…….that is the question professional footballers face now.
Of course I am referring to vaccinations and the reluctance of quite a few players to get their injections to protect themselves, their families and of course others.
It seems ludicrous to tell supporters they cannot enter a ground if you have not been fully vaccinated when it is not mandatory for players to face the same rules.
Players need to face up to their responsibilities towards themselves and the opposing teams and match officials, and all the staff working at both stadiums and training complexes.
Vaccinations should be mandatory and if a player refuses then he doesn’t play and doesn’t get paid as he is not discharging his responsibilities to his club.
Please don’t mention conspiracies, does anyone really think that all the countries in the World have concocted this to exercise control over their populations?
Again these are just my own personal views, but players have been too powerful for too long, clubs bend over backwards literally to make their lives as easy as possible.
Most PL clubs employ “handymen" who at a moment’s notice are despatched to a player’s house to change a lightbulb, a fuse or some other really technical problem they might come across. Players are banned from climbing ladders or using high powered tools in case they have an accident,
which I do not have an issue with.
It is also time for clubs to say who has covid and not hide the information from the fans.
Klopp was open about saying who had the virus at Liverpool, let’s hope other clubs now follow his example. We should also be told if a player who has covid was vaccinated.
90% of the patients currently in hospital with covid were not vaccinated.
To be or not to be………….
posted on 21/12/21
Cheers lads
Looking forward to a massive blow out after it's all over that's for sure
posted on 21/12/21
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 35 seconds ago
comment by LukaBrasi COYS #FreePalestine (U22178)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by LukaBrasi COYS #FreePalestine (U22178)
posted 44 seconds ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 40 seconds ago
comment by LukaBrasi COYS #FreePalestine (U22178)
posted 1 minute ago
You do realise that a rapid heartbeat (which is a potential side effect) is in no way the same as what you originally claimed which was " a spike in heart related illness' by people who have been vaxed"
----------------------------------
The whistle blower Doctor said an increase from 11% to 25% in heart attacks. I purposely didn't use the phrase heart attacks because I didn't want to scare anyone. Hence when I saw the fact article I posted it because not only did it refute the claim it explained why. Those explanations to me did not seem 100% justifiable. And when you look closer at the actual website it's link to political parties is obvious.
All I am trying to do is justify the reason why an athlete might not have a vaccine and provide another side to the arguement in the article by Genius 👍🏻
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you saw that the article refuted the claim by the doctor by linking to actual evidence yet have decided that you, as someone who apparently knows more than medical experts, would disregard it as not justifiable and still make your dubious claim despite not having any evidence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I did and so what? I have provided evidence. I've never said I know more than medical experts. I saw a doctor claim something and looked further into it.
I found an article which refuted the claim and posted it to give balance to that sub argument. But when you look into the article's website and see trustees from political parties then you have question the validity of the website. What is wrong that?
You are very would up at this point 🤣
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You provided evidence that refuted your claim, yer have stuck with your claim (and tried to downplay the evidence you provided yourself) to try and retain some credibility in your original claim.
Have trustees from a wide variety of political parties does not call into question the validity of the organisation. Your insinuation is that the organisation is lying under pressure from its trustees, but to make such a claim you would need to be able to actual show some evidence that this is true. I'll happily concede the point if you can provide some solid evidence of this butnotherwise it is literally a conspiracy theory. That is what is wrong with it.
Your process:
"There has been a spike in heart conditions"
Prove it
"This website refutes it but ignore that and focus on the fact that the organisation has trustees in a number of political parties"
So what?
"Then you have to question the validity"
Why?
"Um..."
So you have been able to offer proper proof of your original claim and instead have relied on the insinuation that the website that refuted the claim is lying, again with no proper proof.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, I will do what I want and spread what I want when I want. Cheers fella 😇
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course you will, because you have your little conspiracy belief to cling to so that you can feel smart.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I like conspiracy theories. I don't trust the bbc or sky or the Sun one bit. When I see a doctor go on TV saying there has been a spike in heart attacks, I question why would he do that in the first place? Why is no one else reporting it? What is his angle?
