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

451–460 of 460 posts

Re: England vaccine passport plans ditched, health secretary says

#451

Post by ghoward »

nobodyandproud wrote: post #442
ghoward wrote: post #441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a false premise because those who would like to get the vaccine, but can't, can voluntarily do things to make sure they don't contract COVID. Instead, they clamor for governments to force people to do something so that they are not inconvenienced. A lot of the consequences of those choices are artificial. They are authoritarian measures designed to elicit compliance, not natural consequences. Also, the very fact…

> It's a false premise because those who would like to get the vaccine, but can't, can voluntarily do things to make sure they don't contract COVID. Instead, they clamor for governments to force people to do something so that they are not inconvenienced. > A lot of the consequences of those choices are artificial. They are authoritarian measures designed to elicit compliance, not natural consequences. Kids 11 and und…

> Kids 11 and under can’t get vaccinated. Not because its dangerous but because our agency is being extremely thorough.

Kids 11 and under are in basically zero danger from COVID.

> Oh and masking? That largely prevents spread. by the infected; not so great at preventing someone masked from getting infected. Also, even this level of temporary mandate is being fought.

When masks are worn properly and changed often. That does not happen in the real world. And cloth masks are largely ineffective against viruses like COVID.

> Meanwhile and this point hundreds of millions (billions) of shots; and the risk factors are well-known. Yet this information doesn’t seem matter.

There is a difference between "heavy testing" (what COVID vaccines have gotten) and proper testing. Proper testing includes heavy samples over a long period. We haven't had a long enough period.

> Good luck working when insurance companies forces high premiums.

Insurance companies will not raise premiums any more than they have to because insurance is heavily competitive. If people start cancelling insurance plans because they raise the premiums on the unvaccinated, you can bet they'll acquiesce.

> This is a veiled threat. I’m not an authoritarian at all, but in any society it’s give and take.

Not a veiled threat. I'm talking about the consequences of locking 10% or more of the able people out of the workforce. The economy will suffer. A natural consequence.

> Some want all of the benefits of society without doing their part, and that will have natural consequences as well.

> That isn’t a threat. That’s just the market correcting itself because it can’t support the level of welfare you’re advocating.

I know it's not a threat, but again, the market will correct itself the other way: if people won't work, the mandates will magically disappear. If insurance is not bought, the surcharges will magically disappear.

Re: England vaccine passport plans ditched, health secretary says

#452

Post by throwawaylinux »

javagram wrote: post #446
throwawaylinux wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So? It's for their own good. Don't you care about what is best for the undesirables?

It’s impossible to fix being elderly by telling them to take a medication or some other means. It just doesn’t scientifically exist. By suggesting we should require the elderly to become non-elderly before mixing with society, you’d be asking the impossible. That makes no sense and no one rational would consider it to be “for their own good”.

The reason to exclude them is not whether or not it's possible to "fix" them. That is irrelevant. The reason to exclude them is that it is for their own good. That's what the original poster said was stated.

I am not asking for the impossible, I am asking that we also protect all the other undesirables and deplorables for their own good.

Re: England vaccine passport plans ditched, health secretary says

#453

Post by rdtwo »

Nexxxeh wrote: post #449
rdtwo wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah it’s true but I’d rather not enrich a bunch of middle men. I think the system is unfair and I don’t want to contribute

You feel sufficiently strongly to condemn those in need of organ transplant, potentially, to death? If you see them as victims of the system, doesn't refusing to donate your organs literally making things worse for them? It feels like you're saying "I could save your life, but I won't because the system isn't the way I want it." Is that a reasonable summary, or am I misunderstanding what you mean?

I see it like i see the Salvation Army. They do a lot of good but every time you donate a portion of the donation goes to hateful causes and so the entire thing is tainted and I refuse to donate to them.

Re: England vaccine passport plans ditched, health secretary says

#454

Post by roenxi »

Retric wrote: post #92
quotemstr wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Discussions generally don't sway people. When someone has a fixed worldview and you present facts that undermine that worldview, he perceives you as a threat (like he would a large bear) and reacts to those facts with the same fight-or-flight response that threats generally elicit. Online, this fight-or-flight response manifests as people downvoting you, flagging you, doxxing you, and so on for presenting hard-to-ref…

It’s not about disagreeing with them. I generally downvote pedantic exceptions because you should respond to an argument in the most generous terms. largely proving your identity did apply to the examples given but doesn’t address the thrust of their argument. Showing an ID to drink or get a senior discount isn’t about identifying you specifically just something about you and that is completely accepted by the genera…

There argument was a one line "we regularly [do this"].

My two line "no, those things are different to this thing" is responding both directly to the thrust of the argument and with an appropriate amount of effort.

Re: England vaccine passport plans ditched, health secretary says

#455

Post by Retric »

roenxi wrote: post #454
Retric wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not about disagreeing with them. I generally downvote pedantic exceptions because you should respond to an argument in the most generous terms. largely proving your identity did apply to the examples given but doesn’t address the thrust of their argument. Showing an ID to drink or get a senior discount isn’t about identifying you specifically just something about you and that is completely accepted by the genera…

There argument was a one line "we regularly [do this"]. My two line "no, those things are different to this thing" is responding both directly to the thrust of the argument and with an appropriate amount of effort.

