To think that unvaccinated people whining about rights and freedoms when they can’t go to a concert

[Anon778833]

Are entitled? I am so sick of hearing the vaccine hesitant / covid deniers say that it makes no difference if you’re vaccinated, so they should be allowed to go around doing exactly what they want even though they don’t care about the effects on other people or don’t believe the virus exists.

The government has not said that they will restrict medical treatments or impose financial penalties on people who don’t get vaccinated. I wouldn’t agree with that. That would be taking away rights.

But I personally don’t think that it’s a god given right to attend clubs, theatres and to go on holiday if you refuse to comply with health measures at the height of a pandemic.

It is the same thing, travel with conditions! Public health issues concern us all. The vaccine refusers have a direct impact on us all.

It is not the same thing - travel to a country where you are not a citizen is not the same as being a citizen in a country - so how do you come to that conclusion?

And there are many things that directly impact on us all but where do you draw the line? Or do you not think the line needs drawing?

'It is not the same thing - travel to a country where you are not a citizen is not the same as being a citizen in a country - so how do you come to that conclusion?'

Oh fgs yes the being a citizen of said country is the variable but the public health concerns are the same.

Where do I draw the line..hmm let's see, we'll when it is a highly infectious virus that has caused global disruption for 18months, deaths, education disruption, mental health issues and caused hospitals to be overwhelmed and routine services halted. 'Fatties' don't have that impact do they?

If we did a study I bet all vaccine refusers are mask refusers and flouters too and wang about 'fascists' without seeming to have the basic concerns about a virus that has killed thousands. But hey, 'their body their rulez'

I don't fit that picture at all. Have worn a mask as required. Have kept to lockdowns. But I have no intention of getting the vaccine, purely for my own personal health reasons. I would not try to dissuade someone else from getting vaccinated, nor would I try to persuade them either. Their decision. I have also had Covid.

All this lumping of people together as being anti-this or anti-that is totally unhelpful at best, and downright discriminatory and hateful at worst.

JaniieJones

Government policies have caused far more damage than the virus. For the vast majority of people it’s a mild illness.

Obesity absolutely does affect availability of funding for other treatments.

Where do I draw the line..hmm let's see, we'll when it is a highly infectious virus that has caused global disruption for 18months, deaths, education disruption, mental health issues and caused hospitals to be overwhelmed and routine services halted. 'Fatties' don't have that impact do they?

I could do the same to stop the million hospital admissions a year from obesity though - remember it is double that of Covid admissions

If I were in government I could immediately ban all junk food and start fining people found to be eating junk food and not losing weight - that would have far reaching impact on business, and mental health but if I did that, I wouldn't need to worry about the admissions for Covid. Plenty of room.

Saying obesity has no impact on our public health is literally ludicrous

Obesity.
Smoking.
Excessive long term alcohol consumption.
Drug abuse.
Driving recklessly.

And all of the people in the above categories should be allowed to consider themselves above the 'unclean' unvaccinated, even though they will end up costing the NHS far more than they have ever contributed in taxes. But we don't go and ban them from things, because life is a bit more complex than than the 'goodies and baddies' tosh you see on Mnet.

'And all of the people in the above categories should be allowed to consider themselves above the 'unclean' unvaccinated, even though they will end up costing the NHS far more than they have ever contributed in taxes.'

Oh I think smokers and drinkers pay over their fair share of tax. In fact don't smokers actually pay for any medical treatment they may require though said tax? Maybe we should get 'fatties' should pay more tax the higher their bmi??

No we don't ban fags, booze and cakes you're right because despite the handringing hysteria on here we do not live in a dictatorship.

[quote hamstersarse]@Cornettoninja

Travel to other countries and the restrictions they may place upon entry is up to that country. Anyone can accept that.

What is more horrifying is the cries for restrictions within your own country - losing your rights as a citizen to do things that are basic features of your democratic country - where you pay taxes and elect a government.

How can it be feasible to collect taxes from citizens yet curtail their right to go to a graduation ceremony because they chose not to have a vaccine? I honestly don't know how you would justify that rationally without it creeping into many other aspects of how we live our lives[/quote]
Believe it or nor I don’t particularly feel strongly about it; probably because I think it’s a proportionate response to the current threat from covid.

Strategically, it makes sense to utilise the strengths (reduced transmission, reduced chance of straining the health service if they do become ill) we have gained from vaccinations and if that means people who are unvaccinated have to abide by a different set of rules for a period to compensate for lack of vaccination then it makes sense to me. We’ve had a good uptake of vaccination but there remains a percentage unvaccinated that is high enough to still cause wider issues without management.