You're right, I hate being part of the sheep. I have my own mind and I like to use by questioning other people and even myself sometimes.
If you trust sky, bbc and the Sun for that matter, bully for you but there always are and always will be two sides to every argument. That you can not dispute.
And there is no harm debating about it. You say I spread lies but there are people are there with heart issues that have been excelerated or exasperated by the vaccine. A relation of mine is one example hence why I looked into it in the first place. Ebdo seems to be having issues as well. Wasn't it strange when three fans at Villa Park, Watford and Newcastle all needed CPR? When has that ever happend before? Maybe it was just a freak of nature. Feck knows.
But I will continue to talk about it until I want, so do one.
posted on 21/12/21
Are you some sort of shrink anyway?
posted on 21/12/21
*Apologies not Ebdo. I meant Southside!. Be well mate.
posted on 21/12/21
comment by LukaBrasi COYS #FreePalestine (U22178)
posted 53 seconds ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 35 seconds ago
comment by LukaBrasi COYS #FreePalestine (U22178)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by LukaBrasi COYS #FreePalestine (U22178)
posted 44 seconds ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 40 seconds ago
comment by LukaBrasi COYS #FreePalestine (U22178)
posted 1 minute ago
You do realise that a rapid heartbeat (which is a potential side effect) is in no way the same as what you originally claimed which was " a spike in heart related illness' by people who have been vaxed"
----------------------------------
The whistle blower Doctor said an increase from 11% to 25% in heart attacks. I purposely didn't use the phrase heart attacks because I didn't want to scare anyone. Hence when I saw the fact article I posted it because not only did it refute the claim it explained why. Those explanations to me did not seem 100% justifiable. And when you look closer at the actual website it's link to political parties is obvious.
All I am trying to do is justify the reason why an athlete might not have a vaccine and provide another side to the arguement in the article by Genius 👍🏻
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you saw that the article refuted the claim by the doctor by linking to actual evidence yet have decided that you, as someone who apparently knows more than medical experts, would disregard it as not justifiable and still make your dubious claim despite not having any evidence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I did and so what? I have provided evidence. I've never said I know more than medical experts. I saw a doctor claim something and looked further into it.
I found an article which refuted the claim and posted it to give balance to that sub argument. But when you look into the article's website and see trustees from political parties then you have question the validity of the website. What is wrong that?
You are very would up at this point 🤣
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You provided evidence that refuted your claim, yer have stuck with your claim (and tried to downplay the evidence you provided yourself) to try and retain some credibility in your original claim.
Have trustees from a wide variety of political parties does not call into question the validity of the organisation. Your insinuation is that the organisation is lying under pressure from its trustees, but to make such a claim you would need to be able to actual show some evidence that this is true. I'll happily concede the point if you can provide some solid evidence of this butnotherwise it is literally a conspiracy theory. That is what is wrong with it.
Your process:
"There has been a spike in heart conditions"
Prove it
"This website refutes it but ignore that and focus on the fact that the organisation has trustees in a number of political parties"
So what?
"Then you have to question the validity"
Why?
"Um..."
So you have been able to offer proper proof of your original claim and instead have relied on the insinuation that the website that refuted the claim is lying, again with no proper proof.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, I will do what I want and spread what I want when I want. Cheers fella 😇
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course you will, because you have your little conspiracy belief to cling to so that you can feel smart.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I like conspiracy theories. I don't trust the bbc or sky or the Sun one bit. When I see a doctor go on TV saying there has been a spike in heart attacks, I question why would he do that in the first place? Why is no one else reporting it? What is his angle?
You're right, I hate being part of the sheep. I have my own mind and I like to use by questioning other people and even myself sometimes.
If you trust sky, bbc and the Sun for that matter, bully for you but there always are and always will be two sides to every argument. That you can not dispute.
