To think the fact that non-vaccinated people will now have to isolate from all non-red countries has been hidden in the small print

[Butterflyfluff]

I’m pretty sure today’s travel announcement means that if you’re not vaccinated then you must self isolate for 10 days and take day 2 and 8 tests (can still test to release) from all countries outside of the red list

This means that non-vaccinated people going to what are currently green countries who thought they wouldn’t have to isolate, now will if they return after 4th October

@Butterflyfluff

How can it reduce the spread?

Say a person who isn’t vaccinated travels to a country with lower rates than the UK for 2 weeks after testing negative

How does that reduce the spread compared to them spending those 2 weeks in a jam packed holiday park in the UK and actually being positive the whole time but they didn’t know as they weren’t tested

Because it contains it in one country. And it reduces the variants spreading too.

@Butterflyfluff

A negative tested unvaccinated person has to be less of a risk than an untested vaccinated person

That probably depends on the tests, tbh. LFTs don't pick up a huge number of cases.

IIRC an LFT is thought to miss up to 40% of cases, so that negative tested unvaccinated person still has a decent chance of carrying the virus.

A vaccinated person is highly protected against even carrying the virus at all, therefore quite possibly still a lower risk.

I'm sure someone mathematically minded could work out percentages and averages, statistics and such.

@goldenrachita

Here come the new puritans loving a bit of punishment for non conformity. You think my friend who was hospitalised with the vaccine and is really worried about having a second dose should just suck it up, be a good girl and take whatever medication she has to at whatever risk if she wants to 'earn back' the right to travel to visit family. Even if she had natural immunity to Covid from a previous infection. Because yeah science. You think good old dead Lisa Shaw did the right thing for the moral majority, never mind, but can we not talk about it, it's 'not helpful'; I think she's that perfectly good reason why people want to exercise their right to choose what goes in their bodies. You know.....the reason you just said didn't exist.

I don’t think anyone has said you shouldn’t have the right to choose whether or not to get the vaccine.

But you also have to appreciate that choice comes with consequences. So I got the vaccine knowing there was a tiny chance of blood clots. That’s my choice. Others decide not to take that risk, knowing there’s a much bigger chance of not being able to travel. That’s theirs.

Because it contains it in one country. And it reduces the variants spreading too.

But unvaccinated people generally can’t travel unless they test negative

They are less of a risk than an untested vaccinated person

A fact not one person has addressed on this thread

The vaccine makes you 8 times less likely to catch covid. That’s a lot less likely than an unvaccinated person.

IIRC an LFT is thought to miss up to 40% of cases, so that negative tested unvaccinated person still has a decent chance of carrying the virus.

Still 60% more likely to identify an issue than someone who hasn’t taken a test at all

@Butterflyfluff

Because it contains it in one country. And it reduces the variants spreading too.

But unvaccinated people generally can’t travel unless they test negative

They are less of a risk than an untested vaccinated person

A fact not one person has addressed on this thread

But unvaccinated people would also have to test, the same test would apply regardless of vaccine passports. It’s a belt and braces approach, it’s not one or the other.

@Covidiom

The vaccine makes you 8 times less likely to catch covid. That’s a lot less likely than an unvaccinated person.

Could you provide a link for that please

*vaccinated

@Butterflyfluff

How can it reduce the spread?

Say a person who isn’t vaccinated travels to a country with lower rates than the UK for 2 weeks after testing negative

How does that reduce the spread compared to them spending those 2 weeks in a jam packed holiday park in the UK and actually being positive the whole time but they didn’t know as they weren’t tested

Because those vaccinated people in the holiday park are less likely to be infected and therefore more likely to reduce viral transmission than the unvaccinated. They will also have less vital load if infected.

*viral

@Pumperthepumper

*vaccinated

They don’t though

Currently most countries on the amber / green list accept vaccination certificates instead of tests

@Butterflyfluff

IIRC an LFT is thought to miss up to 40% of cases, so that negative tested unvaccinated person still has a decent chance of carrying the virus.

Still 60% more likely to identify an issue than someone who hasn’t taken a test at all

the unvaccinated person has a higher chance of carrying the virus with a false positive test than the vaccinated person ever has of catching the virus in the first place.

Like I've said, I don't know the exact statistics, but that's the way it is.

Why would they do that then?

@Butterflyfluff

Air travel already has procedures in place so easier to enforce.

Exactly - so they focus on the easy stuff to look big and brave and lots of people fall for it, even though it’s not even scraping the surface

But you’re also stuck in a metal box with regurgitated air for what could be hours and hours.

The vaccine makes travel more attractive.

@Butterflyfluff - I know of a vaccinated person who didn’t have to test before getting back home to france from his holiday. He took a test the day after he arrived just as a precaution before he went to see his elderly parents and was positive!

Sorry, that was to @Butterflyfluff - why do you think they’re taking vaccine evidence over test results?

Because those vaccinated people in the holiday park are less likely to be infected and therefore more likely to reduce viral transmission than the unvaccinated. They will also have less vital load if infected.

So why does it become a massive problem if the same people are exposed to someone who’s not vaccinated and has been abroad to a country with lower rates than us?

It’s pretty clear here people are making the narrative fit their own views and that all logic is long gone

@Butterflyfluff

If you choose not to take the necessary steps to protect others you can’t expect others to accommodate you.

I guess this is the crux of it for me

As far as I am aware, having the vaccine doesn’t stop you getting or transmitting Covid, it just hopefully means you have less severe symptoms if you do get it

Therefore the only people those who don’t want the vaccine are actually endangering is themselves

Happy to be corrected though

And those clinically extremely vulnerable who have blood cancer or have had an organ transplant. The vaccine doesn't give a lot of them any immunity so they are a ticking timebomb

Like I've said, I don't know the exact statistics, but that's the way it is.

On that absolute gem, I’ll leave you to it 😂

I agree with you it is u fair. I'm not vaccinated, don't plan to either until I do more research. I am heavily pregnant and choose not to be vaccinated.. I have my reasons and I won't be judged by people who are vaccinated because it isn't up to them.

It isn’t unfair. You just don’t like the choices you have.

@Butterflyfluff

Like I've said, I don't know the exact statistics, but that's the way it is.

On that absolute gem, I’ll leave you to it 😂

Why do they always run off?

@Butterflyfluff

Like I've said, I don't know the exact statistics, but that's the way it is.

On that absolute gem, I’ll leave you to it 😂

You do that.

@Covidiom

The vaccine makes you 8 times less likely to catch covid. That’s a lot less likely than an unvaccinated person.

Link please ?

@Pumperthepumper

Why do they always run off?

Probably only paid for set hours