Hopefully matchday vaccines next

[PGWoodwind 119]

4 minutes ago, Laudrupsleftfoot said:

The World Health Organisation and AztraZeneca argued there was no evidence for their widespread use for a start.

Countries also have different variations of booster programmes too so there isn't the 'consensus of the entire world's medical experts' like you've claimed there is.

I don't know if you're pressed for time or being deliberately vague (or have only read wee snippets in the first place) but what do you mean by "widespread use" and who is the party that's saying there is evidence for the widespread use?

I hadn't given any thoughts to boosters before now, I just took it that since you mentioned them it's something that medical professionals are recommending and when I have a quick Google the first WHO page I read isn't saying anything about them having no evidence.

[MisterC 12,269]

7 minutes ago, 10pshortof17pound said:

Kudos to @Dan Deacon for the OP - 23 pages of mayhem ensued and if I’ve been paying attention he’s fucked off to Wales.

It's kept this section going through the international break

[Willis 20,919]

Too many fucking traffic analogies in this thread, its an absolute car crash

[Bad Robot 21,148]

1 hour ago, mitre_mouldmaster said:

You have the whole line between absolute anti-vax mentalists who think they will control out brains down to folk who are just scared of needles.

I dont have the same contempt for the vaccine hesitant side of the scale as I do for the absolute moonhowlers, but for simplicity, they are all on the anti vax scale.

I would say that any one who goes against the recommended advice from the experts who are saying to get the vaccine are anti-vax.

Sure there might be some cunt out there who had covid 6 months ago and is actually analysing his anti-body count in a lab each day and knows he is fighting fit. More likely though is it will be Paul the Amazon packer who had covid 12 months ago, has no idea what his antibody count is and how he will react to the delta strain.

For all the effort Paul puts in, he is still not going to be qualified to actually make a better judgement call than the experts who are telling him to get vaccinated. For that reason if he is saying he does not need the vaccine because 'reasons', then he is anti-vax as he is actively avoiding taking a vaccine that experts are advising him to take.

In short, basically all of the above are 'anti-vax' with the exception of the one about Canada. That is Anti-Passport. If they stated that a 12 year old was in more danger of the vaccine than covid, then this would again be anti-vax.

Paul is probably a poor example re the delta variant as Paul’s natural antibodies are 13 times stronger than compared to someone’s antibodies where they’ve had a double dose

[Willis 20,919]

Paul can go fuck himself, tarrier prick.

[crazy bob swollenbaws 1,865]

1 hour ago, mitre_mouldmaster said:

Cyclists are not allowed to use the motorways whilst on their bikes.

They are not being discriminated against. They are not having their freedom of access or human rights restricted just because they fail to obey the rules.

If the cyclist decides to instead, go sit a test and get a driving licence, then pay the government some money for road tax etc, and get a car, they are then allowed to enter the motorway in their car. Or they could hire a taxi, or other form of motor vehicle transport to do it.

They would however be denied access on their bike, because they are not following the rules.

To be honest, im not 100% sure why I posted this, cunts were going all off on different 'car' angles and I wanted to join in. 

I know why you posted it. Cause your critical thinking skills are non existent. 

In taking a pushbike on a motorway, would you be presenting a clear and present danger to yourself and/or other road users? Are there any groups of users on the motorway you would not be a danger to?  Would you say that that danger would be mitigatable by the other road users? If I was in my car and you on your bike, what could I do on a busy motorway to protect myself? Not a lot due to the difference in expected speeds. 

Now, if you go to the football without being dbl vaxxed, are you a clear and present danger to others? All others or just proportion realistically. what could others do to protect themselves from you if they are worried about you? 

 

[Tiger Shaw 30,455]

Not read all this thread but from what I have read the only thing I take from it is that @PGWoodwindsticks hot cross buns up his arse 

 

[Drunk and disorderly. 14,418]

58 minutes ago, Madina said:

Dont know if you've heard but the vast majority of people outwith the elderly/vulnerable category dont get the flu vaccine. They're certainly not coerced into it by being excluded from football, concerts etc if they choose not to get it 🙄

As I said previously I was being sarcastic. Do keep up 

As I said Covid is much more infectious than the flu and you are much more likely to die/have long term illness. Do you recognise these facts? 

