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

[KennyDavisEyes]

17 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Hi.  Would you mind commenting on this observation with regard to getting back to normal without vaccine, please?

 

 

Specifically on this part:

Counties here in MO that had almost no Covid infections and were colored pale yellow or green a month ago now look like this (map below), spreading out from an initial cluster of 2 counties in the North and 1 in the South.  They test wastewater streams here in MO and finding Delta (the variant originally from India).  BTW, these are the counties where 70-80% of the population has made a rational and logical decision (I kid!  I kid!  It can be true, but these people are my rellies and friends and it usually isn't.  THE FERRETS!) to not be vaccinated, despite early and high vaccine availability to them.

 

 

 

Since almost no place in MO has had mask mandates or any kind of restrictions, ever, when you see change like this charted, there is probably an explanation other than "fear mongering" and again, if the media went away and there was no sensational coverage, the hospitals would still be re-opening their covid wards and the doctors would still be reporting that the patients they hospitalize are 1) unvaccinated 2) younger. 

 

By the way, we have a MO Covid guy on Facebook, just a private citizen, who collects publicly available Covid data independent of media or State or Federal gov't, and his data show the same thing, so it's not somehow media created.

 

 

Ppl that don’t want the vaccine don’t have to get it.

 

Their choice doesn’t make your medicine work.  If what you injected in your body works then you’re good.

 

Why do you care so much what others do?

 

Do you want them corralled to the town square, strapped down, and injected?

 

If someone uses their free will to make a choice that you disagree with.  It still doesn’t change the efficacy of your medicine.  
 

You wanted it, you got it - Toyota!

 

Go live your life.  Let others live theirs.  And don’t resent them for their choice in a God-guaranteed-world of free will.  That’s back to normal. 

And you’ll feel a lot better.

[Batman1876]

1 minute ago, Green Lightning said:

No, it's herd immunity however we reach it. I have no issues with someone who won't Vax. But in a club like the NFL, you have to follow the rules. Is what it be. But I have little tolerance for people who say "Period" as if they know anymore than many one else. You don't. Fauci changed his story at least 5 or 6 times on this pandemic and he's supposed to be the credible expert. This is really a global trial of the RNA type vaccine. Many doubt it. Fine. That said, Bease should follow the rules or make a call.

The "he changed his mind" argument is one that holds limited water, When you wear a jacket in January and a swimsuit in july its because the situation changed not your mind. And when we were unsure in 2018 if Josh Allen would be an MVP player  but in 2021 we are sure he can be an MVP its not so much that we cant make up our mind its that we know more. That being said we know that vaccines are the only medical approach with a proven track record of success at quelling these sorts of global outbreaks. 

 

[KennyDavisEyes]

18 minutes ago, Batman1876 said:

What does this have to do with freedom of choice? I am free chose to be a Pats fan, but that doesn't change the fact that everyone here will rightly tell me that is a terrible, bad and destructive choice sure only to increase the collective evil and sadness of the universe. Not getting the vaccine for reasons other than valid medical reasons is exactly the same, but be a pats fan and don't get the vaccine, you are free to do so.

Because it’s not your life. Why resent them.

 

If the medicine you injected in your body works, then it works.  Relax.

22 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

No.  The factual best way to end this pandemic is for unvaccinated people to get vaccinated.  Period.  Look at the history of viral diseases that no longer threaten the population.

You gonna be strapping ppl down in the town square and injecting them unwillingly?  Cuz that’s what it’s gonna take.

 

Save your energy.

[YoloinOhio]

26 minutes ago, Kelly the Dog said:

How tolerant are you of alcoholics?

[oldmanfan]

7 minutes ago, Green Lightning said:

No, it's herd immunity however we reach it. I have no issues with someone who won't Vax. But in a club like the NFL, you have to follow the rules. Is what it be. But I have little tolerance for people who say "Period" as if they know anymore than many one else. You don't. Fauci changed his story at least 5 or 6 times on this pandemic and he's supposed to be the credible expert. This is really a global trial of the RNA type vaccine. Many doubt it. Fine. That said, Bease should follow the rules or make a call.

