@SpokenTruth
Nope, not good enough because you read way too much into what I said. I should've been more explicit. I should also mention that I talk very much from a perspective of a German citizen. I can't and I won't recommend this measure to any other country unless they're sure they have the right tools to handle it.
1). Vaccination is the most proven and cost effective method.
- Being immune via vaccination or via exposure is virtually the same. The only difference being vaccination being able to tackle multiple strains if necessary. Let's assume it's not. Let's also assume we have sufficient and precise immunity testing.
2). If we're trying to reach heard immunity of 60%, that's ~200 million tests that must be conducted, analyzed and certificates issued. We've only tested 2.2 million people so far.
- Nobody said anything about herd immunity. Nobody who has not been proven as being immune will be allowed outside.
3). If it mutates beyond heard immunity, hey...~200 millions tests again. But first you have to re-quarantine everybody.
- Again, said nothing about herd immunity. And the case you're describing will happen exactly the same if we immunize via vaccines. It'll end up even worse because people trust vaccines more, which means they'll be more reckless.
4). The tests we do have are not an immunity check to begin with. We'd need a whole new damn test.
- Of course we won't issue immunity certificates without knowing that someone is immune, duh?
5). Is 60% heard immunity even good enough? This isn't something we can just do a live test trial with.
- see above
6). Are you even considering the social implications of splitting society into 2 categories? Immune and Carrier.
- You mean the same thing we'd have when we vaccinate? A process that will take several weeks if not months to reach everyone. Also, that would only be a very temporary scenario. At some point the virus will be dealt with, either by going away or becoming endemic, but manageable. Are you treating people who are not vaccinated against other diseases as 2nd class humans?
7). Viral exposure level factors into level of anti-body development. Barely get exposed, barely make anti-bodies, barely pass immunity test...get exposed again next week by a higher concentration...boom, you have it and don't know it. A vaccination is a known, consistent level of exposure.
- I guess we'll have to use a more precise immunity test then? I mean why would I let anyone out who is not proven beyond doubt to be sufficiently immune?
8). How do you enforce immunity certificate rules? Do police start making random DUI-style certificate checks? Who has enforcement jurisdiction? Civil or criminal punishment?
- We already have police checking people, sending them home and giving out fines or even jailing them. How about we do that? Do not forget, this is just a very temporary measure to bridge the time until we have a vaccine.
9). Are the certificates physical or digital? If physical, a paper copy, badge, bracelet, ink stamp? If digital, how do you ensure everybody can access their certificate at all times? Can they be easily forged?
- Do you know what a vaccination card is? How about we use that crazy technology we already have?
10). How are they assigned to an individual? Driver's license, Social Security card, fingerprint, retinal scan?
- See above
11). Who is the certifying authority? Federal government, each state, local? If the latter two, how are they verified and accepted across county/state lines?
- It's obviously federal because leaving country wide issues up to local governments is beyond moronic, not just for health issues. But that's another topic.
12). What about the dangers of people intentionally trying to get infected, hoping to live to get an immunity certificate and either end up dying themselves or unintentionally giving it to others and them dying?
- I guess that's a moral issue that I can't really answer. For those things it would of course be important to have a secure social net, so that people will not feel the need to get infected just so they can work again. So this solution would only work for countries who don't hate their own citizens, like Germany.
I think you're assuming way too much negligence here. Nobody is going to gamble on another outbreak. I would of course only support this measure if the slight issues have been ironed out. It's nothing but a possible tool to mitigate economic and social collapse. We should definitely try to use any measures we have at our disposal to prevent further damage. Downright rejecting such a measure because of a few small issues is silly. That's like opposing lockdowns because it could hurt people, which it does. We will just continue to do the things that are necessary to keep things running and immunity certificates are just one more useful tool. It's certainly better than just easing restrictions for everyone for no reason.
If you demand respect or gratitude for your volunteer work, you're doing volunteering wrong.
Essay Pro