Cole Beasley announces he will not be following Covid protocols, willing to retire

[pepsicat17]

8 minutes ago, nbbillsfan said:

Do I completely disagree with his position, no. I’m fairly open minded on the topic. 

 

The issue is that he does not defend his position in a particularly intelligent or logical fashion. IMO he is a poor voice for the conversation, because he is ill-informed, misinformed, and blinded by ideology. This is an unfortunate pattern in many anti-vax or anti-COVID-vax people, which makes an intelligent and objective dialogue about the subject impossible.

 

Note: I have not gotten a vaccine yet, so I am not a judgmental liberal with zero tolerance for alternative perspectives. 

It seems like you’re trying to make a reasonable comment in the pursuit of a rational dialogue (regardless of the opinion itself, which is the way it should be) then you just have to let us know you’re not a “judgmental liberal with zero tolerance for alternative perspectives”.
 

How can anyone have an “intelligent and objective dialogue” when you make a closing statement like that?

[HappyDays]

48 minutes ago, T master said:

The vaccine does not stop you from getting or spreading the virus it just helps to keep you from dying from it

 

So all the clinical trials and studies and data collected that have shown this statement to be 100% false, what is your explanation for those? Do you think the scientists lied? Performed bad studies? I genuinely want to know your thoughts.

[H2o]

1 hour ago, HappyDays said:

 

See there's this weird double talk thing going on with the anti-vax crowd. On one side it's "the covid vaccine isn't 100% preventive so it's pointless to get;" on the other side it's "if you trust the vaccine why do you care if I'm vaccinated or not?" The two points answer each other. I care if you get the vaccine because some people that get the vaccine will still be susceptible to getting covid, and the more people that are vaccinated the less likely it is that the virus will continue to spread.

I actually don't believe it helps or protects, but on the contrary I don't want to take the chance of self inflicted harm that could come from it. Either be that to me or at my hands to my children. The question is posed for those who believes it does make them "safe" from the effects. I'd rather take my chances with me and my children having remained healthy through this entire ordeal. 

[buffalojedwardo]

big balls Beasley love it!!! 

[Reader]

12 minutes ago, pepsicat17 said:

It seems like you’re trying to make a reasonable comment in the pursuit of a rational dialogue (regardless of the opinion itself, which is the way it should be) then you just have to let us know you’re not a “judgmental liberal with zero tolerance for alternative perspectives”.
 

How can anyone have an “intelligent and objective dialogue” when you make a closing statement like that?

 

I am a very open and tolerant person accepting of everyone...unlike those liberals

 

Just in case anyone is guessing my view on this, the above statement is definitely /s

Edited June 19, 2021 by Reader

[rayray808]

I have a dress code at work but I refuse to let them tell me what to wear and how to live my life.

 

For that reason, I am going to wear whatever I want while at work, and I speak on behalf of other employees who feel the same way.

 

**UPDATE**

 

Anyone know of anywhere hiring?

[Process]

4 minutes ago, buffalojedwardo said:

big balls Beasley love it!!! 

BBB! Hell yeah!

[BuffaloBob]

53 minutes ago, T master said:

The vaccine does not stop you from getting or spreading the virus it just helps to keep you from dying from it and if you are healthy you really need not worry add to that if others get vaccinated & your healthy and don't have it then what is there to fear but the fear they have interjected into all of this !

This is factually incorrect.  The vaccines are not 100% effective against an infection.  But they are 100% effective in preventing death.

 

The two RNA vaccines by Pfizer and Moderna are like 94-95% effective against infection, with the two shots taken.  And that is nearly twice as effective as the typical flu vaccine.  This was demonstrated by the initial trials and has been confirmed in the field as they continue to study people who have received the vaccine, and tracking of breakthrough infections.

 

The Johnson and Johnson is 72% effective at preventing breakthrough infections and also 100% effective in preventing hospitalization and death, but it's advantage was a single dose and not having to store it at extremely low temps.

[HalftimeAdjustment]

7 minutes ago, H2o said:

I actually don't believe it helps or protects, but on the contrary I don't want to take the chance of self inflicted harm that could come from it. Either be that to me or at my hands to my children. The question is posed for those who believes it does make them "safe" from the effects. I'd rather take my chances with me and my children having remained healthy through this entire ordeal. 

 

Well, thanks at least for stating your reasons clearly and calmly, without calling everyone else "sheep" for believing the evidence that it does 'help or protect'.

Just now, BuffaloBob said:

This is factually incorrect.  The vaccines are not 100% effective against an infection.  But they are 100% effective in preventing death.