And there is no harm debating about it. You say I spread lies but there are people are there with heart issues that have been excelerated or exasperated by the vaccine. A relation of mine is one example hence why I looked into it in the first place. Ebdo seems to be having issues as well. Wasn't it strange when three fans at Villa Park, Watford and Newcastle all needed CPR? When has that ever happend before? Maybe it was just a freak of nature. Feck knows.
But I will continue to talk about it until I want, so do one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is your issue, Donald. You say there is no harm debating it, but you aren't debating it. You are sharing unreliable claims without any evidence that make dubious claims to doubt the vaccine. When this is pointed out you dive into conspiracy theories with no evidence to justify your position. What you are trying to do is claim you are being balanced but in reality you are among the flat-earthers and trumpists who think the election was crooked.
You have still been unable to provide reasonable evidence that there has been a spike in vaccine related heart issues. You have referenced some issues at some matches as if this supports your point but we don't know who those people were, what their issue was related to, or if they were even vaccinated. Its like claiming, for balance, that Fabrice Muamba suffered a heart issue before the vaccine so being unvaccinated causes heart issues. You are taking seemingly unrelated events and claiming they are linked.
It is dangerous misinformation that might put people off getting the vaccine and put people at additional risk of the virus all because you want to try to feel smarter than you are by "not believing the MSM", "not being a sheep", etc. Its unbelievably Trumpian buy if that's where you want to place yourself then you do you, and we can all enjoy a good laugh.
posted on 21/12/21
comment by Oscar. #TeamFury. (U12980)
posted 36 minutes ago
To be fair I can see it from both sides why some people want to go full Stasi and see everyone vaccinated every 3 months (even though their protection lies in our vaccine and not someone else’s) and equally why some people don’t want to be vaccinated especially as it’s pretty much becoming a farce now (2 jabs then a booster every 6 or 9 months that has now seemingly become a booster every 3 months) and it doesn’t stop you getting it, it doesn’t stop you spreading it and it doesn’t stop you getting ill, it just reduces the chances. So does an under 30 or 40 year old really need a vaccine every 3 months all things considered? No. Don’t think anyone does other than the most at risk or front line healthcare workers before winter period, should be the same as Flu.
I certainly don’t plan on “getting boosted” every 3 months. I also don’t trust Pfizer as a company at all, still hoping they make some AZ boosters.
Plus for sports people side effects of a vaccine leave you feeling crap for a few days so you can’t really train and if you’re having to do that every 3 months... I get the hesitancy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It is possible to get a "quantitative COVID Antibody test" which will tell you what % of expected antibodies you have. It must be a "quantitative" test.
You can base your decision to get a booster on that.
posted on 21/12/21
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by LukaBrasi COYS #FreePalestine (U22178)
posted 53 seconds ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 35 seconds ago
comment by LukaBrasi COYS #FreePalestine (U22178)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 28 seconds ago
comment by LukaBrasi COYS #FreePalestine (U22178)
posted 44 seconds ago
comment by welshpoolfan (U7693)
posted 40 seconds ago
comment by LukaBrasi COYS #FreePalestine (U22178)
posted 1 minute ago
You do realise that a rapid heartbeat (which is a potential side effect) is in no way the same as what you originally claimed which was " a spike in heart related illness' by people who have been vaxed"
----------------------------------
The whistle blower Doctor said an increase from 11% to 25% in heart attacks. I purposely didn't use the phrase heart attacks because I didn't want to scare anyone. Hence when I saw the fact article I posted it because not only did it refute the claim it explained why. Those explanations to me did not seem 100% justifiable. And when you look closer at the actual website it's link to political parties is obvious.
All I am trying to do is justify the reason why an athlete might not have a vaccine and provide another side to the arguement in the article by Genius 👍🏻
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you saw that the article refuted the claim by the doctor by linking to actual evidence yet have decided that you, as someone who apparently knows more than medical experts, would disregard it as not justifiable and still make your dubious claim despite not having any evidence.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah I did and so what? I have provided evidence. I've never said I know more than medical experts. I saw a doctor claim something and looked further into it.
