Returning to St Marys

[waylander]

It also disproportionally affects those with Special Educational Needs, so you are at much greater risk than you think. 

[Noodles34]

1 hour ago, Lighthouse said:

Smoking is banned in almost all public and commercial buildings. By that measure it is in fact a lot like Covid passports.

Driving is a necessary part of daily life, being unvaccinated isn't. There are also laws governing all the major factors in road deaths; speed, drug and alcohol use, MOT requirements, driving tests, bans for point accumulation, seat belts. Driving is much MORE tightly regulated than simply needing a vaccine.

I can't believe this still has to be explained but it simply isn't true. There is still risk to people, even if they're fully vaccinated, the whole point is to bring deaths down to a level which are comparable to a bad flu season. That number will depend largely on what percentage of the population is vaccinated and what percentage is walking around, spreading disease and acting as a living petri-dish for new variants to develop.

 

Nobody is forcing you to get vaccinated but if you don't then you have a hand in killing people, whether you'd like to admit that or not.

A hand in killing people, seriously? What an fuckwit thing to say. 

[Lord Duckhunter]

Surely the simplest solution is vaccination or proof of a negative result within 48 hours of game.

Either that or a Covid stand. All the non vaccinated could be herded into the chapel. We allow skate in previously  so we’re used to policing   disease ridden people

[Lighthouse]

45 minutes ago, Noodles34 said:

A hand in killing people, seriously? What an fuckwit thing to say. 

Yes. Seriously.

[Noodles34]

2 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

Yes. Seriously.

How does that work then? 
Everyone that really needs a vaccine has one, that was always the objective wasn’t it? So how do people then die. And yeah, I know that it’s not 100% but it pretty damn near to it. So not sure how those who object end up killing people? 

[waylander]

38 minutes ago, Noodles34 said:

How does that work then? 
Everyone that really needs a vaccine has one, that was always the objective wasn’t it? So how do people then die. And yeah, I know that it’s not 100% but it pretty damn near to it. So not sure how those who object end up killing people? 

How many immune-compromised people do you think there are in this country who are unlikely to respond to the vaccines?  

Edited 24 July, 2021 by waylander

[teamsaint]

The Telegraph report tonight makes good reading for those who like to discriminate against the unvaccinated.

just the covid unvaxxed, mind.

For  now. Till the next demand .

[Lighthouse]

20 minutes ago, teamsaint said:

discriminate against the unvaccinated.

😆 You're refusing to spend ten minutes of your life receiving a free vaccine, a privilege many in the developing world would give their right arm for. You are not Rosa Parks.

[JRM]

7 hours ago, Lighthouse said:

😆 You're refusing to spend ten minutes of your life receiving a free vaccine, a privilege many in the developing world would give their right arm for. You are not Rosa Parks.

Fascist. Leave other people's freedoms alone. 

If you want the jab, go for it, but you have no right to tell others what they have to do and create a two tier society. 

[JRM]

So 316,728 votes and the result is in . 60% of you against Vaccine Passports with 40% saying bring them in. 👇🏻 https://t.co/y5Q90NzEvf

[TWar]

11 hours ago, Noodles34 said:

A hand in killing people, seriously? What an fuckwit thing to say. 

Dunno if you have been following the news but COVID kills people...

Our excess death in this country passed 100,000 people in February, now it's up to about 110,000. It definitely does kill people. And as @waylander excellently put, there are still countless people who can't take the virus or will not be able to. I have a close family friend with lupus and another on chemo.

I don't want either of them dying because some prick with a "freedom" complex decided they didn't want a vaccine but still wanted to roam around potentially infecting others. Freedom is all well and good when it doesn't endanger others, in the same way you don't have the freedom to buy and redistribute heroin or to drive when off your face.

[LuckyNumber7]

21 hours ago, Griffo said:

Won’t be setting foot in anywhere asking for proof of vaccination. It is a personal choice and the passport will create a two tier society. If you’ve had the jab then good on you, you’re well protected - crack on.

Saints are perfectly happy to preach inclusivity but are seemingly about to exclude many younger fans from games, who have more chance of drowning month to month than being affected by the virus.

 

 

 

Absolutely, jabbed or not I won't be going back as long as they require proof of vaccination, which at this rate will be never. That is not 'getting back to normal'. I won't be blackmailed into taking something against my will.

