I put this on the main site without highlighting any club, but wondered about the general opinion of Foxes fans, who may not see it in its original form.
With the increased incidence of covid infections, coupled with the news that the Premier League will continue to function, with the obvious overall agreement of the clubs, I sincerely hope we don't get a bunch of footballers saying it's dangerous or putting their health and safety at risk, given that a substantial number of them are not fully vaccinated and, even worse, some are determined not to protect themselves and others.
Were I a person of some influence at a football club, I would mandate every member of staff to get fully vaccinated. Those who still feel strongly against it would automatically go on to half pay and not feature in any matches or training with their team mates. I realise that, generally speaking, footballers do not feature amongst the highest level of intellectual ability. Nonetheless, they are considered to be role models by a large section of the community and as such ought to start acting like them. At the very least, they ought to show more concern for their fellow professionals and all connected with their club.
Vaccinations and footballers
posted on 21/12/21
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 21/12/21
There is no reason whatsoever to mandate vaccination amongst Premier League footballer players. Utterly ridiculous to take a small chunk of one profession and demand that they be vaccinated just because they are in the public eye.
Mandatory vaccination in health and social care I understand entirely as they work with vulnerable people, but there is no justification whatsoever mandating it to Premier League footballers who are human beings with the ability to make choices.
Don't get me wrong everybody should get vaccinated, but I believe everybody should be able to choose whether or not they get it.
posted on 21/12/21
comment by tcwmf | Obers Haven (U6489)
posted 16 minutes ago
If vaccines reduce the period of time that an individual is symptomatic and therefore reduces ability to spread, then I don't see how this really reduces spread of covid as people will almost always be isolating during their symptomatic period
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's about preventing the spread of infectious cells though as much as possible. That's what the vaccine is there to help do.
posted on 21/12/21
comment by JustYourAverageFan (U21016)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by tcwmf | Obers Haven (U6489)
posted 16 minutes ago
If vaccines reduce the period of time that an individual is symptomatic and therefore reduces ability to spread, then I don't see how this really reduces spread of covid as people will almost always be isolating during their symptomatic period
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's about preventing the spread of infectious cells though as much as possible. That's what the vaccine is there to help do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I was replying to the 2nd and 3rd part of this paragraph.
'2. No; vaccination doesn’t not “stop” the spread of SARS-CoV-2. It does, however, reduce an individual’s likelihood of contracting the virus, the likelihood of them developing symptoms, and the period that they are likely to be symptomatic (and more transmissible).'
If the vaccine reduces the likelihood of developing symptoms but the disease retains the ability to spread then you could potentially argue that people will spread it unknowingly, this would be a counterfactor to individuals being less infectious.
If the vaccine reduces the symptomatic period then for lots of people it reduces the time spent in isolation more than it reduces their rate of spread, majority of people I know will isolate and begin testing as soon as they have a single symptom.
posted on 21/12/21
Yes I believe in the efficacy of vaccines, no I don't think Bill Gates is trying to microchip my beagle so that he can harvest my beagle's data
posted on 21/12/21
comment by tcwmf | Obers Haven (U6489)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by JustYourAverageFan (U21016)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by tcwmf | Obers Haven (U6489)
posted 16 minutes ago
If vaccines reduce the period of time that an individual is symptomatic and therefore reduces ability to spread, then I don't see how this really reduces spread of covid as people will almost always be isolating during their symptomatic period
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's about preventing the spread of infectious cells though as much as possible. That's what the vaccine is there to help do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I was replying to the 2nd and 3rd part of this paragraph.
'2. No; vaccination doesn’t not “stop” the spread of SARS-CoV-2. It does, however, reduce an individual’s likelihood of contracting the virus, the likelihood of them developing symptoms, and the period that they are likely to be symptomatic (and more transmissible).'
If the vaccine reduces the likelihood of developing symptoms but the disease retains the ability to spread then you could potentially argue that people will spread it unknowingly, this would be a counterfactor to individuals being less infectious.
If the vaccine reduces the symptomatic period then for lots of people it reduces the time spent in isolation more than it reduces their rate of spread, majority of people I know will isolate and begin testing as soon as they have a single symptom.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes; you could potentially argue that.
But firstly, your argument would be dependent on myriad behavioural factors beyond virological transmissibility. It would claim that under certain circumstances vaccinated people might *transmit* more, not that their infection is more transmissible, which are two different things.
And secondly, as I’ve said above (and see links), real world data would dismiss that argument.
posted on 21/12/21
My argument wasn't that people would spread more having been vaccinated. There are indeed more behavioural factors to consider on both sides of the aisle if you want to make that proposition, but I don't. I was just trying to highlight that some of the benefits of the vaccine which were highlighted, while still very likely to be net benefits overall, do have counterpoints to be made which are reasonable.
posted on 21/12/21
comment by tcwmf | Obers Haven (U6489)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by JustYourAverageFan (U21016)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by tcwmf | Obers Haven (U6489)
posted 16 minutes ago
If vaccines reduce the period of time that an individual is symptomatic and therefore reduces ability to spread, then I don't see how this really reduces spread of covid as people will almost always be isolating during their symptomatic period
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's about preventing the spread of infectious cells though as much as possible. That's what the vaccine is there to help do.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I was replying to the 2nd and 3rd part of this paragraph.
'2. No; vaccination doesn’t not “stop” the spread of SARS-CoV-2. It does, however, reduce an individual’s likelihood of contracting the virus, the likelihood of them developing symptoms, and the period that they are likely to be symptomatic (and more transmissible).'
If the vaccine reduces the likelihood of developing symptoms but the disease retains the ability to spread then you could potentially argue that people will spread it unknowingly, this would be a counterfactor to individuals being less infectious.
If the vaccine reduces the symptomatic period then for lots of people it reduces the time spent in isolation more than it reduces their rate of spread, majority of people I know will isolate and begin testing as soon as they have a single symptom.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"Spread" and "infectious spread" is the important distinction here though. It is likely to be more infectious to those who haven't been vaccinated as opposed to those who have. That's why the biggest problem in hospitals at the moment is unvaccinated people who have a variant other than Omicron, even though Omicron is the biggest threat in the UK at the moment.
People that spread it unknowingly might spread it to those who are also vaccinated. For those who are vaccinated, if you have a cell of the Delta variant (for example) in your system, the vaccine works to kill the host cell(s) and infectious cell(s) as quickly as possible, that's where the less time part comes from. The quicker it can kill these cells, the "less infectious" that person will become, as they are carrying less infectious cells. The problem then is, if they pass this to an unvaccinated person, the chances of the infectious cells multiplying and spreading is greatly increased.
posted on 21/12/21
posted on 22/12/21
Hi OWF,
Back to your original proposition, as I'd prefer not to get into the mire of Covid arguments.
On the face of it, there is some merit to your argument, but I'd say you would be going down a very slippery slope with that approach, even if, as others have questioned, it is legal. Where does this interference in our lives stop exactly? Who is targeted next because they are not doing the 'right thing' - as defined by Boris, Hancock, Gove and their ilk, driven by people who have a single issue focus such as Whitty et al?
For example, smoking is bad for you and puts a strain on the NHS. Should those people who smoke be told in no uncertain terms that they need to quit or they will be put on half pay? There is no need to point out the financial penalty they already suffer in buying cigarettes, in this scenario we are considering going much further along the compulsion route as you described with footballers.
Perhaps we should also target people who don't eat healthily, so a reduction in wages for those who visit takeaways more than once a (insert interval to be decided by Government/employers) might be appropriate?
If you go down this road where does it stop?