While officials talk about the possibility of a so-called vaccine passport — or proof that an individual has been vaccinated against the coronavirus — from the nay-sayers, you get:
Granted, we choose not to take our cues from former politicians who choose to use ignorant tropes to prove a non-point, but I have examined the corners of my heart and don’t see the threat. What am I missing? Is carrying proof that you’re vaccinated a threat to your privacy/liberty/pursuit of happiness? Feel free to weigh in.
Proof of vaccination seems a lot like proof of age. A restaurant/bar/club can card at the door so they don't admit people under 21. Is that an invasion of privacy? It might be a "threat" to the under-aged person's pursuit of happiness, but it's a protection for the business and potentially other people. The reality is that we concede some personal liberties when we opt to be part of a community. (You're underage and don't want to be carded? Don't go to the club.)
I'm not sure what the problem is. Most school districts require proof of various inoculations to let kids enroll. Restaurants require shoes and shirts. Is it the "database" aspect they are concerned about? Like the driver's license database? Or the FBI's fingerprint database? Or the prospect of a national gun registry? It seems to me that people who are vaccinated have nothing to hide, and people who refuse vaccination will not be in the database, so where exactly is the issue?
Sam said it well: In times of crisis, our definition of "privacy" may shift, though I, like you, am not entirely sure how privacy plays into the mix. People worried that administering Social Security numbers was an invasion of privacy. We adapt.
Yes! When it comes to public health, it's like we are like one body. We all have to participate in making that body as healthy as possible. Personal health, that doesn't affect public health is different, and privacy is more appropriate.
What gets me is HIPAA and health privacy has caused all sorts of problems. I worked with a company that was trying to develop a universal health record 3 decades ago. And we still don't have a single, universal health record! Why is health information private? Because it could be used against you. That right there is unfortunate.
I'm carrying a photo on the phone of my vaccine proof. I trust my family and friends - others not so much... If I'm going to take risks I want to be informed...
Actually what would be cool is if there were an app that would tell me if I was within breathing distance of an unvaccinated person, so I could quickly vacate the premises.
I like your twisted way of thinking. I’d add a laser gun, so I could zap those who choose not to vaccinate. I don’t want to kill them. I just want to wing them.
In our history as a nation we have enacted policies in the interest of public health. Mr. Amash may have an issue with the degree of regulation but public safety in times of pandemic requires it. He does not have to present his vaccine passport merely refuse to go to places that demand it. Would he have the same issue with a drivers license or another state issued identification? We all can find a government policy we disagree with, normally we confine our animosity to a policy that affects us financially, constrains religious practice
Amash thinks a vaccination card is dystopian? How about women being denied autonomy over their bodies? How about arresting people for giving someone a bottle of water or something to eat? Folks here have mentioned many of the requirements and restrictions we all live with everyday that, using Amash’s reasoning, could be seen as “dystopian”.
So Justin, time to tell Motor Vehicle that they can stuff your license plates where the sun don’t shine. When one of your kids has their next birthday, buy them a six pack and a pack of cigarettes. Teach them how to stand up to tyranny. Next time you go into a restaurant and see one of those “no shirt, no shoes, no service” signs show those pinkos how a free man lives and take off your pants!
I'm not opposed to it. However, I'm not sure what it would tell us yet though. In the last day, I learned of two, unrelated cases where people tested positive, well after being fully vaccined. One has mild symptoms. The other has no symptoms. My friend who spent time with the person hours before learning she was positive, now has to quarantine. In that second case, the person would not have known had they not been regularly tested for work.
If it is determined that people who are fully vaccinated can still contract coronavirus, but can't transmit it, then it makes sense to have vaccine status known in the public setting. If vaccinated people can contract and transmit, we're in trouble.
I have never heard of someone contracting the virus after vaccination so I wish your friends well. (I’ve read about it but knew no one.) The vaccines are not 100% but still. Knowing someone has made the effort would make me more comfortable being around them. It’s the dead-last hold-outs I want to avoid.
Then, too, I’m not exactly going to ask to see someone’s proof, but for traveling etc., I’d like to know we’ve all made the best effort not to be a spreader.
This is how I currently think of the vaccine: It protects the person who gets it from severe illness or death from COVID. That's all we know now. We don't know if it prevents transmission (though I hope and suspect we'll hear it at least blunts it). That big question remains. We can't live freely if we continue to need to quarantine, miss work, not see people due to positive cases. If the virus does circulate from person to person, vaccinated or not, that could be a big problem for us in seeing more mutations. I don't know if this is wildly different from other viruses in the way it spreads or mutates. I haven't read about that.
True, but we DO know the chances are smaller if someone has been vaccinated. We don't know how much smaller, but we do know there's at least some protection.
True - because they are less likely to be infected. This study seems to confirm that actual infection (asymptomatic or with symptoms) in vaccinated people is mirroring what was seen in the clinical trials. It doesn't mention addressing the possibility of blunted transmission among those who do contract the virus. Either way, if less people are potentially infected, then odds of transmission would be reduced overall. Yay!
Mild or no symptoms are what I would expect from someone who has been vaccinated. The vaccine doesn't prevent the virus from entering the body. What it does prevent in most cases is severe symptoms, hospitalization, or death. We don't know for sure yet how contagious an immunized, infected person might be to unvaccinated persons within range. That's why immunized people are advised to continue wearing a mask and staying at least 6 feet apart from other people in public.
