Do you feel it's safe to return to games?

[Nuff Said 5,191]

3 hours ago, Ray said:

Nuff Said,

I’m not sure what checking vaccination status has to do with anything, are you suggesting that those who, for whatever reason, remain unvaccinated are not permitted into the ground, if so are we heading for unvaccinationism and segregation of society, seriously though, vaccinated or unvaccinated you can still carry and transmit the virus, in fact it could be argued that a vaccinated person is possibly more likely to pass it on, given they (hopefully) are not exhibiting symptoms, whereas an unvaccinated person is more likely to be suffering from symptoms and consequently will probably feel rough and stay at home/in bed anyhow.

If this is the case, and we are considering banning the unvaccinated, then perhaps we would be better served by banning the vaccinated??

I get that most of us have no wish to die, but one thing I can guarantee, is none of us are getting out alive.

However, in answer to your question, I’m ready for a full return and, what was up until March 2020, normality.

Vaccination protects the vaccinated and, by reducing cases of infection and the chances of further mutatations of the virus, it protects the unvaccinated too. To suggest the opposite is twisted logic.

We live in a society, where we all have reasonable expectations of behaviour from each other. Those who behave anti-socially, whether they are criminal or just unpleasant, can expect sanctions as a result. If you sit in the home end and start singing for the away team, you will get ejected from the ground. If you turn up to a mass gathering of people in a football ground unvaccinated, you should not expect to be allowed in, IMHO (once everyone has had a reasonable opportunity to be vaccinated). There's a case to be made that the tiny minority who can't have a vaccine for medically justified reasons should have an exception made, but that is irrelevant to the thrust of the argument.

[AJ 1,232]

I'm not sure where it weighs on human rights/discrimination that you are suggesting you stop people from entering the ground, the only reason they shouldn't be allowed to enter the ground is if they don't have a ticket!

Vaccine or no vaccine, it is up to you at the end of the day, if people want to take the risk of suffering badly because they don't want to get vaccinated then as far as I'm concerned that is up to them. Once the general population are vaccinated and the risk on the NHS returns to nominal levels then there's no reason things can't be back to normal, those that have chosen to remain unvaccinated will have to accept the risks that come with that choice

[Greavsy 2,464]

Trust me, getting vaccinated is not as easy, for some, as you would like think it should be. 

i've had both mine, at the local GP's, invited due to age and no other reasons, but I know of others at the same practice who couldn't get an appointment and were being offered appointments Wisbech and the like, which when they are also working is not suitable. 

Strangely I am also aware of a younger person (whose age group has yet to be called) who got invited to the same surgery, where they are not a registered patient, for their first jab. They do however have a family member who works at the surgery though, funnily enough! 

[Nuff Said 5,191]

15 minutes ago, AJ said:

I'm not sure where it weighs on human rights/discrimination that you are suggesting you stop people from entering the ground, the only reason they shouldn't be allowed to enter the ground is if they don't have a ticket!

Vaccine or no vaccine, it is up to you at the end of the day, if people want to take the risk of suffering badly because they don't want to get vaccinated then as far as I'm concerned that is up to them. Once the general population are vaccinated and the risk on the NHS returns to nominal levels then there's no reason things can't be back to normal, those that have chosen to remain unvaccinated will have to accept the risks that come with that choice

The longer we continue to have unvaccinated members of the population, the longer we are likely to have cases of infection, and the higher the chance of new variants developing. Just look at the areas where infection numbers are still high, there's a strong correlation with low vaccination numbers. The clearer the message that not getting vaccinated *once you get the opportunity* is socially unacceptable, the better. If that means a few people get turned away from a football match, tough.

[Daz Sparks 1,198]

2 minutes ago, Nuff Said said:

If that means a few people get turned away from a football match, tough.

I agree Nuff Said, having the choice to not be vaccinated is fine by me, as long as those that have chosen the vaccine don't suffer the consequences where possible.

[Capt. Pants 4,300]

3 hours ago, Nuff Said said:

We had over 100 cases detected in a secondary school near me a couple of weeks ago. I would guess that many of those involved probably had attitudes like yours.

It's not over till it's over is what I'm trying to say, and it clearly isn't over.

I'm with you on that. 2 or 3 weeks back I was very confident of being allowed back in next season. The Indian variant is now a huge concern and we face a race against time to get the vast majority of the population vaccinated twice. Critical phase coming up.

In light of Dom 'Hindsight' Cummings's comments this week I'm expecting extreme caution from Govt, but at the same time avoiding a return to restrictions. The seeds are being sown to delay the roadmap by the sounds of it which will have implications for large gatherings.

I'm in the Upper Barclay and the location of toilets in the concourse couldn't be worse quite honestly and I think the solution has to be closing the bars all together and minimise queues.