Walking about unvaccinated without a good reason means that you are essentially happy to infect people around you. In the case of Rangers a minority are willing to endanger the lives of fellow supporters. Will no doubt have the hipocracy to chant We Are The People at matches though. 

Covid doesn't recognise your football allegiance. It doesn't recognise your freedom, it just recognises opportunities to spread and mutate into a potentially more infectious and fatal disease. 

Do keep up. 

 

 

 

 

 

[PGWoodwind 119]

11 minutes ago, crazy bob swollenbaws said:

I know why you posted it. Cause your critical thinking skills are non existent. 

In taking a pushbike on a motorway, would you be presenting a clear and present danger to yourself and/or other road users? Are there any groups of users on the motorway you would not be a danger to?  Would you say that that danger would be mitigatable by the other road users? If I was in my car and you on your bike, what could I do on a busy motorway to protect myself? Not a lot due to the difference in expected speeds. 

Now, if you go to the football without being dbl vaxxed, are you a clear and present danger to others? All others or just proportion realistically. what could others do to protect themselves from you if they are worried about you? 

 

Yes - all others.

They could protect themselves by not going to the game but why should the ones who are doing the decent thing be forced to miss out?

[Inigo 32,526]

Poor Paul. Yet another forced into this sorry mess without his consent.

[mitre_mouldmaster 21,509]

42 minutes ago, Bad Robot said:

Paul is probably a poor example re the delta variant as Paul’s natural antibodies are 13 times stronger than compared to someone’s antibodies where they’ve had a double dose

Not really true in the real world examples.

Data out of USA was showing that folk were actually more likely to catch the delta variant if they had previously had Covid Vs folk who had been double jabbed.

The vaccine was actually offering better protection than previous infection.

[crazy bob swollenbaws 1,865]

11 minutes ago, PGWoodwind said:

Yes - all others.

They could protect themselves by not going to the game but why should the ones who are doing the decent thing be forced to miss out?

So let's be clear. You are saying that if you are unvaxxed, go to the game (whether carrying the virus or not)  then u are a danger ro every single supporter regardless of:

1. Their age

2. Whether they themselves are vaxxed or not

3. Whether they have covid antibodies from previous infection

4. Whether they are fit or unfit? Overweight or slim

5. Whether they have underlying health conditions or not?

Your position is everyone is in mortal danger regardless of the above. Is that the case?

 

[PGWoodwind 119]

Just now, crazy bob swollenbaws said:

So let's be clear. You are saying that if you are unvaxxed, go to the game (whether carrying the virus or not)  then u are a danger ro every single supporter regardless of:

1. Their age

2. Whether they themselves are vaxxed or not

3. Whether they have covid antibodies from previous infection

4. Whether they are fit or unfit? Overweight or slim

5. Whether they have underlying health conditions or not?

Your position is everyone is in mortal danger regardless of the above. Is that the case?

 

Well you've now changed it to "mortal danger" and I don't know what you mean by that but if you're sticking with just being a danger then yes that is the case - ask your doctor if knowing the truth on it will affect whether you go to games or not.

[crazy bob swollenbaws 1,865]

2 minutes ago, PGWoodwind said:

Well you've now changed it to "mortal danger" and I don't know what you mean by that but if you're sticking with just being a danger then yes that is the case - ask your doctor if knowing the truth on it will affect whether you go to games or not.

Mortal danger means at high risk of death. So even if you were not carrying the virus you are a deadly risk to everyone else. That is what you have just said. Educate yourself. Ffs. 

[PGWoodwind 119]

1 minute ago, crazy bob swollenbaws said:

Mortal danger means at high risk of death. So even if you were not carrying the virus you are a deadly risk to everyone else. That is what you have just said. Educate yourself. Ffs. 