Proof of vaccination seems a lot like proof of age. A restaurant/bar/club can card at the door so they don't admit people under 21. Is that an invasion of privacy? It might be a "threat" to the under-aged person's pursuit of happiness, but it's a protection for the business and potentially other people. The reality is that we concede some personal liberties when we opt to be part of a community. (You're underage and don't want to be carded? Don't go to the club.)
Ha. "Pursuit of happiness." I miss that like I miss traveling. It's all about personal liberties, and the greater good, isn't it?
I'm not sure what the problem is. Most school districts require proof of various inoculations to let kids enroll. Restaurants require shoes and shirts. Is it the "database" aspect they are concerned about? Like the driver's license database? Or the FBI's fingerprint database? Or the prospect of a national gun registry? It seems to me that people who are vaccinated have nothing to hide, and people who refuse vaccination will not be in the database, so where exactly is the issue?
Sam said it well: In times of crisis, our definition of "privacy" may shift, though I, like you, am not entirely sure how privacy plays into the mix. People worried that administering Social Security numbers was an invasion of privacy. We adapt.
Yes! When it comes to public health, it's like we are like one body. We all have to participate in making that body as healthy as possible. Personal health, that doesn't affect public health is different, and privacy is more appropriate.
What gets me is HIPAA and health privacy has caused all sorts of problems. I worked with a company that was trying to develop a universal health record 3 decades ago. And we still don't have a single, universal health record! Why is health information private? Because it could be used against you. That right there is unfortunate.
I'm carrying a photo on the phone of my vaccine proof. I trust my family and friends - others not so much... If I'm going to take risks I want to be informed...
I did that, too. Mostly because I was concerned I might lose that little vaccine paper. :)
That reminds me to fish mine out of my glove box in my car for my second shot on Monday. Glory!
That’s how I see it. I’ll be fully vaccinated early next week. I don’t mind people knowing that. If we can stem the spread...
Actually what would be cool is if there were an app that would tell me if I was within breathing distance of an unvaccinated person, so I could quickly vacate the premises.
I like your twisted way of thinking. I’d add a laser gun, so I could zap those who choose not to vaccinate. I don’t want to kill them. I just want to wing them.
Staples will laminate them for free I was told !!
In our history as a nation we have enacted policies in the interest of public health. Mr. Amash may have an issue with the degree of regulation but public safety in times of pandemic requires it. He does not have to present his vaccine passport merely refuse to go to places that demand it. Would he have the same issue with a drivers license or another state issued identification? We all can find a government policy we disagree with, normally we confine our animosity to a policy that affects us financially, constrains religious practice
Amash thinks a vaccination card is dystopian? How about women being denied autonomy over their bodies? How about arresting people for giving someone a bottle of water or something to eat? Folks here have mentioned many of the requirements and restrictions we all live with everyday that, using Amash’s reasoning, could be seen as “dystopian”.
So Justin, time to tell Motor Vehicle that they can stuff your license plates where the sun don’t shine. When one of your kids has their next birthday, buy them a six pack and a pack of cigarettes. Teach them how to stand up to tyranny. Next time you go into a restaurant and see one of those “no shirt, no shoes, no service” signs show those pinkos how a free man lives and take off your pants!
Fool.
I'm not opposed to it. However, I'm not sure what it would tell us yet though. In the last day, I learned of two, unrelated cases where people tested positive, well after being fully vaccined. One has mild symptoms. The other has no symptoms. My friend who spent time with the person hours before learning she was positive, now has to quarantine. In that second case, the person would not have known had they not been regularly tested for work.
If it is determined that people who are fully vaccinated can still contract coronavirus, but can't transmit it, then it makes sense to have vaccine status known in the public setting. If vaccinated people can contract and transmit, we're in trouble.
I have never heard of someone contracting the virus after vaccination so I wish your friends well. (I’ve read about it but knew no one.) The vaccines are not 100% but still. Knowing someone has made the effort would make me more comfortable being around them. It’s the dead-last hold-outs I want to avoid.
Then, too, I’m not exactly going to ask to see someone’s proof, but for traveling etc., I’d like to know we’ve all made the best effort not to be a spreader.
Lord, but I miss traveling...
Me, too!
This is how I currently think of the vaccine: It protects the person who gets it from severe illness or death from COVID. That's all we know now. We don't know if it prevents transmission (though I hope and suspect we'll hear it at least blunts it). That big question remains. We can't live freely if we continue to need to quarantine, miss work, not see people due to positive cases. If the virus does circulate from person to person, vaccinated or not, that could be a big problem for us in seeing more mutations. I don't know if this is wildly different from other viruses in the way it spreads or mutates. I haven't read about that.
True, but we DO know the chances are smaller if someone has been vaccinated. We don't know how much smaller, but we do know there's at least some protection.
True - because they are less likely to be infected. This study seems to confirm that actual infection (asymptomatic or with symptoms) in vaccinated people is mirroring what was seen in the clinical trials. It doesn't mention addressing the possibility of blunted transmission among those who do contract the virus. Either way, if less people are potentially infected, then odds of transmission would be reduced overall. Yay!
From 2 days ago.
https://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2021/p0329-COVID-19-Vaccines.html
Mild or no symptoms are what I would expect from someone who has been vaccinated. The vaccine doesn't prevent the virus from entering the body. What it does prevent in most cases is severe symptoms, hospitalization, or death. We don't know for sure yet how contagious an immunized, infected person might be to unvaccinated persons within range. That's why immunized people are advised to continue wearing a mask and staying at least 6 feet apart from other people in public.