 

The two RNA vaccines by Pfizer and Moderna are like 94-95% effective against infection, with the two shots taken.  And that is nearly twice as effective as the typical flu vaccine.  This was demonstrated by the initial trials and has been confirmed in the field as they continue to study people who have received the vaccine, and tracking of breakthrough infections.

 

The Johnson and Johnson is 72% effective at preventing breakthrough infections and also 100% effective in preventing hospitalization and death, but it's advantage was a single dose and not having to store it at extremely low temps.

 

It is important to note they were 100% effective against preventing death in clinical trials, but have not been 100% effective at preventing death in real-world usage based upon data and studies from both Israel and the UK. Also, someone fully vaccinated died in Washington state, I believe. 

[BuffaloBob]

10 minutes ago, H2o said:

I actually don't believe it helps or protects, but on the contrary I don't want to take the chance of self inflicted harm that could come from it. Either be that to me or at my hands to my children. The question is posed for those who believes it does make them "safe" from the effects. I'd rather take my chances with me and my children having remained healthy through this entire ordeal. 

And just out of curiosity, exactly what factual basis informs your belief that vaccines don't help or protect?  I ask this because all of the data, both in trials and empirical data collected in the field, say exactly the opposite.  Overwhelmingly the opposite.

[HappyDays]

9 minutes ago, H2o said:

I actually don't believe it helps or protects

 

But this is a patently ridiculous belief, given the numerous clinical trials and studies that have shown the opposite. I'll ask the same question I asked above - do you think the scientists that ran those studies lied? Performed bad studies? Or have you seen other studies that indicate the vaccines are not at all effective? If none of those, then what prompts you to believe that all of the available data is wrong?

[Capco]

1 minute ago, BuffaloBob said:

And just out of curiosity, exactly what factual basis informs your belief that vaccines don't help or protect?  I ask this because all of the data, both in trials and empirical data collected in the field, say exactly the opposite.  Overwhelmingly the opposite.

 

Cole illustrated the problem perfectly with this tweet:

 

 

[Bad Things]

Thanks Cole, just what this team needed right now.

SMH

[BuffaloBob]

11 minutes ago, HalftimeAdjustment said:

 

Well, thanks at least for stating your reasons clearly and calmly, without calling everyone else "sheep" for believing the evidence that it does 'help or protect'.

 

It is important to note they were 100% effective against preventing death in clinical trials, but have not been 100% effective at preventing death in real-world usage based upon data and studies from both Israel and the UK. Also, someone fully vaccinated died in Washington state, I believe. 

And exactly what were the circumstances of those deaths?  How many were there?  Did they receive both shots and did the infections occur within a few weeks of vaccination?  Were they immunologically compromised to begin with?  Full vaccination requires a latency period to achieve full immunological response.  I have done searches and see no such information.  Please provide me with a link.  Thanks.

 

Also, which vaccines were they?  I mentioned the three approved for use in the US.  There are other vaccines from other providers for which I am not vouching.

Edited June 19, 2021 by BuffaloBob

[Doc Brown]

9 minutes ago, HalftimeAdjustment said:

 

Well, thanks at least for stating your reasons clearly and calmly, without calling everyone else "sheep" for believing the evidence that it does 'help or protect'.

 

It is important to note they were 100% effective against preventing death in clinical trials, but have not been 100% effective at preventing death in real-world usage based upon data and studies from both Israel and the UK. Also, someone fully vaccinated died in Washington state, I believe. 

And 393 non vaccinated Americans died of Covid yesterday.

[nbbillsfan]

25 minutes ago, pepsicat17 said:

It seems like you’re trying to make a reasonable comment in the pursuit of a rational dialogue (regardless of the opinion itself, which is the way it should be) then you just have to let us know you’re not a “judgmental liberal with zero tolerance for alternative perspectives”.
 

How can anyone have an “intelligent and objective dialogue” when you make a closing statement like that?

because that’s largely who are attacking Cole. There are certainly a plethora of judgmental conservators with zero tolerance for alternative perspectives too, they just aren’t relevant to the Cole Beasley conversation.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

5 hours ago, SCBills said:

Eh… not really.  Like most of this, the control stance has shifted over time.  From “15 days to slow the spread” to “actually, we need to reach 70% for herd immunity” …. well, science and medicine would tell you the combination of natural immunity and vaccination has us there already.  
 

We could simply go back to normal right now, but a certain segment of society refuses to allow it… or at least not without the needed compliance to authority.  

 

Could we?  I have a post in this thread about "back to normal" in MO.