Sorry but if you want herd immunity without vaccines then what you’re asking is for millions around the world to die.  That’s the reality.  The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are incredibly effective; if we want people to not die from this vaccinations are the process to do so.

[Rocky Landing]

58 minutes ago, Process said:

Saying you aren't getting the vaccine because of potential blood clots or heart issues is basically saying they aren't getting the vaccine and have no valid reason or idea why.

I’m not going to wear my seatbelt when I drive because if I get into an accident, I might get a serious abrasion, or neck injury from the shoulder strap. 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

25 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Sure, some are basing decisions accordingly-as happens in life.

I think presuming a large majority of folks don’t weigh out pros and cons, and can’t weight out the relative risks involved is selling lots of people short.

 

Well, that could be true.  I could be selling a lot of people short.

 

I think I'm probably assessing accurately.  I am being influenced by a book I've been reading called "Sway" by Ori Brafman which I recommend.

https://www.amazon.com/Sway-Irresistible-Pull-Irrational-Behavior/dp/0385530609

 

I probably should clarify that I intend no disparagement of anyone's intelligence or INTENT to rationally weigh all data.  But Brafman makes a compelling case for very smart, very well educated and trained people - physicians, PhDs, chief airline pilots, CFOs etc - being subject to all kinds of "sways" if they aren't looking out for and actively countering them.

 

So I'm looking for sways that may be influencing people's vaccine decisions, and IMHO one big obvious Sway is "recency bias".   There has been a lot of recent media coverage about vaccine side effects and their incidence.  It's all over and very easy to find.  In contrast, to find info on side effects from asymptomatic or mild covid-19 disease in relevant age groups, I had to pretty much know the data existed, and know where to look.  So I think that "recency bias" is going to be very real here.

 

Another sway Brafman describes is "decision bias": this is where someone has reached a conclusion, they may feel that they are rational and deciding based on logic and data, but they tend to filter new inputs based upon the decision they've already made.   His example is a physician in the ER who has decided that the mother of an ill child is dramatic and exaggerating her child's symptoms and who disregards the mounting evidence on repeated visits that the child is, in fact, ill.

 

Anyway, you could very well be right that I'm selling people short, but I would say that if people aren't working from full information, they can't way the pros and cons and relative risks.   And if people aren't actively looking for and countering "sways", that will also factor in.

 

And IMHO, it's been pretty conclusively shown (outside of "Sway") that most people actually aren't good at assessing relative risks.  I like the Sway book because I think it does a good job of explaining why.

[oldmanfan]

7 minutes ago, KennyDavisEyes said:

Because it’s not your life. Why resent them.

 

If the medicine you injected in your body works, then it works.  Relax.

You gonna be strapping ppl down in the town square and injecting them unwillingly?  Cuz that’s what it’s gonna take.

 

Save your energy.

You want people to die or have long lasting complications from Covid, I guess.  I don’t.  And I’m glad your wife recovered, by the way.  
 

Sorry, just looked back at this.  Too harsh.  My bad.  

Edited June 19, 2021 by oldmanfan

[slipkid]

21 minutes ago, Capco said:

 

Yes, but there are occasionally clever ways for the federal government to coax the states into uniform application of a law across all 50 states, such as judicious use of the Spending Clause. 

 

There's one example involving federal transportation funding for highways that I thought had to do with seatbelt wearing laws (something reserved for the states) but I cannot find any evidence for that right now, so it might have been for something else.  

 

EDIT:  I think I remember now.  It was for alcohol intoxication laws across all 50 states.  

I think it was raising the drinking age to 21 tied to federal transportation funding—something I learned while attending college in Ohio (drinking age=19) while spending summers in Buffalo (drinking age=21) in the mid-1980s. I was pissed when Ohio had to change to 21. It was then that I started to watch how politics works.

 

For my first post on a 60+ page thread, I think we’re going waaaay off topic, and I apologize. That said, I’m glad I didn’t pipe in on anything “on topic.”

[Green Lightning]

5 minutes ago, Batman1876 said:

The "he changed his mind" argument is one that holds limited water, When you wear a jacket in January and a swimsuit in july its because the situation changed not your mind. And when we were unsure in 2018 if Josh Allen would be an MVP player  but in 2021 we are sure he can be an MVP its not so much that we cant make up our mind its that we know more. That being said we know that vaccines are the only medical approach with a proven track record of success at quelling these sorts of global outbreaks. 

