To be livid with the government

[Pissofog]

They are Cowards. Dropping plans for a vaccine passport which would have kept us all safe but after some pushback from the covidiots and the useful fools who enable them in the name of “freedom”. I am so angry that once again public health is put bellow greed and the “rights” of a selfish minority to endanger themselves and others. 😡😡😡

@pyschomath

Very good point. I will be knocking on Boris door personally if I had to show my grandad how to use a smartphone for an app. It takes approximately an hour and a half a week on the phone to instruct him how to use the slow cooker!

@Cornettoninja

Actually it is a big deal because the only masks that show some efficacy is an N95 with no gaps. This is not what people are wearing, and a proper one is really quite uncomfortable

Sorry to say that universal masking actually gives people a false sense of security and are largely pointless anyway

There’s an absolute glut of studies to back up either pov at this point. Masks may not be 100% perfect or even 50% but they have some value and in the case of a pandemic any measure that provides a benefit for little/no effort is a no brainer imho.

People don’t wash their hands to the same standard as surgeons but there’s a benefit to wider society if the majority make some effort to wash their hands regularly even if not perfectly. Masks are about reducing opportunities to pass on a virus even if they don’t completely eliminate all opportunities.

I appreciate that some people find them uncomfortable and others genuinely distressing or physically impossible but the one thing we all have in common is that we are a vector for infection. We can choose to recognise that or ignore it but it remains a universal truth.

Slight tangent, but I personally feel that the threat of covid has been downgraded somewhat, but not completely, and things are comparable with pandemics we have experience of (flu’s mostly). It may not have been part of our culture previously to wear a mask because of, say, swine flu, but actually it does make sense that if we want to reduce the impact of a respiratory virus we use a barrier method along with more traditional hygiene methods.

But it’s not “little/ no” effort, it comes at significant cost! Even amongst those who do not find them distressing, there are Costs to communication, social interaction and personal comfort. These costs are not trivial.

Only a few years ago, there was significant debate in this country concerning the nicab. Most people felt that forcing women to cover their faces in public was a harmful social practice. Now we are supposed to accept that forcing people, including children in primary school, to cover their faces in all public places, is a completely trivial ask. I just don’t get it, I really don’t.

@Bizawit

Significant compared to what? I’m not being disingenuous but I’m of the opinion that the direct and indirect costs (economically, socially, mentally) of high covid infection rates are higher than mandating masks when needed for those that can wear them with exemptions for those who can’t.

I don’t think your niqab comparison is a complete argument. It’s unpopular to force someone to wear one but if a woman chooses to they have the right to, and indeed women do actively choose it. There will be cases where that isn’t true and as a society we try and provide avenues for them to protect themselves but we shouldn’t tell people they’re being forced if they disagree.

Good news. Vaccine passports is a dangerous road for civil liberties.

I am vaccinated and would personally feel a lot safer with vaccine passports but am also painfully aware that safety shouldn't take priority over personal freedom and bodily autonomy - even if in this particular instance it suits me. So, on balance it was a good choice and I'm glad the precedent was not set. However as a PP said, the choice was probably due to systems resource rather than anything lofty like personal freedom

[quote Cornettoninja]@Bizawit

Significant compared to what? I’m not being disingenuous but I’m of the opinion that the direct and indirect costs (economically, socially, mentally) of high covid infection rates are higher than mandating masks when needed for those that can wear them with exemptions for those who can’t.

I don’t think your niqab comparison is a complete argument. It’s unpopular to force someone to wear one but if a woman chooses to they have the right to, and indeed women do actively choose it. There will be cases where that isn’t true and as a society we try and provide avenues for them to protect themselves but we shouldn’t tell people they’re being forced if they disagree.[/quote]
“Significant” was in response to a pp who was saying that the research on benefits is inconclusive, but since there is “little/ no effort” in wearing a mask we should do so regardless. Yes, we can have a discussion about the pros and cons of masking, but that entails having an honest and evidence- based conversation about the costs of masks (which are significant) against their likely benefits; rather than just dismissing/ trivialising the costs of masks and concluding , therefore, that the precautionary approach is to mandate them.

On the second point you misunderstand me.
I understand that many women may choose to wear the nicab. (A lot of people have issues with this even when it’s a choice, because people used to be offended by the idea of face coverings). Many women around the world do not have an option. I was discussing mandatory masking policies (not advise/ personal choice to wear a mask) , hence I drew a comparison with women who are compelled to wear the nicab. Of course people may choose to wear masks for their own personal reasons; we were debating whether the government should reintroduce mask mandates.

I certainly wouldn’t feel any ‘safer’ (what that actually is supposed to mean, )
being around people who have had injections anymore than being around people who haven’t.

We can all catch and transmit this virus. OP, I think you need to sit down and think rationally.

@screwcovid

Seriously worrying that people actually want vaccine passports and believe they are to keep the country safe

That’s because they seriously believe that level of control will be limited to covid and refuse to accept that it will be used for many other things going forward.

Those that welcome VPs believe that those choosing not to have the vaccine are selfish yet cannot see that forcing people to protect them (even though the vaccine does not fully protect anyone) is just as selfish.

I’ve noticed over the time that these threads have been running that a lot of posters in favour of VPs are either higher risk themselves and/or somebody close to them are. I wonder how many people have an elevated risk due to a lifestyle choice? That would make their reasoning even more astounding.

I agree with you OP

I wonder how many people have an elevated risk due to a lifestyle choice? That would make their reasoning even more astounding.

Not really. If a lifestyle choice, they may, in fact I would say would, make their reasoning more suspect.

I'm livid with people expecting me to sacrifice important things in my life again.

.

The Government has spent £75 million on schemes to do with the vaccine passports.

They have served their purpose.