Jump to content


Coronavirus - Part Two.

Recommended Posts

With covid vaccinations where would it stop, medical insurance companies have wanted medical history to be shared for decades.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mutewitness

Don't even think of becoming a Plumber without your vaccination certificate.

Pimlico Plumbers (South London firm ) intends to insist 

that its employees are vaccinated before they are sent out on a job.Presumably the client will be able to insist on seeing the certificate before letting them in.

And on we go into ,"No vaccination. No job".

Note: I'm not an anti-vaxer. But I'm anti compulsory

vaxer.

And where am I coming from on this issue ?

The answer is the following. I object to people being subjected to medical procedures without first having them consent. And if they don't consent ,subjecting them to discrimination.

Edited by petemcewan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, petemcewan said:

Mutewitness

Don't even think of becoming a Plumber without your vaccination certificate.

Pimlico Plumbers (South London firm ) intends to insist 

that its employees are vaccinated before they are sent out on a job.Presumably the client will be able to insist on seeing the certificate before letting them in.

And on we go into ,"No vaccination. No job".

Note: I'm not an anti-vaxer. But I'm anti compulsory

vaxer.

Nearly correct ... PP plan for all new contracts/employment to require vaccination.

Existing employees will be encouraged but not obligated to get jabbed.

I think that I read somewhere that he doesn't have any refusers in his current team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, petemcewan said:

Mutewitness

Don't even think of becoming a Plumber without your vaccination certificate.

Pimlico Plumbers (South London firm ) intends to insist 

that its employees are vaccinated before they are sent out on a job.Presumably the client will be able to insist on seeing the certificate before letting them in.

And on we go into ,"No vaccination. No job".

Note: I'm not an anti-vaxer. But I'm anti compulsory

vaxer.

And where am I coming from on this issue ?

The answer is the following. I object to people being subjected to medical procedures without first having them consent. And if they don't consent ,subjecting them to discrimination.

There are very few people who can demand access to my home and they would be informed of my vaccination status.

Therefore everyone else is by invitation.

I will ask and trust individuals I know to tell me if they have been vaccinated.

I would not contract work with individuals or companies if they could not establish that they have completed their vaccination course.

If someone cannot establish this then someone else will get the job.

This protects them from getting the Corovirus from me, my family or recent visitors.

 

I would not want it on my conscience that somebody who visits or needs to work in my house contracted the virus here.

Similarly if a shop, bus, pub, train, hotel etc. refused entry to protect their workers and other customers that would be normal.

The are some who cannot have vaccinations on medical grounds and society must tolerate the very minor risk posed-which is nothing like the risk posed to this group by those more fortunate. 

 

Ask not what you can do, do what you should do to protect everybody else.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some form of certificate/passport/proof of inoculation is inevitable. Given that some countries, or some airlines, or some face-to-face jobs will require one, you may as well have one in your "back pocket". 

 

If I had a job which involved crossing Africa, I would have to show proof of vaccination against various fevers and poxes before I was allowed through borders. No ifs, no buts, no ranting on social media or a talkshow, I wouldn't get in. And it's been like that for decades. 

 

So the question is - what form should the proof take, when should it be rolled out, what will it cost? If some individuals don't want to carry one they will have to accept their self-imposed restrictions.  

 

Without tantrums.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cyclecar.

Your last paragraph is spot on.

The rest  you describe, I'm aware of.

 

However,as we have been warned.Vaccine passports for Cov-19  will give rise to, a new digital health surveillance infrastructure (that endangers privacy rights) and create vaccine holder elites.

And once your medical history is out in the ether. Every ,Tom,Dick  and Mary will be able to get it.

Restriction on travel will not be an individual choice. It will be imposed on you-by all kinds of agencies.

 

The Lancet does a good job at highlighting the social issues involved.

 

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31034-5/fulltext

Edited by petemcewan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, petemcewan said:

Cyclecar.

Your last paragraph is spot on.

The rest  you describe, I'm aware of.

