Covid 19 (OPEN DISCUSSION)

[Smotie2]

Nah mate, he read it in a thread on Facebook.

What do you think?

Was I replying to you?

 

[Smotie2]

I'm sorry, what?

Vaccinated = fewer symptoms = less coughing and spluttering = less transmission.

Surely that isn't difficult to grasp?

Tell that to the UK which is right now back to its worst levels even with 85 percent vaccination rate

 

[bzparkes]

Tell that to the UK which is right now back to its worst levels even with 85 percent vaccination rate

Death rate compared to when they were unvaccinated has reduced by 1k a day, which is kind of the point.

 

[ziad]

Death rate compared to when they were unvaccinated has reduced by 1k a day, which is kind of the point.

so death isnt good.

 

[Dazzler9]

Is that documented proof?

Article, with references. Note: not peer reviewed.

COVID vaccines cut the risk of transmitting Delta — but not for long

People who receive two COVID-19 jabs and later contract the Delta variant are less likely to infect their close contacts than are unvaccinated people with Delta.

www.nature.com

TLDR vaccination reduces likelihood of onward transmission following breakthrough infection, however this effect reduces after just a few months. Boosters may overcome this.

 

[bzparkes]

so death isnt good.

No, less deaths and less people in ICU as a result of being vaccinated is good though.

 

[Agent93]

However, the Covid-19 vaccines do not protect you 100%

Reminds me of sunscreen, or the pill, or condoms...

 

[HoneyBadger35]

Like all the other "open to nutjob" threads this one will end up locked soon enough. Rinse and repeat.

Multiple threads on the same (or similar) topic being created before the inevitable lock is like the Eagles drafting best available instead of addressing glaring needs and then sitting back and wondering where it went wrong.

The alternative is 50% of the threads on the board get derailed by this topic. This is the only option, all wrapped up in an ignorable package.

 

[Agent93]

The alternative is 50% of the threads on the board get derailed by this topic. This is the only option, all wrapped up in an ignorable package.

This is the "just don't look" thread of the board.

 

[HoneyBadger35]

C'mon Badge, you're better than this 'it only impacts x' line. You can't have missed McGowan's announcement this week that similar policies will soon cover 75% of WA workers. And I'll be shocked if it isn't a requirement for AFL spectators by Round 1.

Probably, and as you rightly point out it’s highly doubtful the AFL are doing this to protect their players but more likely just doing it to protect their season and try to minimise any disruptions.

But when the news breaks and someone’s first stance is to post nazi imagery, and immediately leap to “what about the pedos”, they’re getting treated with kiddie gloves because they’ve shown no ability to be taken seriously.

We don’t have a thread about Healthcare workers who are needing to have the jab by November. We do have a thread about footy players, and while that’s the case I’d like to keep it vaguely related to the AFL and football, and not immediately pivoted to nazism, parallels between unvaccinated and the Holocaust, or pedophiles.

 

[Astro7]

Reminds me of sunscreen, or the pill, or condoms...

For sure. Reminds me that life isn't and never will be perfect and that nature in all it's variants ultimately controls our destiny. We think we're in control, in our short little window of time on this amazing planet, with it's violent, turbulent climate shifts of 4.5 billion years. Look at us and our little problems...insects.
On a cheerier note, congrats and commiserations to the people of Melbourne and Victoria, some well earned freedom at last! Let's hope this translates later to a fully functioning and safe football season...

 

[Agent93]

and not immediately pivoted to nazism, parallels between unvaccinated and the Holocaust, or pedophiles.

The media as we know it platforms hyperbole and hot-takes because they get views. Accepting that these sorts of health exclusions have been happening for at least a decade (smoking) doesn't sell advertising slots.

 

[Ambrose Burnside]

The alternative is 50% of the threads on the board get derailed by this topic. This is the only option, all wrapped up in an ignorable package.

That's always the reasoning used, until the inevitable lock. Rinse and repeat.

 

[bzparkes]

That's always the reasoning used, until the inevitable lock. Rinse and repeat.

The last one was locked once the USA election was over though.

I presume this one'll be locked once 95% of adults are vaccinated across the country.

 

[Ambrose Burnside]

On a cheerier note, congrats and commiserations to the people of Melbourne and Victoria, some well earned freedom at last! Let's hope this translates later to a fully functioning and safe football season...

With the Grand Final at Optus again

The last one was locked once the USA election was over though.

I presume this one'll be locked once 95% of adults are vaccinated across the country.

Nah, there was at least one other one on vaccines that was locked in between the Trump was robbed thread and this current paedos watch footy too thread.

 

[HoneyBadger35]

The media as we know it platforms hyperbole and hot-takes because they get views. Accepting that these sorts of health exclusions have been happening for at least a decade (smoking) doesn't sell advertising slots.

Obviously it doesn’t sell, but it’s a shame because there’s something great about an actual nuanced discussion that is disappearing more and more.

Take Shooshka’s post here which I like:

It's really about where you (each of us personally) draw the line though.