 

More like flip flopped and back tracked. We have no idea what the long term effects of the vaccine will be. For me it was worth the risk. I know plenty of people who had Covid and are fine and full of antibodies. Not the route I'd take but their lives and bodies. As this thread is making clear, tolerance is in short supply these days.

[HalftimeAdjustment]

2 hours ago, BuffaloBob said:

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.

 

Oh I completely disagree with his belief. Why are you asking me?

[oldmanfan]

3 minutes ago, Green Lightning said:

More like flip flopped and back tracked. We have no idea what the long term effects of the vaccine will be. For me it was worth the risk. I know plenty of people who had Covid and are fine and full of antibodies. Not the route I'd take but their lives and bodies. As this thread is making clear, tolerance is in short supply these days.

The mRNA vaccines have the RNA, some salts, and some fat molecules to help keep the RNA soluble.  Once the mRNA is read for resulting synthesis of the spike protein it is degraded.  What in there do you think will cause long term effects?

 

An historical analysis of vaccine complications shows they are extraordinarily rare with any serious complications seen within weeks.  

[nbbillsfan]

42 minutes ago, BuffaloBob said:

It is still an incorrect assumption on your part, first that I failed to comprehend what you said and second, that I intended to prove you were incorrect by simply using myself as the example that makes your assumption incorrect.  

 

I am merely stating that it is incorrect and unsupportable to state that people critical of Cole on this board are "largely" made up of intolerant liberals.  How many of this group do you know well enough to presume to know their political bent let alone their level of intolerance for those of a different one. 

 

And my point is that I am one example of someone, while critical of Cole and people like him in the NFL, who is not intolerant of others because of some political ideology, whether theirs or mine.  But I DO have a lack of tolerance of willful ignorance and gullibility in people.

 

So if you are critical of Cole for being willfully ignorant on the issue and putting it on full display, then that makes at least two of us.  At what point does the number of us cause the number who aren't to fail to meet the definition of largely, as indefinite as it is?

Again, I question your reading comprehension. I never said anything about the criticism I was referring to being exclusive to this board. I was referring to the criticism he is receiving everywhere (News, Social Media, Ect.)

[Freak-O]

37 minutes ago, KennyDavisEyes said:

Ppl that don’t want the vaccine don’t have to get it.

 

Their choice doesn’t make your medicine work.  If what you injected in your body works then you’re good.

 

Why do you care so much what others do?

 

Do you want them corralled to the town square, strapped down, and injected?

 

If someone uses their free will to make a choice that you disagree with.  It still doesn’t change the efficacy of your medicine.  
 

You wanted it, you got it - Toyota!

 

Go live your life.  Let others live theirs.  And don’t resent them for their choice in a God-guaranteed-world of free will.  That’s back to normal. 

And you’ll feel a lot better.

 

The less people that are vaccinated the higher the risk of the virus mutating into something new that the current vaccines won't stop. It might also mutate into something worse. That's why people are upset. 

Edited June 19, 2021 by Freak-O

[BuffaloBob]

9 minutes ago, HalftimeAdjustment said:

 

Oh I completely disagree with his belief. Why are you asking me?

You said it was important to note that they weren't 100% effective at preventing death.  So I was asking more about the studies that you mentioned.

[Green Lightning]

15 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Sorry but if you want herd immunity without vaccines then what you’re asking is for millions around the world to die.  That’s the reality.  The Pfizer and Moderna vaccines are incredibly effective; if we want people to not die from this vaccinations are the process to do so.

Reading comprehension would be nice. I did not, nor am I, asking anyone to do anything. Unlike you I have tolerance for others and don't feel like I have all the answers. Reread without an agenda and you will find I wrote that people should make the decision for themselves but follow the rules based on their decisions.  

[HalftimeAdjustment]

36 minutes ago, T&C said:

Can't count it out though... I know quite a few people who are waiting for it to be FDA approved. 

 

I hope you are right but I would not be at all surprised if, when it is approved, those same people claim the approval process was flawed.

