Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

England vaccine passport plans ditched, health secretary says

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 460 posts

Re: England vaccine passport plans ditched, health secretary says

#341

Post by Ekaros »

longthrow1 wrote: post #338
h_anna_h wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Vaccines drastically reduce hospitalisation. That frees up medical resources for everyone, especially those who aren't vaccinated and those that need care. Don't hospitalise unvaccinated people who have covid then, problem solved.

Also don't hospitalise people who refuse to take care of their own health. They're a terrible and disproportionate burden on health care. We'll set a body fat % cutoff for care.

Or when it was clearly their own fault. Lets say sports like skiing, games or swimming. Maybe poisonings too if it was due neglience.

Re: England vaccine passport plans ditched, health secretary says

#342

Post by skytreader »

gruez wrote: post #335
skytreader wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Heart disease is the leading cause of death in the US. Should we have blood pressure/cholesterol "passports" to pressure people into being healthier? Is heart disease exponentially contagious with the potential to strain medical resources in a matter of days? Again, these aren't interventions against social freedoms, rather an intervention to prevent a public service from being DDoSed, so to speak. The measures a m…

>Is heart disease exponentially contagious with the potential to strain medical resources in a matter of days? How is this relevant when vaccinated people are still contagious? >Again, these aren't interventions against social freedoms, rather an intervention to prevent a public service from being DDoSed, so to speak. Just like banning encryption isn't against social freedoms, but rather an intervention to prevent ba…

>> Is heart disease exponentially contagious with the potential to strain medical resources in a matter of days?

> How is this relevant when vaccinated people are still contagious?

Because while still contagious, they are not exponentially contagious. It's not like I left out that important qualifier in the statement you are replying to.

Vaccinated people can spread in case of a breakthrough infection and infections are less likely to occur in vaccinated individuals.

> Just like banning encryption isn't against social freedoms...

Way to go attacking a straw man, and not even a particularly clever one at that. What does encryption have anything to do with vaccination and vaccination passports?

Re: England vaccine passport plans ditched, health secretary says

#343

Post by nobodyandproud »

ghoward wrote: post #314
nobodyandproud wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s like saying sober drivers can cause accidents. It’s the likelihood, and willful the personal choice that leads to a higher of incident which society decides whether or not to tolerate.

We also hold sober drivers accountable when they cause accidents. Why not vaccinated people when they spread the virus?

Only when they do something reckless, like look at their cellphones or sleep on rhe wheel. Or speed or blow a red light.

Otherwise it’s civil penalties at most

Re: England vaccine passport plans ditched, health secretary says

#344

Post by Retric »

TeeMassive wrote: post #339
pessimizer wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1) show your medical history which is a protected right Your medical history is not a "protected right." The people who provide medical care to you are not allowed to release your medical records without your consent.

> Your medical history is not a "protected right." What are you talking about? It is under the 5h and 14th amendments and under similar rights in other jurisdictions. https://healthcare.uslegal.com/records/sources-of-protection...

Not in case of vaccinations. https://www.ncsl.org/research/health/school-immunization-exe...

Medical data does have various protections in the US, but it’s far more limited than just blanket protection.

Re: England vaccine passport plans ditched, health secretary says

#345

Post by dragonwriter »

skytreader wrote: post #342
gruez wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Is heart disease exponentially contagious with the potential to strain medical resources in a matter of days? How is this relevant when vaccinated people are still contagious? >Again, these aren't interventions against social freedoms, rather an intervention to prevent a public service from being DDoSed, so to speak. Just like banning encryption isn't against social freedoms, but rather an intervention to prevent ba…

>> Is heart disease exponentially contagious with the potential to strain medical resources in a matter of days? > How is this relevant when vaccinated people are still contagious? Because while still contagious, they are not exponentially contagious. It's not like I left out that important qualifier in the statement you are replying to. Vaccinated people can spread in case of a breakthrough infection and infections…

> Because while still contagious, they are not exponentially contagious.

All contagion is exponential, but they have a much lower exponent.

