>> found this little gem whilst random browsing:
>>
>> published 11/9/20
>>
>> BMJ 2020; 370 doi: doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m3558 (Published 11 September 2020)
>> Cite this as: BMJ 2020;370:m3558
>>
>> seems like " they" (Gov) are going to try and enforce us to have a
>> digital passport proving we've been tested or they will sanction our freedom of movement!
>>
I presume you meant this bit....
"Testing for access to certain spaces features heavily in the documents, with reference to “immunity/virus free passports,” likely to be available through an app. The plans say that testing could be used to “give people assurance that, at least for a limited time, they are unlikely to have the virus and are at low risk of transmitting it to others.”
They say, “A negative test result (or potentially a positive antibody result) may inform not just whether you could attend an in-patient appointment, but if you go to work that day, access a venue, get on a flight or visit an elderly relative.” The documents also point to a “significant expansion” of testing funded and delivered by the private sector, such as in football stadiums to allow access.""
What is your problem with that?
i had surgery last week. In order to be admitted I had to present an approved negative result taken within the previous 24 hours.
Not because it meant 100% certainty that I was negative, but that I was unlikely to have it and thus was a low risk to others".
If it could be done quickly enough then test results which are treated as current for 24 hours seem like a damned good idea to me.
In any case, it appears that there is no intention to make it compulsory, you don't have to have the test, you just won't be able to take advantage of any value that people and organisations attach to it.
Do you also believe that the entire thing is a plot so that you can be chipped under the guise of a vaccination?
|