Gabe Davis on covid list

[Dopey]

55 minutes ago, Billsfan1972 said:

I'd love to line up these anti-vaxxers (and that is what they are) and have them list every drug they've ingested and injection they've had and have them explain their reasoning and expertise on each and every one.

 

But letting down their teammates over this makes perfect sense. 

That would be none of your business. You're just a fan. You ain't as important as you think you are.

Edited December 25, 2021 by Dopey

[YoloinOhio]

24 minutes ago, nucci said:

I think they're concerned as it relates to them not being able to play tomorrow

Next man up. Davis fought for and earned this playing time but now he’s going to miss two games. Who is to say the guy behind him doesn’t do what he’s done and all of a sudden he’s not so golden? It may appear selfish but he made this decision with I am sure a lot of thought - it could affect him personally and $ wise - if his value isn’t quite what the coaches thought. 

Edited December 25, 2021 by YoloinOhio

[Hapless Bills Fan]

36 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:

Next man up. Davis fought for and earned this playing time but now he’s going to miss two games. Who is to say the guy behind him doesn’t do what he’s done and all of a sudden he’s not so golden? It may appear selfish but he made this decision with I am sure a lot of thought - it could affect him personally and $ wise - if his value isn’t quite what the coaches thought. 

 

This.  (I'd like to think it was with a lot of thought - I have concerns it was with a lot of mis- or incomplete information but that's another day)

 

Example: Justin Zimmer fought for a roster spot and earned playing time with the Bills.  His snaps were trending up at the start of the season ahead of Harrison Phillips.  Now Zimmer is on season-ending IR and Phillips seems to be doing what the coaches want with his snaps.  Tough luck for Zimmer, better chance of a payday for Phillips.

 

A 4th round pick isn't enough investment to guarantee a guy a spot at the table for a second contract, or even a second look elsewhere.  This was Davis golden opportunity to shine and show the Bills coaches (and a lot of other coaches) what he could do when he saw a bigger role on the field.

 

Now it's someone else's opportunity to shine and show what they can do.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

51 minutes ago, Dopey said:

That would be none of your business. You're just a fan. You ain't as important as you think you are.

 

On the one hand, I agree with you, a player's private health decisions are not our business.  I 100% support players saying "gonna keep that to myself" when asked if they've been vaxxed.

 

On the other hand, the NFL exists and the players get paid because the fans are, well, Fans - we buy PSLs, tickets, concessions, team merchandise, player brand merchandise, watch games on TV, pay for Gamepass.  Players invite us fans into their business with social media accounts because it "builds their brand" and sells their "Tre White Goalie Academy" or "Felic Navidad" shirts.  The NFL encourages fantasy football and Madden and so forth because it "fans" (see what I did there?) interest in the game and helps the NFL land big television contracts that are the heart of their income stream - and thus, the heart of why players get paid.

 

At the base of it, it's fan support that makes the NFL the NFL and gives the players their paydays.

 

So then when it comes down to availability for a critical game, isn't it a little two-faced to turn around at that point and diss off the fans with "you're just a fan, you ain't important" if a fan has questions about why crucial players aren't available because of the collision between their personal health decisions and the NFL's clearly publicized (ahead of the season) rules?

 

See what I mean?  It's not that guy's questions in particular ("every drug they've ingested and every injection they've had" seriously? that's a bit over the top!)

 

But it does seem legit for fans to have questions when it affects players' availability.  And it's a fair point that players who cite stuff like "need more information" "only been out a year" etc sometimes seem willing to take other treatments (the Covid mAb therapy for example) that have been out for "less than a year" and have significant side effects, or therapies that have no solid data supporting their benefit such as the popular "recovery" IV therapies - and players have had debilitating side effects when those go wrong.

 

🤷‍♂️

 

 

[Dr. Who]

1 minute ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

On the one hand, I agree with you, a player's private health decisions are not our business.  I 100% support players saying "gonna keep that to myself" when asked if they've been vaxxed.

 

On the other hand, the NFL exists and the players get paid because the fans are, well, Fans - we buy PSLs, tickets, concessions, team merchandise, player brand merchandise, watch games on TV, pay for Gamepass.  Players invite us fans into their business with social media accounts because it "builds their brand" and sells their "Tre White Goalie Academy" or "Felic Navidad" shirts.  The NFL encourages fantasy football and Madden and so forth because it "fans" (see what I did there?) interest in the game and helps the NFL land big television contracts that are the heart of their income stream - and thus, the heart of why players get paid.

 

At the base of it, it's fan support that makes the NFL the NFL and gives the players their paydays.

 

So then when it comes down to availability for a critical game, isn't it a little two-faced to turn around at that point and diss off the fans with "you're just a fan, you ain't important" if a fan has questions about why crucial players aren't available because of the collision between their personal health decisions and the NFL's clearly publicized (ahead of the season) rules?

