I have said many times I am a democrat before all else. My politics are well known, however, while I oppose right wingers, unionists, imperialists, House-Jocks, globalists I respect their rights to hold their views. I am the same with anti-vaxxers. I truly believe it is their absolute right to refuse to be vaccinated if they so decide.
They though must be as tolerant of the rest of society that sees vaccination as the best solution to this present Covid virus. I am sure when vaccines were introduced for Polio, Smallpox, Diphtheria, Typhoid, Hepatitis A, and B and several others too there were many that objected and refused the preventative solution. I know certainly many people refused the MMR vaccine after a conspiracy theorist made up stories about the connection between the vaccine and autism.
In 1998, Andrew Wakefield and his colleagues published a now-infamous and retracted paper in The Lancet, following which, in 2010, Wakefield was struck off the UK medical register for misconduct by the country’s General Medical Council. The fraudulent work on 12 children promoted a non-existent connection between autism and the MMR vaccine, used against measles, mumps and rubella. It propelled Wakefield to notoriety and turbocharged the anti-vaccine movement.
Although totally discredited he remains a vaccine-sceptic. He tours the anti- vax circuit as diseases once vanquished return because of falling rates of immunization. Many large epidemiological studies have found no difference in risk of developmental delays between children who receive the MMR vaccine and those who don’t take a vaccine.
Diseases that were once a scourge on society have been eradicated due to mass vaccination programmes. The ones mentioned above are just just some but not all of the diseases beaten into retreat.
I have a compromised immune system caused by two other medical factors. I researched carefully before deciding that I would indeed take a Covid 19 vaccine if it was offered to me. I did though, because of my pre-conditions demand that I would only take Pfizer or Moderna their method of delivery does not compromise my medical pre-conditions. I did have a bit of a fight to get my preferred choice however thankfully after an appeal I was granted my wish and received my two doses of Pfizer.
I now have my vaccine passport. I understand I am not 100% protected against Covid and that I could also possibly still be a carrier of a variant. I do though take every precaution I can to lessen any chance of infection or transmission. I doubt I will ever again stop wearing a mask in crowded environments. Certainly anytime I fly or use any form of public transport I will do all I can to protect myself and others around me.
I accept that now and in the foreseeable future society through their respective governments will apply certain restrictions that did not exist pre-covid. For example when flying to other countries I may have to accept the need and cost to have a PCR Test. I may need to wear a mask on a flight, train or bus journey. I accept that I will sometimes be asked by restaurants, theatres, cinemas, concert halls etc to prove I have taken every precaution possible to defeat this terrible life taking virus.I may have to show my vaccine passport, be subjected to a Covid test in mant scenarios. These are the precautions we need to adopt to keep the majority of the population safe. As of 3rd August 4,263,392 people worldwide have died from this virus. 200,466,935 people have been infected. Some suggest the number could be even greater with several countries not revealing correct figures on Covid cases or fatalities.
I accept it can be irritating and cause endless frustration while these checks are carried out at different venues. It is all new to most of us, and change of any kind is difficult for some people to accept. I do though understand that all this caution is necessary. It is needed even although I have done everything I can to help in the fight against Covid I have to accept certain restrictions to my routine. We will never be able to back to life as it was before the virus, that is just the reality.
Those that have taken the decision not have themselves vaccinated are quite within their rights. We all need to be tolerant of their choice. The other side of that coin is that they also have to be tolerant of societies choices and rules.
I have seen many of these anti-vaxxers saying they have a right not to take a vaccine but society has no right to put any restrictions on them for this choice. As the strapline of this article notes, Choices Have Consequences.
Anti-vaxxers cannot demand their rights are respected then become belligerent when society says, well you respect our rights too. We have decided that with no vaccine you may not attend the concert, the football match, fly, go by train, bus or eat in certain restaurants. Democracy is about the majority, not the minority. In this case the majority have decided that is the way it must be, no vaccine then restrictions must apply.
Why should those like myself that have taken every precaution open to us have our health and in my case my life endangered because of your views? You have opted out of the vaccine suggesting it is harmful to you and endangers your life. The millions of others and I that are vaccinated we are not preventing you protecting your body as you see fit. You must then respect our right to protection from your choice. It is only right that you accept restrictions that the majority have decided best protects human health.