 

"15 days to slow the spread" was based on the premise that there would be a coherent response put in place - "test trace isolate" and other mitigation measures, on a national scale.  Did that happen?  No.  No, it did not.

 

Where do science and medicine tell me that the combination of natural immunity and vaccination have us at herd immunity already?  What is the duration of natural immunity from Covid?  How many of those vaccinated contracted Covid and should be subtracted from the natural immunity column?  There is an equation usually used to calculate the fraction of immune or vaccinated people required for herd immunity.  It depends upon a value for Ro.  What value for Ro should be used for the current predominant variants?  I'm actually looking for answers to these questions, so I'd really appreciate being pointed at the facts.

[BuffaloBob]

6 minutes ago, nbbillsfan said:

because that’s largely who are attacking Cole. There are certainly a plethora of judgmental conservators with zero tolerance for alternative perspectives too, they just aren’t relevant to the Cole Beasley conversation.

That is incorrect assumption on your part.  I ain't no intolerant liberal by any definition.  But what I do find hard to tolerate is willful ignorance and gullibility. 

Edited June 19, 2021 by BuffaloBob

[Beast]

16 minutes ago, rayray808 said:

I have a dress code at work but I refuse to let them tell me what to wear and how to live my life.

 

For that reason, I am going to wear whatever I want while at work, and I speak on behalf of other employees who feel the same way.

 

**UPDATE**

 

Anyone know of anywhere hiring?

 

Correct.

 

And Beasley is OK with that.

[BuffaloBob]

3 minutes ago, Beast said:

 

Correct.

 

And Beasley is OK with that.

At least he SAYS he is.  I'll believe it when I see it. 

[Beast]

What about players, coaches, employees of the team, etc., that have already contracted Covid that don't want to be vaccinated?

 

The latest Cleveland Clinic study.....

 

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/new-study-determines-people-whove-had-covid-19-dont-need-to-get-vaccinated

1 minute ago, BuffaloBob said:

At least he SAYS he is.  I'll believe it when I see it. 

 

Does he seem fake to you?

[Hapless Bills Fan]

14 minutes ago, BuffaloBob said:

This is factually incorrect.  The vaccines are not 100% effective against an infection.  But they are 100% effective in preventing death.

 

The two RNA vaccines by Pfizer and Moderna are like 94-95% effective against infection, with the two shots taken.  And that is nearly twice as effective as the typical flu vaccine.  This was demonstrated by the initial trials and has been confirmed in the field as they continue to study people who have received the vaccine, and tracking of breakthrough infections.

 

The Johnson and Johnson is 72% effective at preventing breakthrough infections and also 100% effective in preventing hospitalization and death, but it's advantage was a single dose and not having to store it at extremely low temps.

 

Hi.  Just a little note that the above reflect experience with the initial variants circulating.

 

For the Delta variant currently causing >90% of infections in UK (and likely to predominate in US in a few), data suggest 79% protective against infection and 88% protective against severe disease for the mRNA vaccines.  No data on J&J; AZ (similar technology but 2 doses) 67%.  One dose of AZ was 30%.

 

Still very effective at preventing severe disease and death.

 

 

[QCity]

4 minutes ago, Beast said:

 

Correct.

 

And Beasley is OK with that.

 

 

Yeah, right. If he got cut he would be crying on Twitter for weeks.

[HardyBoy]

1 hour ago, ProcessAccepted said:

Any players can be cut for any reason. I'm a Beasley fan so I think that someone should hold an intervention. He's trashing his brand howling into the wind. People can believe what they want to believe but being so out spoken isn't helping anyone. It's becoming harder for him to strike a compromise with the team/league. 

 

Trashing his brand with who?

[RiotAct]

3 minutes ago, BuffaloBob said:

At least he SAYS he is.  I'll believe it when I see it. 

who will blink first?!?  The suspense is killing me.

[H2o]

16 minutes ago, BuffaloBob said:

And just out of curiosity, exactly what factual basis informs your belief that vaccines don't help or protect?  I ask this because all of the data, both in trials and empirical data collected in the field, say exactly the opposite.  Overwhelmingly the opposite.

We've had every other vaccine. The ones that have been around with years of data behind them. I'm not completely "anti-vax" as people try to label. But we never get flu shots and we're not getting this. The possible heart issues, the possible blood clots, the sickness you get from it, as well as other things I have seen. We're healthy and have been through all of this. The shot is unnecessary to me/us. Not doing it. 

