to deal with it. Some of those choices are taken to protect the vulnerable in society - that seems fair - we cannot take a 'I'm alright Jack' approach to covid as we might to other things.

I personally think that carers do a very important job and are underpaid (a different discussion) but asking them to help protect those that they care for doesn't seem a massive ask.

Why did I have the right to do this every single year of my life with the flu?

Because flu hasn't, in our lifetime, caused a Global Pandemic. I also suspect the flu vaccine may soon become highly recommended, and not having it may start to carry similar limitations to the COVID one.

No one gets their rights taken away for not taking paracetamol

That's because taking paracetamol doesn't stop the spread of infectious diseases.

The problem here is Warm, you are displaying too much sensibility to a group wishing to see none.

My mistake!

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?
^this^ I completely agree!

If you don’t want to be vaccinated, do you have a better idea to move forward? Or are you just hoping that enough of the population have the vaccine so you are protected because of them having it? And that if you do get it and end up needing hospitalising, there are enough beds because the majority had it so the hospitals have space for you?

@snowballer

Maybe they just don't want it Lady. Why should some one be forced to take an injection they don't want by having there freedoms taken away.

Well, technically that group aren't having their freedoms taken away, it's the other group that are getting some back...

Lets not split hairs.

Choices are being taken away if you don't get the injection. You don't need to fluff it out.

Choices are being taken away if you don't get the injection. You don't need to fluff it out

No they are not, you have fundamentally misunderstood. The pandemic took your freedoms away. The vaccine can give them back. You are choosing not to have them back. No-one else, you.

@Honey12346

Yes it is absolutely chilling because we are being coerced into what we do with our own body in order to regain the same rights we had prior to March 2020.

Imagine if the govt made a law tomorrow saying that women who have choosen to have abortions can not have the same rights as ones who didn't.

Abortion is still legal however there will be consequences if you make that choice.

The entirety of mumsnet would agree that is chilling.

But somehow this is different.

Oh now this is just silly

And who had a right to go on holiday before march 2020? Or to go to a gig, or a festival? Travel providers, concert managers etc have always had to follow government rules - have a passport, don't admit under 18s, keep the numbers under x, etc etc.

If you didn't want to get a passport because you didn't want the biometric data recorded, would you be shouting about your rights being taken away?

To give an even more analogous example, do you think you should be allowed to visit Benin without a yellow fever vaccination, because if your bodily autonomy?

I'm not even going to address the witless mention of abortion.