Jump to content

Brum Red

Members
  • Posts

    33
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Brum Red

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://

Recent Profile Visitors

1,791 profile views

Brum Red's Achievements

Mentor

Mentor (12/14)

  • Dedicated
  • Week One Done
  • One Month Later
  • One Year In

Recent Badges

22

Reputation

  1. Thank you for the reply Pill Red - always good to have a contrary view to debate. Why risk it? It is like life essentially- assessing risk. I don’t drink, don’t smoke, have played sport all my life, and have a strong immune system. The number of people in my age group that have died without any known pre-existing conditions is 65. I consider my risk from Covid extremely low, and my children’s almost non-existent. Getting ill is a possibility, but again, I feel that I am well placed to recover with no outside help, like the vast, vast majority of people who catch it. I believe that many people’s perception of the risks posed by Covid have been skewed by the endless tv coverage and government messaging. We have to assess risk every day - every time you get behind the wheel of a car you risk injury or death (your own or someone else’s), and that is our responsibility and choice, not the government’s. Thank you for your good wishes (I have seen plenty wishing illness and death on those with my stance on Twitter!), and for also perfectly proving my point on vaccine passports by saying “You seem to have already made up your mind, which is of course your right”. Firstly, when the vaccine has completed its trials, been approved for non-emergency use, and the long term effects are known, my mind may well change. Secondly, under a vaccine passport scheme, by exercising my right to make an informed decision as you say, the government will remove my right to see the mighty reds, my favourite bands, to enter a cinema, and will segregate me from my friends and colleagues socially. In my view, this is chilling.
  2. Not being able to go to a football match/cinema/concert/other leisure activities etc, when others do have those rights? I’d have said that was a pretty perfect definition of a two-tiered system in which I could do less than my fellow citizens. Your second point is more worthy of debate, and of course we should be sympathetic to those in that situation. Coercing those that have very valid reasons to decline the vaccine, under threat of losing their civil liberties is not a solution that I endorse.
  3. The fact that so many people are seemingly ready to accept the proposed domestic vaccine passports astounds me. I am not an “anti-vaxxer” by any stretch - my two young children are up to date with their vaccinations (bar Covid), as am I. i also readily accept that Covid is dangerous to many, and given that, those people who are vulnerable would be well advised to have their jabs. However, there is a world of difference between protecting the vulnerable, and coercing the entire adult population to have the jab. Chris Whitty is on record as saying that Covid is of no danger to the vast majority of people. Huge numbers of people will never catch it, and most who do will either be asymptomatic or have a very mild illness. 5 million of the most vulnerable are now fully vaccinated - 31 million more have had one dose. The vast majority are now safe. As of Feb 2021, only 3442 people in England had died solely of Covid - the other 78,968 had pre-existing conditions. A friend went into hospital recently with final stage leukaemia, caught Covid on the ward, and was recorded in the stats as a Covid death. Nb: All lives lost are tragic - I do not wish to downplay anyone’s personal loss. While the vaccine has had relatively few serious side effects so far, and hopefully this will continue to be the case, the fact is that it is a new vaccine technology, with trials not due to finish for at least another year, granted approval under emergency use, with its manufacturers given immunity in the event of adverse effects arising. As a relatively young, physically fit person who has barely ever seen their GP, why would I (and potentially my children) take an injection that it’s owners are so confident of they have legal protection, when the average age of a Covid death is approximately 80 (around the UK life expectancy)? Should I feel that I do not need the vaccine (my children certainly don’t, with just 6 u19’s with no pre-existing conditions dying), then I should be free to refuse the jab. Those that do feel they need the jab should take it. We have been fairly familiar with this system for the past few decades with the flu jab - those at risk take it, those that aren’t don’t. Under these proposals, your right to a normal life (or at least one without endless testing) will be taken away from you unless you take the vaccine that you neither need nor want. Add into the mix the following: Logic - you would be able to go to the pub and supermarket via bus without a VP (perfectly safe then) on your way to Ashton Gate, but he refused entry to the stadium on safety grounds! You have just been mixing with the same people on the bus and in the pub, but sitting in a seat in the open air is deemed unacceptable! Even more amazing is the fact that the policy is obviously not based on any genuine public health concerns. Imagine a night out - 4 or 5 pubs with friends, with no issue. You then arrive at the nightclub, to sit with the same people you have spent the past 5 hours with, but are refused entry as it is on the VP banned list! How is that more dangerous than the pubs - can the virus read the signs above the door?!? Thin end of the wedge - we were told numerous times by various politicians (Johnson, Gove, Zahawi) that we weren’t getting vaccine passports. Now they are on the table. Once they are here, they will be here to stay. Biometric face scanners have already been proposed to implement the system. Like the sound of those, and their accelerated intrusion into more facets of your daily life? Those in favour of a VP system - do you think that millions of young, fit and healthy people should be demoted to second class citizens, for exercising their right to choose not to take an injection that they simply do not need, when those at risk are already safe?
×
×
  • Create New...