[pennstate10]

33 minutes ago, H2o said:

I actually don't believe it helps or protects, but on the contrary I don't want to take the chance of self inflicted harm that could come from it. Either be that to me or at my hands to my children. The question is posed for those who believes it does make them "safe" from the effects. I'd rather take my chances with me and my children having remained healthy through this entire ordeal. 

Serious question.  Why dont you believe it helps or protects?

Is your belief based upon scientific studies, with publicly available data?

Or is your belief based upon Facebook groups?

[Hapless Bills Fan]

34 minutes ago, Beast said:

What about players, coaches, employees of the team, etc., that have already contracted Covid that don't want to be vaccinated?

 

The latest Cleveland Clinic study.....

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/new-study-determines-people-whove-had-covid-19-dont-need-to-get-vaccinated

 

This is a good study and a good article about it.

 

A note of caution that the number of relevant people (prevously infected, unvaccinated) they followed was small: 1,359 out of 52,238 people.  That's less than 3% of the study population, which is always a "caution" flag to making conclusions.

 

The study also ended in May 2021.  As it notes,

 

Quote

Scientists are still exploring whether there are benefits to vaccinating people who’ve already had the infection. They’re also examining how natural immunity compares to immunity from vaccination.

 

[Monica] Gandhi [UCSF Infectious Disease specialist] said that she’s often asked whether previously ill people should get vaccinated. She said that the truth is, there isn’t enough data, and we don’t yet know how long natural immunity lasts.

 

The other point is that in UK, they had a policy of "1 shot per cot" to extend vaccine supplies, but are now finding 1 shot doesn't give the desired protection against their current predominant variant (Delta) - but 2 shots do.  That would be an argument for people who have been infected following Gandhi's suggestion:

 

Quote

Her solution: Just get the first dose. Even if it’s unnecessary, that single dose can act as an immune booster.

 

Still, there is some evidence backing the idea that if J&J recipients are considered vaccinated, players and coaches who can provide evidence of a positive covid-19 PCR test should also be treated as vaccinated.  At a very minimum, I think it would be reasonable for these folks to point the NFL/NFLPA medical advisors/committee at the evidence and ask why this isn't considered.

[Motorin']

21 minutes ago, Capco said:

 

Cole illustrated the problem perfectly with this tweet:

 

 

 

Opioid addiction is no joke. If Cole's outburst has anything to do with emotional swings from substances, I hope he gets help. 

 

I know from personal experience how hard they are to kick after serious injury, and how bad the emotional swings are. I can't help but wonder...

[Hapless Bills Fan]

5 hours ago, SCBills said:

I’ve certainly let myself get condescending at times in this thread, and will try to do better in defense of my position (and therefore Cole’s) - but it’s pretty clear that one side views themselves as morally superior on this issue and thus any pushback, at all, is worthy of personal insults.  

 

I understand that perception differs, but I see all the posts we hide. 

 

I think it's pretty clear the "moral superiority" viewpoint rolls both ways, as do the insults.

 

[Doc Brown]

I wonder if the league reached out to Beane after Beasley's twitter rant.  They don't want another Kaepernick type situation which could happen if the Bills cut him and nobody else signs him.  He'd have a case for collusion and the NFL doesn't want to shell out more money on a settlement like they did in Kaepernick's case.

[Capco]

1 minute ago, Motorin' said:

Opioid addiction is no joke. If Cole's outburst has anything to do with emotional swings from substances, I hope he gets help. 

 

I know from personal experience how hard they are to kick after serious injury, and how bad the emotional swings are. I can't help but wonder...

 

Where did you get opioid addiction from?  

 

Fwiw, the reason why I posted that was to exemplify the sad state of affairs with regards to some people refusing to trust the information, experts, and institutions that allow society to exist in the first place.  

[H2o]

1 minute ago, pennstate10 said:

Serious question.  Why dont you believe it helps or protects?

Is your belief based upon scientific studies, with publicly available data?

Or is your belief based upon Facebook groups?

I have seen people I know who have gotten the vax get sick as a dog, some for weeks on end. I've seen the news reports about perfectly healthy kids ending up with heart issues or blood clots after getting the shot. I have also been in close contact with people who've had Covid, while they've had it, and didn't get it. Most of the people I've known to get it have recovered from it. There have only been a couple who passed and they also had other serious health issues. I also see where people getting vaccinated are still getting Covid. Three people I work with got the vax and still got Covid. Since that's the case I don't see where we need it at all, having been healthy through this whole situation, so I won't take that chance. 

[ChasBB]

2 minutes ago, Capco said:

 

Where did you get opioid addiction from?  

