No Vaccine no NHS job says Chris Whitty

Out of interest, which countries require us to have certain vaccines before we can enter the country? You may be confusing 'recommended' with 'required'?

Also, yellow fever for example, is an extremely fatal disease. Covid on the other hand, isn't

Out of interest, which countries require us to have certain vaccines before we can enter the country? You may be confusing 'recommended' with 'required'?

Also, yellow fever for example, is an extremely fatal disease. Covid on the other hand, isn't

https://www.who.int/ith/2016-ith-county-list.pdf
That's a WHO document listing every country and their vaccination requirements and recommendations in regards to Yellow Fever. Some have no requirements, some are just recommended and others it's a requirement to enter. It's a hefty document so I stopped at E but from a quick scan:
Angola, Burundi, Cameroon, CAR, Chad, Congo, Ivory Coast, DR Congo all require a YF vaccination with no exceptions, many more require one if you've been in an area where Yellow Fever transmission is possible or travelled through an airport in a Yellow Fever zone.

Yellow Fever and Covid are also completely different scenarios. People are infected with Yellow Fever from insect bites, person to person transmission is extremely rare because it requires infected blood entering a non infected person's body. It's fatality rate is extremely high but it's ability to spread is minimal. Covid is the flipside, lower fatality rate but much higher spread.

No jab, no NHS job? Professor Chris Whitty says covid vaccines could be compulsory for medics and care staff because all workers should want to get inoculated voluntarily anyway
Having Covid jab could become compulsory for NHS workers and care workers
Professor Chris Whitty said he expects medics to take the vaccine voluntarily
Only 64 per cent of staff at University Hospitals of Leicester NHS took vaccine

A Covid jab could become compulsory for NHS workers and care home staff, as England's chief medical officer says they have a 'professional responsibility' to get vaccinated.

Speaking on Monday Professor Chris Whitty said he expects doctors and care workers to take the vaccine voluntarily, suggesting that they should want to do anything they can to reduce the risk Covid poses to their patients.

He told the government press briefing: 'My view is clearly for medical staff, where I am subject to the same code, it is a professional responsibility for doctors to do things which help protect their patients, and I expect that to be a professional responsibility for all other health and social care staff as well.'

Despite Professor Whitty's expectations a study earlier this month found that only 64 per cent of staff at University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust had taken up the offer to get their first dose by February 3.

While uptake was 71 per cent in white medics, the highest of any group, it plunged to half this level in black staff. This was despite research showing BAME groups are at higher risk of serious illness and death if they catch the virus.

It was also lower among South Asians, where only 60 per cent had received their first dose.

Doctors at the trust — the only occupation with a majority of BAME employees — were also least likely to get the jab, after only 57 per cent turned up to appointments.

And under-30s were less likely to get the jab than their older colleagues, which experts feared could be down to perceptions they are not at high risk from the virus.

Asked about the results earlier this month, the Health Secretary Matt Hancock called on doctors and nurses to get their jabs saying: 'It's important for your patients and of course it is important for the whole of society that we get this to as many people as possible.'

The comments from Professor Whitty come as Boris Johnson yesterday unveiled an ultra-cautious 'roadmap' out of lockdown by June - with schools reopening in a fortnight but little else set to change for months.

Flanked by Professor Whitty and Patrick Vallance as he defended his long-awaited four-phase exit strategy at a No10 briefing, the PM stated that 'Covid zero' was not possible and the return to normality must begin even though cases will rise.

However, Mr Johnson made clear he was prioritising 'certainty over urgency', saying he is being as 'dynamic as possible in the circumstances' and the 'crocus of hope' is starting to appear.

Professor Whitty and Sir Patrick said there are still very significant numbers of people infected with Covid and going to fast risked the outbreak spiralling again.

Prof Whitty added: 'There is still a lot of people in hospital with this disease. This is not the end, but this is the point where we can have a steady, risk-based, data-driven opening up.

'But everybody must stick to the guidelines as they go through the different stages, because if we don't do that then we will get to a stage where the rates go up very high and you'll find there are people who are not protected by the vaccinations.

'These are not 100 per cent effective, as the Prime Minister said.'

The Government's chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick 'completely' agreed with Prof Whitty, adding: 'The caution of going every five weeks is very important because we need to measure so that we're not flying blind on this.

'We need to know what the impact of the opening up steps are.'

Sir Patrick also suggested that the public needs to be prepared for some restrictions, such as masks, to return next winter.

In the Commons this afternoon, Mr Johnson said the 'threat remains' from the disease and cases, hospitalisations and deaths will rise in the coming months because no vaccines can offer 100 per cent protection for the whole population.

'At every stage our decisions will be led by data not dates,' the premier told MPs.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... hitty.html

Actually he didn't say that in fairness, he said they COULD become compulsory for doctors and care workers, he's just suggesting it COULD happen and that they should be voluntarily taking the vaccines to protect the public.

Posted quickly before fully reading.

very understandable mate.... anything involving restrictions or draconian measures and the excitement gets the better of you....

Well done a sentence I can understand

A load of nonsense as usual but still a step in the right direction

you quite clearly failed to understand the article you posted ...

I understood completely, just the lines from the daily mail were a bit harsh on Whitty so I corrected them, so your back to posting nonsense that doesn't make sense

next time you read an article..re read it.
or even get it explained to you...

Coming from someone who can't string two sentences together and thinks Covid 19 is no worse than the flu

there you go again...no i didnt say that and you know i did not..but i suppose if your misinformation is pulled up time and time again , lying then becomes the default setting for trying to not look twp ..you however did say flu could not kill saying 2 lemsips sorts it and doubled and then trebled down on it , one of quite a long list of very stupid things youve said and done...not least of all going on hols in the middle of a pandemic . ... nice try twisting it though...

No jab, no NHS job? Professor Chris Whitty says covid vaccines could be compulsory for medics and care staff because all workers should want to get inoculated voluntarily anyway
Having Covid jab could become compulsory for NHS workers and care workers
Professor Chris Whitty said he expects medics to take the vaccine voluntarily
Only 64 per cent of staff at University Hospitals of Leicester NHS took vaccine

A Covid jab could become compulsory for NHS workers and care home staff, as England's chief medical officer says they have a 'professional responsibility' to get vaccinated.

Speaking on Monday Professor Chris Whitty said he expects doctors and care workers to take the vaccine voluntarily, suggesting that they should want to do anything they can to reduce the risk Covid poses to their patients.

He told the government press briefing: 'My view is clearly for medical staff, where I am subject to the same code, it is a professional responsibility for doctors to do things which help protect their patients, and I expect that to be a professional responsibility for all other health and social care staff as well.'

Despite Professor Whitty's expectations a study earlier this month found that only 64 per cent of staff at University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust had taken up the offer to get their first dose by February 3.

While uptake was 71 per cent in white medics, the highest of any group, it plunged to half this level in black staff. This was despite research showing BAME groups are at higher risk of serious illness and death if they catch the virus.

It was also lower among South Asians, where only 60 per cent had received their first dose.

Doctors at the trust — the only occupation with a majority of BAME employees — were also least likely to get the jab, after only 57 per cent turned up to appointments.

And under-30s were less likely to get the jab than their older colleagues, which experts feared could be down to perceptions they are not at high risk from the virus.

Asked about the results earlier this month, the Health Secretary Matt Hancock called on doctors and nurses to get their jabs saying: 'It's important for your patients and of course it is important for the whole of society that we get this to as many people as possible.'

The comments from Professor Whitty come as Boris Johnson yesterday unveiled an ultra-cautious 'roadmap' out of lockdown by June - with schools reopening in a fortnight but little else set to change for months.

Flanked by Professor Whitty and Patrick Vallance as he defended his long-awaited four-phase exit strategy at a No10 briefing, the PM stated that 'Covid zero' was not possible and the return to normality must begin even though cases will rise.

However, Mr Johnson made clear he was prioritising 'certainty over urgency', saying he is being as 'dynamic as possible in the circumstances' and the 'crocus of hope' is starting to appear.

Professor Whitty and Sir Patrick said there are still very significant numbers of people infected with Covid and going to fast risked the outbreak spiralling again.

Prof Whitty added: 'There is still a lot of people in hospital with this disease. This is not the end, but this is the point where we can have a steady, risk-based, data-driven opening up.

'But everybody must stick to the guidelines as they go through the different stages, because if we don't do that then we will get to a stage where the rates go up very high and you'll find there are people who are not protected by the vaccinations.

