Why Covid19 ‘Vaccine Passports’ For Travel Are Wrong.

Travel has always at it’s most fundamental level been about freedom. Over the years there have been necessary limitations on that freedom, for security needs or the purposes of public health for example, and by and large they have been reasonable and acceptable, but this newly proposed ‘vaccine passport’ for Covid19 is a step too far. It places unparalleled restrictions on our freedom to travel with no clear clinical justification, is immoral, unethical and even illegal in many countries, and should never be imposed on any traveller anywhere.

The covid19 pandemic has seen some of the worst restrictions placed on individual freedoms since the second world war, from unjustified lockdowns to the shutting down of entire industries, including the hospitality and travel sectors, and now as the world starts to come through the end of the pandemic travellers face even more punitive restrictions on their freedom in the form of ‘vaccine passports’.

Restrictions like these, where entire countries have effectively been placed under house arrest, people have been encouraged to hate entire groups of ‘others’ and psychological warfare has been used to terrify people into submission would once been thought of as unthinkable in the western world after the horrors of WWII, and they should horrify anyone with any understanding of authoritarianism and who values the freedom we once had to travel the world. We are not a ‘papers please’ society, according to our very own UK Parliament, and yet it seems that is exactly what we are becoming.

I am a classical libertarian at heart which means that I value individualism and freedom above almost all else, and whilst I recognise that sometimes some restrictions are obviously necessary in society I am extremely suspicious of and naturally opposed to anything that seeks to curtail that freedom without good reason. That is why I am wholly opposed, instinctively and intellectually to the proposed ‘vaccine passports’.

The vaccine.

I should qualify first of all that this is nothing to do with the vaccine itself. As a nurse who routinely advises on travel health and vaccines in my own travel clinic, and wholeheartedly recommends them when they are appropriate (with a huge emphasis on the ‘when based on individual medical histories), I take the same stance with this vaccine too. I should also take a moment to dispel a few myths and misinformation about the vaccine because frankly scaremongering and emotional zealotry has replaced fact and common sense all too often in this debate, and that has been a significant problem.

There are three primary vaccines that have all been approved for use in the UK, declared safe and have met the strict standards set out by the Medicines and Healthcare Regulatory Agency, the Pfizer vaccine, the Oxford Astrazenica vaccine and the Moderna vaccine. All work in similar ways but are safe and they are effective.

Now, like any vaccine there may be side effects, this is true of all medication. Like all vaccines there will be a number of people who have no side effects at all and the vast majority will have a sliding scale of side effects ranging from barely noticeable up to feeling mildly ill. These are in the absolute majority of cases nothing to worry about. There will also be a much smaller percentage of people who may get rare, more serious side effects. Again, this is true of any medication and is not something that is unique to the covid19 vaccination. Acute exanthematous pustulosis or toxic epidermal necrolysis are technically side effects of paracetamol, but people generally consider paracetamol to be safe and don’t think twice about taking one for a headache do they? (Both of those occur in less than 0.01% of patients by the way and are rare to the point of barely being a consideration). Any mainstream media reports of fatalities and side effects should be taken with an extreme amount of salt, remember that there is a vast difference between causation and correlation.

I strongly recommend vaccines in most cases where it is clinically appropriate for the individual, but I also understand that it is and always should be a personal, individual choice, and that choice should never be compromised, coerced or forced.

So in very general terms I do recommend getting the vaccine, but like the risk assessment of all vaccines this is always contingent on an individual risk assessment and personal medical history, because the choice of getting the vaccine is yours and yours alone based on your own judgement and conversations between yourself and a qualified medical professional who knows you best. As a nurse I can advise you, give you the facts, but never coerce, force or pressure you into a decision either way. That is the basis of informed consent and underpins everything we do. One of the most pernicious and horrific things I have seen in this whole farce is the malicious, disgusting and dangerous public attitudes toward anyone who has any genuine questions and concerns over what is still a very new vaccine. People have the right to be worried, they have the right to have questions and concerns and should be able to ask those questions without fear of being berated. There are many out there who may be pregnant for example and concerned about the fact that not enough is yet known about the long term effects for the vaccine to be routinely advised, there may be people with a history of significant reactions to vaccines, you just don’t know people’s individual circumstances or reasons, and you have no right to. These people have the right to make their own decisions based on the facts and the evidence, they are not antivaxxers, they are not evil, they are not killing your grandma or putting people at risk. That mentality needs to end because it is disgusting, pernicious and wrong.

