Vaccine passports: Rewarding the virtuous or stigmatizing the marginalized?

[marshwiggle]

The title pretty much says it all. Vaccine passports would simplify all kinds of things for fully vaccinated people, and would make it easier to keep people safe in all kinds of situations. However, since the vaccination rate varies across the population, groups with lower vaccination rates (for whatever reason) would face restrictions that vaccinated people wouldn't.

Is this a public good, or a discriminatory evil? And whichever it is, is "science" on the "right" side?

[lightning]

The title pretty much says it all. Vaccine passports would simplify all kinds of things for fully vaccinated people, and would make it easier to keep people safe in all kinds of situations. However, since the vaccination rate varies across the population, groups with lower vaccination rates (for whatever reason) would face restrictions that vaccinated people wouldn't.

Is this a public good, or a discriminatory evil? And whichever it is, is "science" on the "right" side?

It's a good idea in theory, until someone, usually someone who is not in a position to enforce, has to deny services to someone without a vaccine passport. The cops at grocery stores help the cashiers enforce ID laws. The bouncers at bars enforce dress codes & age requirements. The TSA and airlines have airport security on speed dial, for dealing with non-compliance . Are all businesses really in a position to have off-duty cops and hired muscle help with enforcement of the vaccine passport--or worse, have their employees doing the enforcement?

And the vaccine passport will provide another rallying point for the nut job freedom fighters. Even though I'm in a hurry to get back to normal, we are in an intriguing spot right now in the pandemic, and the vaccinated & mostly-protected members of the population would like to see if additional increased COVID-19 sickness & death in the ranks of the un-vaccinated will scare the un-vaccinated into compliance. Some people have to learn the hard way.

[waterboy]

Just wondering if some enterprising biologist somewhere is jumping on this issue as a case of natural selection in progress.

[Parasaurolophus]

Presumably, those who cannot be vaccinated for whatever reason would be issued with an official document recognizing their exemption (or, indeed, simply given a vaccine passport).

It seems fine to me, especially at this stage in the game.

[marshwiggle]

Just wondering if some enterprising biologist somewhere is jumping on this issue as a case of natural selection in progress.

There have been lots of stories about how covid is disproportionately affecting poor people, minority communities, etc. because they live in close quarters, often have low paying "essential" jobs, and poor access to transit to get vaccines.  So they, along with the anti-vaxxers by choice, are being selected against. I'm not sure how many biologists want to touch that.

[marshwiggle]

Presumably, those who cannot be vaccinated for whatever reason would be issued with an official document recognizing their exemption (or, indeed, simply given a vaccine passport).

It seems fine to me, especially at this stage in the game.

That would defeat the entire purpose and make the whole thing pointless.

[Parasaurolophus]

Presumably, those who cannot be vaccinated for whatever reason would be issued with an official document recognizing their exemption (or, indeed, simply given a vaccine passport).

It seems fine to me, especially at this stage in the game.

That would defeat the entire purpose and make the whole thing pointless.

That depends on what, exactly, the point of the 'passport' is, doesn't it?

It seems to me that we should treat those who cannot be vaccinated the same way we treat the vaccinated for most purposes. They're going to be unvaccinated no matter what, through no fault of their own. That's the base level of risk we should be prepared to accept. Everyone else...

[marshwiggle]

Presumably, those who cannot be vaccinated for whatever reason would be issued with an official document recognizing their exemption (or, indeed, simply given a vaccine passport).

It seems fine to me, especially at this stage in the game.

That would defeat the entire purpose and make the whole thing pointless.

That depends on what, exactly, the point of the 'passport' is, doesn't it?

It seems to me that we should treat those who cannot be vaccinated the same way we treat the vaccinated for most purposes. They're going to be unvaccinated no matter what, through no fault of their own. That's the base level of risk we should be prepared to accept. Everyone else...

No. People who have medical reasons they can't be vaccinated will presumably want to be protected from covid, (especially if they're immuno-compromised), and so will be willing to maintain some safety precautions (such as distancing) to protect themselves. The anti-vaxxers by choice, on the other hand, will typically balk at any restrictions on them, even if that may place others at risk.

A different passport for people who can't be vaccinated might make sense for this reason, if it clarifies what restrictions they will be willing to accept for their own safety.