I would be angry if I am on a plane, train bus and an unvaccinated, unmasked person was allowed near me, possibly infecting me. I would be the same in other public venues, stadia, bars, etc. You say you do not want to be treated differently that you are not second-class citizens. Then act like first class citizens and accept your choice means restrictions. Nobody is forcing you to take the vaccine. All we ask in return is that you not to force the virus and your will on us.
Unfortunately a number of pro Indy sites have turned out to be merely pro SNP sites and have blocked a number of bloggers, including myself. We have managed to frustrate these efforts to close us down through our readers sharing our articles and building our audience. In addition many have taken out free direct subscriptions. I very much appreciate this support.
“I am a democrat”.
Who believes in Apartheid and the bullying of concientious objectors.
Aye, we see ye, Roddy.
Who bought ye…?
I have no idea what you are talking about. Reading this I suspect most people would be in a similar position when interacting with you. False charges and accusations seem to be the modus operandi these, days of the Kool Aid drinkers and biology deniers.
Where’s the bullying?
Is it bullying for a university to say you need 3 B’s and you only get 3 C’s?
Is it bullying to say as a football stadium that you’re not allowed to bring in weapons?
Is it bullying to say as a music venue that you’re not allowed to smuggle in glass bottles?
Or is it just locations are using their discretion to decide that they wish to keep their staff safe from Trumpers who even if they had COVID wouldn’t stay at home and therefore would spread it…
Extremely well put Roddy. Everyone has a choice and if one of these choices is to be part of a society then the majority of that societies wishes has to be taken into account. The alternative is to go off into the wilderness somewhere and start a new society.
I have chosen to not vaccinate. I can catch the virus exactly as a vaccinated person can do. I can spread the virus just as a vaccinated person can do. Why should I be restricted in my movements and actions more than a vaccinated person?
Because you are a selfish person that only has regard for yourself that is why.
If that’s true Roddy, then it’s also true that anyone who wishes to exclude any person based on what substances that have in their system is also selfish
I don’t even know what point you are trying to make with this comment.
I respect your right to take it, but after reading the official literature I have decided that I am not willing to participate in the first human trail of an mRNA based treatment. Especially while it is still in the official trial period.
What you are describing in this article is that anyone who makes an informed choice that does not match your personal choice, then it is correct that they should have fewer rights than you. I regard that as selfish, especially as I have no wish to restrict your movements.
You are absolutely the type of person I speak of in my article. We have to accept your decision but you are enraged and against any decision society takes. As I say you are entitled to refuse the vaccine that is your decision but understand it has consequences. The old phrase, applies, about cake and eating it!
Please explain why my not allowing my body to receive a vaccine is regarded by you as selfish. My not having a vaccine affects no-one. I think you need to elaborate on who you think suffers by my non-use of the vaccine.
Not what I said read just the headline choices, have consequences. I defend your right not to vaccinate I ask you defend the majorities, right to protect their choice.
Barrheadboy, barring me from entering events because I have not had the vaccine is to act in pretence that I am more of a danger to others. I have anti-bodies to the virus as much/more/the same as most people, naturally. If I get the vaccine I develop fresh/new anti-bodies. If I catch the COVID-19 I develop fresh/new anti-bodies. People with the full vaccine in any event that I am barred from are as much a danger to everyone as you or I am. What is being portrayed in the media, yours and the mainstream, amounts to the type of propaganda used against Jews in pre-war Germany. I suggest you think a bit more methodically than you have been doing as it shows a lack of understanding in your opinion piece article. There are things we know and things we have an opinion on. I will ask you this question, where in the media is the talk of those who have had COVID-19 and developed the natural resistance without the vaccine being allowed a passport to get into nightclubs. Are those who have had the natural vaccine barred from places because vaccinated people do not regard them as unselfish and responsible enough to be under the same roof as them?
As I said in my other replies self centred selfish bastards that want their cake and to eat it too.
I love your blogs, but must take issue with you on this. Not everyone who decides not to be vaccinated is an anti vaccination individual. Me, for example; I had my first vaccine and have been left with pretty awful symptoms such as overwhelming exhaustion and dizziness. No-one can tell me if this will resolve itself. I, therefor, can’t consider another jab. Am I now to be excluded from all the good outings in life? This used to be a democratic country and I am in despair, as I feel we will end up with a “them and us” society.