The ‘vaccine passport’.

Despite frequent exertions to the contrary, the Health Secretary Matt Hancock explicitly ruling them out and even the UK vaccines Minister Nadhim Zawadi stating that there are absolutely, definitely, without any shadow of a doubt zero plans at all for any form of passport, because ‘it isn’t how we do things in Great Britain’ according to our very own, supposedly Libertarian Prime Minister, the truth is that a vaccine passport is being considered in Whitehall.

This means at the very least we will be forced to carry some form of ID or information showing our vaccination status to be able to at the very least travel, but more likely to do anything else too.

Of course the language used is very evasive and non committal, it is sometimes referred to as a passport, or a certification, but it is happening. It has already happened in New York and soon the rest of the so called land of the free, other countries are following suit and the EU is pushing for it too (I’m less surprised there, they have form). And it is very, very wrong.

Apart from the fact that there are obvious logistical and practical concerns about the effectiveness of any new passport, the very idea is immoral and illegal in many countries.

Don’t we already have vaccination passports?

One of the most common arguments for this system is that we already have vaccination passports and requirements for travellers, so why is this new vaccine passport any different? What those who make that erroneous comparison are referring to is the ICVP, or the International Certificate of Vaccination or Prophylaxis, and whilst it is true that it is used in that way, the two things are not comparable at all.

First of all is the disease itself, and the risk of covid19 is not comparable to the risk of those diseases where vaccines are considered mandatory under the ICVP by an order of magnitude. Yellow Fever for example is a mosquito borne disease where up to 1 in 4 will develop serious symptoms and of those people, up to half of those cases will prove fatal. Case fatality rates of Yellow Fever are in the range of 15 to 50% and the disease is very prone to having extreme epidemic outbreaks, compared to the current CFR of 0.8 – 9.64% and dropping for covid19. To give another example Meningitis is a very serious disease that in most cases doesn’t require a proof of vaccination on entry to a country, unless you are attending the Hajj or Umrah pilgrimages in Saudi Arabia due very specifically to the significantly raised risk during that time. These are mandatory vaccinations in a sense, but are used in very specific circumstances in very specific countries, they are not applied across the board as a blanket measure and only apply to distinct and specified high public health risks. Covid19 does not now fit that definition, not by a long shot.

At best, in my opinion, the Covid19 vaccination should be added to the list of ‘recommended’ travel vaccines and people should be allowed to make their own risk assessments and their own choices.

Secondly the ICVP is mandated under specific International Health Regulations under the World Health Assembly, regulations that provide an international set of laws and guidelines that provide a public health response to various PHEICs (Public Health Emergencies of International Concern). More importantly these regulations are applied very specifically in very limited, surgical ways that effectively curtail and manage any current and emerging public health risks whilst still allowing international travel, traffic and trade and still allowing society to function normally. This is part of the reason fir example that international travel bans and border closures have never been a recommended part of emergency pandemic response protocols.

We already have a set of internationally recognised standards for public health risks and mandatory vaccination status for travel in very specific circumstances, if this current pandemic reached the standard required to be managed by that, it easily could be. It does not. We do not need a whole new ‘passport’ system.

The proposed ‘vaccine passport’ is not even close to being the same thing as this. Not only is this a blanket solution where a tailored surgical strike solution would be appropriate, so far every country who is planning this are essentially applying their own standards to it, potentially applying it to not only travel but everyday life as well, and worst of all it will not be international health organisations or authorities that oversees its implementation or use. It will not be the WHO (who by the way do not recommend vaccine passports or immunity passports either) or a border official checking you meet international requirements to enter a very specific place at a specific time, it will be the owner of an airline taking the unilateral decision to ban those who don’t have the vaccine, it will be no neck John the doorman, with no qualifications or basic intelligence, banning you from entering the hotel unless you show your papers. And it won’t be an internationally recognised certificate of vaccination either, like the ICVP, it will be any number of tech companies designing a variety of apps that will decide what is acceptable and how you have to present your vaccination status, with zero guarantee so far that it will be recognised from one country to the next.

