News Forum - The future of Covid vaccine ‘passports’ in access to services | VIDEO

[ThailandRyan]

Travel is looking tenuous as well with a mix and match Vaccine policy that some countries are undertaking.

https://globalnews.ca/news/8086370/mixed-vaccines-travel-policy/

 

Of course YMMV.  Take it for what it is but the article is interesting.

As the article states, The Centre for Disease Control (CDC), the U.S.’s main health body, does not currently recognize a mix of a vector vaccine, such as AstraZeneca, with an mRNA vaccine, such as Pfizer or Moderna, as fully vaccinated.

It does, however, recognize a mix of two mRNA vaccines, such as Pfizer and Moderna, as fully vaccinated.

 

 

[Stonker]

33 minutes ago, BlueSphinx said:

@Thaired was as good as certain referring to the Nuremberg code.  I am pretty sure you knew that and are only trying to deflect again by referring to the Geneva Convention. 

The failure to provide the required written Informed Consent to individuals being given these Experimental Drug Vaccine (Biological Agents), make the injection of these Experimental Drug Vaccines (Biological Agents) by definition; a violation of

(1) The 1947 Nuremberg Code,

(2) The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) Treaty,

(3) The 1964 Declaration of Helsinki, and

(4) The American Medical Association (AMA) Code of Ethics. 

1) If he was referring to the Nuremberg code, I credited him with more intelligence since it isn't the "law" anywhere, in any country, nor has it ever been, so under no circumstances can it be against "international human rights law" as it isn't "law" anywhere.

2) You presumably mean Article 7 of the ICCPR which says that "In particular, no one shall be subjected without his free consent to medical or scientific experimentation". Since it was a UN resolution and the UN have approved the vaccines for use then it's impossible for them to be "medical or scientific experimentation" which was the UN said was Ph 3 trials.

3) Like the Nuremberg Code, the Declaration of Helsinki has no legal authority anywhere and it has also been formally rejected by a number of countries, including the USA, so again under no circumstances can it be against "international human rights law" as it isn't "law" anywhere.

4) The AMA doesn't make "international human rights laws".

Maybe if you'd read or thought about these a bit more instead of just blindly repeating nonsense you'd have realised all that for yourself. But maybe not ...

[Stonker]

1 hour ago, BlueSphinx said:

May I remind you that it was you that mentioned the Tetanus vaccine as somehow relevant in a discusion about covid-19 vaccines.

Well, yes ... I mentioned six vaccines for three different issues as examples of the most commonly and widely used, in response to @Mike's claim, which you supported,  " 'that increased numbers of vaccinations among a population increases the speed at which virus mutations occur.  This is even more true when the vaccinations are of differing types as the virus will have more varied catalysts causing the mutations." to show that he and you were talking absolute and complete balls.

It would be hard to give examples of just how much complete balls the two of you were talking without ... well ,,, giving examples

1 hour ago, BlueSphinx said:

We both now that a) it is not used as mass-vaccination during a pandemic, and b) even more important - Tetanus cannot be transmitted from person to person

Well, yes, it's used as a mass vaccination to prevent a pandemic - that doesn't stop it showing very clearly that you and @Mike were talking utter balls, though.

 

1 hour ago, BlueSphinx said:

Let's leave it at that now that your continual deflection has been exposed...

 

The invitation's there if you want a rational debate, but if you don't, because you're evidently not as well informed as you like to pretend to be ... well  ... up to you.

 

[Stonker]

31 minutes ago, ThailandRyan said:

Travel is looking tenuous as well with a mix and match Vaccine policy that some countries are undertaking.

https://globalnews.ca/news/8086370/mixed-vaccines-travel-policy/

Of course YMMV.  Take it for what it is but the article is interesting.

As the article states, The Centre for Disease Control (CDC), the U.S.’s main health body, does not currently recognize a mix of a vector vaccine, such as AstraZeneca, with an mRNA vaccine, such as Pfizer or Moderna, as fully vaccinated.

It does, however, recognize a mix of two mRNA vaccines, such as Pfizer and Moderna, as fully vaccinated.

As I mentioned before here, the whole idea is a non-starter anyway, locally or internationally, as there's no standard for either vaccines or for a "vaccine 'passport'" even within Thailand since even if all those living here put the app on their smart phones that would still exclude all those vaccinated abroad, including Thais, which makes the whole idea a complete waste of time.

