I'm very interested to see how this sort of situation will align with the increasing number of countries/airlines/music venues/hotels/theme parks that are stating they will only admit people who have been vaccinated.
It will probably take careful legislation to prevent those who can't be vaccinated from being relegated to second class citizens alongside those who won't get vaccinated. At the end of the day both groups still pose an infection risk.
My expectation is that most businesses will have some official policy of "you must be vaccinated to enter" but they won't actually enforce it. This decreases their liability on both sides (Don't want to be seen inviting outbreaks, but don't want to deal with HIPAA / privacy laws).
I was surprised to learn that the US already has a list of required vaccines for legal immigration[1]. I think its very likely the Covid-19 vaccine makes the list, considering even the flu vaccine is required.
It's fairly common for countries to require vaccinations simply to enter them as well. For example, I've personally gotten the yellow fever vaccine, which is required to enter Kenya.
That vaccine is actually relatively risky. Yellow fever is a serious disease, and the vaccine from weakened - but not killed - yellow fever virus. Thus very occasionally it causes what's basically yellow fever. That's still much safer than the risk of getting yellow fever if you are visiting a place like Kenya. But at least where I live, doctors won't give it to you without confirming where exactly you are travelling, because the otherwise the risk/benefit tradeoff isn't worth it.
A while back, when outbreaks of measles were occurring in the US (IIRC), they were sometimes blamed on immigrants. I wasn't surprised that vaccination was required for immigration, but it took a surprising amount of searching to find it.
Many countries already mandate some vaccinations before permitting entry (yellow fever comes to mind). Which requires a certificate as proof. I don't know how those countries handle people who can't get vaccinated, but I suspect that there are lessons to be learnt there.
Anecdote: I needed to get a yellow fever vaccination for last-minute travel to Kenya. So last minute in fact that medically speaking, the vaccine was useless as the immunity wouldn't have kicked in yet. Immigration did in fact notice this, and had no problem with letting me in when I explained why.
That certificate at least has zero security features, and could easily be faked.
It could be easily faked. But if you come down with yellow fever in a place where you claimed immunity, all they have to do is contact the doctor that stamped it. They are regulated by the WHO and won’t lie for you.
Suddenly you have a case of international fraud while bedridden in a country that takes yellow fever very seriously.
The difference between yellow fever and covid is the mortality rate.
Covid is below 1% (hard to find data as everyone stopped talking about mortality rates when the number of cases skyrocketed without an increase in deaths).
Yellow fever is around 3-7%.
People traveling to Kenya will want to vaccine for their health and largely won't try to fake it.
In theory, people who can’t be vaccinated and people who can buy choose not to be will both need to be excluded from large crowds until the virus is no longer a significant risk factor.
In practice, given all that has happened since the last election, I expect the current UK government solution to show all the skill of a bored teenager mimicking Jackson Pollock in a school art class.
This is highly unlikely. These companies need the income. The last thing they'd want to do is add on further restrictions to their struggling industries.
Yeah, but they might not need the income from the few who cannot get vaccination for medical and not mental reasons. And rather focus on the paying majority.
Which would be somewhat discriminating against those people. But if the vaccination works as promised (95%), it should allow some nonvaccinated people without problems?
It's important to note that the 95% refers to the reduction of mild COVID-19. There is very little data on how well the vaccines actually prevent the spread of illness - often called sterilizing immunity(1) - most of the trials simply weren't doing the extensive PCR testing required to measure that.
There's a good chance they do in fact reduce the spread of COVID-19 too in a significant way, as many vaccines achieve that. But some don't.
The second issue, is that we don't have enough data yet to know if the vaccines prevent severe COVID-19, let alone deaths, in the people most at risk. That at least we'll probably find out soon from the UK.
>they will only admit people who have been vaccinated
Is any country issuing a proof of vaccination document? If they don't have a system already in place to issue these, I think it's unlikely they will be able to roll it out at this point.
Basically, I'll believe it when I see it. To me it seems like a very hard thing to enforce and implement. I suspect the companies are more interested in "security theater" to facilitate normal business operations as soon as possible than actually excluding people who haven't been vaccinated.
I think the problem is this is not government controlled, but will be individually implemented by each private org. Without central administration, they're likely to rely on the vaccination card they give patients to track when their next shot/brand of shot will be. If you're excluded for valid medical reasons, you might not get a card... but as of now, an exclusion card doesn't seem to exist.
This is why I mention legislation. I think we could see it becoming illegal to exclude people based on their vaccine status. Or maybe we have some sort of exemption card.
Vaccination is medical procedure. It's not different from other medical procedures. As such, it's part of patient-doctor confidentiality.
Put differently, when asked, you are not obliged to answer any questions about whether or not you are vaccinated. For instance, if I ask you whether you had a flu shot last year, you do not have to answer me.
What about public authorities? Same thing applies, unless vaccination is legally mandatory. Then we'd have a different discussion.
Finally, how many private businesses are willing to risk a court case over refusal of service because a patron isn't willing to divulge medical information? Not to mention potential violations of discrimination laws.
Public schools in every US state already require vaccination, by law [0]. The regulations are without exception written in such a way that anyone who wants to make a fuss about it will find it easier to claim a religious exemption than to test it in court, but there's a lot of legal precedent for mandating vaccines.
Re: public schoools, and, by extension, any public entity. This is why I stated:
> What about public authorities? Same thing applies, unless vaccination is legally mandatory. Then we'd have a different discussion.
Everything you mention is the "different discussion" in that statement.