Your piece this morning comes across as somewhat smug ……you are vaccinated……lucky you. Maybe I’m just feeling sorry for myself but I’m disappointed in your article this morning.
Yes you are feeling sorry for yourself I always find it amusing when I read comments that begin, I always read your blogs,tweets posts implying therefore that somehow gives you a right to be insulting and right in what you are saying. As the the blog states life is a democracy the majority rule. These measures are precisely what is required to protect people like yourself too. A recent study in Israel shows that measures like this actually increase the numbers of people getting vaccinated. The more who vaccinate the safer the remainder of the population. That helps you and any other unfortunates that have problems with vaccines. Disappointment is part of life, you will get over it.
You are completely in error in these statements. A vaccinated person protects no-one else from catching COVID-19 in any way shape or form. The vaccinated person catches the virus, doesn’t notice and passes it on to others.
People get hideous illnesses like Ebola, Janice. Do you think they should just be allowed to roam about and infect everyone they come into contact with, because that is what you are implying. When the uptake level of the vaccine reaches a certain point, we can probably relax the rules, but we need to reach that point or we – all us, vaccinated and non-vaccinated – will be in lockdown intermittently forever. I sympathize with your reaction to the vaccine and your decision to not have the second dose, but we all have responsibility for others, too, and, in a situation like this, the bigger picture has to be the norm: that is, society as a whole’s welfare. If the 18-35 age group take up the vaccine offer now, we might get out of this fairly quickly. They are now the single group most at risk of Covid now, and most at risk of Long Covid.
All that needs to be said is Goodbye. I thought you were better than this Roddy.
I didn’t have any expectations on you so there you go.
“… Anti-vaxxers cannot demand their rights are respected then become belligerent when society says, well you respect our rights too. We have decided that with no vaccine you may not attend the concert, the football match, fly, go by train, bus or eat in certain restaurants. Democracy is about the majority, not the minority. In this case the majority have decided that is the way it must be, no vaccine then restrictions must apply… ”
In a nutshell, Roddy. We all have to make the choices we make and take the consequences. When we talk of conspiracy theorists, we should, however, be a bit careful, because gene science shows us that things can act as catalysts although not in themselves harmless.
At the end of the day, we have to weigh up the pros and cons as individuals but must also remember that we need a certain level of take-up of vaccines or they are rendered far less efficient, and people may well die as a result of your decision. Personally, I have always, even as a young person, opted for the vaccine of the day because, usually, the side-effects are considerably less onerous than the illness from which you are being protected.
In the case of autism, of course, for some parents whose children were autistic just at the time of the MMR vaccine, it might have appeared that there was a link, or we might discover in the future that it was a catalyst, although you might also think it would have some to light by this time. What is fairly certain is that a large number of Gulf War veterans did suffer side-effects as a result of multiple vaccines being given in a oner, although, again, the information is sparse. In the end, we have to decide for ourselves, but we should not complain if society takes the bigger picture and decides to curtail certain activities for you – in the general sense, Roddy, not you specifically – as a non-vaccinated person.
I agree, Roddy. Good title. People are quick these days to claim their rights and freedoms, not accepting that these things have a counter side. With freedom comes responsibility and with rights comes obligation.
‘Entitlement’ is not accepting those responsibilities and obligations.
Hi Roddy I’d be interested on your take on this
https://www.redvoicemedia.com/2021/08/freedom-fighter-court-victory-ends-masking-shots-quarantine-in-alberta/
Nope, completely disagree with you on this issue. First off, freedom of choice and whether to partake in medical practises, experimentation etc are fundamental, inalienable and inherent rights. They are non conditional. Whether a majority choose to partake in medical practises and experiments is irrelevant. They do not have a right to then ban folk from partaking in other aspects of life whether it be an outing to a concert or to buy life’s essentials. Nor should it be something that folk “tolerate”. These are decisions that folk should accept. In addition to folk who choose not to use pharmaceuticals for one reason or another, there are folk who medically cannot take them and are advised against doing so. The ban discriminates against them just as much as those who assert their rights. Rights are not there only if a majority agree to them. They are not to be set aside because folk feel uncomfortable. They are to be asserted. Failure to assert one’s rights is how they become trampled upon. A right of course cannot be removed. It can only be waived or ignored if permitted to do so.