Hopefully in 4 weeks time the data is looking good and we can look forward to the start to the season and normality.

 

Edited May 28, 2021 by Capt. Pants

[Duncan Edwards 2,271]

8 minutes ago, Capt. Pants said:

I'm with you on that. 2 or 3 weeks back I was very confident of being allowed back in next season. The Indian variant is now a huge concern and we face a race against time to get the vast majority of the population vaccinated twice. Critical phase coming up.

In light of Dom 'Hindsight' Cummings's comments this week I'm expecting extreme caution from Govt, but at the same time avoiding a return to restrictions. The seeds are being sown to delay the roadmap by the sounds of it which will have implications for large gatherings.

We do seem to be being softened up for a potential pushback on the June 21st date. 

Hancock and Zahawi have both put out statements that make me think it's in the balance. 

[yellowrider120 793]

5 hours ago, Wrathofthefarkely said:

Why? 

The data clearly shows older age group infections and deaths have gone through the floor. 

Another month, this is done. 

Open up the ground. Pack in, enjoy being back and stop panicking. 

Agree 100%. 

[Ray 111]

3 hours ago, Nuff Said said:

Vaccination protects the vaccinated and, by reducing cases of infection and the chances of further mutatations of the virus, it protects the unvaccinated too. To suggest the opposite is twisted logic.

We live in a society, where we all have reasonable expectations of behaviour from each other. Those who behave anti-socially, whether they are criminal or just unpleasant, can expect sanctions as a result. If you sit in the home end and start singing for the away team, you will get ejected from the ground. If you turn up to a mass gathering of people in a football ground unvaccinated, you should not expect to be allowed in, IMHO (once everyone has had a reasonable opportunity to be vaccinated). There's a case to be made that the tiny minority who can't have a vaccine for medically justified reasons should have an exception made, but that is irrelevant to the thrust of the argument.

Hi Nuff Said,

Vaccinations primarily protect the vaccinated from suffering symptoms, not from carrying the virus, although various studies show they may do and the figures for this vary dramatically, furthermore there is now a school of thought (from eminent virologists) that these vaccines are potentially more likely to accelerate mutations, which sort of makes sense to me as the virus is attempting to get around the vaccines, therefore potentially putting everyone at a greater risk.  Vaccinated and unvaccinated can carry the virus, so just because 27,250 people in Carrow Rd are vaccinated it will not necessarily stop transmission.  Consequently, if we do want to segregate society then perhaps this can be done by suggesting to those who are most vulnerable to self-ban (for the want of a better phrase), to protect themselves from any carrier, vaccinated or unvaccinated, or we could take the view that if the vaccinations are so good at their job, why would a vaccinated person be worried who they were sat next to, vaccinated or unvaccinated, as both individuals can carry the virus.

[city4eva 215]

Yes with a full crowd

[Nuff Said 5,191]

1 hour ago, Ray said:

Hi Nuff Said,

Vaccinations primarily protect the vaccinated from suffering symptoms, not from carrying the virus, although various studies show they may do and the figures for this vary dramatically, furthermore there is now a school of thought (from eminent virologists) that these vaccines are potentially more likely to accelerate mutations, which sort of makes sense to me as the virus is attempting to get around the vaccines, therefore potentially putting everyone at a greater risk.  Vaccinated and unvaccinated can carry the virus, so just because 27,250 people in Carrow Rd are vaccinated it will not necessarily stop transmission.  Consequently, if we do want to segregate society then perhaps this can be done by suggesting to those who are most vulnerable to self-ban (for the want of a better phrase), to protect themselves from any carrier, vaccinated or unvaccinated, or we could take the view that if the vaccinations are so good at their job, why would a vaccinated person be worried who they were sat next to, vaccinated or unvaccinated, as both individuals can carry the virus.

Hi Ray,

In the time honoured PinkUn tradition, what’s your source for claims like “there is now a school of thought (from eminent virologists) that these vaccines are potentially more likely to accelerate mutation”? I’m no expert, but it sounds unlikely. 

[nutty nigel 7,651]

Great poll but it's too far in the future for me. If it was tomorrow I'd go. But one thing I've learned in the last year is that things change very quickly. 

[Ray 111]

Hi Nuff Said,

I'll supply info tomorrow sometime, off down the pub now, which is obviously of higher importance👍🍺

Cheers

Ray

[lake district canary 4,552]

 

8 hours ago, Nuff Said said:

8 hours ago, lake district canary said:

They could just stop selling alcohol.  It would stop some of the crowding in the concourse......I've never understood why people have to drink alcohol at a football match anyway, plenty of pubs open befiore a match. If you are then desperate for a pint at half time, bring a can with you. Who wants to spend most of half-time queing for a drink anyway? 