The alternative is that everyone who has been vaccinated is subject to the same rules as the unvaccinated which also isn’t ‘fair’. Covid hasn’t stabilised like a comparable virus like say, measles, where there is a margin to cope with the demands of the unvaccinated population.

Presuming your problem isn’t with covid vaccines generally how would you approach managing infections and health service capability in the unvaccinated population given you’re limited in what can be done to reduce infections and severity of illness without vaccination?

Going off on a tangent, but agree:

Drug abuse
should be allowed to consider themselves above the 'unclean' unvaccinated, even though they will end up costing the NHS far more than they have ever contributed in taxes
The amount of threads I have seen on mumsnet about drug use, typically cocaine and weed, when people are accepting of it, admit to partaking in in and have no issue with it. Sitting at home smoking weed but that's OK because it doesn't hurt anyone.

I wonder how many people who take drugs, think about the how many youngsters are drawn in to the life of dealing, running, making, country lines, recruitment etc. Committing crimes, stabbings, beatings, drug driving, shoplifting, ODs, taking over homes of vulnerable people etc?

The users themselves, whether recreational or the long term. Mention porn on here and it's a hot topic, but how many people are in the industry or prostitution because of drugs? How much resources in the NHS are taken up because of it, or other emergency services.

Arguments in favour of restrictions on the basic freedoms of ‘the unvaccinated’ centre around the idea that the vaccine reduces transmission however, the vaccine does not stop transmission and as there’s no way to tell who is and who isn’t infectious it makes any restrictions purely about control/punishment.

People don’t glow in the dark if they are infected, you could have a room full of exclusively vaccinated who are all infectious and a room full of exclusively non vaccinated who are not infectious.

Anecdotally, I know roughly equal amounts of vaccinated and non vaccinated yet all of the infections, hospital admitted and even death has been amongst the fully vaccinated 🤷🏻‍♀️

if that means people who are unvaccinated have to abide by a different set of rules for a period to compensate for lack of vaccination then it makes sense to me.

How long is enough for you? Given the vaccination efficacy seems to wane, this is more likely to be permanent isn't it? What counts as 'fully vaccinated' once a booster is available? I've had 2 doses but how long is that going to be valid now?

Do I want to keep having a jab, no not really because I have zero problem in getting Covid (again). But if I don't my rights will be curtailed?

There is a theory called the Parasite Stress Theory which has looked at how infectious disease and changes in values go together - something like, the more infectious disease there is in a society, the more the call to authoritarianism / collectivism, so I sort of understand where it all comes from with people who support it. It does make sense. But I still don't like it!

How long is enough for you?

How long is a piece of string? There is no answer to that question because it’s not a static situation; who knows where we’ll be in 3,6 or 12 months time. Strategies have to change with the situation and we’re finding ourselves in situations that don’t have a plan to follow.

I understand that as an individual you don’t have a problem contracting covid, but if there’s a large enough proportion of society who think the opposite then why should your individual circumstances trump a majority? Individualism doesn’t work for every situation and this is one of them. At the moment. It’s always a fluid, changing situation dependent on the circumstance of the society of the moment. I’m not unsympathetic, there’s plenty gone on in recent years that I fundamentally disagree with but I have to continue to live in this society so find a way to reconcile my own beliefs alongside that unless I choose to find one that does align more closely with my views.

That theory sounds interesting though, I’ll look that up.

Arguments in favour of restrictions on the basic freedoms of ‘the unvaccinated’ centre around the idea that the vaccine reduces transmission however, the vaccine does not stop transmission and as there’s no way to tell who is and who isn’t infectious it makes any restrictions purely about control/punishment

It isn’t punishment though, it’s playing the odds (like pretty much every measure implemented throughout the pandemic). Vaccines reduce transmission therefore a room full of vaccinated people are less likely to put strain on the health service in the case of an outbreak than a room full of unvaccinated people.

Afaik the jury is still out on whether the vaccines efficacies are actually waning to a significant degree or whether we’re still observing the effect of delta against vaccines developed prior to its existence.

Tbh I can’t see vaccine passports being used internally anyway. There’s little point, imho, in a population that’s almost at 90% of the 16+ age groups vaccinated. That remaining 10% aren’t going to make much of a difference in reality.

I understand why it’s not completely off the table but in truth if we’re at the point of considering vaccination proof to access certain things we’re already on a course of bigger problems with covid.

I posted this on another thread, but in retrospect maybe I should have posted here as the discussion is more about transmission.

