royalsociety.org/news/2021/02/12-challen...r-vaccine-passports/


Legal challenges are the next hurdle for vaccine passports - partly on the grounds of discrimination.

Is the 'no jab - no job' stance from employers acceptable, when vaccinations can legally be refused?

JK2006 wrote:
I wouldn't go on a cruise or coach trip anyway, if you paid me a million quid. Nothing to do with infectious diseases.

You may need a £Million Quid in the future to travel if the calamities continue.

My quote for a ticket (one way) to Bangkok recently was $10,000 when normally it's about $900 return (or $1200 if I choose "Premium Economy" to avoid the ghastly peasants 2 seats behind me).

Although I see some airlines are offering fabulously low prices to places like Dubai which you would have to pay me a million pounds to take up. I'm not saying I wouldn't go..I'd take the Million Pounds, go for a day and return to the UK having booked a long time dream..a luxury berth on the Queen Mary 2 on a lazy week's cruising from Southampton to New York.

# do they still have those older gentleman on board to dance with older lady heiresses?

## My lovely friend the late singer Tony Monopoly who won Opportunity Knocks 9 times sang on the QE2 for 2 years but says he hated it. He liked the gay bar especially for the crew though. I think he slept with every sailor onboard except the Captain.

Here in Germany the ethics council already advised the government that vaccinated people should not receive privileges compared with non-vaccinated (though this is just advisory for the government).

Younger people are highly unlikely to suffer bad consequences from Covid. The average age of death is in the 80s (actually higher than the life expectancy of those in that cohort). However younger people have also been locked down, largely to protect the vulnerable. It would be most unfair - but also contrary to logic - to "release" the vulnerables once vaccinated, but continue to keep the non-vulnerables restricted.

Once the vulnerable people have been vaccinated, why not release everyone? At least, as has been said on this thread, as a relatively young person I can decide whether I want to "risk" getting on a plane, same as I decide whether I want to smoke or drink or drive too fast.

The "variants" used as an excuse to maintain lockdowns seem to be some sort of bogeyman. ALL viruses mutate and, through survival of the fittest, tend toward variants which are more transmissible but less likely to kill their host. Even if these variants are more transmissible I need to see some kind of data to prove that they are more deadly / more likely to fill hospitals. If there's no proven consequence to them then it's no excuse.

Kantilever wrote:
Here in Germany the ethics council already advised the government that vaccinated people should not receive privileges compared with non-vaccinated (though this is just advisory for the government).

Younger people are highly unlikely to suffer bad consequences from Covid. The average age of death is in the 80s (actually higher than the life expectancy of those in that cohort). However younger people have also been locked down, largely to protect the vulnerable. It would be most unfair - but also contrary to logic - to "release" the vulnerables once vaccinated, but continue to keep the non-vulnerables restricted.

Once the vulnerable people have been vaccinated, why not release everyone? At least, as has been said on this thread, as a relatively young person I can decide whether I want to "risk" getting on a plane, same as I decide whether I want to smoke or drink or drive too fast.

The "variants" used as an excuse to maintain lockdowns seem to be some sort of bogeyman. ALL viruses mutate and, through survival of the fittest, tend toward variants which are more transmissible but less likely to kill their host. Even if these variants are more transmissible I need to see some kind of data to prove that they are more deadly / more likely to fill hospitals. If there's no proven consequence to them then it's no excuse.

The never ending variations, or just the threat of them is why I think that as we are this far into lockdown nonsense, the only thing left to do is keep going with it until it vanishes (like last summer, almost) but shut the borders completely for a while and hope others do the same.

As long as the infection is allowed to spread, because the vaccines don't prevent transmission, the variants will be encouraged and it will be a never ending cycle of lockdowns and a brief respite in summer. For ever. They can bugger off with that!

Well you are going the route of Boris'n'Matt Honey; we have to erase this virus (because it is so deadly) like Ebola or Smallpox or the Black Plague etc.
Some of us believe this is a trivial virus for most of us; less lethal than Flu. Like the Common Cold.
We must learn to live with it.

JK2006 wrote:
Well you are going the route of Boris'n'Matt Honey; we have to erase this virus (because it is so deadly) like Ebola or Smallpox or the Black Plague etc.
Some of us believe this is a trivial virus for most of us; less lethal than Flu. Like the Common Cold.
We must learn to live with it.

Oh yes, but I don't think it is going to happen while there is the excuse of never ending variants.
The barn door is already open, so no point in closing half of it.

It is a very reluctant U-turn, but if you look at the figures they are suggesting for normality (ish) with the failure rate of the tests, you will see that it is impossible to ever reach the freedom figures. (plus the certainty of variants, because that is what viruses do)
We are being sold a false hope of ever getting back to normal or living with it.
Our perception of how trivial or deadly it is (its both) makes no difference, as long as freedom depends on something unattainable.

Yes, absolutely, if they suggest we open everything up and ditch all testing, hooray and hallelujah, but they wont!

I think that the omission of infection rates from the 4 tests for opening up is hugely significant and a complete change of direction.

Yes, if they were intending to include this then with variants - you are right Honey -there is simply no way out. It is no oversight it is not a test condition. The Gov want out of the situation they have boxed themselves into.

The omission should also put to bed any conspiracy theories: infection rates would be #1 to include if you wanted to sustain loss of freedoms.

They are monitoring the baselines: deaths & hospital capacity. They will quietly ditch infection rate narratives. It is really positive news; this will end over Spring.

Wyot wrote:
I think that the omission of infection rates from the 4 tests for opening up is hugely significant and a complete change of direction.

Yes, if they were intending to include this then with variants - you are right Honey -there is simply no way out. It is no oversight it is not a test condition. The Gov want out of the situation they have boxed themselves into.

The omission should also put to bed any conspiracy theories: infection rates would be #1 to include if you wanted to sustain loss of freedoms.

They are monitoring the baselines: deaths & hospital capacity. They will quietly ditch infection rate narratives. It is really positive news; this will end over Spring.

Thank goodness they have dropped it. It made no sense at all. I feel quite relieved.


Give me a minute or two and I will resume ranting about pubs and gyms.

Honey wrote:
Wyot wrote:
I think that the omission of infection rates from the 4 tests for opening up is hugely significant and a complete change of direction.

Yes, if they were intending to include this then with variants - you are right Honey -there is simply no way out. It is no oversight it is not a test condition. The Gov want out of the situation they have boxed themselves into.

The omission should also put to bed any conspiracy theories: infection rates would be #1 to include if you wanted to sustain loss of freedoms.

They are monitoring the baselines: deaths & hospital capacity. They will quietly ditch infection rate narratives. It is really positive news; this will end over Spring.

Thank goodness they have dropped it. It made no sense at all. I feel quite relieved.


Give me a minute or two and I will resume ranting about pubs and gyms.

I can give or take pubs these days - however I do enjoying dining out and I forgotten what's it like now. I am missing the high streets bigly, I have always enjoyed shopping even clothes shopping. I do like charity shops also to get my books and my partner buys clothes second-hand clothes to cut up for her crafts. (One man's junk is another man's treasure) Even a man's junk can be a treasure for the lady.

For anyone interested on the effects of lockdown on the brain/memory.

The lack of variety of place and social interactions has significant consequences. It is not just "boredom":

www.bbc.com/future/article/20201113-covid-19-affecting-memory

Wyot wrote:
For anyone interested on the effects of lockdown on the brain/memory.

The lack of variety of place and social interactions has significant consequences. It is not just "boredom":

www.bbc.com/future/article/20201113-covid-19-affecting-memory

So dementia with now increase as well as debt.

I suppose WEF will have a cure for that.