I found an article which refuted the claim and posted it to give balance to that sub argument. But when you look into the article's website and see trustees from political parties then you have question the validity of the website. What is wrong that?
You are very would up at this point 🤣
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You provided evidence that refuted your claim, yer have stuck with your claim (and tried to downplay the evidence you provided yourself) to try and retain some credibility in your original claim.
Have trustees from a wide variety of political parties does not call into question the validity of the organisation. Your insinuation is that the organisation is lying under pressure from its trustees, but to make such a claim you would need to be able to actual show some evidence that this is true. I'll happily concede the point if you can provide some solid evidence of this butnotherwise it is literally a conspiracy theory. That is what is wrong with it.
Your process:
"There has been a spike in heart conditions"
Prove it
"This website refutes it but ignore that and focus on the fact that the organisation has trustees in a number of political parties"
So what?
"Then you have to question the validity"
Why?
"Um..."
So you have been able to offer proper proof of your original claim and instead have relied on the insinuation that the website that refuted the claim is lying, again with no proper proof.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, I will do what I want and spread what I want when I want. Cheers fella 😇
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Of course you will, because you have your little conspiracy belief to cling to so that you can feel smart.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I like conspiracy theories. I don't trust the bbc or sky or the Sun one bit. When I see a doctor go on TV saying there has been a spike in heart attacks, I question why would he do that in the first place? Why is no one else reporting it? What is his angle?
You're right, I hate being part of the sheep. I have my own mind and I like to use by questioning other people and even myself sometimes.
If you trust sky, bbc and the Sun for that matter, bully for you but there always are and always will be two sides to every argument. That you can not dispute.
And there is no harm debating about it. You say I spread lies but there are people are there with heart issues that have been excelerated or exasperated by the vaccine. A relation of mine is one example hence why I looked into it in the first place. Ebdo seems to be having issues as well. Wasn't it strange when three fans at Villa Park, Watford and Newcastle all needed CPR? When has that ever happend before? Maybe it was just a freak of nature. Feck knows.
But I will continue to talk about it until I want, so do one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is your issue, Donald. You say there is no harm debating it, but you aren't debating it. You are sharing unreliable claims without any evidence that make dubious claims to doubt the vaccine. When this is pointed out you dive into conspiracy theories with no evidence to justify your position. What you are trying to do is claim you are being balanced but in reality you are among the flat-earthers and trumpists who think the election was crooked.
You have still been unable to provide reasonable evidence that there has been a spike in vaccine related heart issues. You have referenced some issues at some matches as if this supports your point but we don't know who those people were, what their issue was related to, or if they were even vaccinated. Its like claiming, for balance, that Fabrice Muamba suffered a heart issue before the vaccine so being unvaccinated causes heart issues. You are taking seemingly unrelated events and claiming they are linked.
It is dangerous misinformation that might put people off getting the vaccine and put people at additional risk of the virus all because you want to try to feel smarter than you are by "not believing the MSM", "not being a sheep", etc. Its unbelievably Trumpian buy if that's where you want to place yourself then you do you, and we can all enjoy a good laugh.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Feck Donald Trump bro. Enjoy the rest of your evening. For the record I really hope Vaccines do not have any impact on anyone who already has an underlining heart condition and here is the doctor on that GB News segment :
https://youtu.be/gJ8t0qQ5R4I.
Should have just posted this in the first place lol.
posted on 22/12/21
Comment Deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 22/12/21
Yeah that would've saved a lot of time if you'd just said you watch that at the start to be fair.
posted on 22/12/21
comment by Tarrico_sees_red (U5595)
posted 9 hours, 19 minutes ago
I can’t believe you’re admitting to watching GBeebies. Absolute joke
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I saw a clip of the segment. Never said I am a regular viewer👍🏻