Except the first line actually acknowledges your argument doesn’t apply in every case thus making it a pedantic argument.

Saying X is usually Y, doesn’t actually mean showing ID to demonstrate an unrelated fact is somehow unusual.

Re: England vaccine passport plans ditched, health secretary says

#456

Post by ceesharp »

tinus_hn wrote: post #83
ceesharp wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference is that in a very short period of time, numerous people can end up with the virus. The diseases you listed are distributed over the year. You don't see thousands of people getting a heart attack in a week in the same area. COVID puts the healthcare system at risk because it is a sudden surge of cases which ends up being overwhelming.

What is the difference with ‘we’re used to it’? The things you describe also apply to the flu, yet no one would consider requiring vaccination cards for that. It just turns out there already are beds for people that get that because we are used to it.

The flu doesn't require as many ICU beds. Nor do you need to stay weeks or months in the hospital because you had the flu.

Re: England vaccine passport plans ditched, health secretary says

#457

Post by roenxi »

Retric wrote: post #455
roenxi wrote: post #454

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There argument was a one line "we regularly [do this"]. My two line "no, those things are different to this thing" is responding both directly to the thrust of the argument and with an appropriate amount of effort.

Except the first line actually acknowledges your argument doesn’t apply in every case thus making it a pedantic argument. Saying X is usually Y, doesn’t actually mean showing ID to demonstrate an unrelated fact is somehow unusual.

I don't actually follow what you said here, but to be clear pedantry is a focus on arbitrary precision or something close to.

My argument isn't that, there is no level of imprecision where I'd be satisfied. I went straight to the substance which is the examples listed are acceptable in ways that a vaccine mandate is not.

It is perfectly reasonable to expect proof that someone is who they say they are when picking up a parcel or borrowing a book in their own name. It isn't like it is information that they aren't implicitly volunteering as part of the transaction. Ditto ID for a hotel stay to an extent, the normal case for a hotel stay is you have already identified yourself to the hotel.

There is a fair comparison when it comes to drivers licenses (I echo Mr Mouse's argument there). But 25% relevant examples is not a good batting average. And it isn't pedantry to point that out, it is routine argumentativeness. The complaint against vaccine passports is people are being forced to reveal information about themselves that they may not want to. I don't want to have to start registering information about myself with the government to have a pub lunch; the risk for those systems to go bad is off the charts high.

Re: England vaccine passport plans ditched, health secretary says

#458

Post by 13years »

Straw wrote: post #423
13years wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All the current data suggests something very different. https://www.forbes.com/sites/jemimamcevoy/2021/08/06/fully-v...

I can't find any source in there suggesting a lack of effectiveness. The underlying source linked by the article mentions a reduction of 80% in symptomatic disease, which is responsible for most transmission. I can't find anything very recent, but here's an analysis that takes Delta into account: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/... Finding 80+% protection against symptomatic disease and ~4…

Those estimates are based on modelling with assumptions to fill in missing information. Significant is the assumption of little waning immunity.

Current data trends don't look so optimistic.

https://dailysceptic.org/2021/08/22/latest-phe-data-shows-va...

Re: England vaccine passport plans ditched, health secretary says

#459

Post by void_mint »

MatteoFrigo wrote: post #61
azalemeth wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is very true. I personally find it mad that the UK is the nation with the highest covid infection rate in western europe, with ~30k new cases/day. Long covid is a real, debilitating condition and if anything is going to affect the young -- who are least vaccinated -- the most, thus creating a long-term disease burden and morbidity cost on both those individuals and the country as a whole. Ignoring the human cost…

You have the right to be unhappy. However, looking at the latest data from the UK at https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/... , it is not clear whether pushing for more vaccines will change the situation in any way that makes you happy. For example, that report says that 97% of the blood donors has some kind of antibodies, either from vaccine or previous infection. This number is almost 100% fo…

> For some age groups (Table 4), the vaccinated are more likely to be infected than the unvaccinated.

This is some great lying with statistics. The age ranges you're referencing are groups in which the unvaccinated group is much smaller, insanely small comparatively. Of course a group with almost no people are going to show a reduced rate. You'd find a similar ratio if I took 50k people and split them by whether their name was Steve and then measured the likelihood that either group got covid. The Steve group is definitely going to have a lower rate.

Re: England vaccine passport plans ditched, health secretary says

#460

Post by tonfa »

isoskeles wrote: post #261
tonfa wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems odd given that EU+CH did implement things properly wrt to cryto and trusted certs, but yes I guess there's a possibility that UK messed it up :)

Oh yeah, I don’t know exactly what they’re doing in UK. SMART Health Card is an open standard that requires using ES256 for signing (more here: https://spec.smarthealth.cards/ ). I assumed we were just talking about SHC, but UK could do something outside that standard. These all look the same, like a QR code, but the underlying structure could be different. I believe NY’s Excelsior Pass is also doing something slight…

If you're from the US, that might explain the misunderstanding. The apps in Europe (EU+other countries) have standardized trusted certs roots. So being able to create a qr code doesn't help at all, it won't pass the verifier apps.
Post reply on HN