 

Fwiw, the reason why I posted that was to exemplify the sad state of affairs with regards to some people refusing to trust the information, experts, and institutions that allow society to exist in the first place.  

That could be because the information may not be trustworthy or is at minimum at least challengeable.  Sometimes, our institutions fail us - wouldn't be the 1st time and won't be the last.  As citizens in a free society, we have the right (really, a duty) to demand proof and to challenge claims.  Do your own research.

[stevewin]

3 hours ago, Buffalo Boy said:

57 pages?????

Really?????

Must be a bunch of independently wealthy MoFos on this here site, got nothin better to do😜

I read this thread during high level meetings

[QCity]

6 minutes ago, H2o said:

I have seen people I know who have gotten the vax get sick as a dog, some for weeks on end. I've seen the news reports about perfectly healthy kids ending up with heart issues or blood clots after getting the shot. I have also been in close contact with people who've had Covid, while they've had it, and didn't get it. Most of the people I've known to get it have recovered from it. There have only been a couple who passed and they also had other serious health issues. I also see where people getting vaccinated are still getting Covid. Three people I work with got the vax and still got Covid. Since that's the case I don't see where we need it at all, having been healthy through this whole situation, so I won't take that chance. 

 

It would probably been better if the vaccine was never developed, huh?

[Motorin']

9 minutes ago, Capco said:

 

Where did you get opioid addiction from?  

 

Fwiw, the reason why I posted that was to exemplify the sad state of affairs with regards to some people refusing to trust the information, experts, and institutions that allow society to exist in the first place.  

 

That is a valid point you bring up.

 

It just occurred to me that the guy played on a broken leg, and probably took lots of pain meds to get through. 

 

Then he shows up to mini-camp touting a broken tooth and takes to Twitter with emotionally charged posts. 

 

I'm not trying to attack the content of his comments by suggesting he's high. Rather I'm expressing concern for the guy's well being. 

 

I hope he's not addicted to anything, but if that has anything to do with his behavior I hope he gets help... 

 

 

Edited June 19, 2021 by Motorin'

[Hapless Bills Fan]

24 minutes ago, H2o said:

We've had every other vaccine. The ones that have been around with years of data behind them. I'm not completely "anti-vax" as people try to label. But we never get flu shots and we're not getting this. The possible heart issues, the possible blood clots, the sickness you get from it, as well as other things I have seen. We're healthy and have been through all of this. The shot is unnecessary to me/us. Not doing it. 

 

Vaccines with years of data behind them were once new vaccines.    Many of them wouldn't have had the desired public health impact, if the relevant populations hadn't been willing to take them as soon as they were available - not years later.  How many years do you need, when millions of doses have been administered?

 

Question: what are the heart issue and blood clot risks from Covid-19 disease?  How do they compare to those risks from the vaccine?

 

Here's a study from a group at Oxford showing that the risks of blood clots is significantly higher from covid-19 disease than from the vaccine, including in people who were not ill enough to be hospitalized and 30% under 30 years old:

https://osf.io/a9jdq/

 

Here's a recent JAMA study of college athletes (young healthy studs) in which 2.3% (2,300 per 100,000) showed evidence of cardiomyopathies on MRI.  Symptom-based evidence was 0.3% (300 per 100,000).

 

The CDC is currently concerned about reports of 475 vaccine recipients under 30 with possible myocarditis or pericarditis.  I can't find the number of vaccine recipients under 30, but per CDC there are 3.4M vaccine recipients under age 18.  Therefore the upper bound of people under 18 with possible vaccine-related cardiomyopathies is 14 per 100,000.  This would be based on symptoms, so the comparator number would be 300 per 100,000 or roughly 21x more from disease.

 

Your decision, obviously, but if it's to be considered a rational and logical one, it has to factor in the risks on both sides, not show 'recency bias' by considering vaccine risks that have been widely talked about recently, while disease risks to healthy <30s have gotten far less Airplay.

 

Current data are saying that even with the risk of vaccine side effects, the risk to young healthy people from the disease is objectively greater.

 

 

[Capco]

5 minutes ago, ChasBB said:

Do your own research.

 

I've just had an epiphany.  

 

People today wouldn't be so quick to condemn the expertise of others with decades of experience in their fields if they actually had to go to the library and check out a book.  

 

Easy access to information via the internet is a double-edged sword.  

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, Pokebball said:

Never addressed the efficacy of social media. But many a celebrity sure seem to use it.

 

They sure do.  I'm just unclear on when and where it has proven itself as a positive strategy to achieve change.