'These are not 100 per cent effective, as the Prime Minister said.'

The Government's chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick 'completely' agreed with Prof Whitty, adding: 'The caution of going every five weeks is very important because we need to measure so that we're not flying blind on this.

'We need to know what the impact of the opening up steps are.'

Sir Patrick also suggested that the public needs to be prepared for some restrictions, such as masks, to return next winter.

In the Commons this afternoon, Mr Johnson said the 'threat remains' from the disease and cases, hospitalisations and deaths will rise in the coming months because no vaccines can offer 100 per cent protection for the whole population.

'At every stage our decisions will be led by data not dates,' the premier told MPs.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... hitty.html

Actually he didn't say that in fairness, he said they COULD become compulsory for doctors and care workers, he's just suggesting it COULD happen and that they should be voluntarily taking the vaccines to protect the public.

Posted quickly before fully reading.

very understandable mate.... anything involving restrictions or draconian measures and the excitement gets the better of you....

Well done a sentence I can understand

A load of nonsense as usual but still a step in the right direction

you quite clearly failed to understand the article you posted ...

I understood completely, just the lines from the daily mail were a bit harsh on Whitty so I corrected them, so your back to posting nonsense that doesn't make sense

next time you read an article..re read it.
or even get it explained to you...

Coming from someone who can't string two sentences together and thinks Covid 19 is no worse than the flu

there you go again...no i didnt say that and you know i did not..but i suppose if your misinformation is pulled up time and time again , lying then becomes the default setting for trying to not look twp ..you however did say flu could not kill saying 2 lemsips sorts it and doubled and then trebled down on it , one of quite a long list of very stupid things youve said and done...not least of all going on hols in the middle of a pandemic . ... nice try twisting it though...

Utter nonsense as usual, you said why are we locking down we don't for flu

No jab, no NHS job? Professor Chris Whitty says covid vaccines could be compulsory for medics and care staff because all workers should want to get inoculated voluntarily anyway
Having Covid jab could become compulsory for NHS workers and care workers
Professor Chris Whitty said he expects medics to take the vaccine voluntarily
Only 64 per cent of staff at University Hospitals of Leicester NHS took vaccine

A Covid jab could become compulsory for NHS workers and care home staff, as England's chief medical officer says they have a 'professional responsibility' to get vaccinated.

Speaking on Monday Professor Chris Whitty said he expects doctors and care workers to take the vaccine voluntarily, suggesting that they should want to do anything they can to reduce the risk Covid poses to their patients.

He told the government press briefing: 'My view is clearly for medical staff, where I am subject to the same code, it is a professional responsibility for doctors to do things which help protect their patients, and I expect that to be a professional responsibility for all other health and social care staff as well.'

Despite Professor Whitty's expectations a study earlier this month found that only 64 per cent of staff at University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust had taken up the offer to get their first dose by February 3.

While uptake was 71 per cent in white medics, the highest of any group, it plunged to half this level in black staff. This was despite research showing BAME groups are at higher risk of serious illness and death if they catch the virus.

It was also lower among South Asians, where only 60 per cent had received their first dose.

Doctors at the trust — the only occupation with a majority of BAME employees — were also least likely to get the jab, after only 57 per cent turned up to appointments.

And under-30s were less likely to get the jab than their older colleagues, which experts feared could be down to perceptions they are not at high risk from the virus.

Asked about the results earlier this month, the Health Secretary Matt Hancock called on doctors and nurses to get their jabs saying: 'It's important for your patients and of course it is important for the whole of society that we get this to as many people as possible.'

The comments from Professor Whitty come as Boris Johnson yesterday unveiled an ultra-cautious 'roadmap' out of lockdown by June - with schools reopening in a fortnight but little else set to change for months.

Flanked by Professor Whitty and Patrick Vallance as he defended his long-awaited four-phase exit strategy at a No10 briefing, the PM stated that 'Covid zero' was not possible and the return to normality must begin even though cases will rise.

However, Mr Johnson made clear he was prioritising 'certainty over urgency', saying he is being as 'dynamic as possible in the circumstances' and the 'crocus of hope' is starting to appear.

Professor Whitty and Sir Patrick said there are still very significant numbers of people infected with Covid and going to fast risked the outbreak spiralling again.

Prof Whitty added: 'There is still a lot of people in hospital with this disease. This is not the end, but this is the point where we can have a steady, risk-based, data-driven opening up.

'But everybody must stick to the guidelines as they go through the different stages, because if we don't do that then we will get to a stage where the rates go up very high and you'll find there are people who are not protected by the vaccinations.

'These are not 100 per cent effective, as the Prime Minister said.'

The Government's chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick 'completely' agreed with Prof Whitty, adding: 'The caution of going every five weeks is very important because we need to measure so that we're not flying blind on this.

'We need to know what the impact of the opening up steps are.'

Sir Patrick also suggested that the public needs to be prepared for some restrictions, such as masks, to return next winter.

In the Commons this afternoon, Mr Johnson said the 'threat remains' from the disease and cases, hospitalisations and deaths will rise in the coming months because no vaccines can offer 100 per cent protection for the whole population.

'At every stage our decisions will be led by data not dates,' the premier told MPs.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/articl ... hitty.html

Actually he didn't say that in fairness, he said they COULD become compulsory for doctors and care workers, he's just suggesting it COULD happen and that they should be voluntarily taking the vaccines to protect the public.

Posted quickly before fully reading.

very understandable mate.... anything involving restrictions or draconian measures and the excitement gets the better of you....

Well done a sentence I can understand

A load of nonsense as usual but still a step in the right direction

you quite clearly failed to understand the article you posted ...

I understood completely, just the lines from the daily mail were a bit harsh on Whitty so I corrected them, so your back to posting nonsense that doesn't make sense

next time you read an article..re read it.
or even get it explained to you...

Coming from someone who can't string two sentences together and thinks Covid 19 is no worse than the flu

there you go again...no i didnt say that and you know i did not..but i suppose if your misinformation is pulled up time and time again , lying then becomes the default setting for trying to not look twp ..you however did say flu could not kill saying 2 lemsips sorts it and doubled and then trebled down on it , one of quite a long list of very stupid things youve said and done...not least of all going on hols in the middle of a pandemic . ... nice try twisting it though...

Utter nonsense as usual, you said why are we locking down we don't for flu

a laughing emoji ? no mate you know exactly what was said...know exactly how stupid you were and a laughing emoji does not change that.... as for lockdown i do not agree with it... but dont make shit up eh.

I have got to say it is alright for people to refuse a vaccine, that is their right, but to my mind these people are thoughtless and inconsiderate to the health of others, BUT anyone who does not have the vaccine and is working with vunerable and ill people , should not be let anywhere near them. no vaccine then no contact. If that means no work then so be it, peoples lives first

It cant be alright in one breath,then thoughtless and inconsiderate in the next surely? As you say,those who wish not to take the jab,have the right to do so,so I guess all new employee's in the care/nursing profession will be required to have it,but for those who have been doing this kind of job for maybe many, many years,it will be difficult to make those people have it, if they choose not to?

I think the point is that you can refuse the jab but don't expect that to be without consequences.

There's talk about needing the jab proof for travelling and employment lawyers are just waiting for the first case of employers making it compulsory (not just health care and NHS).

The thing is, this isn't like just another flu, you don't take 10 days off work if your wife has flu to self-isolate ! So it's likely if you choose not to have the jab you might still get paid/statutory sick pay if you get the virus but unlikely they will pay you for self-isolation even though it may well still be law for you to self-isolate.

This is going to get very messy,especially for the likes of those such as mysef,who on doctors advice,cannot for varying reasons,have the jab.that is discriminatory against some people,who have chosen to follow advice to not take it? As for others who,for whatever reason refuse to take it? Who knows?
But if I to be denied travel,because of my disabilities(and serious allergic reactions are a disability) Then I will not accept it,why would I?

If your doctor also advises you against the Yellow Fever jab then you would also be denied access to multiple counties. Likewise several countries also require you to have had the Polio jab to enter.
Countries can decline you entry for a criminal record, not having a visa, not having a passport, certain occupations like military services, film crews, reporters, etc, some countries will deny you entry if you’ve visited another country they’re not to fond of. Countries have the ability to close their borders and deny you access whenever they want, the USA banned certain passports from entering a few years back and the EU closed their borders last year.