These are economic decisions, designed in the most charitable interpretation as a response to get ‘back to normal’ and kickstart travel and the economy again, at worst they are decisions based on fear and ignorance and designed to illegally and immorally discriminate, coerce and bully. They are political decisions based on the extreme precautionary principle. What they are not are decisions based on science or clinical data.

The ethical and legal issues.

The ethical issues around the blanket enforcement of a vaccine passport are quite clear. Travel and freedom of movement are basic human rights, and when those rights are curtailed in any way, which they can be for good and very specific reasons, there must be clear and unarguable reasons for that. This vaccine passport, based on the supposed threat of Covid19, simply does not reach that standard. It doesn’t even come close.

The impact of any passport will quite simply be discriminatory, both directly and indirectly and that is illegal under the Equalities Act 2010 in the UK and Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights in the EU. Many other western countries have similar legislation. It really is as simple as that.

Our public health policy is based on the medical paradigm of informed consent, and rightly so. UNESCO’s Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights states very clearly that any medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned.

As I stated earlier there will be a large number of people who physically cannot get the vaccine for a wide variety of reasons, from religious concerns to medical issues and everything in between. There will even be for some time yet a number of willing younger people who want the vaccine but are unable to get it because of their low risk status. For some European countries and in the US for example, it may well be coming to the end of 2021 or even 2022 before everyone who wants a jab can be vaccinated. Many countries are still very far behind the UKs rollout. Is that fair? Should they be denied the right to live their lives? Discriminating against those people by denying them access to travel, denying access to services or punishing them in other ways by treating them differently than those who can get or have had the vaccine is illegal. Punishing those who do not or can not get the vaccine and rewarding those that do is immoral and unethical, especially when bribery and threatening language is used to force people to get it, or use it as a way to ‘get back to normal’ out of a system of disproportionately harmful lockdown measures they imposed on the country in the first place. It is just abhorrent. It is coercion plain and simple, and that is morally, ethically and legally wrong, and as I said earlier goes against every fundamental ethical principle of informed consent that any medical practice is underpinned by.

Then of course there are also those who will be indirectly discriminated against by the introduction of mandatory vaccine passports. There are those from lower economic backgrounds, black and ethnic minority backgrounds and younger age groups who are traditionally less likely to take part in vaccination rollouts, again for a wide variety of reasons, and they will be discriminated against. Frankly it doesn’t matter if you think that is right or not, they have that right, and that freedom of choice.

Even the EU Parliamentary Assembly, on their own report on the ethical, legal and practical considerations for the Covid19 vaccination rollout in January 2021, stated very clearly in its resolution 7.3 that the vaccine should never be mandatory, that all citizens should be made very aware of that fact and they should never under any circumstances be politically, socially or otherwise pressured to get it or discriminated against if they choose not to get it.

That is pretty black and white isn’t it? The vaccine is not mandatory and no one should be pressured into getting it or discriminated against for not getting it. You cannot put it any simpler than that, and yet this is exactly what the vaccine passport does! The vaccine does not meet the clinical standard for mandatory travel vaccination consideration, and yet governments all over the world are threatening to punitively take away not only our rights to travel but our basic freedoms to live and work if we do not get it.

And the worst thing about this is the wholesale support from the mob! I wonder how history will judge the colour of their shirts? Brown is already taken.

The mainstream media is full of headlines stating this is a way to ‘help us travel safely again‘ and as a way to jumpstart international travel (which by the way had no clinical reason to be stopped in the first place). Tech companies specialising in biometric data are jumping at the bit to make a lot of money off this and are obviously ramping up the ‘return to normal’ rhetoric for their own ends.

Fear. Control. Threats. Coercion.

Seriously, can no one else see a problem with this?

The practical issues.