 

However,as we have been warned.Vaccine passports for Cov-19  will give rise to, a new digital health surveillance infrastructure (that endangers privacy rights) and create vaccine holder elites.

And once your medical history is out in the ether. Every ,Tom,Dick  and Mary will be able to get it.

Restriction on travel will not be an individual choice. It will be imposed on you-by all kinds of agencies.

 

The Lancet does a good job at highlighting the social issues involved.

 

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31034-5/fulltext

Restriction on travel has been in place in the UK for some time ..... and has been ignored by many.

 

The Lancet article does raise some of the social issues with "passports", but it should be clear that the article was written in May last year and is referring to "immunity" passports prior to vaccines having been developed.

 

Also, where you claim that things "will give rise to" and "will be able to", you should really be using the word "may" instead of "will".

 

I also think that the majority do not understand that a vaccine "passport" cannot guarantee (at the moment) that the holder will not infect others.

It can, however,  be used as an incentive to maximise vaccine uptake, and I suspect that Mr Pimlico may have that in mind.

Edited by enntee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, petemcewan said:

Cyclecar.

Your last paragraph is spot on.

The rest  you describe, I'm aware of.

 

However,as we have been warned.Vaccine passports for Cov-19  will give rise to, a new digital health surveillance infrastructure (that endangers privacy rights) and create vaccine holder elites.

And once your medical history is out in the ether. Every ,Tom,Dick  and Mary will be able to get it.

Restriction on travel will not be an individual choice. It will be imposed on you-by all kinds of agencies.

 

The Lancet does a good job at highlighting the social issues involved.

 

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31034-5/fulltext

so why not use the tried, trusted and tested method in use for decades for yellow fever? No need for any fancy digital system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, enntee said:

Restriction on travel has been in place in the UK for some time ..... and has been ignored by many.

 

The Lancet article does raise some of the social issues with "passports", but it should be clear that the article was written in May last year and is referring to "immunity" passports prior to vaccines having been developed.

 

Also, where you claim that things "will give rise to" and "will be able to", you should really be using the word "may" instead of "will".

 

I also think that the majority do not understand that a vaccine "passport" cannot guarantee (at the moment) that the holder will not infect others.

It can, however,  be used as an incentive to maximise vaccine uptake, and I suspect that Mr Pimlico may have that in mind.

I remember when certain posters claimed that wearing of masks would (not might) result in more crime as the crims wouldn't be identified.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Cyclecar said:

So the question is - what form should the proof take, when should it be rolled out, what will it cost? If some individuals don't want to carry one they will have to accept their self-imposed restrictions.  

 

Without tantrums.  

The same form as provided to EU27 residents in the UK to prove their settled status: a line entry in a government database.

 

Sauce, goose, gander,  etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, nightrider said:

so why not use the tried, trusted and tested method in use for decades for yellow fever? No need for any fancy digital system.

What, and miss the increased opportunity for extra surveillance of people?

 

The government are talking about adding vaccine certificate functionality to the NHS track and trace app. Given the original NHS track and trace app's privacy failings were a big part of the public rejecting it, I think linking vaccine certificates with other functionality is likely to have the same result.

 

Any vaccine certificate solution should be entirely stand alone. It shouldn't be usable to tell track where people have been, who they've been in contact with or anything else of the sort. Just verify whether they've been vaccinated or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, altus said:

What, and miss the increased opportunity for extra surveillance of people?

 

The government are talking about adding vaccine certificate functionality to the NHS track and trace app. Given the original NHS track and trace app's privacy failings were a big part of the public rejecting it, I think linking vaccine certificates with other functionality is likely to have the same result.

 

Any vaccine certificate solution should be entirely stand alone. It shouldn't be usable to tell track where people have been, who they've been in contact with or anything else of the sort. Just verify whether they've been vaccinated or not.

My thoughts exactly - and anyone trying for anything further should be viewed with extreme suspicion.

I also question whether all this hoo-har is really needed -after all this is merely an extreme form of flu, for which vaccines are available, and with the vast majority of sane people being vaccinated, will it not die out, for most, anyway?

Edited by RollingJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

X