Re: England vaccine passport plans ditched, health secretary says

#346

Post by Nextgrid »

spookthesunset wrote: post #312
Nextgrid wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Providing ID to enter a bar or nightclub (where some have these machines which no doubt capture and store that data) is commonplace even though the venue has no business knowing who the person is.

I mean the reason you do this is to prove you are 21. Requiring anybody who enters any random business on the street to show a vaccine card is not even close to an apt comparison.

The vaccine card is to prove you are vaccinated. In both cases they're merely after a boolean (is_over_18? vs is_vaccinated?).

But we're clearly accepting the idea of giving up way more information in the former case even though all that's needed is the boolean, so why the fuss around the vaccines when they're ultimately also after a boolean?

Re: England vaccine passport plans ditched, health secretary says

#347

Post by drewrv »

spookthesunset wrote: post #307
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So should we invest in vastly increasing hospital staffing and facilities because the current ICU loads are the new normal?

Y'all had 1.6 years to do this. And no, the present ICU loads are not gonna be "the new normal". Covid is here forever. We knew this way, way back in March of 2020. Only now are people finally getting the message. Life is short. We cannot play this game anymore. The time to go back to actual, 2019 pre pandemic normal is today.

I take your argument as “covid will be around forever so we should act like it doesn’t exist” which is nonsensical to me. I’m not sure I can come up with a more charitable interpretation: sometimes things change and societies need to adapt.

Re: England vaccine passport plans ditched, health secretary says

#348

Post by UncleMeat »

throwaway316943 wrote: post #340
UncleMeat wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. I don't even have a strong opinion about punishing people for infecting others through negligence. But I think it is worth bringing up whenever anti-vaxxers bring up alcohol and drunk driving.

To be clear, I am not opposed to vaccines. I think the current vaccine is the best option for people at high risk of negative outcomes due to COVID. What I am opposed to is coercion by the state on something that is a personal choice. Calling this argument “antivaxx” is another example of the disingenuous way people are behaving. It’s a smear campaign that is being parroted without any critical thought.

Cool. But the argument "we let people drink alcohol despite harm caused to others" is a bad one.

Re: England vaccine passport plans ditched, health secretary says

#349

Post by TeeMassive »

snovv_crash wrote: post #211
hervature wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What about waiting for full FDA approval? I agree that your Facebook Mom groups are full of BS but why are PhD earners more hesitant than only high school educated [1]. [1] - https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.20.21260795v...

Full FDA approval has happened though. It was basically just a formality that anti-vaxxers managed to find. At this point the vaccines are known to be safe, they have billions of doses given.

There are no way to know the long terms effects (if you do please provide the plans of your time traveling machine to nearest patent office).

The drug companies are not only under total immunity but also will get paid regardless if the vaccine works or not in the long term. The reporting of adverse effects is probably getting suppressed, for example OSHA is now admitting it won't record vaccines adverse effects so it doesn't discourage vaccinations (https://ogletree.com/insights/osha-revokes-guidance-on-recor...). There were vaccines that were deemed "safe" yet were scrapped because they weren't (Dengue vaccine, Guillain-Barré of the 1979 flu vaccines).

The immunity of the vaccines is fading after a few months and Pfizer is now talking about bi-annual booster shots and daily pills.

Personally I got my two shots of Pfizer, which is considered the safest, because it made sense to me. But even then I got adverse effects making me not want another booster shot. Calling people "anti-vaxxers" is because they do not want to take an experimental vaccines (mRNA vaccines are not vaccines in the traditional definition) is just intellectual laziness.

Re: England vaccine passport plans ditched, health secretary says

#350

Post by junon »

hervature wrote: post #330
junon wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a different point than before, though. That's child vaccination vs. general population vaccination.

Just because certain subgroups of people have valid reasons does not mean it applies to the general populace.

Yes I think I agree with you. Just because certain subgroups of people might not feel comfortable getting vaccinated, it doesn't mean you can apply the same logic to the general populace, as most people are safe to get vaccinated.
Post reply on HN