Now quite apart from the fact that the proposed vaccine passports are unethical in concept and illegal in practice, why is no one asking fundamental questions about the practical logistics of running such a scheme? As I stated before this is not an addition to the already existing ICVP programme overseen by various WHA’s, this is a whole new set of systems being looked at by a variety of different countries with different ideas and different tech companies all trying to undercut each other to get the lucrative contracts. And we all know that the UK and EU governments stellar record with farming out contracts during the pandemic don’t we?

Still think this is a good idea?

I mean at the end of the day we still do not know the long term effectiveness of the vaccine. Will we need to get a new jab every single year just like we do the influenza jab and then get an updated passport for that? How often will booster jabs be needed? How much will that cost? Who will pay for it? More importantly, who will make money from it? Hell, influenza has the potential to be a significant risk every flu season, are we going to be expected to add our flu jab status to the vaccine passport too?

What about the requirements for each individual country? What if any given country doesn’t recognise the specific brand of vaccine you have taken? What if the French decide to throw another political strop about Astrazeneca? Will only those with the Pfizer jab be allowed in? Will the ‘digital green passport’ be accepted in Mexico? Or Thailand? Or Australia?

What if you have only had one jab but cannot get an appointment for your second dose before your need to travel? Will that be allowed? What if a country decides to enact policies that don’t recognise any passport at all and lets anyone travel, or the next country decides to only recognise one specific type of app? What if every country has their own specific app? Will world travellers need a hundred different apps and every type of jab imaginable? Will we need IATA’s ‘travel pass’ to fly on their airlines, but a completely separate one to enter the country when we land? What if we have one flight with an IATA airline but then another connecting flight outside of that system?

We also seriously need to question the role of private business in international health regulations like this. If, as the EUs own resolution 2337 on democracies facing the covid19 pandemic states ‘any proposed vaccine passport should only ever be used for their designated purpose of monitoring vaccine efficacy, potential side-effects and adverse events’, then why exactly are private businesses and corporations being allowed to stipulate their own discriminatory rules based on them? Will private airlines, hotels, bars or any other travel or leisure industry business open themselves up to future legal action? And if they are going to be forced to use this system to ‘reopen’ without punitive action, then will that help or will it more likely hinder their business?

What about privacy issues around those developing apps having access to private medical records, which at this current developmental stage is being proposed as an alternative to little pieces of card. Apart from the tiny issue of medical confidentiality, which despite recent rhetoric is actually very important, what guarantees do we have that our data will be kept that way? Why should every Tom, Dick and Harry be able to access or view our personal medical data which at the moment are still protected under legal privacy and confidentiality laws?

And perhaps most importantly how long will this be a requirement? The risk of covid19 is falling rapidly, to the point it is barely more of a risk than influenza and it hasn’t been considered a High Consequence Infectious Disease since last March, and that is being compounded as vaccine rollouts continue to get better and better (some places are performing better than others admittedly). The risk of international travel is already relatively low. Will these passports only last until the risk has fallen low enough? Who decides that standard? Are we expected to believe that the risk should fall to absolute zero which just will not happen? Or will this be a permanent requirement? In which case a whole new set of worrying questions need to be asked.

What is the point?

And that level of risk leads to perhaps the real question that no one is asking. What exactly is the point here?

Now just to shut the extremists up, covid19 is a very real disease, it is a very serious disease that can have very serious consequences and has placed a huge strain on the worlds health systems over the last year. That is a fact and is not in doubt. What covid19 is not however is the world ending plague that the media and the world’s governments have portrayed it to be.

When it first appeared in 2019 it hit the worlds population hard, as new diseases tend to do, so hard in fact that governments around the world ignored existing emergency pandemic response protocol and clinical advice designed for this exact scenario (yes, governments all over the world have been preparing for this for decades) and did the exact opposite based on fear, the precautionary principle and public opinion, which led to travel bans, lockdowns and mask mandates. No government wanted to be seen to be doing nothing.

With any new disease large numbers of initial cases and deaths in the population it effects are unfortunately inevitable until more is learned about the disease and actions are taken against it. But as we have learned over the course of the year the risk is now not as high as initially feared.