[BlueSphinx]

7 minutes ago, Stonker said:

Well, yes ... I mentioned six vaccines for three different issues as examples of the most commonly and widely used, in response to @Mike's claim, which you supported, that " 'that increased numbers of vaccinations among a population increases the speed at which virus mutations occur.  This is even more true when the vaccinations are of differing types as the virus will have more varied catalysts causing the mutations." to show that he and you were talking absolute and complete balls.

It would be hard to give examples of just how much complete balls the two of you were talking without ... well ,,, giving examples

Well, yes, it's used as a mass vaccination to prevent a pandemic - that doesn't stop it showing very clearly that you and @Mike were talking utter balls, though.

Well, if you're unable to "leave out the links, insults and chickens and just stick to a simple, positive exchange as @King Cotton so wisely suggested, if you've got the "capacity" to explain the dichotomy between what you're claiming and the very obvious reality.

Let's keep it simple:

... where are all these mutations of tetanus, polio and MMR, which if you're correct should be running rampant across the globe, particularly in the most vaccinated countries?" , which I wouldn't have thought was asking too much for anyone who's as well informed as you like to think you are and you pretend to be, maybe your usual departure with your tail between your legs before you slide sideways and repeat the exact same nonsense in another thread won't be unexpected.

The usual blabber > Tetanus cannot be transmitted person to person vaccinnated or not, covid-19 can be transmitted person to person even when vaccinated.  Without transmission there can be no variants, so why do you mention tetanus and the tetanus-vaccines in a discussion about variants in a covid-context?

[Stonker]

52 minutes ago, BlueSphinx said:

The usual blabber > Tetanus cannot be transmitted person to person vaccinnated or not, covid-19 can be transmitted person to person even when vaccinated.  Without transmission there can be no variants, so why do you mention tetanus and the tetanus-vaccines in a discussion about variants in a covid-context?

Because firstly they're vaccines, which is what you and @Mike referred to, so examples that clearly disprove what you and @Mike claimed, along with the vaccines for polio, measles, mumps and rubella which you seem to want to now ignore although they're also "transmitted person to person" like Covid.

.

.

Oh, and secondly because the tetanus vaccines also vaccinate against diptheria as I mentioned, which, the last time I looked, was also "transmitted person to person", just like Covid.

Edited September 5, 2021 by King Cotton
Quarrelsome content deleted.

[AdamX]

3 hours ago, Stonker said:

I'm neither worrying about you nor forcing my choice on you - whether you take the vaccine or not is entirely your decision as far as I'm concerned.

All I'm worried about is how your decision affects me and others I'm concerned about, which I don't think is any more unreasonable than being worried about people driving on the  wrong side of the road - if you want to do so, fine, up to you, but just don't do it near me if it affects me.

What's so unreasonable about that?

 

Its unreasonable to force things on others, simply to assuage ones own personal fears.

Worry to your hearts content about how other people decisions affect you, and make the changes you need to yourself, but don't expect others to go along with you.

That really all the pro-choicers are asking for.

Lock yourself down, take the vaccine, wear what ever face covering you want, carry a vaccine passpor but you do not force these things on others.

Is that really so much to ask?

 

 

[Stonker]

7 minutes ago, AdamX said:

Its unreasonable to force things on others, simply to assuage ones own personal fears.

Worry to your hearts content about how other people decisions affect you, and make the changes you need to yourself, but don't expect others to go along with you.

That really all the pro-choicers are asking for.

Lock yourself down, take the vaccine, wear what ever face covering you want, carry a vaccine passpor but you do not force these things on others.

Is that really so much to ask?

That's like saying drive on the correct side of the road if you want to but don't force me to if I don't, or don't force me to use the toilet if I want to take a dump on the bus seat next to you.

Your actions affect not just you but those around you as well.

It's your actions that are dragging out the lockdowns, mask wearing, etc, because you refuse to acknowledge that your actions affect others, not the pro-maskers / pro-lockdowners, etc.

[Alavan]

6 hours ago, BraveNewFahrenheit said:

Yes, this is your future SLAVE:

She didn't need to be vaccinated.
If she had shown a certificate of recent PCR-test, she would have been allowed, like everybody else.
But obviously, she is above normal law abiding people.
And beating by police is another item. Was she beaten? If so, that is unacceptable, but what did she do? Just wanting to enter without following the rules? Or did she started a fight?
I don't know as I didn't see any pics or read the whole story. A one sided report of the incident is not always the correct history

[Alavan]

4 hours ago, Stonker said:

Really?

Are you sure they did?

It's really only of academic interest but since you bring it up,  Rule 92 of Article 3 of the Geneva Convention, which I'm reasonably familiar with and which I'm reasonably sure is what you're talking about, only applies during armed conflict and then only to prisoners of war or civilians in occupied countries.

Edit: if you're talking about something else, then do please elaborate.

I think he is speaking about the 1948 Paris International declaration of human rights, Stonker
https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights

[Stonker]

14 minutes ago, Alavan said:

I think he is speaking about the 1948 Paris International declaration of human rights, Stonker
https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights

He may well have been, I don't know, but if he was he was incorrect there too as the UDHR isn't legally binding nor is there any direct mention of this in it anyway.

It's a while ago, but I used to give presentations on this as they were mandatory every year and as I was PH & TQ it usually fell to me, so I'm reasonably familiar with all of these.

[Benroon]

7 hours ago, BraveNewFahrenheit said:

Yes, this is your future SLAVE:

The clutching at straws phase is well and truly behind us now - as we move into the desperation phase !

If you break the law willingly (assuming that is the law in France) then accept the consequences, I think it happens in every country like that.

[Benroon]

14 hours ago, TheDirtyDurian said:

Exactly. I'm totally fine with it all too. It's just some guy at the door looking at something on my phone for two seconds. He's not recording anything about me. 

Correct but it's enough to send the paranoid into apopletic shock !

However are you sure ? Maybe he has a camera behind his retinas that sends the information as to where you bought your last supersoft toilet roll to the world leaders in order to complete that part of their world domination dastardly plan to control you ! Especially as they've invested so much in the bum gun !

It would be laughable if it wasn't so tragic !

[Benroon]

16 hours ago, Freeduhdumb said:

The problem with your mob rule, collectivist attitude is... it impacts my freedom. If I wanted to go live like a hermit and restrict my freedom of movement, that would be one thing, but I am not willing to do that. I will not let the mob impose it's will upon my right to free travel on this planet. No.. I will not let it happen. Not without a fight I won't. You're clearly happy to allow the state to exploit the majority... to RULE YOU, I however am not. I will not accept the manipulation of the 51% on this planet, under the guise of what we all call democracy, to dictate my free will right to remain free. 

Democracy: The manipulation of the 51%. 

The 'mob' being the vast majority of the worlds finest scientists, virologists and doctors ? They're a 'mob' ?

Now if you consider yourself better informed than that little lot, I'll back you but from what I've seen so far with your David Icke type stylee of irrational logic and debate, you're not even in the same universe. 

[riclag]

18 hours ago, Bob20 said:

It's going to happen everywhere. Not because of blackmail to get you vaccinated. But because it's impossible to control if we don't all play ball.

Sounds like Germany back in the 30's! God forbid ! "Play ball"

Arm bands , and sewn on  patches

Edited September 5, 2021 by riclag

[Benroon]

2 hours ago, AdamX said:

Its unreasonable to force things on others, simply to assuage ones own personal fears.

Worry to your hearts content about how other people decisions affect you, and make the changes you need to yourself, but don't expect others to go along with you.

That really all the pro-choicers are asking for.

Lock yourself down, take the vaccine, wear what ever face covering you want, carry a vaccine passpor but you do not force these things on others.

Is that really so much to ask?

1) Who's forcing it ? I hear that a lot on here so who's doing it ?

2) If it was your choice to have a blue car, when everyone else has ordered red that's fine because it doesn't directly impact anyone else more than nuisance value. But choose to not vaccinate DOES potentially impact everyone else, its bewildering why you conspiracy theorists can't get that into your heads,  it makes you more dangerous to others, it makes you more likely to COST the system that could be helping other more considerate people who care about their fellow beings, it means you're more likely to take up that hospital bed that could be used by someone that cares about others, and of course it means you are more likely to die bringing avoidable grief on your loved ones, though I'm going to assume here no right minded individual with loved ones would choose to not have a vaccine, and it means the world will be a slightly less worrying place! To dismiss 99% of the worlds best brains as 'the mob' only shows how desperate the anti vaxxers have become! They are all we have.

I didn't particularly want to have the vaccine but I did so as socially and morally it was the correct thing to do on the evidence we have and not based on something that MIGHT happen in the future or any bizarre conspiracy theory so evident on here. To not do so makes you a pariah IMO and that is only going to increase so get use to it. 

