Health V National Wealth: Why Lockdown to protect people who won’t protect themselves?
Steve Endacott
Chairman Neural River, Neural Voice and Electric Car Organization | Travel Industry Thought Leader | Keynote Speaker | Sustainable Tourism Advocate
During the first lockdown, I accepted all restrictions on my rights to work, mix and travel as I recognised the need to protect the vulnerable in the absence of a vaccine.
11 months on from the first vaccines and with over half the country “Triple Vaccinated”, I think it’s time to ask, “Who are we locking down to protect and is the economic cost worth it?”
I accept the right of the individual, even when faced with sound medical research showing the benefits of vaccines, not to take them. For a few, there are medical reasons why they cannot be Vaccinated, but for many, it’s a choice. However, we live in a democracy and when 85% of the population have been vaccinated, government policy should be based on the needs of the vast majority, which means no further lockdowns and a policy of living with Covid-19.
More controversially what happens if Hospital wards do become overrun? Should the vaccinated take priority over the unvaccinated? My humanity says “no”, but cold logic says “should there not be some consequences?”
Living with Covid-19 will need some changes to the “Norms”, for example carrying around Covid-19 passes for entry to certain locations.
Having returned last week from a Ski Trip in France, where all entry to pubs and restaurants requires the presentation of a “Passe Sanitaire” proving your fully vaccinated status, I must question why the UK Media finds this a breach of our rights. Sorry, but I think it’s my right to demand that people I’m mixing within enclosed spaces are as safe as possible for my personal health.
Similarly, I think it is reasonable to ask people who are going to sporting events or travelling on holiday to take a low-priced lateral flow test. This provides reassurance and an increased likelihood of a Covid-19 free environment.
However, I do object to being differentiated against and made to feel guilty by our government just because I want to travel.
Why should travellers not be able to use “Free” NHS lateral flow or PCR tests whilst travelling overseas, when it's free to use these services if you want to go to a music or sporting event? As stated, many times, even if these tests are not free, the Government is best positioned to provide low-cost testing at around £12.50 per lateral flow and £22.50 for PRCs which cover costs and generate a small profit for the NHS.
Given the Omicron infection rate in the UK, I am more likely to catch Covid-19 from visiting a local pub, restaurant, or supermarket than whilst travelling. So, what is the logic of insisting travellers returning to the UK must quarantine for 2 days and take a further PCR test? Where is the scientific evidence that people returning to the UK have a higher infection rate than the domestic population? The simple answer is that there is none, but hitting travellers is an easily visible action when politicians want to be seen to be doing something.
The Government has announced a £1 Billion package to help hospitality and leisure businesses to survive the coming lockdown which is likely to take effect from Dec 27th, 2021. However, although the assistance to hospitality locations of £6k is clear, it’s very unclear how or what leisure business can claim.
Although any assistance is welcome, it’s a drop in the ocean and not enough to stop the wholescale shutting of high street travel agents and the failure of many tour operators, particularly those in the Ski sector.
The only thing that can save the UK travel sector is the rapid spread of Omicron in a triple vaccinated population where the latest research shows it has a mild impact, with the unvaccinated being locked down to protect them. Not locking down the whole population is the right choice for our Economic Wealth as a country and gives the travel industry a chance of a summer holiday season, assuming other holiday destinations take the same approach.
Sorry if this blog offends, sounds selfish and is treats travel as a priority when it's clearly not for all. However, travel has provided my living for virtually all my working life and if we don’t fight hard the UK outbound travel sector could easily be destroyed by another lengthy Covid-19 lockdown.
.
Managing Partner DefConco
12mo132 COVID+, 110 Hypertension , 153 Type 2 Diabetes patients Calling on government authorities to review the scientific benefits of eMedica in combating the Virus and bacteria. With a track record of success against COVID-19 and clinical trials in Maharashtra's government hospitals, diseases. We hold FDA and CDSO certifications https://www.linkedin.com/posts/raju-ubale-8318039_132-covid-110-hypertension-153-type-2-activity-7144242105467531264-ZA_z?utm_source=share&utm_medium=member_desktop
Founder Travel Counsellors. Customer Service Speaker, Business Mentor, Investor. Relationship before Transaction. Do the Right thing and do the Thing Right. Travel Bureau Integrity Travel Group
2yNo words that agree with this nonsense. Just leave this with you as reference The Nuremberg Code https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejm199711133372006 Read it, digest it then understand it!
Head of B2B Partnerships at Tapi Carpets & Floors | Driving B2B growth with strategic partnerships
2yI understand and appreciate the intent of the article but means testing access to healthcare to particular sub groups is also a dangerous road. Look at the vast swathes of pregnant women not vaccinated because the NHS government failed in their messaging and meant most pregnant women declined the vaccine out of fear - they would be part of the unvaccinated by this rule. There are also small but substantial groups who are unable to have the vaccine for health reasons. No other vaccine is mandated in the UK by law despite the societal benefits of them such as the MMR vaccine. The current vaccines now protect the individual from serious illness but not society from viral spread therefore the societal benefit of any mandated approach is border line at best. I’d also add I’m triple jabbed, immunosuppressed and just had covid. All LFTs have been negative throughout but was positive on PCR.
Senior Delivery Lead
2yThis is a very appropriate article. The fact is that although vaccination does not prevent transmission, it does reduce the likelihood of hospitalisation by up to 19x less likely. If everyone was vaccinated there would be no need for draconian measures to protect the NHS being over whelmed. Whilst I don't condone a forced medical.procedure for those who genuinely don't want it or agree charging people for health care when they need it based on vaccination status, I do agree that the consequences of not having the vaccination should be with those who are not having it out of choice. Those that have should be allowed to carry on with vaccination passports because catching the virus is highly unlikely to need NHS treatment. Those not vaccinated should be allowed essential shopping only and restricted on all other non essential.activity to prevent them from risking the NHS if they were to catch covid. This is working in other countries, but once again civil rights and liberties are being hijacked and abuse vs their true cause to say this us unfair. Our country is once again bowing to the pressure of minorities population groups who choose not to do the right thing by society at the expense of those that do.