Despite initial fears, Covid19 was declassified as a High Consequence Infectious Disease over a year ago now. Of all current active cases, the risk of developing severe symptoms is just 0.4%. For those under 50 and with no specific health risks the risk is even lower than that, with even the risk to those over 75 (and over the average age of death in the UK) with severe comorbidities the highest, yet still less than 1%. The number of cases has fallen significantly, perhaps in part to the overreporting of data due to rushed PCR tests being administered incorrectly at too high a cycle rate, but the levels of hospitalisations and deaths have dropped significantly too. Asymptomatic spread, once used to scaremonger the population to believe that everyone who didn’t have symptoms were spreading the disease by default, is now believed to be negligible compared to initial estimates. The number of cases and deaths that were initially feared, based on now highly laughable and debunked models from the ever wrong Ferguson et al (and yet still not as high as those prepared for in the planning for an emergency response for a super coronavirus pandemic) never happened. Hospitals were never overwhelmed.

A serious disease yes, but an honest conversation about the genuine risk was never allowed to happen because of the fear and the precautionary principle.

The vaccine rollout programme in the UK has been extremely successful, and it has been fair to good in many other countries too, with huge percentages of the adult population already vaccinated in the UK. Findings from the University College London suggest that this is reinforcing the natural antibodies and T Cells that the population in the UK has naturally built up and has lowered the risk of the virus spreading through communities significantly.

So given all of this, by the time any of the practical issues raised around the introduction of the vaccine passports are solved, they will be largely irrelevant to the risk of covid19 and be completely redundant, so what exactly is the point of introducing them at all? Especially now, when we are coming to the end of this?

Why are we not only continuing with extreme and disproportionate measures, but contemplating adding even more draconian measures in on top? Where is the justification for it? The truth is there is no justification. No clinical justification at any rate.

It is time we started to open up travel again.

It is time the world opened up again and travel resumed as normal. Travellers are hungry to see the world they love and the travel industry is eager to have them back. There is still room for some mild caution of course, and it is perhaps right that smaller countries who do not have the healthcare infrastructure to cope with another outbreak take a little more time to slowly ease back to normality, that is reasonable and proportionate, but in general terms there is no reason that most developed countries cannot open up fully with no restrictions, no mandatory quarantines or lockdowns, no mask mandates or any other wholly unnecessary punitive (and against all science, before anyone starts) impositions. And certainly no damn covid19 vaccine passports.

Although to be fair as a nurse I am ecstatic that people are finally paying attention to basic hand hygiene, I have been screaming from the rooftops for years! We can keep that change!

Vaccines are a wonderful thing, and the covid19 vaccine is a great step that will absolutely help in the fight against the disease, but forcing or coercing people is not the way to ensure a strong uptake. Continued punitive and disproportionate measures that curtail travel for no real clinical reason are no longer justifiable in any way, shape or form, and a ‘vaccine passport’ that will be a permanent solution is not the answer. Pandemic response best practice has always been to protect the vulnerable and learn to live with the disease as life goes on. We have done it with every PHEIC before, from sarscov1 to MERS and many more, and we do it every single year with influenza, norovirus and many others. It is time we did that with sarscov2 and Covid19 as well.

The proposed vaccine passport is wrong on every level, it is unethical, immoral, impractical, unworkable and illegal, and it should be opposed with every fibre of our being in a free and democratic society.

Did you enjoy this article? I would love to hear your thoughts in the comments section below or on my Facebook or Twitter pages and please feel free to share it with any or all of the social media buttons. If you want to get more great backpacking tips, advice and inspiration, please subscribe to updates via email in the box to your right.

Related Articldes

Ask A Nurse. 10 Of Your Most Common Travel Health Questions Answered.

Everything You Need To Know About Travel Vaccinations But Were Afraid To Ask.

How To Decide What Travel Vaccinations You Really Need.

The Ultimate Guide To Travel Vaccinations.

Michael Huxley is a published author, professional adventurer and founder of the travel website, Bemused Backpacker. He has spent the last twenty years travelling to over 100 countries on almost every continent, slowly building Bemused Backpacker into a successful business after leaving a former career in emergency nursing and travel medicine, and continues to travel the world on numerous adventures every year.