You don’t have the right to visit any country you please free of that nation’s laws. The fact is if for the next 6 months or 12 months or whatever, if a country asks for a Covid vaccine to enter then you have no choice but to accept it. Or enter the country illegally.

What a silly arguement, "no choice to accept it"
I am fully aware of certain countries requirements regards vaccines,and the criminal record etc etc,but to date I have travelled without vaccinations without hindrance,
maybe its because I research the country I am visiting, and if certain requirements are to be met, i.e yellow fever vaccines etc,then I cannot visit there,as the risks are very high for me.I also understand I am at the mercy of every countries laws, outside of the uk.
You are saying these things, as if I am an anti vaxxer for some reason? I am sure people in the same situation as myself, will contest this on grounds of discrimination, and in my personal opinion, rightly so.

So you've researched countries and discovered you aren't able to visit so you don't visit them?
And you understand you're at the mercy of a country's laws prohibiting from visiting?
So which part of "no choice to accept it" is silly? From your own admission it sounds like you've accepted vaccine restrictions before.

I'm not saying these things as if you're an anti vaxxer I'm saying these things as if you're someone who won't have the vaccine, whether that be by choice or not is irrelevant. People have already been in this position for decades and I would be surprised if any regular traveller has successfully won entry to a country on the basis of discrimination.

I shall clarify, when I said "researched" I mean I have checked to see if vaccine is required,before booking a holiday, and then realising I cannot go! So under "normal" times, I have been picky as to which countries I have visited, due to severe allergies,most jabs are dangerous to me,not my fault, but now I guess my list of countries will shrink further still.by the way, I am one of those people who you speak of (in this position for decades) so I guess I now get the point
Strange world eh? Being restricted from free travel etc, due to f@cking allergies, and the risks associated with most vaccines.
Guess I'll have to go on holiday by dinghy from now on ps, why would I expect entry to any country with no passport? (Not covid one) didn't know of any country that just waves you through, unless you are a refugee of course.

You've still not clarified which part of my point "no choice to accept it" is a silly argument.

Why is your view on Covid vaccination "I will not accept it,why would I?" different to any other vaccination "I have checked to see if vaccine is required,before booking a holiday, and then realising I cannot go!"?

Pre Covid, a country has put a vaccination restriction in place which doesn't allow you to visit and you've accepted it. Now with talks of some countries potentially requiring a Covid vaccination to enter you're opposed to such restrictions and are prepared to fight it on grounds of discrimination.

"why would I expect entry to any country with no passport?"
Why do you expect entry to a country with no Covid vaccine if that's their requirement?

1.i said i wouldnt accept it,being discriminated against,NOT the vaccine,the discrimination!!
2.due to my condition,its a pre requisite to check requirements of ANY country I wish to visit,to save me any hassle of booking,then finding out I cannot go,and lose money.
3,its a known FACT you cannot enter ANY country without a passport, whereas I have travelled to date without need for vaccines!
And the "no choice" bit regards compulsory vaccines,well I obviously would avoid these countries,as I have to date.(mostly african countries)some of which I have no plans to visit anyway!so no need to,so yes in a way accepted it.maybe as I have not been restricted in my travels to date,I'm not just going to lie down and accept it??
I jointly own a property in spain,with my brother and sister,so what now,I sell my share and stay home every year? Not to worry,I am sure there wil be stil parts of the world open to myself,and others in same boat!!

I have got to say it is alright for people to refuse a vaccine, that is their right, but to my mind these people are thoughtless and inconsiderate to the health of others, BUT anyone who does not have the vaccine and is working with vunerable and ill people , should not be let anywhere near them. no vaccine then no contact. If that means no work then so be it, peoples lives first

It cant be alright in one breath,then thoughtless and inconsiderate in the next surely? As you say,those who wish not to take the jab,have the right to do so,so I guess all new employee's in the care/nursing profession will be required to have it,but for those who have been doing this kind of job for maybe many, many years,it will be difficult to make those people have it, if they choose not to?

I think the point is that you can refuse the jab but don't expect that to be without consequences.

There's talk about needing the jab proof for travelling and employment lawyers are just waiting for the first case of employers making it compulsory (not just health care and NHS).

The thing is, this isn't like just another flu, you don't take 10 days off work if your wife has flu to self-isolate ! So it's likely if you choose not to have the jab you might still get paid/statutory sick pay if you get the virus but unlikely they will pay you for self-isolation even though it may well still be law for you to self-isolate.

This is going to get very messy,especially for the likes of those such as mysef,who on doctors advice,cannot for varying reasons,have the jab.that is discriminatory against some people,who have chosen to follow advice to not take it? As for others who,for whatever reason refuse to take it? Who knows?
But if I to be denied travel,because of my disabilities(and serious allergic reactions are a disability) Then I will not accept it,why would I?

If your doctor also advises you against the Yellow Fever jab then you would also be denied access to multiple counties. Likewise several countries also require you to have had the Polio jab to enter.
Countries can decline you entry for a criminal record, not having a visa, not having a passport, certain occupations like military services, film crews, reporters, etc, some countries will deny you entry if you’ve visited another country they’re not to fond of. Countries have the ability to close their borders and deny you access whenever they want, the USA banned certain passports from entering a few years back and the EU closed their borders last year.

You don’t have the right to visit any country you please free of that nation’s laws. The fact is if for the next 6 months or 12 months or whatever, if a country asks for a Covid vaccine to enter then you have no choice but to accept it. Or enter the country illegally.

What a silly arguement, "no choice to accept it"
I am fully aware of certain countries requirements regards vaccines,and the criminal record etc etc,but to date I have travelled without vaccinations without hindrance,
maybe its because I research the country I am visiting, and if certain requirements are to be met, i.e yellow fever vaccines etc,then I cannot visit there,as the risks are very high for me.I also understand I am at the mercy of every countries laws, outside of the uk.
You are saying these things, as if I am an anti vaxxer for some reason? I am sure people in the same situation as myself, will contest this on grounds of discrimination, and in my personal opinion, rightly so.

So you've researched countries and discovered you aren't able to visit so you don't visit them?
And you understand you're at the mercy of a country's laws prohibiting from visiting?
So which part of "no choice to accept it" is silly? From your own admission it sounds like you've accepted vaccine restrictions before.

I'm not saying these things as if you're an anti vaxxer I'm saying these things as if you're someone who won't have the vaccine, whether that be by choice or not is irrelevant. People have already been in this position for decades and I would be surprised if any regular traveller has successfully won entry to a country on the basis of discrimination.

I shall clarify, when I said "researched" I mean I have checked to see if vaccine is required,before booking a holiday, and then realising I cannot go! So under "normal" times, I have been picky as to which countries I have visited, due to severe allergies,most jabs are dangerous to me,not my fault, but now I guess my list of countries will shrink further still.by the way, I am one of those people who you speak of (in this position for decades) so I guess I now get the point
Strange world eh? Being restricted from free travel etc, due to f@cking allergies, and the risks associated with most vaccines.
Guess I'll have to go on holiday by dinghy from now on ps, why would I expect entry to any country with no passport? (Not covid one) didn't know of any country that just waves you through, unless you are a refugee of course.

You've still not clarified which part of my point "no choice to accept it" is a silly argument.

Why is your view on Covid vaccination "I will not accept it,why would I?" different to any other vaccination "I have checked to see if vaccine is required,before booking a holiday, and then realising I cannot go!"?

Pre Covid, a country has put a vaccination restriction in place which doesn't allow you to visit and you've accepted it. Now with talks of some countries potentially requiring a Covid vaccination to enter you're opposed to such restrictions and are prepared to fight it on grounds of discrimination.

"why would I expect entry to any country with no passport?"
Why do you expect entry to a country with no Covid vaccine if that's their requirement?

1.i said i wouldnt accept it,being discriminated against,NOT the vaccine,the discrimination!!
2.due to my condition,its a pre requisite to check requirements of ANY country I wish to visit,to save me any hassle of booking,then finding out I cannot go,and lose money.
3,its a known FACT you cannot enter ANY country without a passport, whereas I have travelled to date without need for vaccines!
And the "no choice" bit regards compulsory vaccines,well I obviously would avoid these countries,as I have to date.(mostly african countries)some of which I have no plans to visit anyway!so no need to,so yes in a way accepted it.maybe as I have not been restricted in my travels to date,I'm not just going to lie down and accept it??
I jointly own a property in spain,with my brother and sister,so what now,I sell my share and stay home every year? Not to worry,I am sure there wil be stil parts of the world open to myself,and others in same boat!!