Some people won't be happy until Covid is eradicated, which is never going to happen.

[John B]

12 hours ago, Lord Duckhunter said:

Surely the simplest solution is vaccination or proof of a negative result within 48 hours of game.

 

That is clearly correct because it is possible to be vaccinated and have Covid that is why passports are unlikely to become law as the Labour Party agrees with what you are saying

 

Of course we have to live with Covid but everything should be done to limit its spread but passports do not completely reduce the spread

[Whitey Grandad]

2 minutes ago, John B said:

That is clearly correct because it is possible to be vaccinated and have Covid that is why passports are unlikely to become law as the Labour Party agrees with what you are saying

 

Of course we have to live with Covid but everything should be done to limit its spread but passports do not completely reduce the spread

But they encourage people to get vaccinated. And they do help a lotto reduce the spread too. 

[Charlie Wayman]

14 hours ago, teamsaint said:

Of course he is being excluded . Vaccine passports have no public health benefit, and will prove disastrous for the relationship between the state and the individual, a relationship that has already been hugely damaged.

 

Complete tosh! Don't embarrass yourself.

[CB Fry]

1 hour ago, JRM said:

Fascist. Leave other people's freedoms alone. 

If you want the jab, go for it, but you have no right to tell others what they have to do and create a two tier society. 

I don’t think you know what Fascism is sweetheart.

As far as I can see you are well within your rights to not take the vaccine.

Private businesses are well within their rights to refuse entry or manage their premises in order to protect public/customer/employees health, and as long as it is within the law. Don't start sparking up a fag on a filling station forecourt for example. Get jabbed for Malaria if you want to go on a plane to to sub Saharan Africa. You can't go into a sports ground in the UK carrying a eight piece stainless steel set of chef's knives. And so on.

So you have a right to not get jabbed. No problem.

But you have no right to go to a football stadium to watch a professional sporting event. Buy a ticket and fulfill the terms of entry.

[Lighthouse]

1 minute ago, CB Fry said:

I don’t think you know what Fascism is sweetheart.

As far as I can see you are well within your rights to not take the vaccine.

Private businesses are well within their rights to refuse entry or manage their premises in order to protect public/customer/employees health, and as long as it is within the law. Don't start sparking up a fag on a filling station forecourt for example. Get jabbed for Malaria if you want to go on a plane to to sub Saharan Africa. You can't go into a sports ground in the UK carrying a eight piece stainless steel set of chef's knives. And so on.

So you have a right to not get jabbed. No problem.

But you have no right to go to a football stadium to watch a professional sporting event. Buy a ticket and fulfill the terms of entry.

I was just about to post something like this but you’ve saved me the bother. I’m baffled by the number of people who don’t know the difference between ‘human rights’ and ‘terms and conditions’.

[egg]

2 hours ago, JRM said:

Fascist. Leave other people's freedoms alone. 

If you want the jab, go for it, but you have no right to tell others what they have to do and create a two tier society. 

 

Edited 25 July, 2021 by egg
Just read the thread through, the point has been made.

[SaintBitterne]

A bit off topic, but still in the return of fans convo. Has anyone heard about Everton away tickets being released?

[JRM]

2 hours ago, CB Fry said:

I don’t think you know what Fascism is sweetheart.

As far as I can see you are well within your rights to not take the vaccine.

Private businesses are well within their rights to refuse entry or manage their premises in order to protect public/customer/employees health, and as long as it is within the law. Don't start sparking up a fag on a filling station forecourt for example. Get jabbed for Malaria if you want to go on a plane to to sub Saharan Africa. You can't go into a sports ground in the UK carrying a eight piece stainless steel set of chef's knives. And so on.

So you have a right to not get jabbed. No problem.

But you have no right to go to a football stadium to watch a professional sporting event. Buy a ticket and fulfill the terms of entry.

This is not private business we are talking about you fuckwit, its nanny state government using fear, coercion ,blackmail to get people to take a vaccine they don't even need. It's more like the soviet union the way we look to the state for our "freedoms "

[JRM]

2 hours ago, Lighthouse said:

I was just about to post something like this but you’ve saved me the bother. I’m baffled by the number of people who don’t know the difference between ‘human rights’ and ‘terms and conditions’.

This is govt coercion not terms and conditions, crack on with your fear mongering, as Gary Nevilles survey showed your opinion is in the minority. 