Did I say "deadly risk" aye?

Don't think so.

[crazy bob swollenbaws 1,865]

2 minutes ago, PGWoodwind said:

Did I say "deadly risk" aye?

Don't think so.

So just how much risk is a healthy dbl vaxxed person at from you if you don't have the virus?

 

How much risk is a healthy dbl vaxxed person at if you do have the virus?

Does that risk level change with any of the factors I mentioned age, weight etc etc? 

 

[crazy bob swollenbaws 1,865]

4 minutes ago, PGWoodwind said:

Did I say "deadly risk" aye?

Don't think so.

So you are not a deadly risk so we don't need vaxxed if we don't want to be then?? Penny dropping yet?

[PGWoodwind 119]

2 minutes ago, crazy bob swollenbaws said:

So just how much risk is a healthy dbl vaxxed person at from you if you don't have the virus?

Have you made a mistake typing that?

[crazy bob swollenbaws 1,865]

1 minute ago, PGWoodwind said:

Have you made a mistake typing that?

No. Read my previous posts again. Clear and present danger was the criteria remember.

[Tomatasauce 1,253]

3 minutes ago, crazy bob swollenbaws said:

So let's be clear. You are saying that if you are unvaxxed, go to the game (whether carrying the virus or not)  then u are a danger ro every single supporter regardless of:

1. Their age

2. Whether they themselves are vaxxed or not

3. Whether they have covid antibodies from previous infection

4. Whether they are fit or unfit? Overweight or slim

5. Whether they have underlying health conditions or not?

Your position is everyone is in mortal danger regardless of the above. Is that the case?

 

Who really cares, the people your asking this don’t make the rules! the law, if it stays that way (and I can’t see them backtracking completely now) means unvaccinated fans aren’t getting in, including my da and brother who are both season ticket holders, tough shit! they clearly aren’t happy but I’ve not heard them greetin about it, they know their options and it’s their choice to accept them or not I’d guess 

id be interested to know what the bears den discriminated posters are doing about the current situation they find themselves in, moaning on here, Is that it? 
 

 

[PGWoodwind 119]

5 minutes ago, crazy bob swollenbaws said:

No. Read my previous posts again. Clear and present danger was the criteria remember.

So you're asking if people are at risk from me if I don't have the virus?

At risk of what?

[Bad Robot 21,148]

32 minutes ago, mitre_mouldmaster said:

Not really true in the real world examples.

Data out of USA was showing that folk were actually more likely to catch the delta variant if they had previously had Covid Vs folk who had been double jabbed.

The vaccine was actually offering better protection than previous infection.

It’s all true 
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.08.24.21262415v1

[crazy bob swollenbaws 1,865]

2 minutes ago, PGWoodwind said:

So you're asking if people are at risk from me if I don't have the virus?

At risk of what?

That was going to be my question to u?  Assuming the guy next to me ( eg you ) does not have the virus am I totally safe?  

What proof do I have that you aren't violent and won't attack me for saying the wrong thing? Do Rangers check criminal history before entry? 

What about if you just returned from somewhere with yellow fever? Are the club checking your travel records and you had yellow fever, ebola etc vaccinations? 

And to be clear your position is that re covid, everyone else is at same risk etc other regardless of weight, health , vax status etc? 

[PGWoodwind 119]

Just now, crazy bob swollenbaws said:

That was going to be my question to u?  Assuming the guy next to me ( eg you ) does not have the virus am I totally safe?  

What proof do I have that you aren't violent and won't attack me for saying the wrong thing? Do Rangers check criminal history before entry? 

What about if you just returned from somewhere with yellow fever? Are the club checking your travel records and you had yellow fever, ebola etc vaccinations? 

And to be clear your position is that re covid, everyone else is at same risk etc other regardless of weight, health , vax status etc? 

hahaha fuck sake

[crazy bob swollenbaws 1,865]

Just now, PGWoodwind said:

hahaha fuck sake

Well quantify things then. Prove me wrong.

Notice u don't answer the weight question. Everything black and white with you eh?