Tagged with: , , , , ,
Posted in Travel Health, Travel Talk
195 comments on “Why Covid19 ‘Vaccine Passports’ For Travel Are Wrong.
  1. Steve says:

    This isnt about covid anymore, this is about the precedent that this vaccine passport sets! The removal of consent and the coercion/force of a medical procedure to go about your daily life! Thats a very dangerous precedent!

  2. Martin says:

    These are wrong on so many levels.

  3. John says:

    So unBritish. What happened to our so called libertarian PM?

  4. Helen says:

    I work on critical care and have treated so many covid patients and you are absolutely right. This put so much pressure on us but no more than usual winter pressure, and none that would not be an issue if warnings on staffing levels were ever heeded. Using scare tactics like overwhelming the NHS should never be allowed to justify such authoritarian measures.

    • I agree completely. If they really cared about saving the NHS they would have listened to calls for better staffing and more critical care capacity for decades, including from Exercise Cygnus.

  5. Craig says:

    These should never be allowed. Absolutely disgusting.

  6. Leanne says:

    So much food for thought here and a lot of great points. I genuinely always assumed that this was no different to any other travel vaccine border control.

  7. Barry says:

    So it turns out the politicians were all lying about bringing them in after all. I’m shocked.

  8. Jan says:

    Excellent article and very well argued. Jan.

  9. James says:

    So how soon before the ‘vaccine’ passport also includes how much you drink or smoke or what your body fat % is? How soon before it isn’t just about travel but getting into shops? Or your finances and your food quota, or access to education or getting a mortgage? Or is that conspiracy too?

  10. Ian says:

    This is Unconstitutional and evil. I will never accept a Vaccine Certificate/Passport. We live in 2021 not in 1939 Germany.

  11. Peter Welsby. says:

    I normally like your opinions but you are wrong on this. It’s a harmless bit of paper and a fuck you those selfish idiots who refuse to help get rid of this awful virus. Refuse the vaccine all you like, feel free to put your own lives at risk but what right have you got to put the rest of us in the same position?

    • What right do you have to impose your fear and ignorance on others and take away their natural right to choice and consent? Medical ethics exist for a reason, and if you think this is a harmless bit of paper and anything like the ICVP used for other travel vaccines you are going to get a very rude awakening.

  12. Matt says:

    Surely this is extremely counter productive? The coercion, threats and sinister nature of this proposal will put alot of people off who were previously “on the fence” about taking the vaccine.

    • Exactly, I agree, and sadly see this all too often in my travel clinic. It is natural and okay to have concerns and questions about any medication, vaccine and medical procedure, but instead of allowing medical professionals to answer those with calm, measured fact, unqualified mobs are screaming fire and brimstone at people and pushing them to extreme reactions. If they would just shut the hell up with the moral indignation and judgemental idiocy vaccine uptake would be even higher than it is and a lot easier to roll out too.

  13. Sean Blackmore. says:

    Goering said in the Nursmburg trial the only thing a government needs to turn people into slaves is fear.

  14. Lisa says:

    Why are these even needed? i don’t understand why the “i trust the science” people are ignoring that those who recovered from covid have antibodies that are much more effective at fighting future covid than vaccine antibodies? What is the point of the vaccines never mind passports?

  15. Kelly says:

    Good luck travelling then.

  16. David says:

    covid is now just an excuse to literally subvert democracy and freedoms.

  17. Dan says:

    Taking the vaccine and having a vaccine passport is just leading to a digital ID and a social credit system. Welcome to China.

  18. Rob Malone says:

    I read double-jabbed people carry same levels of Covid as the untaxed and could be as capable of passing on virus as non-immunised. So what’s the point?

    • Not quite, but not far off either. The vaccination does reduce the chances of individuals who are at risk having serious symptoms, but very little more than that. Some studies are showing that it reduces transmission but it doesn’t seem to do that by much, and those studies are not concrete or numerous enough yet either,

  19. Nick says:

    So these vaccine passports are being implemented without sufficient scientific debate as to their effectiveness? So much for democracy.

  20. Katherine says:

    You should be proud to show a vaccine passport! It shows you care about other human beings! And you call yourself a nurse? You’ve just lost a long time fan.

  21. Anthony Wild says:

    It’s a disaster that we have come to this in our supposedly free society. I’m not an anti vaxxer but i am not in favor of forcing people what to do.