 

See what I mean?  It's not that guy's questions in particular ("every drug they've ingested and every injection they've had" seriously? that's a bit over the top!)

 

But it does seem legit for fans to have questions when it affects players' availability.

 

 

Yes, the situation is more complex than a purely private situation. If fans get mad at Star for his availability issues, this is a form of that issue. (And I am generally pretty amenable to the dissenting view on this particular matter because I find the government intrusion/media propaganda coercive, moralizing, and selectively hostile to protest.) Nonetheless, if you are paid as an entertainer and can't show up for a performance, expect backlash. Add in the decades of support involved in sports' fandom and the limited windows most teams have for a legit chance at a SB -- how many Bills' fans have lost loved ones over the years who missed out on a championship -- it's a real thing.

[Rick 'r Mortis]

1 hour ago, nucci said:

You're good. Merry Christmas

Ohhh it's a Christmas miracle!!!

[nucci]

47 minutes ago, Rick 'r Mortis said:

Ohhh it's a Christmas miracle!!!

The miracle is the OL playing well

[97bills]

3 hours ago, Billsfan1972 said:

Yes I would.  I have faith in the millions of doctors who support it and have gotten vaccinated (approximately 98%) over the mesa candidates Davis & Beasley. 

 

Of course, when us "sheep" are all walking zombies, you'll have the last laugh.....😜

My doctor said he isn’t taking that *****. Exact words lol 

[Billsfan1972]

56 minutes ago, 97bills said:

My doctor said he isn’t taking that *****. Exact words lol 

So again he is smarter then the other 98%....  Did he graduate from Harvard?  Yes inquiring minds want to know.

[HappyDays]

Kendrick Bourne made it off the covid list in time for this game because he wasn't required to stay on it for 10 days. Beasley is out at least this week no matter what and Davis is out until at least the Jets game no matter what. That's the risk a bunch of our players decided to take and we're worse off for it.

[YoloinOhio]

4 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

Kendrick Bourne made it off the covid list in time for this game because he wasn't required to stay on it for 10 days. Beasley is out at least this week no matter what and Davis is out until at least the Jets game no matter what. That's the risk a bunch of our players decided to take and we're worse off for it.

It’s actually only very few

[HappyDays]

Just now, YoloinOhio said:

It’s actually only very few

 

We know of 4 for certain, all of which have had to miss at least one critical game. Davis is going to miss at least two no matter what.

[YoloinOhio]

3 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

We know of 4 for certain, all of which have had to miss at least one critical game. Davis is going to miss at least two no matter what.

Yes, it’s only about 5 players total 

[Rick 'r Mortis]

27 minutes ago, Billsfan1972 said:

So again he is smarter then the other 98%....  Did he graduate from Harvard?  Yes inquiring minds want to know.

Even if he did, doesn't matter. There are plenty of quacks out there, obviously including in the medical field. 

[Billsfan1972]

51 minutes ago, Rick 'r Mortis said:

Even if he did, doesn't matter. There are plenty of quacks out there, obviously including in the medical field. 

And 98% disagree with him

[97bills]

1 hour ago, Billsfan1972 said:

So again he is smarter then the other 98%....  Did he graduate from Harvard?  Yes inquiring minds want to know.

I don’t no man, it did catch me off guard but then I started to lough. But after that I started to ask him why he didn’t want to take it. And he said he wasn’t a fan of new medicine. 

1 hour ago, BUFFALOBART said:

...You see a Witch Doctor?

Maybe so, but his still human and can have his on opinion. 

[Dick_Cheney]

2 minutes ago, 97bills said:

I don’t no man, it did catch me off guard but then I started to lough. But after that I started to ask him why he didn’t want to take it. And he said he wasn’t a fan of new medicine. 

Maybe so, but his still human and can have his on opinion. 

Please get yourself a new doctor, for your own sake.

 

In the meantime, uhh, I guess enjoy your leech treatments and remember not to touch yourself or your palms will get hairy. Not like new medicine has ever really helped anything, ya know?

[97bills]

3 minutes ago, Dick_Cheney said:

Please get yourself a new doctor, for your own sake.

 

In the meantime, uhh, I guess enjoy your leech treatments and remember not to touch yourself or your palms will get hairy. Not like new medicine has ever really helped anything, ya know?

Grow up dude, I said what a doctor told me and your acting like a child, I hope your 19 

[Billsfan1972]

2 minutes ago, 97bills said:

Grow up dude, I said what a doctor told me and your acting like a child, I hope your 19 

Learning to spell and grammar wouldn't be a bad thing for you to think about too...

[Dick_Cheney]

4 minutes ago, 97bills said:

Grow up dude, I said what a doctor told me and your acting like a child, I hope your 19 

I'm 12 and I never learned to read.

[Brueggs]

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-covid-19-tracker-week-16-tyler-huntley-dalvin-cook-among-more-than-170-players-on-covid-list/#:~:text=NFL COVID-19,Reyes (Dec. 15)

I know everyone has their opinion, but so many people are acting as if they know more than they really do.  