The title I agree with “All choices have consequences”. A prime example is this:
Scotland and England are equal partners with equal authority to the state of GB. However, every Scot alive today was born in to the lie that the English government which refers to itself as”UK” is the sole authority of GB and Scotland is beholden to the English government. Every parliamentarian Scotland has shared this indoctrinated view.
Why is this not challenged? Why, when Scotland and England are legally equal partners with equal authority to the state, are Scotland’s pro-indy representatives not at the very least asserting Scotland’s authority? Why do Scots accept that Scotland CANNOT while England CAN? As equals it matters not whether England and all of England’s territories unite against Scotland. England forms only HALF the partnership. Scotland the other. The only thing stopping Scotland are the people of Scotland who refuse to hold their own to account and demand that they act according to the status of equals.
How long do you think it would take before the English government fought against it? The moment the Scottish government took their rightful seats directly opposite the English government as the equal partner of the treaty? Or when Scotland’s representatives stopped referring to them as the sole authority of the state? I would wager they would fight tooth and claw to prevent the Scottish government from taking their position at the table within the parliament of GB but what would that demonstrate and how would they justify their stance against it? Noting that the English parliament was abolished and in its place the parliament of GB was created to house both countries governments as equals.
What is stopping them from doing so? Fear of others reactions? That they may be chucked out? What if they refused to go? Would the police be used against them? And if so, what would stop the Scottish government from making a proclamation there and then? Both governments and their courts recognise Scots sovereignty. They would have no option but to acknowledge the proclamation. Fear of the Scots reaction? Scots voted to reassert their statehood so only the English establishment supporters would whinge before accepting the inevitable. So why not push them to act? Are ordinary Scots simply afraid to tell them to do so?
You should have the right not to take the vaccine but you do not have the right to go around passing the virus on to other people. You are a member of a society. Most people being hospitalised now are the unvaccinated.
This virus kills people. If you know someone who has been killed by the virus you do not easily dismiss it. If you know someone who only just survived the virus in intensive care you do not easily dismiss it. I experienced both.
I had a very bad reaction to the first jab of the vaccine but despite this went ahead with the second jab. Very little reaction the second time.
Remember Trump supporters are anti vaccine for Covid19 in USA but Trump secretly got vaccinated earlier this year. These people are killing fellow American citizens with their lies.
Unfortunately, most people refuse to accept that with “rights” come responsibilities. They take thier rights as a given but consider that responsibility is up to others.
Doing something for the good of society never even occurs to them.
Andrew LLoyd Webber stated on BBC Radio that a person choosing not to vaccinate is the same as a drunk person choosing to drive a car. Roddy, do you agree with that statement/analogy?
Let me push that back at you a person that knows they are HIV having unprotected sex is that acceptable if their choice is not to use a condom?
barrheadboy, getting the vaccine does not protect you from transmitting the virus to others. that is a fact. In answer to your question an HIV positive person should ensure they do not pass the virus to others.
Nowhere in the article does it even remotely suggest that vaccination prevents you from catching or transmitting the virus. However feel free to make things up to fit your narrative. Who needs accuracy when only your rights or beliefs matter eh? As I say selfish self centred bastards.
So what about the selfish people who have been vaccinated and now think they are bomb proof, and are probably still spreading the virus even though they might not suffer badly from it?.
Thus putting the unvaccinated for whatever reason at risk?.How many vaccinated are ignoring track and trace and regular testing as well as not self isolation when possibly being symptomatic?.
They have at least taken every precaution possible, whataboutery does not work with this.
It’s not whataboutery it’s a simple statement of fact.
It seems the meaning of whataboutery is not something you understand.
I know what whataboutery means m8 But the fact still stands.
Nope it truly doesn’t stand.
I’m not an antivaxxer. probably had more than most on here.
one of the last to get smallpox vax, got cholera one every 6 months, diptheria etc. all PROVEN VACCINES, which stopped it being passed on.
