AIBU to ask if anyone cares? (Passports)

[Revertion]

I'm posting here rather than in the CV board because I don't think this is actually about the virus anymore.

We all saw it coming, some earlier than others, but it's coming on the 1st of October.

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/news.sky.com/story/amp/covid-19-vaccine-passports-required-in-scotland-for-entry-to-large-venues-from-1-october-12403321

https://www.gov.scot/publications/coronavirus-covid-19-mandatory-vaccine-certification/

Honestly I could weep. And I can say that as someone who this plan, in it's current iteration at least, is not going to affect in any way.

But this is setting a precedent. An unprecedented change to our way of life and it has happened without being mentioned on any manifesto, without public consultation, and without clear plans, scopes, limitations and exemptions having been finalised.

It’s saying that in this country, we can limit your daily life based on your perceived health status and we can measure that perceived health status any way we choose to and we don’t need to provide any scientific reasoning, justification, or evidence that there is a need for it or benefits to it.

That is without getting into details about human rights, valid exemptions, and the blinding issue of an end date being based on ministers (not medics or experts) consideration on preventing spread of CV, when the very same plan says, regarding negative testing as an alternative, that it is not considered appropriate because it would undermine one of the main aims which is to encourage vaccination.

So the scope of the plan is not even aligned with the aim.

That is the precedent we are setting here and it is coming from a government who are attempting to make emergency powers permanent (subject to public consultation - for which there is already a CLEAR PRECEDENT of this government entirely disregarding on other issues).

Yes, yes, slippery slopes are a fallacy and all that. But can we call it that when the top of the slope isn't ethically or morally 'correct' and you don't have to make too many logical distinctions or conclusions before you get to the bottom?

AIBU to think this has the potential to be dangerous?

And, specifically if you are in Scotland or follow Scottish politics, AIBU to think the current government really have no line when it comes to their reach into personal lives and freedoms?

(This is coming straight off the back off their attempts to make emergency powers permanent, the 4 year olds can change gender, the thoughts can be a hate crime, etc. Where does it end?).

I'm really having a 'final nail in the coffin' moment this morning. Feel utterly powerless. BUT prepared to be told I'm unreasonable because I'm apparently also a masochist....

"As I understand it, research has demonstrated that vaccinated people who catch covid are measurably less likely to spread it than the unvaccinated."

Scientists don't think that's especially true for delta.

@tigger1001

‘Scientists don't think that's especially true for delta.’

Source?

Although nasal delta viral load is similar in vax/unvax people, it’s likely that it reduces much quicker in vax people, as exemplified by the behaviour of previous variants and apparent in the results of a small scale study in Singapore (mentioned in your previous link from Nature).

Another study showed that, on average, those who tested positive & were vaccinated had lower viral loads.

What is the threat? And I already said 'coerce' meant 'by force'

Im pointing out that it doesn’t just mean force

Thats why i said force OR threat

And id take ‘get this jab or you won’t be able to resume your social life’ as a threat

[quote thatonehasalittlecar]@tigger1001

‘Scientists don't think that's especially true for delta.’

Source?

Although nasal delta viral load is similar in vax/unvax people, it’s likely that it reduces much quicker in vax people, as exemplified by the behaviour of previous variants and apparent in the results of a small scale study in Singapore (mentioned in your previous link from Nature).

Another study showed that, on average, those who tested positive & were vaccinated had lower viral loads.[/quote]
I already quoted the source further down.

It's also been the subject of discussion in the news in recent weeks.

Sorry tigger

I just jumped right in to answer alixandra and didnt read the rest of the thread

@RufustheBadgeringReindeer

Sorry tigger

I just jumped right in to answer alixandra and didnt read the rest of the thread

That's ok. I'm posting on my phone and am a bit of a dinosaur so don't want to go hunt the article again 😂

@tigger1001

If it’s the Nature source, you haven’t read it right. It doesn’t say anything of the sort, as I explained in detail in my PP.

[quote thatonehasalittlecar]@tigger1001

If it’s the Nature source, you haven’t read it right. It doesn’t say anything of the sort, as I explained in detail in my PP.[/quote]
I must have missed your pp - will go back and find it.

[quote thatonehasalittlecar]@tigger1001

If it’s the Nature source, you haven’t read it right. It doesn’t say anything of the sort, as I explained in detail in my PP.[/quote]
It's ok - I've read it now 😂

@LizzieMacQueen

I agree OP. The fact that they want these emergency powers to be permanent ( not necessary! ) and also soon it'll be illegal to demonstrate outside Holyrood.