[JRM]

23 hours ago, Lighthouse said:

Wearing trainers is a personal choice, don’t expect to get let into too many night clubs. If it’s a personal choice, you aren’t being excluded.

You are excluded in government make it law. 

[JRM]

So 316,728 votes and the result is in . 60% of you against Vaccine Passports with 40% saying bring them in. 👇🏻 https://t.co/y5Q90NzEvf

[CB Fry]

11 minutes ago, JRM said:

This is not private business we are talking about you fuckwit, its nanny state government using fear, coercion ,blackmail to get people to take a vaccine they don't even need. It's more like the soviet union the way we look to the state for our "freedoms "

 

10 minutes ago, JRM said:

This is govt coercion not terms and conditions, crack on with your fear mongering, as Gary Nevilles survey showed your opinion is in the minority. 

For someone twatting on about fear mongering, the only person I can see shitting their little pants about this is, well, you.

[Lighthouse]

13 minutes ago, JRM said:

to get people to take a vaccine they don't even need

We’ve got hospitals and graveyards full of people who said that and every medical professional of any credibility is saying anyone who is able should get the vaccine; medically vulnerable or otherwise.

12 minutes ago, JRM said:

This is govt coercion not terms and conditions, crack on with your fear mongering, as Gary Nevilles survey showed your opinion is in the minority. 

Saints fans are a minority compared to Man Utd fans. I’m fine with that and I’m fine with this.

11 minutes ago, JRM said:

You are excluded in government make it law. 

That evil government department, the DVLA, won’t let you onto public roads unless you obtain a drivers license. Very exclusive of people who can’t be bothered doing a driving test they don’t need… except it isn’t.

 

Being excluded means you have literally no way of being included, like putting signs on pubs saying, "no blacks." Anything you could overcome in ten minutes, for free, at a walk in vaccination centre is not ‘exclusion’.

[Whitey Grandad]

55 minutes ago, JRM said:

So 316,728 votes and the result is in . 60% of you against Vaccine Passports with 40% saying bring them in. 👇🏻 https://t.co/y5Q90NzEvf

So, less than 0.5% of the population and you think this is significant?

[Whitey Grandad]

1 hour ago, JRM said:

This is not private business we are talking about you fuckwit, its nanny state government using fear, coercion ,blackmail to get people to take a vaccine they don't even need. It's more like the soviet union the way we look to the state for our "freedoms "

You are a danger to society whether you like it or not. Nobody is forcing you to get vaccinated. Just don’t expect to go freely amongst the rest of the world if they don’t want you to.

[RedArmy]

18 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

You are a danger to society whether you like it or not. Nobody is forcing you to get vaccinated. Just don’t expect to go freely amongst the rest of the world if they don’t want you to.

A danger to society? Calm down with the hyperbole.

In what respect is he a danger to anyone but himself? 
We can catch and spread the virus just as he can. If the vaccine is good enough we don’t need to worry about an unvaccinated person, we’ll be fine. 

[suewhistle]

Christ! I agree with something that CB Fry posted. I must go and have a lie down.

Can I suggest that all those who don't want to be told to get a vaccine try and get themselves infected and then isolate themselves for a bit, thus gaining a degree of immunity and less likely to pass the virus on. No cheating by going into hospital if it gets worse..

 

[waylander]

2 hours ago, JRM said:

This is not private business we are talking about you fuckwit, its nanny state government using fear, coercion ,blackmail to get people to take a vaccine they don't even need. It's more like the soviet union the way we look to the state for our "freedoms "

this guy didn't think he needed a vaccine either  https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-57958358

[Saint_Jonny]

2 hours ago, JRM said:

This is not private business we are talking about you fuckwit, its nanny state government using fear, coercion ,blackmail to get people to take a vaccine they don't even need. It's more like the soviet union the way we look to the state for our "freedoms "

The irony of you calling someone else a fuckwit with an attitude like this. 

[suewhistle]

Interesting and relevant article just published this afternoon..: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/25/seriously-ill-young-people-in-current-covid-admissions-expert-warns

[Badger]

Has anyone said how the 'vaccine passport' would be implemented and work ?

When booking tickets do I have to register a 'passport number', or just tick a box confirming that I will abide by the club's terms and conditions incl the vaccine ? Or are the stewards going to ask to inspect your phone, or proof of the jabs before admission ?