Why should I take an unproven one when it doesn’t stop me from catching it or passing it on to others?
I have a DNR on my medical records so I’m not going to be a drain on the NHS.
Let us be very clear you obviously cannot read very well. I have defended your right to refuse any vaccination you want. I have agreed it is your right to take whatever steps you feel necessary to protect your life and well being. However it seems like the rest of the I won’t take a vax mob you have zero tolerance for those that have decided to take the jag, wear the mask social distance. Not only do you expect your rights are met without question you want to trample over the rights of those in the majority, as I say selfish self centred bastards.
Fitness enthusiast, age 42 from England who refused vaccine dies of Covid. As he was being put on a ventilator he said I wish I had got vaccinated. His family pleads with people to get vaccinated.
USA Professional golfer Bryson De Chambeau (age 27) missed the Olympics because he was ill with covid defended his decision not to get vaccinated as he was young and healthy. He was nevertheless very ill and lost 10 pounds he says. He says he didn’t want to take a vaccine when an older person needs it more than him.
Just how did taking a vaccine against a deadly disease beyond so complicated?
obviously you’re not so well educated as you believe, when you state that I cannot read, I probably am more proficient than yourself.
I do follow all the recommended actions to prevent the spread, which seem to work,face mask, distancing etc.
what I wont do is take an unregistered drug until it receives the full research approval.
what I stated was that, by, all the medical professions, the vaccine does not stop me from catching the virus or passing it on to others.
I do believe that a vaccine passport is a dangerous way of falling into a false sense of security which will cause the spread.
Then it must be your comprehension of the language. I repeat for the hard of understanding my article clearly agrees with your right to refuse a vaccine. It then goes on to suggest that choices have consequences. You want the choice it’s just the condlsequences bit you don’t like. I repeat selfish bastards.
Wondered how long your patience would hold, Roddy!
😁😁
obviously you don’t understand what a DNR is, this proves that, at least, I am willing to take what ever consequences not being vaxxed entails.
As long as I don’t involve anyone else in my decision or cause any harm.
Am I still a selfish bastard?
No it shows that you think that your decision to DNR makes a difference if your insistence on not taking a vaccine results in someone else’sdeath or illness because you just go about as normal mingling with those that have vaccinated is somehow nullified because you won’t be resuscitated should you succumb to the virus reeks of narcissistic selfishness off the Richter scale. If you do not accept the majority decision of society go off and create a new society of your own with all the others that do not want to accept the wisdom 9f the scientists.
Roddy, you certainly maintained your stance a great deal longer than I could have done!!
The high reliance on vaccines as the main way out of Covid seems to miss out what is often a huge contributing factor in dealing successfuly with any disease, namely nutritional deficiencies. This blog explains why vitamin D, based on the precautionary principle and lack of known side effects, probably should have been promoted more and earlier in dealing with Covid.
https://www.jonathan-cook.net/blog/2021-02-15/lives-lost-covid-vitamin-d/
I have heard this a few times. The Sun Is Your Best Source of Vitamin D. So how come Italy, Spain, South Africa,Brazil, India 5 nations blessed with loads of sunshine and in Spain and Italy high vitamin D diets had at one point the highest incidence rates of infection and deaths? Interesting though this info is it doesn’t really have a baring on my article does it?
No baring? I thought the point was about preventing the spread of covid. A vaccine for covid is unlikely to be a single magic bullet, so other factors are important and should be addressed in conjunction with a vaccine. The prevalence of health issues in serious or fatal cases is very evident and long covid may prove to be another serious issue that vaccines alone won’t eliminate and since it will be those cases that will largely determine when it is deemed that covid is under control, underlying factors such as vitamin deficiency should be taken into account as well.
With regards to vitamin D, Italy had it’s two highest spikes of cases in Nov 2020 & March 2021, so basically in winter or just coming out of it, so low levels of sunshine and therefore low levels of vitamin D. I don’t expect vitamin D will be a single magic bullet either, but even though I am vaccinated, I take it since it might help prevent or reduce the seriousness of getting covid and it doesn’t have any known side effects. Sorry to have gone off the single issue of vaccines. I’ll leave it at that.
No it is about choices, and the selfish attitude of a,certain section of the world’s community.