It's a news report quoting research done at Imperial College and others that found that virus levels in a fully vaccinated person who has contracted the Delta variant are similar to those of a person who has not had a vaccination.
www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/delta-infection-unvaccinated-and-vaccinated-people-have-similar-levels-of-virus

Jesus what a load of crap on this thread..IRL I really don’t care who has been vaccinated or not.
I do care about their overall attitude to covid. But I do believe in the right of choice and overall I do believe in using vaccination passports but with a viable alternative such as free twice weekly testing

But Jesus all this rubbish comparing to obesity etc. Yes such issues cost a fortune and takes up nhs resource but it’s not transmissible and smokers etc aren’t being offered two vaccines to greatly reduce their risk of smoking related diseases. If they could be offered that, and they refused, I would probably think they should face restrictions on care, lifestyle and support

It’s replies like that that make me more in favour of vaccine passports, not the media

Oh and if we’re on anecdotal evidence. I know a mix of vaccinated and non vaccinated who have covid. The only one hospitalised and who died with no pre existing health conditions was unvaccinated and in early 50s 🤷‍♀️

NearlyAlwaysInsane You do realise that obese people need repeated appointments just to get the same actual treatment afforded to thin people. So while you might say they take up resources, it is the Drs who are doing this in not affording them the same rights as thin people and giving them treatments initially when they first attend.

Maybe Drs need to see past the fat and offer them the same treatments in the first place and treat them like humans which would in turn save a whole host of appointments and longer term issues. But then again it is easy to blame the fat people for those repeated appointments if you don't experience this discrimination first hand, you assume it is all down to them needing it more, not that they are not afforded the same options just because they are fat and so as a result end up coming back time and time again until they are finally given the same options.

But Jesus all this rubbish comparing to obesity etc. Yes such issues cost a fortune and takes up nhs resource but it’s not transmissible

Well this would be a much stronger argument if vaccines prevented transmission. They don’t. The issue isn’t really transmission anyway, it’s taking up hospital resource.

and smokers etc aren’t being offered two vaccines to greatly reduce their risk of smoking related diseases.

I think we need to be careful with this also, the causes of vaccine hesitancy are complex and difficult to unpack also. You could tell smokers to quit and the obese to eat less and it wouldn’t achieve anything. The problem with coming down really heavy here is that you entrench anti vaxxers and store up even bigger problems for yourself in the future.

If we’re going to get smart about this, it’s worth acknowledging that the biggest problem are anti vaxxers who are also vulnerable to severe covid. Rather than blanket punishment strategies for the young and healthy, a smarter approach is needed to persuade those who really need the vaccine to get it.

Here’s some more info on parasite stress theory

I think it’s playing out here…that there is a significant call for a more authoritarian approach. Like vaccine passports to go to a concert!

bigthink.com/surprising-science/are-parasites-shaping-geopolitics/

@TheKeatingFive

But Jesus all this rubbish comparing to obesity etc. Yes such issues cost a fortune and takes up nhs resource but it’s not transmissible

Well this would be a much stronger argument if vaccines prevented transmission. They don’t. The issue isn’t really transmission anyway, it’s taking up hospital resource.

and smokers etc aren’t being offered two vaccines to greatly reduce their risk of smoking related diseases.

I think we need to be careful with this also, the causes of vaccine hesitancy are complex and difficult to unpack also. You could tell smokers to quit and the obese to eat less and it wouldn’t achieve anything. The problem with coming down really heavy here is that you entrench anti vaxxers and store up even bigger problems for yourself in the future.

If we’re going to get smart about this, it’s worth acknowledging that the biggest problem are anti vaxxers who are also vulnerable to severe covid. Rather than blanket punishment strategies for the young and healthy, a smarter approach is needed to persuade those who really need the vaccine to get it.

Except they greatly reduce transmission don’t they. And hospitalisation and death. Yiu really close your eyes to that don’t you

And yes the causes of vaccine hesitancy are complex, hence I would prefer they were offered an alternative e g regular testing. But completely denying the need fir any responsibility in all this is what makes me less and less interested in their case

I would genuinely like to have an understanding of the different reasons and % involved . Many just haven’t got round to it

@lljkk well you are lucky than. I have two relatives and several friends. My children are apparently going to be orphans now we have been vaccinated and I will never be a grandparent if my dd18 has the vaccine

I live in France and about half of the local people Ì have on my FB are bitching and moaning about the vaccine and the vaccine passport. ... it's made reconsider a lot of my friendships/acquaintances.

It's easy to snooze or unfollow friends on FBk. I don't see my aunt's right wing rants unless I deliberately visit her page, or my cousin's weird ideas about nutrition. I scan thru their pages occasionally to see pics of their pretty homes or cute grandkids. One friend posts mean stuff about anti-vaxxers but I only snooze him -- he's facing a terminal disease diagnosis and a very witty fellow, I don't want to lose all contact.