My comment was a rebuke against what is mentioned in the grandparent comment:
> but will be individually implemented by each private org
Private organisations - restaurants, shops, music venues, malls, theatres,... - may try and ask for personal medical information, but you are not obliged to divulge anything to them.
Private organisations barring entrance because you are unwilling to disclose personal medical information: I'm wondering how well that would hold up in a legal case.
For instance, you have an autoimmune disease and you can't get vaccinated. You present at a restaurant. You are asked "are you vaccinated?". If you answer the question truthfully with "no" but you don't want to disclose your medical condition, you likely risk getting barred anyway. So, now you are in a position where you need to make a trade off: divulge your medical condition - which isn't any of the restaurant's business - in hopes of gaining access (no guarantee) or keep silent.
See where this is going? The problem isn't people who are against vaccination, it's the potential of creating legal hurdles for people who can't get vaccinated due to a medical condition which may bar them from participating in society. That's just not okay.
Moreover, if private venues are afraid of being the butt of an infection cluster (e.g. as a result of contact tracing) then they ought to insure themselves. That would be not much different from insuring oneself from other liabilities such as a patron tripping and breaking their arm in theme park. This is also the very reason why many venues have warnings and provide waivers to patrons giving up the right to take legal action against the venue.
Lastly, the article you quote specifically focusses on choosing to not get vaccinated based on philosophical or religious arguments within a public context: getting educated at a public school. Which is a different category of legal challenges. Moreover, the conclusion of the article is that tort law is only a second best approach to publicly mandated vaccination within that category.
There's plenty of precedent for this. For example many countries require evidence of yellow fever immunisation upon entry, if coming from a high risk region.
That is the difference between a county and a business. Countries have the legal authority to deny passage through their borders with limited exception. Businesses have the right to reserve service in some cases but not others.
Exactly. It's the last past I was getting at as a rebuke to the grandparent comment.
Reserving service isn't straightforward. Especially not when it comes to sharing private medical information e.g. when someone wasn't vaccinated because of an autoimmune disease.
Your exact medical condition is no concern of that business, and one shouldn't be forced to give up that information lest risking to be barred from service.
It's for this reason why many businesses have terms and conditions pointing out to customers the role of personal responsibility, and asking them to waive their right to legal action. Moreover, let's not forget the existence of business insurance that protects from calamities.
If vaccination can't be mandated through public action because there's not enough support, then that comes with consequences for the general public. One of them would be that the relationship between owner and patron gets burdened by a new liability. The question then is whether or not the harm of publicly mandated vaccination outstrips the harm caused by that liability in everyday life.
Most healthy young people won't be vaccinated in the long run, I suspect. Those most at risk, the health workers and those who are most likely to spread it will get it, but everyone else will be kind of optional.
That companies are advocating for "passports" is more than likely an expression against anti vaccination sentiments and a desire to open for business whatever the costs.
People with serious allergies often have severe reactions to vaccines period, existing ones and all these new ones too. I wouldn't bet on any of the others doing much better.
My understanding is that with the exception of the Oxford vaccine, all the front runners use the same technology. This limitation could well apply to all of them.
> How will they verify that individuals have been vaccinated if the government doesn't supply that information?
Should public authorities keep a record of whether or not you've been vaccinated?
Vaccination is a medical procedure. As such, whether someone is or isn't vaccinated could be considered a private matter (patient-doctor confidentiality), just like any other medical treatment.
If vaccination became mandatory, we'd have a different discussion. But if it's not, a public government has little argument to keep a record about your medical history, and, even less so, divulge that information to private actors.
Can private actors - venues, hotels, restaurants,... - force someone to divulge medical information?
No. They can't. They could ask, but you're not obliged to answer anything related to your medical history.
Could they refuse entrance if you refuse to provide medical information?
I'm curious when the first legal cases will pop up where someone decides to take a venue to court because they were actively refused entrance over being unwilling to divulge medical information.
The NHS is providing a certificate to show vaccination has taken place. I imagine other countries will follow suit. I could even see it ending up as an official stamp in your passport or similar.
There's already a process and standard, internationally-recognized certificate for Yellow Fever vaccination, overseen by the WHO. Some countries check this book at the border.
The certificate booklet has space for other vaccinations.
This has not been announced, unless I've missed it in the last 36 hours, only speculated about.
There are NHS vaccination reminder cards which you'll be given at your first appointment and recommended to keep in your wallet - with sticker(s) of what dates you had / will have jabs, and a little info about how to find out more info.
This is standard NHS practise for vaccinations that require multiple spaced out injections - I've had two cards pretty much identical to the photo I've seen of the covid ones in the last few years, for other vaccines from the NHS.
The UK's Health Minister confirmed to Sky News yesterday morning that they are not for providing proof you've been vaccinated, and that they do not need to be kept after your final injection.
I have certificates lying around somewhere for the vaccinations I received as a kid. Pretty sure school required them baring some waiver. I’m not making predictions about how the Covid vaccine will be handled, but rather just putting it into a little context.
if you travel a lot it's common to carry a vaccination card (I have one for all those tropical disease vaccinations I've had) - I expect many countries will require you to carry such covid status documentation before they let you in (or board the plane to their country
Those claims are bullshit.
The people most likely to travel are last in line to receive the vaccine and supply is limited so you cannot just go to your GP and get the shots.
I would assume that within the next six months most airlines, at any rate, will require either proof of vaccine or a reasonable excuse for not having it. Some airlines are already talking about this.
It will probably take careful legislation to prevent those who can't be vaccinated from being relegated to second class citizens alongside those who won't get vaccinated. At the end of the day both groups still pose an infection risk.