Choices are based on information and trust. If based on that some people make a decision that doesn’t match yours, who are you to say that they are selfish. With an attitude like that, they could just as easily say that you are being foolish. Neither is worth stating. Personally I’d say that many were lacking reliable information on which they have made their decision not to be vaccinated, but no one knows for sure how this will play out. The precautionary principle plays both ways.
The issue of wearing a mask in enclosed public areas should in my view be mandated since there is no potential side effect on the wearer. Vaccines don’t have the same degree of certainty. When I was phoned by the NHS to book a vaccine appointment, the first question was whether I wanted to be vaccinated. That’s as it should be. I have no idea what they’d have said if I’d said no, but at the very least I expect a database would log reasons so that these could then be addressed by the NHS. Comments about selfishness have no place in this matter.
It is your attitude that is in question Ian not mine. Every single post of yours reeks of narcissistic entitlement. I have said your choice is your choice nobody is forcing you to take a vaccine you however want to firce the rest of us to accept your Russian roulette. The strapline for the article sums it up which you seem incapable or unwilling to accept. Choices have consequences.
Unfortunately as usual it is the government’s Scotland and England that have contributed to the uncertainty of people both for and anti vaccination . The lies and misinformation from all sides has corrupted the situation where people instead of listening and acting on the proven information coming from specialists with superior knowledge and experience are being bombarded by all sorts of nut jobs intent on muddying the water and driving their own reasons . And it certainly doesn’t help the situation when politicians are using fear and division to drive their own furrow and profit from that fear
Except one of the options isn’t a vaccine and clinical trials are not complete. Sori I reserve the right not to be used as a walking experiment. Further to the above no one is reporting the fact that the NHS own internal audit shows that over 1 million people have had adverse reactions to the “vaccine”? Oh aye safe as houses it is!
Did you actually read the article because your comment makes zero sense if you have.
Barrheadboy, after reading everyone’s comments one thing is clear to me. No-one here, including you, can tell me the danger difference that someone vaccinated poses to other people compared to those who are not vaccinated. Therefore we must acknowledge that there is no difference. If we can agree on that, barrheadboy, or if you cannot prove an non-vaccinated person is more of a danger to others than a vaccinated person, then you must agree that vaccine passports are useless in stopping spread of the virus. I hope you understand this argument enough that you will answer me with respect rather than name calling.
You hope, you want, your opinion, note the pattern? It is conclusively proved vaccines work including the Covid vaccines. Those dying from Delta Variant are those that chose not to take the vaccine. That said my article was not about the efficacy of the vaccine. You lot are so caught up in your own narcissism you only see, read or hear that which suits your own narrow view. You will not tolerate or accept any other view except your own. My article backed entirely people’s right not to take the vaccine if they decided their health was better served without a vaccine. All we asked in return you accept the majority society view on the vaccine. But as always you lot want your cake and to eat it too. I repeat CHOICES HAVE CONSEQUENCES. Once you realise and accept that then life will be a lot easier or you to navigate.ex
i have no idea what you read from my pattern of words and you never said so I expect it falls into another of your fantasies that you don’t have explanations for. What is very clear for all who reads your replies is that you got the vaccine without knowing if it would help you or not. When you got your vaccine it allowed you to produce the antibodies that are produced by your body in reaction to the vaccine, we are told that there are some who would have died from COVID but not from the vaccine.. These same antibodies are produced when someone recovers from COVID. Some people must have (flu?)antibodies to cover COVID already as there are those who catch it but are hardly affected. There is no reason for you to fear non-vaccinated people so, as much as you are very old (though your arguments are childlike), I’m sure you’ll be around long enough for to get over yourself and trust non-vaccinated people as being conscientious objectors who prefer to get their antibodies naturally, and do not deserve in having restricted movement.
I have tolerated your abusive nonsense long enough. My site, my rules good bye.
I got the first then had a severe adverse reaction leading to still with me skin complications and another issue I will keep undisclosed. I chose not to get the 2nd being obviously worried about my health. I’m 40 dad of 2 young kids, fitness instructor. Happy with folks deciding, obviously I won’t qualify for a passport, my folks live in bloody Spain. Rather depressing!