Maybe we could adapt "Farke on a horse" with a special Pink Un version called "Lakey on a high horse"? 😉

This may be a surprise to you, but many people behave and feel differently to you and, as long as it's within the law, they are perfectly entitled to do so.

Not a surprise at alI, don't know why you should say that.  It's just my point of view, that's all.

[Terminally Yellow 2,485]

1 hour ago, Nuff Said said:

Hi Ray,

In the time honoured PinkUn tradition, what’s your source for claims like “there is now a school of thought (from eminent virologists) that these vaccines are potentially more likely to accelerate mutation”? I’m no expert, but it sounds unlikely. 

Article here.

It does make sense if you think about it. A virus is a living organism. Just as other organisms adapt to survive, so will a virus. 

 

[ricardo 7,416]

3 hours ago, city4eva said:

Yes with a full crowd

👍

[pete 320]

If allowed would go tomorrow but would take certain precautions.  Get an earlier train much earlier to avoid crowded trains and get to the ground and avoid the congested concourse and straight to seat.  Wear mask and socially distance which I regularly practice to avoid the great unwashed as much as possible.

[CANARYKING 644]

Bars and toilets are the big problem, sitting in the stand in the open will be fine. Personally I would close the bars and have extra portable toilets by the turnstiles, have a restricted area just outside the ground

[Banjoman 41]

2 hours ago, Terminally Yellow said:

Article here.

It does make sense if you think about it. A virus is a living organism. Just as other organisms adapt to survive, so will a virus. 

 

Well, there's nothing in that article suggesting that particular variant evolved because of vaccine pressure - indeed, the variant predominant in South Africa emerged before the vaccine. It just so happens to be a bit more resistant to antibodies against corona classic.

The virus will mutate as it replicates. So if someone has high level immunity (eg fully vaccinated) then mutations should be unlikely to happen within that person because there won't be many replications before clearance.

Someone with poor but not absent immunity, which might include partial vaccination (especially against the new variant in the UK), and some unlucky non-responders, well then there will be a selection pressure on the virus to overcome that low immunity if they are exposed.

And the more unvaccinated people mixing, the higher chances of that happening are. 

[Iwans Big Toe 312]

I don't feel safe at all.

If fans are going to return to watching live football they should all be made to show they have had vaccinations, probably at least 4 jabs each. Everyone should be made to wear at least two masks, possibly three if we want to really reduce the spread of infection.

No one should be able to come within 15 meters of another person while in an enclosed space. I realise this would severely hamper the amount of people who are able to watch a game, but come on, the safety of others is the most important thing, stop being so selfish.

 

[Terminally Yellow 2,485]

7 hours ago, Banjoman said:

Well, there's nothing in that article suggesting that particular variant evolved because of vaccine pressure - indeed, the variant predominant in South Africa emerged before the vaccine. It just so happens to be a bit more resistant to antibodies against corona classic.

You've missed the point. The point of the article wasn't that the variants currently in circulation had mutated because of vaccines but that mutation could occur in future because of vaccines. 

[JF 694]

18 hours ago, PaulineFowler said:

Nah I want to carry on as we are in case there is a Brundall variant in six months

They are currently working their way through the Just Eat menu of variants. We’ve had Chinese and Indian, Thai is next 🍲🍲🍲

[JF 694]

20 hours ago, Nuff Said said:

Vaccination protects the vaccinated and, by reducing cases of infection and the chances of further mutatations of the virus, it protects the unvaccinated too. To suggest the opposite is twisted logic.

We live in a society, where we all have reasonable expectations of behaviour from each other. Those who behave anti-socially, whether they are criminal or just unpleasant, can expect sanctions as a result. If you sit in the home end and start singing for the away team, you will get ejected from the ground. If you turn up to a mass gathering of people in a football ground unvaccinated, you should not expect to be allowed in, IMHO (once everyone has had a reasonable opportunity to be vaccinated). There's a case to be made that the tiny minority who can't have a vaccine for medically justified reasons should have an exception made, but that is irrelevant to the thrust of the argument.

Does the same apply to the yearly flu vaccine then? What you’re suggesting is ridiculous and will lead to a two tier society. I’ve had covid in February and for me it was nothing worse than a mild cold, I appreciate that isn’t the case for a very small percentage of people but those people have the vaccine. I’ve absolutely no intention of having a vaccine that has some seriously nasty side affects for a virus I’ve already had and have antibodies for. Latest research indicates that natural immunity may even last forever. I’ll wait it out on the studies of natural immunity before taking the jab 

Edited May 29, 2021 by JF

[pearsos 56]

18 hours ago, AJ said:

I'm not sure where it weighs on human rights/discrimination that you are suggesting you stop people from entering the ground, the only reason they shouldn't be allowed to enter the ground is if they don't have a ticket!