Not against this measure by any means, even if it does upset the misguided civil liberties brigade, but not sure it will be effectively managed.

 

[teamsaint]

7 hours ago, Charlie Wayman said:

Complete tosh! Don't embarrass yourself.

 

Looks like the parliamentary committee embarrassed themselves too.

ttps://committees.parliament.uk/committee/327/public-administration-and-constitutional-affairs-committee/news/155788/no-justification-for-covid-passports-say-committee/

[Saint86]

To me its irrelevant whether you support vaccines or not. The bigger issue is the very slippery slope of adopting any form of passport to society and a system that will become an effective digital ID card. Fundamental points here (as i see it) is that covid has a survivability rate of 99.98%, the most vulnerable have been double vaccinated, 90% have had at least 1 jab, and people are entirely ignoring natural immunity in these debates. Against that we see a very one sided push for these passports from certain sectors despite any reasonable scientific debate or even a political debate in this country. I don't see an winning argument for adopting such an autocratic system that infringes on liberal freedoms. It is fundamentally the segregation of elements of society that don't tow the line - and even if that isn't you personally, surely that is going to include family members, friends, colleagues etc. I am sure we all (or at least a lot of us) know someone in this bracket? What will be next for them? As a society are we going to ban them from all forms of public entertainment? From working? Leisure centres/activities? Already people are having their education opportunities jeopardized. Are we just going to slowly ostracise them and turn them into pariahs because they're fundamentally acting out of concern for their health and what they put in their bodies?

Its also fairly irrelevant to the transmission of covid. In a 32k crowd thats 90% vaccinated with a vaccine that only has a circa 60% protection against asymptomatic transmission (and falling), who is going to care about the 3200 who may be unvaccinated (but for damn sure will get immunity the other way) vs the 17,000 who could pass it asymptomatically despite being vaccinated? The only way you deal with this issue is a robust system to show proof of a negative test, and its also a lot fairer and more in line with a free society. There is also an argument to say that the youngest and least at risk should be encouraged to get a broad spectrum natural immunity to covid whilst the vulnerable are most protected by the vaccines - but that is an entirely separate debate).

You also have the glaring issue in football that children won't be vaccinated and are therefore in line to be excluded from football presumably? Along with those who can't receive the vaccines or those that have had bad reactions to the vaccines. These people will form a significant part of a football club's fanbase / future fanbase.

Its a no to vaccine passports from me at anyrate.

Edited 25 July, 2021 by Saint86

[The Cat]

I don't agree with vaccine passports and don't see how you can fairly have them anyway until all age groups have been offered the jab.

We all know unvaccinated people are more likely to catch and transmit the virus, but you can't enforce a passport at an all ages event where kids will be in attendance and are just as likely to pass the virus on as an unvaccinated adult.

In my opinion the only fair way for companies who wish to go down this route at the moment is to allow entry to people who either provide proof of vaccine or of a negative test regardless of age.

 

[Saint86]

1 hour ago, teamsaint said:

 

Looks like the parliamentary committee embarrassed themselves too.

ttps://committees.parliament.uk/committee/327/public-administration-and-constitutional-affairs-committee/news/155788/no-justification-for-covid-passports-say-committee/

I'd actually not seen that. So there has been parliamentary debate which invalidates one of my above points. Boris and co are just going to ride rough shod over the outcome no doubt still citing the same emergency powers that they're using to try to ban protests and silence journalists then? Not to mention ignoring businesses.

[billyb333]

5 hours ago, SaintBitterne said:

A bit off topic, but still in the return of fans convo. Has anyone heard about Everton away tickets being released?

No nothing anywhere indicating when and if we will be allowed in at the moment, no tickets on sale on the Everton web site yet, although we know they have a very high % of ST holders 

[Whitey Grandad]

3 hours ago, RedArmy said:

A danger to society? Calm down with the hyperbole.

In what respect is he a danger to anyone but himself? 
We can catch and spread the virus just as he can. If the vaccine is good enough we don’t need to worry about an unvaccinated person, we’ll be fine. 

As an unvaccinated potential carrier he is a much bigger danger than someone who has been vaccinated. You might argue that he is much more of a danger to other unvaccinated people like himself than he is to those who have seen sense.

