Double Vaccination Required To Attend Premier League Matches

So are you saying you're actually called 'HighstreetHorn'?! OK mate, I've already had enough of you. You're clearly not the ticket, so I'm putting you on ignore. Enjoy yourself

 

Thank f.ck for that.

 

This is one of the main issues of this anti vaccine twattery. Mainstreaming voodoo and magical thinking. Andrew Wakefield is a prime example, measles now growing as a result of 'normalising' refusal of MMR.

 

Sure. But you can't just go sticking needles in kids arms without mum or dad's say so.

The damage was done when Wakefield's poorly researched, quackery paper (with a tiny sample size) wasn't properly peer reviewed and allowed to appear in the normally reputable Lancet.

Why doesn't it surprise me at all that he's now an anti-vax cult hero coining it in in the good old USA?

 

Shacked up with Elle Macpherson too.

 

There are some countries you have to show a vaccine record to enter. Yellow Fever springs to mind as a vaccination i had to have to take a holiday. It was a discretionary Leisure trip, but a compulsory condition of travel. so i had the vaccination because i wanted to go to that country.

As it happens i had additional non mandatory vaccinations too, (rabies vaccine) and a tetanus booster. I did not really think about the side effects of the vaccine. I did not think about the risk of long term side effects of the vaccine at all. I did about the consequences if i unfortunately caught one of the illnesses i was mitigating. So i am one of those people who simply don't understand why people are refusing to have a Covid vaccination.

Going to football stadium among thousands of others; conditions apply to protect the safety and enjoyment of all. If you don't want to comply you cant attend.

Having to prove you have been vaccinated to my mind is about collective reassurance to the rest of the attendees. Personally i am more concerned if people stop attending because of the anxiety about the disease. As it happens my seat in the LGT is the first row after the wheelchair area. I expect the adults and children in that area are more likely to be at risk of all sorts of viruses, Covid, flu, etc. If vaccination of all attendees reassures them, i think it is further the aggravation of demonstrating that i have had the vaccine.

Having to show you vaccine status to vote or get treatment at A&E, is on a totally different plain. There they maybe implications on civil liberties. But watching Bachman turn into Perry Digweed in the first few home games is not.

 

No, there are implications for civil liberties (not that that term is really apposite any more) but most would argue (rightly, imo) that those implications are low-level and certainly not comparable to something like access to health care, so can much more legitimately be overriden.

 

She’s not the full shilling on this. It’s therefore not surprising she’s got her knockers.

 

Just play all the matches here, that should do.

 

I’m actually making this expression as I type, which I can tell you is not easy.

Knockers = detractors, critics. She certainly has those.

Some of you need to consider your attitudes and maybe attend church or other place of worship this weekend to seek spiritual guidance.

 

Anybody could be forgiven for thinking you're referring to a nice little town in the Borders on the north bank of the Tweed with a racecourse and a village on the north Norfolk coast with a windmill.

 

You might think that. I couldn't possibly comment.

 

If I remember correctly, Wakefield was struck off as a doctor because, in doing his research / quackery (delete as applicable) he gave medication and took samples from the children for the purpose of his study but without telling the parents what he was really doing.

 

An excellent article in today's Guardian (and that's not something you hear often!) Premier League take note.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...ff-get-covid-jab-good-idea-despite-legal-risk

 

We were having a general chat about taking the vaccine in the office yesterday I said something like "all over 30's should take it" and one of my colleagues (in his 30's) said he wasn't going to have it. When asked politely why not he went into a full on rant about personal choice and why should he explain to us decision. It was very strange what his reaction was.

 

Yes. Must confess it hadn’t occurred to me that “belief” under the Equality Act could apply in this instance.

There’s a more general point buried in there which is that, given low rates of take up amongst ethnic minorities, any “no jab no job” policy might be discriminatory on that basis. That seems to be indirect discrimination under the Act, though, so it would probably be lawful as the employer could offer a justification for it.

 

Another essay for your students!

 

Discrimination law is somewhat on the fringes of my comfort zone!

 

All adults should take it, irrespective of their risk levels from the current variant/strain. There are three reasons for this. 1) Mutations 2) Mutations 3) Mutations.

 

Eh? I’m firmly in the ‘let’s get vaccinated people’ camp. But even I draw the line at telling people they should have it and ignore any (professional) health advice they have had to the contrary.

 

But he's right. Steve Cooper wouldn't take it and look what happened.

 

Sorry, if you have had specific medical advice against it, you should of course not be vaccinated. My comment was in response to the apparent assertion that anyone under 30 need not be vaccinated. I should have been clearer.

 

Bizarre. If everyone is to be treated equally under the law then surely the reasons why some might choose not to have a vaccine, and for those reasons to be seen as justified (and an exemption granted), or unjustified, would need to be equal too. A medical exemption would be justified, 'coz I'm black and my witch-doctor told me not to and my people have been experimented on in the past' wouldn't be. Particularly seeing as the latter argument is obviously not relevant in this case.

If black workers in care homes and the NHS lose their jobs disproportionality then that will be because of their choice, not their colour, and certainly not discriminatory against their race.

 

That’s why it’s only indirect discrimination at most. And that form of discrimination is capable of being justified under the Act, which I believe it would be.

 

If the government had taken control over our borders on Covid then we'd have been more like New Zealand and maybe 150,000 deaths avoided.

Certainly even recently they didn't stop flights from India because they were after a trade deal and so we ended up with the delta variant here.

Vaccine passports are a minor issue compared to that disaster.

 

The side effects of the vaccine are not worse than Covid in the younger age group.

Under 40's get Pfizer or Moderna not AZ vaccine.

 

Depends on the infection rate - that is questionable at the current high rates.

 

No it think that it doesn't depend on infection rates. Higher infection rates or not the vaccines work overall very effectively at very low risk seen so far.

And no vaccines have known long term side effects.

Covid certainly does.

 

My reply was to the assertion that Covid effects in the young are no worse than vaccine side effects, which possibly depends on infection rate -see https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/news...r-young-people-looks-to-have-shifted-12362404

Also young people should get vaccinated to reduce viral reproduction and thus lower the possibility of more dangerous strains emerging.

I agree with everything in your post, though.

 

So say 20,000 people have been fully vaccinated and attend the game - it would still spread within the stadium exactly the same amount as it would if there were 20,000 people there who are unvaxxed...? It would just mean that those people who caught it have a higher immunity / less severe side effects from it - so surely it affects the unvaxxed more than the vaccinated as they are much more likely to have severe side effects from it? So how would this adversely affect you or anyone who is vaccinated? It would be the exact same as if you caught it from a vaccinated person! (Who are exactly as likely to contract the virus and spread it than those who are unvaxxed).
Please correct me if this is untrue, as I have not seen any evidence that vaccinated people are less likely to contract or spread it, in fact quite the contrary.

 

The CDC in the US states that the data with mRNA vaccines dhows that transmission is reduced by vaccination https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/science-briefs/fully-vaccinated-people.html. Pfizer vaccines, which many people at football will have been given (being young), are mRNA vaccines. The CDC data does not relate to traditional antigen vaccines purely because the US is not using them. There is nothing in the science to indicate that they would not have the same effect.

 

This article suggests the vaccinated group do reduce the spread of Covid 19 infection by 80%. What that means in epidemiology of the disease I am not able to say. But it suggests that a crowd of 20,000 fully vaccinated people are less likely to spread disease than unvaccinated. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02054-z

 

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/...-can-cut-household-transmission-by-up-to-half