As the government (or an employer) could, in theory, mandate just about anything - but at some point the general population will say no (I'm not saying they are creeping towards that... that is a rabbit hole I don't want to head down).

When it comes to AFL, I'd say based on the vaccine mandate it is almost reasonable to mandate contraception in the AFLW. The theory is the same. Of course I (and I assume most) think that would be completely inappropriate - but they are contracted to play, if they choose not to it is their choice, it only applies if you are an AFLW player.

Basically as you say, there are plenty of items required of people in different industries (AFL is the same) - but there also has to be a line where personal choice is deemed more important that public/league/workplace protection.

The AFLW/pregnancy issue is a great point. That does feel like a big overreach. There’s a few things that make it different to me, like AFLW contracts being shorter, season length, the fact it’s not full time employment for them etc, but I see the parallel. In essence, clubs trying to protect their investment and their talent from not being usable on game day, though one player getting pregnant will not result in pregnancies spreading through the league due to close contact. Similarly, AFL players miss games to see their kids born, some have left hubs early etc. but obviously that’s a much shorter period of time missed. I think there’s no perfect answer there but admit I’d not considered the parallel.

I forget who but somebody also raised the concept of conscription in war, which is of course a huge overreach on face value but something that societally became accepted because of the bigger picture at play. I guess it depends where you fall on Covid in terms of the severity and the big picture nature of it. People having different views on the severity of this is the basic root of most of these discussions, and I’m not sure there’ll ever be enough research or information to close that gap and bring everyone onto the same side as it relates to how severe this is or isnt.

 

[Choogler]

Of all the things to ‘knee jerk’ to the AFL choose this.

Pedophiles, murders, drug dealers and animal abusers walking the streets and probably into games.

How about if you have a conviction for any of the crimes I just listed you won’t be allowed in?

Let’s get the criminals banned first before the people who don’t trust a vaccine.

I'm struggling to comprehend the ridiculousness of this post!

 

[HoneyBadger35]

That's always the reasoning used, until the inevitable lock. Rinse and repeat.

What would your preference be, knowing people will still want to post their thoughts on the news regardless of if there’s a dedicated thread or not.

 

[Ambrose Burnside]

What would your preference be, knowing people will still want to post their thoughts on the news regardless of if there’s a dedicated thread or not.

Keep it the way we had it, just a genuine news thread that's moderated (I understand it's still there, but the nature of threads like this is everyone gravitates to this one because of the nutters. See also: 14 pages in two days) so we don't have to scroll through paedo and nazi stuff (can't believe I'm writing that on a footy forum, but here we are. gg 2021) rather than allowing these threads for a little while, tempers getting flared, arguments getting out of hand, then going back to just having a moderated news thread because it's gone too far even for a free-for-all thread

 

[Choogler]

Yes. Because the end result is the same.

You are employed under certain conditions. If you don't meet those conditions you lose your job.

Explain to me please why many jobs would end in dismissal if you turned up to work inebriated, especially ones involving heavy machinery.

I'm sure player contracts would currently include conditions including compliance with AFL rules, mandates etc... but if not, they need, from this point forward to include clauses dealing with this issue. I would start with this years crop of draftees and then every contract that is renewed. That would remove any ambiguity.

 

[bzparkes]

I'm struggling to comprehend the ridiculousness of this post!

It's always the Paedos mate, don't you know?

 

[06Premiers]

This thread is the Lizard people thread from Wish.

 

[Godfather32]

Keep it the way we had it, just a genuine news thread that's moderated (I understand it's still there, but the nature of threads like this is everyone gravitates to this one because of the nutters. See also: 14 pages in two days) so we don't have to scroll through paedo and nazi stuff (can't believe I'm writing that on a footy forum, but here we are. gg 2021) rather than allowing these threads for a little while, tempers getting flared, arguments getting out of hand, then going back to just having a moderated news thread because it's gone too far even for a free-for-all thread

I think we need to have a thread like this, sometimes you just want to shoot the s**t within our community, which you can't do on the news thread.
I don't want to talk about stuff on the SRP board with a bunch of randoms I've never discussed anything with in my life.
It's really easy for anyone that doesn't want to wade through the crap to just avoid the thread completely.

 

[Choogler]

So what's the clinical proof after 7 years which is the standard trial period before releasing to the public?

Oh we haven't had it for 7 years as it's still in trials....

If you think the 7 years is the standard trial period for vaccines you are not correct. On April 26, 1954, the FIRST Salk polio vaccine field trials, involving 1.8 million children, began at the Franklin Sherman Elementary School in McLean, Virginia. Children in the United States, Canada and Finland participated. ONE YEAR LATER, on April 12, 1955, researchers announced the vaccine was safe and effective and it quickly became a standard part of childhood immunizations in America. That is significantly less than 7 years... more along the timeline for the Covid Vax!

 

[Choogler]

Keep the personal attacks out mate.

Suggesting I'm not doing my own research is offensive.

Research how long they trialled Polio Vaccines before they came on-line.... it certainly wasn't 7 years.