  22. Michelle says:

    I went to a restaurant on Friday night and they did not ask anyone for vaccine passports! Needless to say they’ll have my business. I will not comply with this. Ever.

  23. Laura Halford says:

    So many excellent points in this article and I think it is obvious now (they have all but admitted it) that these are just threats to get the younger age groups to take the vax. Wrong on so many levels.

  24. Richard says:

    I think what is becoming clearer is that those who are in favor of forced/mandatory Vaccinations and Vaccine Passports would have made very good fall in line Nazis.

  25. Laslo says:

    Today vaccine passports, tomorrow social credit system? Where does it end?

  26. Leanne says:

    How can you call yourself a nurse and be anti vax and anti science?

  27. Neil says:

    Covid is just about done so no need for vaccine passports at all.

  28. Dave C. says:

    I’m honestly struggling with this and terrified of what is coming further down the line. I just cannot accept that the global push for vax passports is just some great benign groupthink done for our benefit. Increasingly it looks like a concerted, pre-arranged project. I hope I’m wrong but I don’t think I am.

  29. Will says:

    An asymptomatic unvaccinated but infected individual poses risk of transmission of only 0.3%. I’m not certain that vaccine passports add a lot of value, nor worth dividing society, if mask mandates and symptom screening processes are in place.

    • They don’t add any value at all Will, and neither do mask mandates or screening processes at this point, not unless you want to bring them in for every other communicable disease too.

  30. Becki says:

    They are working really well in France.

  31. Mel says:

    I know this is a month or two old now but everything you said has been absolutely spot on.

  32. Jeff says:

    There is no way the passports reach the standard for informed consent, there are other treatment options and making a choice of treatment is not refusal of it. and even if it was no one can be punished for doing so.

  33. Sophie Young says:

    We all know vaccinne passports will develop into a Chinese style social credit system but with different language.

  34. Brian says:

    It’s all already planned out, they are coming wether you like it or not, along with full on digital ids. Anyone who thinks we live in a democracy has their eyes firmly shut.

  35. Dominic says:

    It’s absolutely crazy to me that you’re proud of your willful ignorance and being an anti vaxxer. It’s insane.

  36. John says:

    I believe in being vaccinated but hate the idea of Vaccinne passports. They are just wrong. I mean do people REALLY want to show their “papers” everytime the go to a shop or a bar or anywhere else? That is insane!

  37. Jodie says:

    Really appreciate such a well thought out and reasonable article on this issue, GREAT job! I have to agree these decisions really do seem to be being made with anything but people’s health in mind.

  38. Pete says:

    There is never an excuse to demand health status of anyone. Ever. It is wrong & unscientific.

  39. Sam says:

    What scares me the most isn’t the idea of the passports themselves. but the readiness in which so many are embracing them and are ready to judge and condemn those that disagree.

  40. Ste says:

    Tell me how a vaccine passport will make any difference to the annual winter stress the NHS is under every year?

  41. Greg says:

    Obscene loss of liberty. How it can even considered?!

  42. Tim says:

    This one article is better than anything I have seen from the biased, scaremongering msm! Love to see it!

  43. Michelle says:

    Time for that permanent gap year from the UK.

  44. Chris says:

    What variant are we on this week? I forget?

  45. Gabriella Ćarnoká says:

    I agree completely!

    Bodily autonomy must never be trampled on.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Hi, I'm Michael! I'm a published author, qualified nurse and world travelling professional adventurer! I have spent 15 years travelling over 100 countries and I want to inspire you to do the same! Want to know more about me? Just click here!

Get notified about all the latest travel tips, advice and inspiration as well as amazing competitions and exclusive discounts! Don't worry we will never send you spam or unwanted mail.

Join 18,231 other followers

Global Spirit Partnership Badge
Copyright notice.

© Bemused Backpacker and the gecko logo is owned and copyrighted by Michael Huxley 2020. Unless stated, all blog and website content is owned and copyrighted by Michael Huxley 2020.

Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from Michael Huxley is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Michael Huxley and Bemused Backpacker with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Protected by Copyscape DMCA Copyright Detector

%d bloggers like this: