It’s widely accepted that vaccine doesn’t stop infection and doesn’t stop transmissions, but does reduce the effects,yeah?
Therefore, why is it only the unvaccinated have to have proof of a negative test in the last 24 hours?
Personally, I’d rather be in the company of unvaccinated as if they were infected they’d know more about it than vaccinated and responsibly self isolate. Vaccinated are probably the “super spreaders”
Stopping all infection is practically impossible, so that point is moot. The key thing are reductions, and reductions are not binary, and nor do they need to be to have a massive effect.
Pretty much all the experts and all the studies (done by experts, and checked by experts) are saying vaccines reduce transmission, but more importantly they massively reduce the number needing hospital beds. Of course there will be some cranks who disagree, but these have been proven wrong time and time again, it's not like they're going to become messiah's now, most of them have been struck off or were not even qualified in the first place.
3 jabs (or two jabs + infection) pretty much covers Omicron as much as two jabs covered Delta, for infection, based on same timeframes. If you don't get infected, it's hard to transmit it.
2 jabs 5 months ago won't cover it as well, but still far better than none, or one previous infection months ago, again this is already proven.
Anyway, the point above is not even the major point, because as this transmits so well, there is an argument that there's little point even trying to fight it and that it will get to everyone anyway (which it probably will), but this is covered by the point below.
The main point now is that as this thing spreads so fast (they still don't know how much faster yet), the NHS simply won't cope with the volume of unvaccinated people (5m adults in this category) with a much larger percentage for overwhelming healthcare, which then effects everyone. The unvaccinated are 8:1 more likely to need healthcare, based on comparative risk profiles. Why should 90% of adults suffer and get a lesser standard of healthcare because 10% won't (for wonky reasons)?
Risk isn't binary, it's a sliding scale. Risk reduction measures don't need to be binary, to have a big effect. Risk multiples and covid increases are often exponential, moderate reductions x moderate reductions x moderate reductions = massive differences compared to no reductions.
The sustained covid load on healthcare is driving down response to other consultations, surgeries, A&E, GP's etc at a time when we really need those going in the other direction.
Big assumption expecting the unvaccinated to be responsible, and for all of them to know they have it, most are transmissible before they even get symptoms, that's if they do get symptoms.
They're not really asking a lot here are they? Vaccines are a massive risk benefit to the individual and to healthcare, and taking a test takes about 10 minutes and is free. These small measures could stop a doubling in people needing healthcare, or at least spread the load out, so it is all not needed at the same time.
Most countries introduced vaccine passports months ago (with a lot tighter restrictions), even France and Sweden. Yes, there was some initial backlash, but people have calmed down now. The week after the announcement 5m of the French had started their jabs, and they've now got a higher percentage of partially vaccinated than us. Our "restrictions" on the unjabbed are minimal compared to most other countries, and we've next to no restrictions on the vaccinated.