 

So, on that basis it would be ok for someone to enter the ground:-

(a) Drunk

(b) Wearing the away teams shirt in the home supporters only section

(c) Carrying a weapon

etc, etc.

The club has the right to refuse entry, so why not if you can’t prove you have had 2 vaccinations OR have had a negative covid test within the last xx (number) of days, which is what is happening with regard to things such as foreign travel at the moment.

 

 

[Banjoman 41]

2 hours ago, Terminally Yellow said:

You've missed the point. The point of the article wasn't that the variants currently in circulation had mutated because of vaccines but that mutation could occur in future because of vaccines. 

No I do see your point, and I don't really disagree as such, but I feel it's hard to claim that vaccines specifically will accelerate mutations compared to the virus evolving to avoid natural immunity. I don't think the article or the Nature study says that either. Indeed, responses after vaccination look higher than natural infection plus no vaccine (as with some other vaccines). 

The main driver for mutations will be the sheer amount of infected people vs poorly immune populations, and globally that's a big problem. But of course there may be limited mutations possible without the virus losing function. Lots of unknowns still. 

[Ray 111]

Hi Nuff Said,

As promised another article I came across attached.  My knowledge is insufficient to agree or disagree with what Bossche says, however I always prefer to look at all sides of a discussion and who knows who is correct, I certainly don't and my suspicion is no-one, whoever they are, does know, I suspect the answer lies somewhere in the middle, we are after all in unprecedented times, in the modern era at least.  There will no doubt be people (including scientists) who dismiss this article and they may be right, they may not be of course!!

Cheers

Ray

Bossche Paper.docx

[Midlands Yellow 4,114]

13 hours ago, pete said:

If allowed would go tomorrow but would take certain precautions.  Get an earlier train much earlier to avoid crowded trains and get to the ground and avoid the congested concourse and straight to seat.  Wear mask and socially distance which I regularly practice to avoid the great unwashed as much as possible.

No pub crawl Pete? You could meet Lakey (adequate social distancing mind) 

[Hairy Canary 713]

The process of evolution is well understood and is playing out exactly as expected in front of our eyes during this pandemic.

The mutations that are happening are entirely random, based on errors and natural variations during the reproduction process. There have been several hundred recorded mutations of this virus identified already and no doubt many more that were never identified. The vast majority of the mutations didn't benefit the virus in any way and simply died out. The few that are of benefit, like having the ability to transmit more easily, will gain a natural advantage and will eventually become more prevalent than the "original".

The evidence that we have concerning the vaccine shows that it reduces both the severity of the disease and also the likelihood of catching it. Therefore, the more people that have the vaccine (or have natural antibodies after catching it) the less opportunity the virus has of mutating into something so altered that the vaccine can't protect us from it.

The paper that Terminally Yellow posted supports exactly this. Sorry Ray but couldn't get the paper you posted to open.

So, everyone has the right not to be vaccinated but, like all choices, it comes with ramifications, particularly when that choice negatively effects other people. Whether that means not being allowed to attend large scale sporting events is another debate, but I can certainly see why it is something that gets discussed.

The world has hundreds of years of history of killer diseases and only since the age of vaccines have we managed to control many of them - smallpox and polio have been given a good hiding even in my lifetime. The evidence for vaccines has been there for decades, why ever wouldn't you have it!

[BroadstairsR 2,218]

It's a hackneyed phrase but "rights" come with responsibilities.

If you chose to live in a society, enjoy the benefits of that society and are protected by those benefits then a degree of personal sacrifice needs making. It's the way it works.

Vaccine refusers, for whatever reason, have every right to take that stance. They have no right to put other members of the society they chose to live in at risk. Even the slightest risk.

Roll on vaccination certificates. The next time I board an aeroplane I would wish all my fellow passengers to have been certified in such a way. Stands to reason.

Edited May 29, 2021 by BroadstairsR

[JF 694]

1 hour ago, BroadstairsR said:

It's a hackneyed phrase but "rights" come with responsibilities.

If you chose to live in a society, enjoy the benefits of that society and are protected by those benefits then a degree of personal sacrifice needs making. It's the way it works.

Vaccine refusers, for whatever reason, have every right to take that stance. They have no right to put other members of the society they chose to live in at risk. Even the slightest risk.

Roll on vaccination certificates. The next time I board an aeroplane I would wish all my fellow passengers to have been certified in such a way. Stands to reason.

Astonishing attitude.  You think it’s right to exclude people from society because they don’t share the same acquired immunity as yourself? Absolutely irrelevant to you that they themselves may have immunity acquired through prior infection? But they don’t have the same papers you have so they don’t have the same rights? Some people need to have a good look at themselves in the mirror

Edited May 29, 2021 by JF