Nicola Sturgeon's 'shame on you' comment was my nail in coffin moment. >>> follow that discussion on the feminism board

This

They are still the same party who pushed for Named Person. Too much power for too long & insufficient separation of powers - of course it's a disaster.

@Sushirolls

Totally agree with you, OP.

This is no longer about the virus, and all about control.

Bang on

[quote Geamhradh]@louleey
That's how the vaccine passports (EU passes) work.
Either:
*Vaccinated
*Negative Test Result
*Had Covid.

It's not vaccine or nothing.[/quote]
Fair comment this is true, although a positive PCR is only valid if within 6 months, but what science is this based on? I listened to a podcast the other day on LBC, I can’t remember who the presenter was but he said there is an Oxford study (and yes he did give details of a source but because I agreed with what he was saying I didn’t feel the need to go and look for it) which states vaccinated people have the same viral load as unvaccinated and transmit it the same etc so it comes down to the vaccine really does protect the person having it and not others. There is also the fact many scientists believe vaccinating on a mass level during a pandemic creates vaccine resistant strains which is happening now

@tigger1001

Great! Hope it helps clear a few things up for you.

@louleey

The Oxford study is referenced here: www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02187-1?utm_medium=affiliate&utm_source=commission_junction&utm_campaign=3_nsn6445_deeplink_PID100045542&utm_content=deeplink

But to be clear (and for the 3rd time on this thread):

Yes, it appears that with the Delta variant (not the previous ones), the nasal viral load is the same in vaccinated & unvaccinated people.

However another study has shown that the viral load of the delta variant reduces much more quickly in vaccinated people, so it is believed that you are not as infectious for as long if you have been vaccinated.

They are still investigating this, but a similar reduction (quicker in vaccinated people than unvaccinated) has also been shown with previous variants.

Vaccine-resistant strains are always a risk, but the more the virus replicates, the more opportunity it has to evolve.

Reduced transmission is the aim here, be it through social distancing, wearing masks or vaccinations allowing your body to reduce the viral load quicker.

[quote thatonehasalittlecar]@louleey

The Oxford study is referenced here: www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02187-1?utm_medium=affiliate&utm_source=commission_junction&utm_campaign=3_nsn6445_deeplink_PID100045542&utm_content=deeplink

But to be clear (and for the 3rd time on this thread):

Yes, it appears that with the Delta variant (not the previous ones), the nasal viral load is the same in vaccinated & unvaccinated people.

However another study has shown that the viral load of the delta variant reduces much more quickly in vaccinated people, so it is believed that you are not as infectious for as long if you have been vaccinated.

They are still investigating this, but a similar reduction (quicker in vaccinated people than unvaccinated) has also been shown with previous variants.

Vaccine-resistant strains are always a risk, but the more the virus replicates, the more opportunity it has to evolve.

Reduced transmission is the aim here, be it through social distancing, wearing masks or vaccinations allowing your body to reduce the viral load quicker.[/quote]
If it reduces much more quickly that doesn’t take away the fact vaccinated people are still just as likely to spread It even if for a shorter time. So allowing them to do things just on the basis they are vaccinated still makes absolutely no sense, but I’m happy to agree to disagree on this point, we all have different opinions and that’s ok

OP I'm not going to read the whole thread as I will find it too upsetting but I totally agree with you.

I can't have the vaccine due to medical history, I assumed I'd be getting an exemption but was told by my gp that there is no actual mechanism for this as things stand.

I feel like I'm living in some sort of nightmare at present. I'm hugely unlikely to want to go to a nightclub or large event but they've already said that they'll extend usage as required.

Having long-term health issues is pretty socially exclusionary as it is, and now this on top of it.

[quote thatonehasalittlecar]@louleey

The Oxford study is referenced here: www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02187-1?utm_medium=affiliate&utm_source=commission_junction&utm_campaign=3_nsn6445_deeplink_PID100045542&utm_content=deeplink

But to be clear (and for the 3rd time on this thread):

Yes, it appears that with the Delta variant (not the previous ones), the nasal viral load is the same in vaccinated & unvaccinated people.

However another study has shown that the viral load of the delta variant reduces much more quickly in vaccinated people, so it is believed that you are not as infectious for as long if you have been vaccinated.

They are still investigating this, but a similar reduction (quicker in vaccinated people than unvaccinated) has also been shown with previous variants.

Vaccine-resistant strains are always a risk, but the more the virus replicates, the more opportunity it has to evolve.

