Remember ‘immunity passports’? Back in April they were floated as a possible means by which we could all get back to a normal life. We could be tested for antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 – the virus which causes Covid-19 – and, if we tested positive, we could be allowed to go about our business. The presumption was that we would be immune from further infection, at least for a while. The idea quickly bit the dust. There was one good argument against it: it might encourage young people, who are very unlikely to come to harm from Covid-19, deliberately to set out to catch it in order to gain a positive antibody test and therefore an immunity passport.
Yet the government’s current position – that having Covid-19 cannot be trusted to give you any immunity against Covid-19 for any length of time (reiterated by the Prime Minister while explaining why he would have to self-isolate for a fortnight in spite of his body ‘bursting with antibodies’) – has always seemed bizarre.
Get Britain's best politics newsletters
Register to get The Spectator's insight and opinion straight to your inbox. You can then read two free articles each week.
Already a subscriber? Log in
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in