2 minutes ago, Saint86 said:

Its also fairly irrelevant to the transmission of covid. In a 32k crowd thats 90% vaccinated with a vaccine that only has a circa 60% protection against asymptomatic transmission, who is going to care about the 3200 who may be unvaccinated (but for damn sure will get immunity the other way) vs the 17,000 who could pass it asymptomatically despite being vaccinated? 

Asymptomatic transmission by vaccinated people is so small as to be negligible. I don’t know where you get your figure of 60% from.

[Saint86]

3 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

As an unvaccinated potential carrier he is a much bigger danger than someone who has been vaccinated. You might argue that he is much more of a danger to other unvaccinated people like himself than he is to those who have seen sense.

Asymptomatic transmission by vaccinated people is so small as to be negligible. I don’t know where you get your figure of 60% from.

Sorry Whitey, your're right to question that number. When i looked last week Israel was reporting 64% protection.

Sadly its dropped to 39% on latest evidence.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/23/delta-variant-pfizer-covid-vaccine-39percent-effective-in-israel-prevents-severe-illness.html

Looks like I inadvertently made my point incorrectly weighted towards the vaccine passport side!!! 🙃

Edited 25 July, 2021 by Saint86

[Whitey Grandad]

6 minutes ago, The Cat said:

I don't agree with vaccine passports and don't see how you can fairly have them anyway until all age groups have been offered the jab.

We all know unvaccinated people are more likely to catch and transmit the virus, but you can't enforce a passport at an all ages event where kids will be in attendance and are just as likely to pass the virus on as an unvaccinated adult.

In my opinion the only fair way for companies who wish to go down this route at the moment is to allow entry to people who either provide proof of vaccine or of a negative test regardless of age.

 

Children are much less likely to pass on the infection for the same reason that they are less affected by it.

I have some sympathy for the general point that allowance should be made for those who have not had a chance to get vaccinated or who cannot. Possibly by means of a negative test although the lateral flow tests that the UK uses are not intended to be used as a green light.

[Whitey Grandad]

3 minutes ago, Saint86 said:

Sorry Whitey, your're right to question that number. When i looked last week Israel was reporting 64% protection.

Sadly its dropped to 39% on latest evidence.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/23/delta-variant-pfizer-covid-vaccine-39percent-effective-in-israel-prevents-severe-illness.html
 

Thanks for the update, but that’s not the same thing as asymptomatic transmission.

[Saint86]

9 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

Thanks for the update, but that’s not the same thing as asymptomatic transmission.

Well I mean, it includes asymptomatic transmission 🤷‍♂️. Also, the previous figures were a 64% effectiveness at reducing transmission. Whilst those latest figures are a 39% at preventing infection. I don't care overly about the nuance of the comparative wording given something like 80% of covid cases are asymptomatic and its highly transmissible.

My point is. Vaccine passports are flawed and are discriminatory. If you want to ensure safety at these events, then for me, the only safe and non discriminatory route is testing prior to entry.

Edited 25 July, 2021 by Saint86

[Whitey Grandad]

2 minutes ago, Saint86 said:

Well I mean, it includes asymptomatic transmission 🤷‍♂️.

My point is. Vaccine passports are flawed and are discriminatory. If you want to ensure safety at these events, then for me, the only safe and non discriminatory route is testing prior to entry.

I didn’t see anything about asymptomatic transmission in that report, only about how effective they assumed the vaccine to be about infection or hospitalisation. Asymptomatic transmission could only occur through someone who had no symptoms but yet had caught and developed the disease. 

Well, yes, of course they’re discriminatory, they’re supposed to be. All systems will have their flaws and testing is possible less definitive than knowing that someone has been vaccinated some time ago.

There’s no point arguing over modest differences in effectiveness but other reports show that all vaccines are well worth having.

https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/europe/pfizer-vaccine-is-88-effective-against-delta-covid-variant-u-k-study-finds-1.10018272
 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/carlieporterfield/2021/07/21/study-finds-pfizer-and-astrazeneca-vaccines-effective-against-the-delta-variant---as-long-as-you-get-both-doses/?sh=5f6192c6480b

 

 

[East Kent Saint]

Look this is Boris we are dealing with here , no doubt it will all change before football gets going again . Today he was saying anyone who has been a victim of a crime will be given the investigators name and contact number Ha Ha Ha ! A bit like Patel’s we have control of our borders Ha Ha Ha !

To JRM yes people do need the jab . We could go the Black Death route but even that involved moving to the country and isolation !

[Saint86]

36 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

I didn’t see anything about asymptomatic transmission in that report, only about how effective they assumed the vaccine to be about infection or hospitalisation. Asymptomatic transmission could only occur through someone who had no symptoms but yet had caught and developed the disease. 

Well, yes, of course they’re discriminatory they’re supposed to be. All systems will have their flaws and testing is possible less definitive than knowing that someone has been vaccinated some time ago.

There’s no point arguing over modest differences in effectiveness but other reports show that all vaccines are well worth having.

https://www.haaretz.com/world-news/europe/pfizer-vaccine-is-88-effective-against-delta-covid-variant-u-k-study-finds-1.10018272
 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/carlieporterfield/2021/07/21/study-finds-pfizer-and-astrazeneca-vaccines-effective-against-the-delta-variant---as-long-as-you-get-both-doses/?sh=5f6192c6480b

 

 

Are they meant to be discriminatory? I thought they were meant to be an effective way to control the virus at large venues and make them safe 🙄? Genuinely scary how quickly some people have adopted this mindset. The inarguably safe way for large venues to be open is through testing, and only through testing.

I didn't state vaccines weren't worth having, i said i was against vaccine passports.

Also the 88% effectiveness against hospitalisation is another figure that is worsening with time. Its an interesting one, how low will that figure get before people are no longer happy to go to a football stadium with tens of thousands of other fans who all think there is no risk of them transmitting covid and that they all have a safe level of protection?

Say 60k fans with a 50% reduction in transmission rate and an 80% effectiveness against hospitalisation? Or, negative test results prior to entry?

Edited 25 July, 2021 by Saint86

[kwsaint]

The discriminatory argument is irrelevant.  I have been to East Africa and had to produce a Yellow fever vaccination certificate to travel.  The freedoms of the individual get trumped by the decision of democratically elected governments to make decisions in the best interests of the population as a whole.  There is no such thing as absolute freedom without consequence and those who claim that it is an infringement of their human rights clearly dont understand how human rights work.

It's really a matter of whether insisting on vaccine passports will actually work, both from a health perspective and also practically.  You can still be a carrier having had the double vaccine, although likely to get it more mildly and inflict a lesser viral load on others.  Plus as has been mentioned, lots of under 18s won't have been jabbed.  So there is bound to be some transmission at mass gatherings of people.  It's just a balancing act of trying to reduce risk.

My personal view is that clubs should close all concessions and get people to move through the concourse area as quickly as possible as that is where the highest risk of transmission is.  Not sure that insisting that everyone is double jabbed will make that much difference at outside sporting events, although for indoor events and night clubs it would probably make sense.   

[East Kent Saint]

Well as long as only every other seat is used for social distance and we all promise not to cheer the team as it could spread Covid it should be alright …. Esp in our usual seats in the Kingsland .

Edited 25 July, 2021 by East Kent Saint

[whelk]

What is wrong with a two tier society? The thick cunts and the rest of us. St Mary’s might be more pleasant this season

[Saint86]

24 minutes ago, East Kent Saint said:

To JRM yes people do need the jab . We could go the Black Death route but even that involved moving to the country and isolation !

 

17 minutes ago, kwsaint said:

The discriminatory argument is irrelevant.  I have been to East Africa and had to produce a Yellow fever vaccination certificate to travel.  The freedoms of the individual get trumped by the decision of democratically elected governments to make decisions in the best interests of the population as a whole.  There is no such thing as absolute freedom without consequence and those who claim that it is an infringement of their human rights clearly dont understand how human rights work.

I see similar arguments made to justify the introduction of these passports a lot. Firstly, an international travel passport is not the same as a passport to go to your local football ground. Secondly, Covid has an average mortality rate of circa 0.02% and diminishes with age. Comparatively Plague and Yellow fever have infection mortality rates in the region of 50%-70% even with today's medicine 🤷‍♂️. There is no comparison to be made severity wise.

Take Measles as another example, comparable mortality rate to covid and more infectious... but no vaccine passports 🤷‍♂️

Anyway, i stand by the moral standpoint that they shouldn't be introduced.

Edited 25 July, 2021 by Saint86