Reduced transmission is the aim here, be it through social distancing, wearing masks or vaccinations allowing your body to reduce the viral load quicker.[/quote]
I suppose though the issue the government has is that the public message was very much "vaccinated people don't transmit the virus". And while I do get what you are saying re viral loads dropping quicker, it would appear that vaccinated people can transmit the virus - maybe for a shorter period of time than an unvaccinated person, but it can still be transmitted.

It just breeds a false sense of security.

We don't know enough yet one way or another. Which again begs the question why introduce vaccine passports only to
(Currently) specific venues?

There has been such mixed messages from the government with regards to covid. No wonder people are questioning their decisions.

"If it reduces much more quickly that doesn’t take away the fact vaccinated people are still just as likely to spread It even if for a shorter time. So allowing them to do things just on the basis they are vaccinated still makes absolutely no sense, but I’m happy to agree to disagree on this point, we all have different opinions and that’s ok"

@louleey you said this much better than I did, but agree.

If scientists are not all in agreement then it's ok if we are not too.

For me, the vaccine passports have far too many unanswered questions to be an effective way to stop the spread. And in all honesty will they be thoroughly checked?

@MaxNormal

OP I'm not going to read the whole thread as I will find it too upsetting but I totally agree with you.

I can't have the vaccine due to medical history, I assumed I'd be getting an exemption but was told by my gp that there is no actual mechanism for this as things stand.

I feel like I'm living in some sort of nightmare at present. I'm hugely unlikely to want to go to a nightclub or large event but they've already said that they'll extend usage as required.

Having long-term health issues is pretty socially exclusionary as it is, and now this on top of it.

I'm so sorry to read this. I can understand the worry this must give you.

This has been Scottish governments whole mo through covid. Come up with a grand plan, announce it publicly, then walk away and leave it to others to sort out how it actually will work.

It's awful that gp's who are already overworked have been left to deal with the questions without having been given the answers themselves,

This has been Scottish governments whole mo through covid. Come up with a grand plan, announce it publicly, then walk away and leave it to others to sort out how it actually will work

In a nutshell unfortunately. And my six-monthly consultant review has just been moved to March, in about the world's worst timing (but at least I haven't had a very necessary operation cancelled like a poor friend of mine).

My poor gp is lovely but her hands are tied.

@louleey @tigger1001

Agreed - if people can spread it, even for a shorter amount of time, it suggests we continue protecting the most vulnerable with social distancing, masks and no mass gatherings.

It’s a shame our vibrant nightlife and cultural landscape will be destroyed in the process, but hey, better safe than sorry, right?

Or we could balance the risks and do everything practical to reduce transmission, including limiting the contact to people who will be infectious for less time.

We all saw the graphs early on that showed how quickly things spread; even a day or so can make a massive, massive difference at a population level.

There is so much arguing and throwing around of 'sources' to try and discredit quotes. Quotes arguing over the differences (sometimes minute differences) between transmission etc of Covid for the vaccinated and unvaccinated. It's constant and it seems to switch on a daily basis but is there conclusive evidence that a vaccinated person is by far and away less of a transmission risk than a non-vaccinated person? No there is not. Because if you are vaccinated, you can still transmit the virus. Full stop.

My point being, vaccination maybe beneficial to the individual's survival prospects but it is not stopping transmission. Precisely why Covid vaccination passports to be able to live life as you are currently is the biggest, sickest joke I think I've ever heard since all of this began.

For the record, I'm double vaccinated but I am vehemently against the use of unethical, pointless, discriminatory, social destruction passes.

@Wildwhiterose

You aren’t looking at this on a population level.

Numbers are plucked from the air, but, let’s say each infected person passes the virus to 4 people each day of infection.

Anti-vax Andy is infectious for 10 days, so passes it on to 40 people. They each pass it on to another 4 people each day they are infectious, which is, if my maths is correct, a fuck load of people.

Double vax Dave is infectious for 3 days, so passes it on to 12 people.

Can you see the difference? It isn’t about individual cases, it’s about what happens in a population where a few days does make a huge difference.

It’s not about stopping transmission, it’s about reducing it. It’s always been about balancing the need to reduce transmission with the need to keep society functioning.

We limit the ability of people to take illegal drugs. This has mainly health effects on the person affected, but can have implications on others via indirect social mechanisms.

Vaccine passports for high risk scenarios that are not necessary for survival are ok I think. It would be better to have an alternative pcr test and/or antibody test.

Medical people have to have several jabs to work on hospitals. Understandably you might not want someone non vaccinated for measles to have regular contact with pregnant women as it can have higher risk for the pregnancy; or immunosuppressed people. Travellers have to be vaccinated for yellow fever to go to certain places in the world.