Adult DS actually owns & wears a MAGA cap, thinks Kyle Rittenhouse has been unfairly prosecuted, but got his vacc no hesitation. Wanted to travel this summer. He says he deleted his social media.

Adult DD thinks vaccines should be compulsory for all health & social care workers or they lose their jobs. She doesn't know what the health or social care sector should do about existing severe workforce shortages. We just chatted about this, she only uses SM to post pouty pics.

Mostly we can shape our social media feeds. Unfollow, Hide, snooze, mute... We can all agree it's frustrating when that doesn't work.

If you don't like the above sentence, you are literally a Nazi, as in 'by definition'; you desire the curtailment of the rights of your political enemies.

THEY ARE NOT FUCKING NAZIS. Jesus H Christ on a bike, stop comparing a few restrictions to the Third Reich.

A lot of people get upset about having Nazism explained to them, because they don't think that's what they are. But there are people on this very thread saying that going to gigs or restaurants etc is a privilege, and it isn't. The freedom to go about one's business freely is a RIGHT and, by the way, the corollary responsibility is to exercise that right, not to blandly submit to experimental drugs.

Again. There are no actual Nazis here. Stop it. Stop comparing the systematic murder (and all the other degradations that happened over the decade before that) to a few restrictions during a global pandemic.

It is a very weak and lazy argument.

Bottom line: If pubs, clubs, events want to survive you can bet your bottom dollar that even if the government don't require vaccinations to enter, if they lose custom because of that, they will start to require them themselves. That is how the free market works. But there isn't a free market in the UK, there is government control. So like it or not the government, on advice of its scientific advisers has implemented some measures.

I can understand people who don't want to get vaccinated because they don't trust the government, don't trust the vaccine, still aren't sure it's safe or effective or whatever. As long as they have done some reading themselves and aren't just listening to conspiracy nuts.

But. "oh i got the vaccination or else i couldn't go to Majorca" isn't a principled anti-vaccination stance, is it? So if the govt nudge unit says to the government "if you attach some strings to some fun things, people who are a bit wavery and don't actually believe all the conspiracy theories, will get vaccinated" and thus we will move closer to the point of high enough vaccination rates for everything to open again.

That is the point we are currently at. It isn't about curtailing the rights of people who have a sound reason for not wanting to be vaccinated (outlined above) it is about capturing those who really don't care but are just making noise for some reason.

In a few months it's Christmas. Based on last year i expect there to be a relaxation of the rules, with an accompanying small spike afterwards. But we'll see. I'd rather not have any spike, no deaths and low new cases. But we are where we are

[quote ArnoldtheAngryTapir]I posted this on another thread, but in retrospect maybe I should have posted here as the discussion is more about transmission.

It's a news report quoting research done at Imperial College and others that found that virus levels in a fully vaccinated person who has contracted the Delta variant are similar to those of a person who has not had a vaccination.
www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/delta-infection-unvaccinated-and-vaccinated-people-have-similar-levels-of-virus[/quote]
Yes but that’s once the virus has been contracted, even then there is still a benefit in reduction of severity of illness. Reduction in transmission is still awaiting clarification (afaik) but there is clearly a significant impact even if it’s not total.

For the purposes of not overwhelming healthcare (which is what all of this has been about ultimately) any reduction in transmission shouldn’t be ignored because it’s not 100%. Nor should the reduction in severity of illness. This is what allows us to function without drastic restrictions such as lockdowns.

I’m not aiming this at you personally, but it’s really frustrating to keep reading statements that essentially say the vaccines don’t work to stop transmission because that’s what people take away from articles like that. They do, just not 100% but we don’t need 100% as long as it’s managed with that in mind which means considering other mitigations alongside vaccinations. This isn’t news and it was said on their approval back in January that they weren’t going to be a silver bullet. It’s not all or nothing.

Thanks for linking @hamstersarse - I’ll take a look at that later

'Again. There are no actual Nazis here. Stop it. Stop comparing the systematic murder (and all the other degradations that happened over the decade before that) to a few restrictions during a global pandemic.'

Oh but it's now it all started apparently!! government needing to protect people by trying to control the spread of a virus next thing you know they'll be rounding us all up and committing genocide. Such an appalling comparison to make isn't it.

'Except they greatly reduce transmission don’t they. And hospitalisation and death. '

Someone queried this earlier on, if not on this thread then a similar one. Even though the hospitalisations and deaths have actually plummeted the 'my body my rulez they're all nazis' wailers refuse to accept it.

I can understand why leftists are called useful idiots.