I think Thaiger are actually sailing very close to the wind of culpability by providing a platform thereby indirectly encouraging such dangerous misinformed claptrap that hasn't the slightest grasp on reality or borne out by the known facts and statistics!

[Benroon]

10 minutes ago, riclag said:

Sounds like Germany back in the 30's! God forbid ! 

Arm bands ,anyone ?

Leaving aside the poor taste of that comment, its only in your head

[Bob20]

5 minutes ago, riclag said:

Sounds like Germany back in the 30's! God forbid ! 

Arm bands ,anyone ?

The big difference between then and now is choice.

And choice comes with consequences.

It's started with the vaccine passports and limiting access for the unvaccinated...

I can see it's unavoidable if we want to get back to anything like a normal life again with freedom for the majority, not for a minority.

[riclag]

9 minutes ago, Benroon said:

Leaving aside the poor taste of that comment, its only in your head

Poor taste LOL

'I think Thaiger are actually sailing very close to the wind of culpability by providing a platform thereby indirectly encouraging such dangerous misinformed claptrap that hasn't the slightest grasp on reality or borne out by the known facts and statistics"!

[riclag]

15 minutes ago, Bob20 said:

The big difference between then and now is choice.

And choice comes with consequences.

It's started with the vaccine passports and limiting access for the unvaccinated...

I can see it's unavoidable if we want to get back to anything like a normal life again with freedom for the majority, not for a minority.

I play the new normal game! I defiantly don't agree with it!

More and more  Govt restrictions  aren't my idea of freedom!

Freedom ,you don't realize you have it until you lost it

Edited September 5, 2021 by riclag

[Bob20]

20 minutes ago, riclag said:

I play the new normal game! I defiantly don't agree with it!

More and more  Govt restrictions  aren't my idea of freedom!

Freedom ,you don't realize you have it until you lost it

I don't say I agree with it. I say I can see that it's unavoidable in the situation that the virus forced us in.

And we're not talking government restrictions. We're talking lifting restrictions. 

Oxymoronically though, the ones who don't play ball and keep fighting for absolute individual freedom will be left out and restricted. Still, your choice is respected, as long as you realise that every choice has consequences, same as for the other side.

Health, you don't realise you have it until you lose it. And when you lose it: what good is freedom then?

[roodujardin]

On 9/4/2021 at 12:11 PM, Freeduhdumb said:

You're a very poor student of history... freedoms when taken are rarely given back by governments. Humanity is at the crossroads of freedom and enslavement... what's it going to be?

The current generation will not relate to this as they haven't experienced it. We also now have the anti-everything people to deal with as well. Fifty years ago in the west we all had vaccine cards; we had them for decades. Two major things you couldn't do if not up to date was: you could not got to school or travel. When it became clear these vaccines were no longer required, the system was dropped. 

[riclag]

46 minutes ago, Bob20 said:

Health, you don't realise you have it until you lose it. And when you lose it: what good is freedom then?

Play on words much! Suffice to say  ,Freedom in this context, is about Govt control !  Do this ,don’t do that! 
I’m very suspicious of some countries more than ever ,when it comes to new rules,infringement on   rights  and freedom of speech  in this new normal . Now that the whole world accepts that   vax and unvax can spread the virus  . I don’t see the use of subjecting people to demands that you must have covid papers to get into a establishment and other social events.I guess I’m also frustrated with the $$$ and inconveniences  they demand to adhere to those demands 

Edited September 5, 2021 by riclag

[Bob20]

17 minutes ago, riclag said:

Play on words much! Suffice to say  ,Freedom in this context, is about Govt control !  Do this ,don’t do that! 
I’m very suspicious of some countries more than ever ,when it comes to new rules,infringement on   rights  and freedom of speech  in this new normal . Now that the whole world accepts that   vax and unvax can spread the virus  . I don’t see the use of subjecting people to demands that you must have covid papers to get into a establishment and other social events.

Every choice has consequences.

I accept the consequences of my choice to get jabbed.

You accept the consequences of your choice not to get jabbed.

Fair enough 

Fruitful discussion.

[riclag]

5 minutes ago, Bob20 said:

Every choice has consequences.

I accept the consequences of my choice to get jabbed.

You accept the consequences of your choice not to get jabbed.

Fair enough 

Fruitful discussion.

I get jabbed ! I have no problem with it. Its the demands and  how there enforced ,that I have issues with