[Sun_Worshiper]

I'm all for vaccine passports, particularly for things like flying and entering arenas. There would be exceptions (i.e. the grocery store) and exemptions for people who can't get vaccinated for some legitimate reason, but this would indeed stigmatize the "marginalized" (more apt labels would be the selfish, ignorant, and apathetic) and, in doing so, lead to higher vaccination rates.

And make no mistake, vaccine passports are coming. Not from the federal government, in most cases, but from the private sector.

[Parasaurolophus]

Presumably, those who cannot be vaccinated for whatever reason would be issued with an official document recognizing their exemption (or, indeed, simply given a vaccine passport).

It seems fine to me, especially at this stage in the game.

That would defeat the entire purpose and make the whole thing pointless.

That depends on what, exactly, the point of the 'passport' is, doesn't it?

It seems to me that we should treat those who cannot be vaccinated the same way we treat the vaccinated for most purposes. They're going to be unvaccinated no matter what, through no fault of their own. That's the base level of risk we should be prepared to accept. Everyone else...

No. People who have medical reasons they can't be vaccinated will presumably want to be protected from covid, (especially if they're immuno-compromised), and so will be willing to maintain some safety precautions (such as distancing) to protect themselves. The anti-vaxxers by choice, on the other hand, will typically balk at any restrictions on them, even if that may place others at risk.

A different passport for people who can't be vaccinated might make sense for this reason, if it clarifies what restrictions they will be willing to accept for their own safety.

Like I said, that's fine. I merely indicated that I'm OK with governments deciding to do the other thing if they decide that's more desirable to preserve privacy or some such reason.

In any event, the main point remains unchanged: I don't see how such documents could appropriately be characterized as discriminatory or stigmatizing, so long as accomodations are made for those who legitimately cannot be vaccinated. For anyone else, well, tough shit.

[clean]

Who Can NOT get the vaccine?

Unlike the Flu vaccine, it does not rely on eggs. There is nothing in it that is active or alive like Small Pox, polio, or measles did.

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/recommendations/underlying-conditions.html?s_cid=11413:reasons%20not%20to%20get%20covid%20vaccine:sem.ga:p:RG:GM:gen:PTN:FY21


Not trying to argue, but I m not sure who is prohibited from getting it, at least longer term (like pregnant or nursing mother)..

[ciao_yall]

Just wondering if some enterprising biologist somewhere is jumping on this issue as a case of natural selection in progress.

There have been lots of stories about how covid is disproportionately affecting poor people, minority communities, etc. because they live in close quarters, often have low paying "essential" jobs, and poor access to transit to get vaccines.  So they, along with the anti-vaxxers by choice, are being selected against. I'm not sure how many biologists want to touch that.

Then, isn't it even more important for these people to get vaxxed? And if there are barriers (transportation, time off to recover from side effects) then this is a good opportunity to address these.

[Istiblennius]

Just wondering if some enterprising biologist somewhere is jumping on this issue as a case of natural selection in progress.

More like a case of carrying capacity in progress. Density-dependent factors that push back on population growth do include increasing rates of disease spread. And as noted, some of the folks bearing the brunt of population density and being most impacted by spread are not necessarily anti-vaxxers or part of the pseudopatriotic Kristian "freedom for me at the expense of freedom for everyone else" crowd.

[dismalist]

Vaccine passports neither reward the virtuous nor stigmatize the marginal. They allocate, with safety in mind.

Vaccine passports would be extremely helpful if the virus affected only others, and not ourselves. Then in our regime of no forced vaccinations, freedom of association would rule, and we could use passports to enforce exclusion decided upon by non-state bodies, such as universities.

However, the availability of vaccines have made such a consideration much less relevant. They have turned a public bad into a private bad. Anybody who wants to be vaccinated can be and protect him or herself from the non-vaccinated. Still, freedom of association would hold. If a particularly risk averse group, such as university faculty, wanted their place of work to be free of the non-vaccinated, that is perfectly proper.

Vaccine passports provide information. More information is better.

[downer]

These sources of info don't discriminate. But employers discriminate on the basis of the information they provide.

There's no doubt there is discrimination. The issue is whether it is fair or not. Some Republican governors and administrations have stood out as protectors of the individual, banning this discrimination. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the issue, it is hard to take them seriously.

There were no protests against previous requirements of vaccination for employment that I recall. There has been plenty of discussion of child vaccination and a lot of people are against mandatory vaccination by the state for minors. Immigrants to the US are required to get a host of vaccinations.