I'm not understanding no.1, what do you mean by you won't accept it? It read in an earlier post like you were saying that you wouldn't accept another country's rules on the COVID vaccination. Are you thinking you can sue another country for refusing you entry? Please explain.

I have got to say it is alright for people to refuse a vaccine, that is their right, but to my mind these people are thoughtless and inconsiderate to the health of others, BUT anyone who does not have the vaccine and is working with vunerable and ill people , should not be let anywhere near them. no vaccine then no contact. If that means no work then so be it, peoples lives first

It cant be alright in one breath,then thoughtless and inconsiderate in the next surely? As you say,those who wish not to take the jab,have the right to do so,so I guess all new employee's in the care/nursing profession will be required to have it,but for those who have been doing this kind of job for maybe many, many years,it will be difficult to make those people have it, if they choose not to?

I think the point is that you can refuse the jab but don't expect that to be without consequences.

There's talk about needing the jab proof for travelling and employment lawyers are just waiting for the first case of employers making it compulsory (not just health care and NHS).

The thing is, this isn't like just another flu, you don't take 10 days off work if your wife has flu to self-isolate ! So it's likely if you choose not to have the jab you might still get paid/statutory sick pay if you get the virus but unlikely they will pay you for self-isolation even though it may well still be law for you to self-isolate.

This is going to get very messy,especially for the likes of those such as mysef,who on doctors advice,cannot for varying reasons,have the jab.that is discriminatory against some people,who have chosen to follow advice to not take it? As for others who,for whatever reason refuse to take it? Who knows?
But if I to be denied travel,because of my disabilities(and serious allergic reactions are a disability) Then I will not accept it,why would I?

If your doctor also advises you against the Yellow Fever jab then you would also be denied access to multiple counties. Likewise several countries also require you to have had the Polio jab to enter.
Countries can decline you entry for a criminal record, not having a visa, not having a passport, certain occupations like military services, film crews, reporters, etc, some countries will deny you entry if you’ve visited another country they’re not to fond of. Countries have the ability to close their borders and deny you access whenever they want, the USA banned certain passports from entering a few years back and the EU closed their borders last year.

You don’t have the right to visit any country you please free of that nation’s laws. The fact is if for the next 6 months or 12 months or whatever, if a country asks for a Covid vaccine to enter then you have no choice but to accept it. Or enter the country illegally.

What a silly arguement, "no choice to accept it"
I am fully aware of certain countries requirements regards vaccines,and the criminal record etc etc,but to date I have travelled without vaccinations without hindrance,
maybe its because I research the country I am visiting, and if certain requirements are to be met, i.e yellow fever vaccines etc,then I cannot visit there,as the risks are very high for me.I also understand I am at the mercy of every countries laws, outside of the uk.
You are saying these things, as if I am an anti vaxxer for some reason? I am sure people in the same situation as myself, will contest this on grounds of discrimination, and in my personal opinion, rightly so.

So you've researched countries and discovered you aren't able to visit so you don't visit them?
And you understand you're at the mercy of a country's laws prohibiting from visiting?
So which part of "no choice to accept it" is silly? From your own admission it sounds like you've accepted vaccine restrictions before.

I'm not saying these things as if you're an anti vaxxer I'm saying these things as if you're someone who won't have the vaccine, whether that be by choice or not is irrelevant. People have already been in this position for decades and I would be surprised if any regular traveller has successfully won entry to a country on the basis of discrimination.

I shall clarify, when I said "researched" I mean I have checked to see if vaccine is required,before booking a holiday, and then realising I cannot go! So under "normal" times, I have been picky as to which countries I have visited, due to severe allergies,most jabs are dangerous to me,not my fault, but now I guess my list of countries will shrink further still.by the way, I am one of those people who you speak of (in this position for decades) so I guess I now get the point
Strange world eh? Being restricted from free travel etc, due to f@cking allergies, and the risks associated with most vaccines.
Guess I'll have to go on holiday by dinghy from now on ps, why would I expect entry to any country with no passport? (Not covid one) didn't know of any country that just waves you through, unless you are a refugee of course.

You've still not clarified which part of my point "no choice to accept it" is a silly argument.

Why is your view on Covid vaccination "I will not accept it,why would I?" different to any other vaccination "I have checked to see if vaccine is required,before booking a holiday, and then realising I cannot go!"?

Pre Covid, a country has put a vaccination restriction in place which doesn't allow you to visit and you've accepted it. Now with talks of some countries potentially requiring a Covid vaccination to enter you're opposed to such restrictions and are prepared to fight it on grounds of discrimination.

"why would I expect entry to any country with no passport?"
Why do you expect entry to a country with no Covid vaccine if that's their requirement?

1.i said i wouldnt accept it,being discriminated against,NOT the vaccine,the discrimination!!
2.due to my condition,its a pre requisite to check requirements of ANY country I wish to visit,to save me any hassle of booking,then finding out I cannot go,and lose money.
3,its a known FACT you cannot enter ANY country without a passport, whereas I have travelled to date without need for vaccines!
And the "no choice" bit regards compulsory vaccines,well I obviously would avoid these countries,as I have to date.(mostly african countries)some of which I have no plans to visit anyway!so no need to,so yes in a way accepted it.maybe as I have not been restricted in my travels to date,I'm not just going to lie down and accept it??
I jointly own a property in spain,with my brother and sister,so what now,I sell my share and stay home every year? Not to worry,I am sure there wil be stil parts of the world open to myself,and others in same boat!!

1. I never said you were refusing the vaccine because of your own opinions. I'm asking why in the past you accepted such requirements but not now? Why is a Covid vaccination requirement discrimination but not Yellow Fever?

2. Like in the previous point. You've researched a country, found out that due to your condition and the country's requirements you can't go, you've then not gone to said country. Again that looks like you've accepted this, why was this not discrimination in the past but it is now?

3. There are many countries you can travel to without a passport. The 26 countries within the Schengen area for example, you could go from Porto to Warsaw to Rome and cross a dozen borders without needing a passport. You can travel to the Republic of Ireland from the UK without a passport too, the USA and Canada also have a similar arrangement. So of the top of my head there's ~30.

"what now,I sell my share and stay home every year?"
No. Because it won't be a permanent measure IF some countries do adopt it and there will be many countries that don't or will have exceptions. Have a test, extra charges, waive certain insurance rights, isolate on arrival/departure, etc.

"I am sure there wil be stil parts of the world open to myself,and others in same boat!!"
There definitely will be, likewise there will also be parts of the world closed off to you as there have been and still will be regardless of Covid.
I would not be surprised if in the next decade both of us will lose and gain access to certain countries due to political reasons, economic booms and collapses, health crisis's, or something else entirely.

There has ALWAYS been parts of the world closed off to myself,due to my condition,and yes, most arent on my "places to go" list,so maybe I've avoided the need to check them thouroughly,
Passports? Are you saying I could travel TO these countries without a passport? As how does that work,as I have to show one when leaving the uk,so wouldnt be allowed to fly.I get the china one,after all it is still one country,the rest? Ill take your word for it.
As forcparts of the world being closed to me,well thats the way it is for myself,and tens of thousands of brits,I'll stick to where I can travel with the knowledge of not having to have certain vaccination documents to do so.

a laughing emoji ? no mate you know exactly what was said...know exactly how stupid you were and a laughing emoji does not change that.... as for lockdown i do not agree with it... but dont make shit up eh.

try and change history if you like, but you were saying they didn't need lockdowns for Hong Kong flu when you were a kid. I explained exactly that's because this is a serious pandemic, the flu is not comparable in the slightest, with the exception of Spanish flu 100 years, that's because we had no medical science!

Waive certain insurance rights? I would not travel to those countries,simple.I have had no problems to date with getting "fully insured" and if there were waivers,I wouldnt travel to those particular places.I carry an EpiPen everywhere I go,and have no problems with getting cover so far, I get it may well change,but doesnt mean I dont feel aggrieved about it? Im not looking for an argument, its just with all the restrictions we have imposed on us through lockdown,this issue makes me angry.

There has ALWAYS been parts of the world closed off to myself,due to my condition,and yes, most arent on my "places to go" list,so maybe I've avoided the need to check them thouroughly,
Passports? Are you saying I could travel TO these countries without a passport? As how does that work,as I have to show one when leaving the uk,so wouldnt be allowed to fly.I get the china one,after all it is still one country,the rest? Ill take your word for it.
As forcparts of the world being closed to me,well thats the way it is for myself,and tens of thousands of brits,I'll stick to where I can travel with the knowledge of not having to have certain vaccination documents to do so.

You can travel to Ireland using bus passes, rail cards, drivers license, health insurance card, birth certificate and a few others without needing to show or even owning a passport. The USA/Canada border also has similar leniencies. As for China? I assume you're referring to the Schengen Area? The Schengen Area is the 26 countries in the EU that allow you to travel between them without a passport, not a region of China.

"There has ALWAYS been parts of the world closed off to myself,due to my condition,and yes, most arent on my "places to go" list"
Maybe I'm being cynical but it reads, like you're only opposed to these measures because they potentially affect you personally and places you want to go. Not because of the general principles of the restriction.
Despite the presumably millions of people in your situation. The fact that several dozen countries on multiple continents still impose vaccine restrictions and have done for years if not decades, leads me to believe any restrictions you try to fight on grounds of discrimination will be completely ineffective.

a laughing emoji ? no mate you know exactly what was said...know exactly how stupid you were and a laughing emoji does not change that.... as for lockdown i do not agree with it... but dont make shit up eh.[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]

try and change history if you like, but you were saying they didn't need lockdowns for Hong Kong flu when you were a kid. I explained exactly that's because this is a serious pandemic, the flu is not comparable in the slightest, with the exception of Spanish flu 100 years, that's because we had no medical science![/quote]


So are you saying the 30k+ that died from hong kong flu in the uk,is irrelevant?? As it wasnt "A serious" episode then? Flu has been around for a lot longer,but still kills 100's of thousands every year worldwide,I'm sorry but flu is a serious epidemic,and is a killer.we now have plenty of "medical science" but cannot beat it.I fear the same will become the case with covid,due to its continuous mutating, as with flu.(they chabge the jab formula,every year in an effort to control it.

a laughing emoji ? no mate you know exactly what was said...know exactly how stupid you were and a laughing emoji does not change that.... as for lockdown i do not agree with it... but dont make shit up eh.

[/quote][/quote][/quote]

try and change history if you like, but you were saying they didn't need lockdowns for Hong Kong flu when you were a kid. I explained exactly that's because this is a serious pandemic, the flu is not comparable in the slightest, with the exception of Spanish flu 100 years, that's because we had no medical science![/quote]


So are you saying the 30k+ that died from hong kong flu in the uk,is irrelevant?? As it wasnt "A serious" episode then? Flu has been around for a lot longer,but still kills 100's of thousands every year worldwide,I'm sorry but flu is a serious epidemic,and is a killer.we now have plenty of "medical science" but cannot beat it.I fear the same will become the case with covid,due to its continuous mutating, as with flu.(they chabge the jab formula,every year in an effort to control it.[/quote]

It's been done to death but the flu is the flu, we all know what it is and live with it, we haven't locked down for it because it's the flu. Covid-19 has caused the World to stop and is far more of a problem than the flu.

I didn't say it was irrelevant, I said this is far more infectious and even with the World locking down, it is still spreading and is killing people, flu is not the same as covid 19 or as vigilant.

a laughing emoji ? no mate you know exactly what was said...know exactly how stupid you were and a laughing emoji does not change that.... as for lockdown i do not agree with it... but dont make shit up eh.

[/quote][/quote]

try and change history if you like, but you were saying they didn't need lockdowns for Hong Kong flu when you were a kid. I explained exactly that's because this is a serious pandemic, the flu is not comparable in the slightest, with the exception of Spanish flu 100 years, that's because we had no medical science![/quote]


So are you saying the 30k+ that died from hong kong flu in the uk,is irrelevant?? As it wasnt "A serious" episode then? Flu has been around for a lot longer,but still kills 100's of thousands every year worldwide,I'm sorry but flu is a serious epidemic,and is a killer.we now have plenty of "medical science" but cannot beat it.I fear the same will become the case with covid,due to its continuous mutating, as with flu.(they chabge the jab formula,every year in an effort to control it.[/quote]

It's been done to death but the flu is the flu, we all know what it is and live with it, we haven't locked down for it because it's the flu. Covid-19 has caused the World to stop and is far more of a problem than the flu.

I didn't say it was irrelevant, I said this is far more infectious and even with the World locking down, it is still spreading and is killing people, flu is not the same as covid 19 or as vigilant.[/quote]

virulent

There has ALWAYS been parts of the world closed off to myself,due to my condition,and yes, most arent on my "places to go" list,so maybe I've avoided the need to check them thouroughly,
Passports? Are you saying I could travel TO these countries without a passport? As how does that work,as I have to show one when leaving the uk,so wouldnt be allowed to fly.I get the china one,after all it is still one country,the rest? Ill take your word for it.
As forcparts of the world being closed to me,well thats the way it is for myself,and tens of thousands of brits,I'll stick to where I can travel with the knowledge of not having to have certain vaccination documents to do so.

Countries like Greece have a cheek mind, we will need a vaccine passport, yet virtually none of their citizens have been vaccinated?

We should ban World wide travel for a year to let them catch up, otherwise we will be bringing back the Greek and Turkish variants!

No Vaccine No Job in direct care of patients , those who cannot have Vaccine on health or moral grounds they move to non patient contact roles only , not enough job operational role , offer staff early redundancy package .

There has ALWAYS been parts of the world closed off to myself,due to my condition,and yes, most arent on my "places to go" list,so maybe I've avoided the need to check them thouroughly,
Passports? Are you saying I could travel TO these countries without a passport? As how does that work,as I have to show one when leaving the uk,so wouldnt be allowed to fly.I get the china one,after all it is still one country,the rest? Ill take your word for it.
As forcparts of the world being closed to me,well thats the way it is for myself,and tens of thousands of brits,I'll stick to where I can travel with the knowledge of not having to have certain vaccination documents to do so.

You can travel to Ireland using bus passes, rail cards, drivers license, health insurance card, birth certificate and a few others without needing to show or even owning a passport. The USA/Canada border also has similar leniencies. As for China? I assume you're referring to the Schengen Area? The Schengen Area is the 26 countries in the EU that allow you to travel between them without a passport, not a region of China.

"There has ALWAYS been parts of the world closed off to myself,due to my condition,and yes, most arent on my "places to go" list"
Maybe I'm being cynical but it reads, like you're only opposed to these measures because they potentially affect you personally and places you want to go. Not because of the general principles of the restriction.
Despite the presumably millions of people in your situation. The fact that several dozen countries on multiple continents still impose vaccine restrictions and have done for years if not decades, leads me to believe any restrictions you try to fight on grounds of discrimination will be completely ineffective.

Yes you are being cynical, this is not just about myself! But there is a difference between recommended vaccines, and mandatory vaccines, and those countries I would avoid, for aforementioned reasons,is it discrimination in your eyes? Maybe not.
And I'm not afraid of losing a fight, if it helps others in such circumstances. I don't believe there should be restrictions in place for people "unable" to take a vaccine.why not do regular testing on us,as even with the jab,nobody is 100% safe.
And you can still catch,and spread the virus,even after being jabbed.maybe ban travel for this year,and see where the world is then?

There has ALWAYS been parts of the world closed off to myself,due to my condition,and yes, most arent on my "places to go" list,so maybe I've avoided the need to check them thouroughly,
Passports? Are you saying I could travel TO these countries without a passport? As how does that work,as I have to show one when leaving the uk,so wouldnt be allowed to fly.I get the china one,after all it is still one country,the rest? Ill take your word for it.
As forcparts of the world being closed to me,well thats the way it is for myself,and tens of thousands of brits,I'll stick to where I can travel with the knowledge of not having to have certain vaccination documents to do so.

You can travel to Ireland using bus passes, rail cards, drivers license, health insurance card, birth certificate and a few others without needing to show or even owning a passport. The USA/Canada border also has similar leniencies. As for China? I assume you're referring to the Schengen Area? The Schengen Area is the 26 countries in the EU that allow you to travel between them without a passport, not a region of China.

"There has ALWAYS been parts of the world closed off to myself,due to my condition,and yes, most arent on my "places to go" list"
Maybe I'm being cynical but it reads, like you're only opposed to these measures because they potentially affect you personally and places you want to go. Not because of the general principles of the restriction.
Despite the presumably millions of people in your situation. The fact that several dozen countries on multiple continents still impose vaccine restrictions and have done for years if not decades, leads me to believe any restrictions you try to fight on grounds of discrimination will be completely ineffective.

Yes you are being cynical, this is not just about myself! But there is a difference between recommended vaccines, and mandatory vaccines, and those countries I would avoid, for aforementioned reasons,is it discrimination in your eyes? Maybe not.
And I'm not afraid of losing a fight, if it helps others in such circumstances. I don't believe there should be restrictions in place for people "unable" to take a vaccine.why not do regular testing on us,as even with the jab,nobody is 100% safe.
And you can still catch,and spread the virus,even after being jabbed.maybe ban travel for this year,and see where the world is then?

"this is not just about myself"
Except you had no qualms about countries imposing mandatory vaccinations because they were places you didn't want to go? Now that it directly effects you you want to fight it?

"there is a difference between recommended vaccines, and mandatory vaccines"
I've not claimed they're the same thing. But there are dozens of countries that already have mandatory vaccination requirements and have done long before Covid was a thing. The WHO document I left a link to was composed in 2016 and there are multiple countries where a Yellow Fever vaccination is a requirement not a recommendation.


Do you think not allowing people under a certain height on rollercoasters is discrimination?
Do you think not allowing people over a certain weight limit on helicopters or bungee jumps is discrimination?
Do you think not allowing a blind person blind to fly a plane or drive a bus is discrimination?
Do you think not allowing someone who is Covid positive to visit a care home is discrimination?

If you do think any of the above are discriminatory, which ones and why? If you don't think they are examples of discrimination then explain why you think your situation is different.
Discrimination is the unjust treatment of people, personally I don't think the above restrictions would be considered unjust. They're precautions put in place for the safety of the person in question as well as the safety of others.

"why not do regular testing on us,as even with the jab,nobody is 100% safe.
And you can still catch,and spread the virus,even after being jabbed"

You can also still die in a car crash despite being under the speed limit, protected by an airbag and wearing a seatbelt. The chances of it though are severely reduced. It's the same thing with the virus and vaccinations.

There has ALWAYS been parts of the world closed off to myself,due to my condition,and yes, most arent on my "places to go" list,so maybe I've avoided the need to check them thouroughly,
Passports? Are you saying I could travel TO these countries without a passport? As how does that work,as I have to show one when leaving the uk,so wouldnt be allowed to fly.I get the china one,after all it is still one country,the rest? Ill take your word for it.
As forcparts of the world being closed to me,well thats the way it is for myself,and tens of thousands of brits,I'll stick to where I can travel with the knowledge of not having to have certain vaccination documents to do so.

You can travel to Ireland using bus passes, rail cards, drivers license, health insurance card, birth certificate and a few others without needing to show or even owning a passport. The USA/Canada border also has similar leniencies. As for China? I assume you're referring to the Schengen Area? The Schengen Area is the 26 countries in the EU that allow you to travel between them without a passport, not a region of China.

"There has ALWAYS been parts of the world closed off to myself,due to my condition,and yes, most arent on my "places to go" list"
Maybe I'm being cynical but it reads, like you're only opposed to these measures because they potentially affect you personally and places you want to go. Not because of the general principles of the restriction.
Despite the presumably millions of people in your situation. The fact that several dozen countries on multiple continents still impose vaccine restrictions and have done for years if not decades, leads me to believe any restrictions you try to fight on grounds of discrimination will be completely ineffective.

Yes you are being cynical, this is not just about myself! But there is a difference between recommended vaccines, and mandatory vaccines, and those countries I would avoid, for aforementioned reasons,is it discrimination in your eyes? Maybe not.
And I'm not afraid of losing a fight, if it helps others in such circumstances. I don't believe there should be restrictions in place for people "unable" to take a vaccine.why not do regular testing on us,as even with the jab,nobody is 100% safe.
And you can still catch,and spread the virus,even after being jabbed.maybe ban travel for this year,and see where the world is then?

"this is not just about myself"
Except you had no qualms about countries imposing mandatory vaccinations because they were places you didn't want to go? Now that it directly effects you you want to fight it?

"there is a difference between recommended vaccines, and mandatory vaccines"
I've not claimed they're the same thing. But there are dozens of countries that already have mandatory vaccination requirements and have done long before Covid was a thing. The WHO document I left a link to was composed in 2016 and there are multiple countries where a Yellow Fever vaccination is a requirement not a recommendation.


Do you think not allowing people under a certain height on rollercoasters is discrimination?
Do you think not allowing people over a certain weight limit on helicopters or bungee jumps is discrimination?
Do you think not allowing a blind person blind to fly a plane or drive a bus is discrimination?
Do you think not allowing someone who is Covid positive to visit a care home is discrimination?

If you do think any of the above are discriminatory, which ones and why? If you don't think they are examples of discrimination then explain why you think your situation is different.
Discrimination is the unjust treatment of people, personally I don't think the above restrictions would be considered unjust. They're precautions put in place for the safety of the person in question as well as the safety of others.

"why not do regular testing on us,as even with the jab,nobody is 100% safe.
And you can still catch,and spread the virus,even after being jabbed"

You can also still die in a car crash despite being under the speed limit, protected by an airbag and wearing a seatbelt. The chances of it though are severely reduced. It's the same thing with the virus and vaccinations.

I do not have to explain anything and by answering your daft questions regarding not letting blind peoplet fly etc I'm entering into argumentative territory, so I'll leave it here.I simply do not have the time to explain myself on a topic that could rage on for days.thanks for your posts though,I appreciate your view on vaccines, but tbh, not one of the countries you have mentioned are on my personal bucket list,so really haven't the need to check their vaccine requirements.so do I get my money back for what may be a useless passport?

There has ALWAYS been parts of the world closed off to myself,due to my condition,and yes, most arent on my "places to go" list,so maybe I've avoided the need to check them thouroughly,
Passports? Are you saying I could travel TO these countries without a passport? As how does that work,as I have to show one when leaving the uk,so wouldnt be allowed to fly.I get the china one,after all it is still one country,the rest? Ill take your word for it.
As forcparts of the world being closed to me,well thats the way it is for myself,and tens of thousands of brits,I'll stick to where I can travel with the knowledge of not having to have certain vaccination documents to do so.

You can travel to Ireland using bus passes, rail cards, drivers license, health insurance card, birth certificate and a few others without needing to show or even owning a passport. The USA/Canada border also has similar leniencies. As for China? I assume you're referring to the Schengen Area? The Schengen Area is the 26 countries in the EU that allow you to travel between them without a passport, not a region of China.

"There has ALWAYS been parts of the world closed off to myself,due to my condition,and yes, most arent on my "places to go" list"
Maybe I'm being cynical but it reads, like you're only opposed to these measures because they potentially affect you personally and places you want to go. Not because of the general principles of the restriction.
Despite the presumably millions of people in your situation. The fact that several dozen countries on multiple continents still impose vaccine restrictions and have done for years if not decades, leads me to believe any restrictions you try to fight on grounds of discrimination will be completely ineffective.

Yes you are being cynical, this is not just about myself! But there is a difference between recommended vaccines, and mandatory vaccines, and those countries I would avoid, for aforementioned reasons,is it discrimination in your eyes? Maybe not.
And I'm not afraid of losing a fight, if it helps others in such circumstances. I don't believe there should be restrictions in place for people "unable" to take a vaccine.why not do regular testing on us,as even with the jab,nobody is 100% safe.
And you can still catch,and spread the virus,even after being jabbed.maybe ban travel for this year,and see where the world is then?

"this is not just about myself"
Except you had no qualms about countries imposing mandatory vaccinations because they were places you didn't want to go? Now that it directly effects you you want to fight it?

"there is a difference between recommended vaccines, and mandatory vaccines"
I've not claimed they're the same thing. But there are dozens of countries that already have mandatory vaccination requirements and have done long before Covid was a thing. The WHO document I left a link to was composed in 2016 and there are multiple countries where a Yellow Fever vaccination is a requirement not a recommendation.


Do you think not allowing people under a certain height on rollercoasters is discrimination?
Do you think not allowing people over a certain weight limit on helicopters or bungee jumps is discrimination?
Do you think not allowing a blind person blind to fly a plane or drive a bus is discrimination?
Do you think not allowing someone who is Covid positive to visit a care home is discrimination?

If you do think any of the above are discriminatory, which ones and why? If you don't think they are examples of discrimination then explain why you think your situation is different.
Discrimination is the unjust treatment of people, personally I don't think the above restrictions would be considered unjust. They're precautions put in place for the safety of the person in question as well as the safety of others.

"why not do regular testing on us,as even with the jab,nobody is 100% safe.
And you can still catch,and spread the virus,even after being jabbed"

You can also still die in a car crash despite being under the speed limit, protected by an airbag and wearing a seatbelt. The chances of it though are severely reduced. It's the same thing with the virus and vaccinations.

I do not have to explain anything and by answering your daft questions regarding not letting blind peoplet fly etc I'm entering into argumentative territory, so I'll leave it here.I simply do not have the time to explain myself on a topic that could rage on for days.thanks for your posts though,I appreciate your view on vaccines, but tbh, not one of the countries you have mentioned are on my personal bucket list,so really haven't the need to check their vaccine requirements.so do I get my money back for what may be a useless passport?

It will probably be the most visited countries like Spain and Greece and I would imagine the big airlines will use them, but lets wait see the results from Boris's review!

a laughing emoji ? no mate you know exactly what was said...know exactly how stupid you were and a laughing emoji does not change that.... as for lockdown i do not agree with it... but dont make shit up eh.

[/quote][/quote][/quote]

try and change history if you like, but you were saying they didn't need lockdowns for Hong Kong flu when you were a kid. I explained exactly that's because this is a serious pandemic, the flu is not comparable in the slightest, with the exception of Spanish flu 100 years, that's because we had no medical science![/quote]


So are you saying the 30k+ that died from hong kong flu in the uk,is irrelevant?? As it wasnt "A serious" episode then? Flu has been around for a lot longer,but still kills 100's of thousands every year worldwide,I'm sorry but flu is a serious epidemic,and is a killer.we now have plenty of "medical science" but cannot beat it.I fear the same will become the case with covid,due to its continuous mutating, as with flu.(they chabge the jab formula,every year in an effort to control it.[/quote]


Peston's show had some facts on flu, before 2000, flu deaths were in the region of 40,000 a year, but that changed from 2000 to around 20,000.

What changed?

Free VACCINATIONS for the over 65's.

It's been done to death but the flu is the flu

You're right it has been covered but by doubling, tripling down on the fact that you don't understand the difference between a flu pandemic and bad seasonal you are seriously undermining every other position you put forward.

Personally, I'm happy to run with this logic as it gets Covid down to same level as a bad cold season, which means we can end these damn lockdowns.

I'm not sure that's the point your intending to make, but it is 100% the outcome of you're logic

On the plus side we've now completley cured flu apparently as if thats not slightly suspicious


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.indepe ... html%3famp

It's been done to death but the flu is the flu

You're right it has been covered but by doubling, tripling down on the fact that you don't understand the difference between a flu pandemic and bad seasonal you are seriously undermining every other position you put forward.

Personally, I'm happy to run with this logic as it gets Covid down to same level as a bad cold season, which means we can end these damn lockdowns.

I'm not sure that's the point your intending to make, but it is 100% the outcome of you're logic

On the plus side we've now completley cured flu apparently as if thats not slightly suspicious


https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.indepe ... html%3famp

Interesting article, the main point to take away is the R rate for Flu is 1.3 to 1.5 and Covid 19 is 2.5 to 3, which is the problem it's twice as transmissible that's why we needed massive measures to stop the NHS from completely collapsing, it's pretty much failed to cope even with these total lockdowns and all the rest of the measures. Plus why I was saying flu is not an issue any more is because we had a vaccine, which has already reduced the numbers significantly.

The reasons it's died out are clear, the measures, vaccines and fact it's no where near as transmissible have all but killed it off for this year, take away those measures it will be back with a vengeance next year no doubt.

I still don't think that Hong Kong Flu season compares with Corona?

The Spanish flu was similar to this but then we just had to ride it out we didn't have any real medical intervention that could be applied to counteract it!

Interesting article, the main point to take away is the R rate for Flu is 1.3 to 1.5 and Covid 19 is 2.5 to 3, which is the problem it's twice as transmissible

The reasons it's died out are clear, the measures, vaccines and fact it's no where near as transmissible have all but killed it off for this year, take away those measures it will be back with a vengeance next year no doubt.

If we were talking about a slight reduction you'd have an argument. We are talking about elimination and that is far less feasible. Almost certainly what is more probable is that flu is being misdiagnosed as COVID.

I'm a big believer in Occam's razor - the idea that requires the smallest number of assumptions is usually correct.

I still don't think that Hong Kong Flu season compares with Corona?

Why?

According to WHO HK Flu killed up to 4M globally COVID is around 2.5M so on that scale absoltuley comparable.
Hong Kong Flu was a new strain of influenza H3N2 COVID19 is a new strain of corona virus (i.e. common cold)
Both were labeled pandemic by all international medical bodies.

The fact that you keep calling it a flu season doesn't change any of this.

I think deep down you know the answer but it's a mighty big hill to climb back down from you've managed to get yourself up on there....

Interesting article, the main point to take away is the R rate for Flu is 1.3 to 1.5 and Covid 19 is 2.5 to 3, which is the problem it's twice as transmissible

The reasons it's died out are clear, the measures, vaccines and fact it's no where near as transmissible have all but killed it off for this year, take away those measures it will be back with a vengeance next year no doubt.

If we were talking about a slight reduction you'd have an argument. We are talking about elimination and that is far less feasible. Almost certainly what is more probable is that flu is being misdiagnosed as COVID.

I'm a big believer in Occam's razor - the idea that requires the smallest number of assumptions is usually correct.

I still don't think that Hong Kong Flu season compares with Corona?

Why?

According to WHO HK Flu killed up to 4M globally COVID is around 2.5M so on that scale absoltuley comparable.
Hong Kong Flu was a new strain of influenza H3N2 COVID19 is a new strain of corona virus (i.e. common cold)
Both were labeled pandemic by all international medical bodies.

The fact that you keep calling it a flu season doesn't change any of this.

I think deep down you know the answer but it's a mighty big hill to climb back down from you've managed to get yourself up on there....

I don't want to underplay it, it was bad more likely 1 Million deaths worldwide and 80,000 in the UK, a normal flu season then was around 40,000.

Covid 19 with all the massive measures which were enough to eliminate flu. 2.5 Million deaths and 122,000 so far and still raging around the World, although the vaccine will now have an impact on the total numbers.

My point has been replying to we didn't need measures in 1967 why do we need them now, it's obvious why, this is twice as transmissible and Worldwide travel has sent it to every corner of the World in weeks.

I respect your views but would couldn't have just let this rip like we did with HK Flu


Mortality
The estimates of the total death toll due to Hong Kong flu (from its beginning in July 1968 until the outbreak faded during the winter of 1969–70[30]) vary:

The World Health Organization and Encyclopaedia Britannica estimated the number of deaths due to Hong Kong flu to be 1–4 million globally.[2][16]
The United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that in total, the virus caused deaths of 1 million people worldwide.[31]
However, the death rate from the Hong Kong flu was lower than most other 20th-century pandemics.[15] The World Health Organization estimated the case fatality rate of Hong Kong flu to be lower than 0.2%.[2] The disease was allowed to spread through the population without restrictions on economic activity, and a vaccine created by American microbiologist Maurice Hilleman and his team became available four months after it had started.[22][23][24] Fewer people died during this pandemic than in previous pandemics for several reasons:[31]

Some immunity against the N2 flu virus may have been retained in populations struck by the Asian Flu strains that had been circulating since 1957.
The pandemic did not gain momentum until near the winter school holidays in the Northern Hemisphere, thus limiting the infection's spread.
Improved medical care gave vital support to the very ill.
The availability of antibiotics that were more effective against secondary bacterial infections.
By region
For this pandemic, there were two geographically-distinct mortality patterns. In North America (the United States and Canada), the first pandemic season (1968/69) was more severe than the second (1969/70). In the "smoldering" pattern seen in Europe and Asia (United Kingdom, France, Japan, and Australia), the second pandemic season was two to five times more severe than the first.[26] The United States health authorities estimated that about 34,000[32][33] to 100,000[31] people died in the U.S; most excess deaths were in those 65 and older.[34]

1968 flu pandemic, also called Hong Kong flu pandemic of 1968 or Hong Kong flu of 1968, global outbreak of influenza that originated in China in July 1968 and lasted until 1969–70. The outbreak was the third influenza pandemic to occur in the 20th century; it followed the 1957 flu pandemic and the influenza pandemic of 1918–19. The 1968 flu pandemic resulted in an estimated one million to four million deaths.

There has ALWAYS been parts of the world closed off to myself,due to my condition,and yes, most arent on my "places to go" list,so maybe I've avoided the need to check them thouroughly,
Passports? Are you saying I could travel TO these countries without a passport? As how does that work,as I have to show one when leaving the uk,so wouldnt be allowed to fly.I get the china one,after all it is still one country,the rest? Ill take your word for it.
As forcparts of the world being closed to me,well thats the way it is for myself,and tens of thousands of brits,I'll stick to where I can travel with the knowledge of not having to have certain vaccination documents to do so.

You can travel to Ireland using bus passes, rail cards, drivers license, health insurance card, birth certificate and a few others without needing to show or even owning a passport. The USA/Canada border also has similar leniencies. As for China? I assume you're referring to the Schengen Area? The Schengen Area is the 26 countries in the EU that allow you to travel between them without a passport, not a region of China.

"There has ALWAYS been parts of the world closed off to myself,due to my condition,and yes, most arent on my "places to go" list"
Maybe I'm being cynical but it reads, like you're only opposed to these measures because they potentially affect you personally and places you want to go. Not because of the general principles of the restriction.
Despite the presumably millions of people in your situation. The fact that several dozen countries on multiple continents still impose vaccine restrictions and have done for years if not decades, leads me to believe any restrictions you try to fight on grounds of discrimination will be completely ineffective.

Yes you are being cynical, this is not just about myself! But there is a difference between recommended vaccines, and mandatory vaccines, and those countries I would avoid, for aforementioned reasons,is it discrimination in your eyes? Maybe not.
And I'm not afraid of losing a fight, if it helps others in such circumstances. I don't believe there should be restrictions in place for people "unable" to take a vaccine.why not do regular testing on us,as even with the jab,nobody is 100% safe.
And you can still catch,and spread the virus,even after being jabbed.maybe ban travel for this year,and see where the world is then?

"this is not just about myself"
Except you had no qualms about countries imposing mandatory vaccinations because they were places you didn't want to go? Now that it directly effects you you want to fight it?

"there is a difference between recommended vaccines, and mandatory vaccines"
I've not claimed they're the same thing. But there are dozens of countries that already have mandatory vaccination requirements and have done long before Covid was a thing. The WHO document I left a link to was composed in 2016 and there are multiple countries where a Yellow Fever vaccination is a requirement not a recommendation.


Do you think not allowing people under a certain height on rollercoasters is discrimination?
Do you think not allowing people over a certain weight limit on helicopters or bungee jumps is discrimination?
Do you think not allowing a blind person blind to fly a plane or drive a bus is discrimination?
Do you think not allowing someone who is Covid positive to visit a care home is discrimination?

If you do think any of the above are discriminatory, which ones and why? If you don't think they are examples of discrimination then explain why you think your situation is different.
Discrimination is the unjust treatment of people, personally I don't think the above restrictions would be considered unjust. They're precautions put in place for the safety of the person in question as well as the safety of others.

"why not do regular testing on us,as even with the jab,nobody is 100% safe.
And you can still catch,and spread the virus,even after being jabbed"

You can also still die in a car crash despite being under the speed limit, protected by an airbag and wearing a seatbelt. The chances of it though are severely reduced. It's the same thing with the virus and vaccinations.

I do not have to explain anything and by answering your daft questions regarding not letting blind peoplet fly etc I'm entering into argumentative territory, so I'll leave it here.I simply do not have the time to explain myself on a topic that could rage on for days.thanks for your posts though,I appreciate your view on vaccines, but tbh, not one of the countries you have mentioned are on my personal bucket list,so really haven't the need to check their vaccine requirements.so do I get my money back for what may be a useless passport?

Well I think I've got my answer

I respect your views but would couldn't have just let this rip like we did with HK Flu

Likewise, disagree with you on a lot of this, but equally appreciate the consistency both in your position and also in the courtesy of your responses

Mortality
The estimates of the total death toll due to Hong Kong flu (from its beginning in July 1968 until the outbreak faded during the winter of 1969–70[30]) vary:

The World Health Organization and Encyclopaedia Britannica estimated the number of deaths due to Hong Kong flu to be 1–4 million globally.[2][16]
The United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that in total, the virus caused deaths of 1 million people worldwide.[31]
However, the death rate from the Hong Kong flu was lower than most other 20th-century pandemics.[15] The World Health Organization estimated the case fatality rate of Hong Kong flu to be lower than 0.2%.[2] The disease was allowed to spread through the population without restrictions on economic activity, and a vaccine created by American microbiologist Maurice Hilleman and his team became available four months after it had started.[22][23][24] Fewer people died during this pandemic than in previous pandemics for several reasons:[31]

Some immunity against the N2 flu virus may have been retained in populations struck by the Asian Flu strains that had been circulating since 1957.
The pandemic did not gain momentum until near the winter school holidays in the Northern Hemisphere, thus limiting the infection's spread.
Improved medical care gave vital support to the very ill.
The availability of antibiotics that were more effective against secondary bacterial infections.
By region
For this pandemic, there were two geographically-distinct mortality patterns. In North America (the United States and Canada), the first pandemic season (1968/69) was more severe than the second (1969/70). In the "smoldering" pattern seen in Europe and Asia (United Kingdom, France, Japan, and Australia), the second pandemic season was two to five times more severe than the first.[26] The United States health authorities estimated that about 34,000[32][33] to 100,000[31] people died in the U.S; most excess deaths were in those 65 and older.[34]

1968 flu pandemic, also called Hong Kong flu pandemic of 1968 or Hong Kong flu of 1968, global outbreak of influenza that originated in China in July 1968 and lasted until 1969–70. The outbreak was the third influenza pandemic to occur in the 20th century; it followed the 1957 flu pandemic and the influenza pandemic of 1918–19. The 1968 flu pandemic resulted in an estimated one million to four million deaths.

So we can agree it was a pandemic then, rather than a just nasty flu season. It is a start...

I respect your views but would couldn't have just let this rip like we did with HK Flu

Likewise, disagree with you on a lot of this, but equally appreciate the consistency both in your position and also in the courtesy of your responses

Mortality
The estimates of the total death toll due to Hong Kong flu (from its beginning in July 1968 until the outbreak faded during the winter of 1969–70[30]) vary:

The World Health Organization and Encyclopaedia Britannica estimated the number of deaths due to Hong Kong flu to be 1–4 million globally.[2][16]
The United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated that in total, the virus caused deaths of 1 million people worldwide.[31]
However, the death rate from the Hong Kong flu was lower than most other 20th-century pandemics.[15] The World Health Organization estimated the case fatality rate of Hong Kong flu to be lower than 0.2%.[2] The disease was allowed to spread through the population without restrictions on economic activity, and a vaccine created by American microbiologist Maurice Hilleman and his team became available four months after it had started.[22][23][24] Fewer people died during this pandemic than in previous pandemics for several reasons:[31]

Some immunity against the N2 flu virus may have been retained in populations struck by the Asian Flu strains that had been circulating since 1957.
The pandemic did not gain momentum until near the winter school holidays in the Northern Hemisphere, thus limiting the infection's spread.
Improved medical care gave vital support to the very ill.
The availability of antibiotics that were more effective against secondary bacterial infections.
By region
For this pandemic, there were two geographically-distinct mortality patterns. In North America (the United States and Canada), the first pandemic season (1968/69) was more severe than the second (1969/70). In the "smoldering" pattern seen in Europe and Asia (United Kingdom, France, Japan, and Australia), the second pandemic season was two to five times more severe than the first.[26] The United States health authorities estimated that about 34,000[32][33] to 100,000[31] people died in the U.S; most excess deaths were in those 65 and older.[34]

1968 flu pandemic, also called Hong Kong flu pandemic of 1968 or Hong Kong flu of 1968, global outbreak of influenza that originated in China in July 1968 and lasted until 1969–70. The outbreak was the third influenza pandemic to occur in the 20th century; it followed the 1957 flu pandemic and the influenza pandemic of 1918–19. The 1968 flu pandemic resulted in an estimated one million to four million deaths.

So we can agree it was a pandemic then, rather than a just nasty flu season. It is a start...

Aye I'll give you that