I think there's a distinction to be made between diseases that are infectious and those that are not. If you have cancer and you want to attend an event, that's nobody's business because they're not going to catch it from you. If however the disease you have is serious and highly-transmissible then that's another matter entirely.

Its been the case internationally for decades. Yellow fever in african countries for example

Showing a pass every time you attend any kind of event is a bit more intrusive. But in the end, I do agree with you that there is nothing fundamentally wrong with the approach.

Yellow fever is debilitating at a very high rate...

Covid is highly lethal for some category of people..

Note: I corrected my comment to say "debilitating", although relatively "lethal" is probably not inaccurate.

Is not the vaccine available for anyone who wants it? The point of the Yellow Fever vaccine is to get it when traveling to a country where it is prevalent and you don't have the immunity of the local population, and not to bring it back to an unprotected population.

So I'm not sure what your point is. Both diseases are dangerous.

Yellow fever vaccine is mandatory when you travel in a country with high risk.

Covid vaccine will be mandatory when you want to go in situations / places with high risk.

So why would you be against covid health pass and not yellow fever health pass ?

He is saying in general YF vaccine is mandatory when you PASS THROUGH a high risk country (such as kenya) BEFORE going to the coubtry requiring the vaccine (such as tanzania)

Which properties define that category? Edit: the weak and frail, the ones with multiple comorbidities (avg 4)? The ones that are vulnerable for any virus in general?

Yes. Are you familiar with what public health is? Such restrictions are so people are encouraged to get vaccinated. Taking something away so far is most effective way to convince people.

That's not what "convincing" is. That's "coercing".

If you want to convince, do it with data and logic, not by taking away rights.

Going to a football match is not a human right. I don't see any problem with requiring vaccinations before attending big crowded events with lots of people.

> Leftists are going for internal passport systems and repeating the mistakes of the Nazis.

You lose any credibility when you compare compulsory vaccination to genocidal campaigns that killed 6-7million Jewish people and 2-4million disabled people, lgbt people, and Gypsy, Roma and Traveller people.

In general no, we don't.

But pragmatically in the current circumstances this seems to be the best option (or least bad) until things are sorted.

> current circumstances

As Milton said, "Nothing is so permanent as a temporary government program."

Officials have already hinted that masks, lockdowns, etc. will be implemented (at least seasonally) forever.

To clarify for anyone else like me who haven’t had their coffee, this is Milton Friedman, not John Milton (I figured the lingo sounded a bit too modern).

Milton is a genius, but this particular thing won't continue for the simple reason that, if as in Denmark, you have to be tested 3 times a week to have an always current pass, then the public will notice and be strongly incentivized to care.

And that kills these kinds of programs, unless there is a very good reason.

Well, of course masks and lockdowns will be mandated if needed in the future.

If there's an outbreak of a serious contagious disease then measures deemed necessary when that happens will be implemented. It's nothing sinister, just common sense and that has been the case for centuries.

Do you think governments are going to give up their power after implementing digital passes?

Yes. There is no reason for people to keep being tested all the time for Covid if/when that is no longer a risk. Once/if the risk has passed this will all stop because there is neither a justification nor value for governments to continue.

It's a little paranoid to claim that governments are continuously trying to create totalitarian states. Or that, in any case, they can do what they want, they can't. We already see that with all the debates on these passes and safety measures put in place. They are a hard sell to the public and everyone's watching. There is already huge pressure not to have them for a day longer than absolutely necessary and politically governments will have to stop as soon as possible.

> It's a little paranoid to claim that governments are continuously trying to create totalitarian states.

What in human history makes you think that?

There is evidence of governments using power beyond their intended use to create totalitarian states.

I already have to show my ID to get into some events, and that has my full name, DoB, weight, address, and organ donor status on it. Date of vaccination hardly seems more sensitive than any of those. I could certainly imagine categories of health data that raise concerns but honestly this isn't it.

I guess you never traveled internationally or to countries which have mandatory vaccinations. Polio, Yellow Fever etc.

Yes I do want the events that I attend to not be attended by self-centered people who think "their rights" (to an enclosed space during a pandemic) trump the collective safety of the place.

So no, what I do find disturbing is that some people prefer to spread deadly diseases because they can't be bothered with the collective

If the alternative is death, sure.

Which it certainly is not, if you look at the numbers.

People sick with corona going to events will clearly cause statistical deaths, it's not ambiguous.

People who drive (especially SUV) will clearly cause statistical deaths, it's not ambiguous.

sure and we require them to have a pass (you might know it as driving license) to mitigate the loss.

If you do not think that driving license counts, from the health angle, people with visual impairments are required to wear glasses (or have corrective surgery) to drive.

Sure, we make all sorts of trade offs. The other poster is arguing that people should people able to choose for themselves whether they risk infection, which isn't the point of these passes, they are a community health measure.

Cars don't infect other cars on the road.

Neither do people anymore, or at least those who aren't comfortable with that risk, since the vaccine is widely available for all...

If the vaccine works, why in the world do you care who doesn't want to take it?

> since the vaccine is widely available for all...

They sure as fuck aren't. There's three countries in the world where the percentage of fully vaccinated is over 50% (two of which have <1m people, and the third one being Israel that doesn't even pretend to count Palestinians). In France that number is 14%. In my country we haven't even reached 1%.

> If the vaccine works, why in the world do you care who doesn't want to take it?

Because there are millions of people that can't receive one due to the weaker immune system, which is where herd immunity is supposed to kick in.

> People sick with corona going to events will clearly cause statistical deaths, it's not ambiguous.

People with any kind of cold symptoms going out and mingling also clearly cause statistical deaths, it's not ambiguous. Yet, we lived in a world where people did that routinely and it was left up to parents to protect their children from influenza, something far deadlier than Covid19 for them.

Also, destroying economies, livelihoods, preventing socialization, travel will also clearly cause statistical deaths, it's not ambiguous.

But, I guess, Covid19 means the saint class never owning up to their mistakes.

Beatings will continue until morale improves, I guess.

You wrote this after I said in a sibling tree that we do make all sorts of trade offs. I agree there's lots of places that we could make better ones!

> we could make better ones

Who is the "we" deciding what tradeoffs are better?

Various different 'societies'.

I mean, humans have lived as groups with rules for thousands of years, I'm not sure what you are getting at.

Ok so the actual alternative is a non-functioning healthcare system and routine procedures suddenly becoming an issue.

So perhaps it's not death, but definitely economical stagnation.