[Capco]

20 minutes ago, slipkid said:

I think it was raising the drinking age to 21 tied to federal transportation funding—something I learned while attending college in Ohio (drinking age=19) while spending summers in Buffalo (drinking age=21) in the mid-1980s. I was pissed when Ohio had to change to 21. It was then that I started to watch how politics works.

 

For my first post on a 60+ page thread, I think we’re going waaaay off topic, and I apologize. That said, I’m glad I didn’t pipe in on anything “on topic.”

 

Yep.  South Dakota v. Dole, 483 U.S. 203 (1987).

[BigDingus]

4 hours ago, HappyDays said:

 

The vaccine isn't 100% preventive. No one has said it is. Too many people in this thread are using singular cases as evidence of something that no one is trying to argue.

 

https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/effectiveness/why-measure-effectiveness/breakthrough-cases.html

 

To summarize - No vaccine will prevent 100% of cases. I believe even the measles vaccine has a 97% success rate. But all data shows the covid vaccine greatly reduces the chance of getting covid. For patients who get the vaccine and still get covid, the chance of them having severe symptoms and/or being hospitalized is greatly lessened compared to those who contracted the virus without being vaccinated.

 

Imagine the vaccine has a 95% success rate. If 140 million people are vaccinated there will still be 7 million people in that group susceptible to getting covid. A small percentage of that 7 million will develop severe symptoms and a smaller percentage still will die. No one has tried to hide this fact.

 

You can't use singular anecdotes when we're talking about tens of millions of case studies. Medical science is based on percentages and probabilities, not absolutes.

It's also worth stating the evidence HIGHLY indicates that those who are vaccinated, even if they somehow manage to contract the virus, are exponentially less at risk for any severe symptoms, and very, very, VERY few are hospitalized. 

Again, people need to stop th inking the only 2 options are A) LIve or B) die. There's an entire spectrum of symptoms between those, many being life-altering & highly dangerous. You know what the vaccine prevents? Damn near everything on the severe end of that spectrum aside from just death.

You could get vaccinated, be unlucky & catch COVID, but then just have mild symptoms & get over it. Or you could just get COVID without any vaccine protection whatsoever, and gamble with whatever symptoms, regardless of severity that you may incur. 

I'd prefer not to risk hospitalization or debilitating effects that I could've prevented. There's an inmate at the jail I work for who just caught COVID a second time. He passed on the vaccine because he thought since he caught it last summer he'd be good to go. Well now he's had 2 surgeries, had his eyeballs drained, has necrosis on his left wrist that almost killed him, and a host of other complications that came from his last stint with the virus.

And guess what? Right before we sent him out to the hospital this morning for more follow up treatment, the jail announced we were offering another round of vaccinations on the 29th. I asked him if he'd like the paperwork to at least read about it, and he said "well I already caught it twice, so I doubt I'll catch it again. I don't think I'll need it."

[HalftimeAdjustment]

Just now, BuffaloBob said:

You said it was important to note that they weren't 100% effective at preventing death.  So I was asking more about the studies that you mentioned.

 

Oh, I see. Here is a media summary of a Lancet article.

https://www.timesofisrael.com/pfizer-vaccine-96-7-effective-at-preventing-covid-deaths-israeli-data-shows/

 

The reason I mentioned this is that claiming 100% effectiveness at preventing death is negated as soon as 1 person who is fully vaccinated dies of Covid. And there appear to have been breakthrough cases in Israel, the UK, and the US. However it is very rare, and they are extremely effective at preventing death from Covid. Additionally some studies include people who had both shots but were not +2 weeks.

 

Also a study of real world data is by definition an observational study rather than a clinical trial. In the clinical trials all 3 vaccines had 0 deaths as far as I am aware. It should be expected that in hundreds of millions of vaccinated individuals, some will still die of Covid. After all the general population includes a lot of severely immunocompromised individuals who may not get full vaccine benefit. It also is so large that just plain bad luck could apply like hitting a reverse lottery.

 

Anyhow... the use of "100%" may sound like a weaker data point than 98% or whatever to a skeptic, because 100% is easily disproven by a single counter example at which point they reject the entirety of the data.

 

Finally if someone has a "belief" that the vaccine does not help in the face of all available evidence, I don't see that more evidence will convince them.