Look at this article.  They go out of their way to point out who is unvaxxed.  There are 3 players (2 being Bills) on this list.  

I'm not a mathematician or a scientist, but based on this sample, it would indicate that the vast majority of the infected players are vaxxed.  If that is the case, and it appears to be, why are there different protocols for the vaxxed and unvaxxed?  Why are the unvaxxed being "punished" when the virus does not seem to discriminate?  

We need these guys on the field, and league rules might prevent that at the worst possible time of the season.  

I know some of you guys will cling to the idea that every player should fall in line, but doing that requires that you discount that players/persons belief system and right to make an informed decision based on sound information (which there seems to be very little of).  At this point, it seems like pointing the finger at the unvaxxed is a hard argument to back up.

[HomeskillitMoorman]

18 minutes ago, Brueggs said:

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-covid-19-tracker-week-16-tyler-huntley-dalvin-cook-among-more-than-170-players-on-covid-list/#:~:text=NFL COVID-19,Reyes (Dec. 15)

I know everyone has their opinion, but so many people are acting as if they know more than they really do.  

Look at this article.  They go out of their way to point out who is unvaxxed.  There are 3 players (2 being Bills) on this list.  

I'm not a mathematician or a scientist, but based on this sample, it would indicate that the vast majority of the infected players are vaxxed.  If that is the case, and it appears to be, why are there different protocols for the vaxxed and unvaxxed?  Why are the unvaxxed being "punished" when the virus does not seem to discriminate?  

We need these guys on the field, and league rules might prevent that at the worst possible time of the season.  

I know some of you guys will cling to the idea that every player should fall in line, but doing that requires that you discount that players/persons belief system and right to make an informed decision based on sound information (which there seems to be very little of).  At this point, it seems like pointing the finger at the unvaxxed is a hard argument to back up.

I think it’s moreso that those guys were aware that the penalties were greater if you’re not vaxxed and still chose not to. Even after all this time when there’s no evidence that the vaccine actually does anything negative. It may not help as much as many once thought, but it also doesn’t seem to be a threat in any way. 

[Spiderweb]

3 hours ago, 97bills said:

My doctor said he isn’t taking that *****. Exact words lol 

Well again, he is in the extreme minority but don't let that slow you down.

[Brueggs]

26 minutes ago, HomeskillitMoorman said:

I think it’s moreso that those guys were aware that the penalties were greater if you’re not vaxxed and still chose not to. Even after all this time when there’s no evidence that the vaccine actually does anything negative. It may not help as much as many once thought, but it also doesn’t seem to be a threat in any way. 

Based on that alone, it would make sense to take a wait and see approach rather than do something that can't be undone, at least to me.  

There are many instances of negative responses to the vaccine, which is something that can be expected given the volume.  

I see guys on here arguing about what their doctor said.  I know two doctors that are completely against it, and one doctor that has taken it, but refuses to let her children get it.  Speaking out against the vaccine publicly comes at a price, and that is even more concerning.  

With the playoffs looming in the very near future, I think the league should level out the playing field on the protocols.  There just isn't enough evidence out there to support the discrimination.  

 

[cale]

When your own players sabotage your team.

[oldmanfan]

1 hour ago, Brueggs said:

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/nfl-covid-19-tracker-week-16-tyler-huntley-dalvin-cook-among-more-than-170-players-on-covid-list/#:~:text=NFL COVID-19,Reyes (Dec. 15)

I know everyone has their opinion, but so many people are acting as if they know more than they really do.  

Look at this article.  They go out of their way to point out who is unvaxxed.  There are 3 players (2 being Bills) on this list.  

I'm not a mathematician or a scientist, but based on this sample, it would indicate that the vast majority of the infected players are vaxxed.  If that is the case, and it appears to be, why are there different protocols for the vaxxed and unvaxxed?  Why are the unvaxxed being "punished" when the virus does not seem to discriminate?  

We need these guys on the field, and league rules might prevent that at the worst possible time of the season.  

I know some of you guys will cling to the idea that every player should fall in line, but doing that requires that you discount that players/persons belief system and right to make an informed decision based on sound information (which there seems to be very little of).  At this point, it seems like pointing the finger at the unvaxxed is a hard argument to back up.

There are different protocols because vaccinated people do not pass the virus along as readily as unvaccinated nor do they get as seriously ill as one can get if unvaccinated.

 

I still think the league should have mandated vaccines as soon as they were FDA approved.  Players would then have had free choice to be vaccinated or seek other employment.  This is a public health issue; deciding that you simply don’t want to follow rules as Beasley seems to be doing is basically saying you don’t care about the guy next to you.

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

7 hours ago, Billsfan1972 said:

Yes I would.  I have faith in the millions of doctors who support it and have gotten vaccinated (approximately 98%) over the mesa candidates Davis & Beasley. 

 

Of course, when us "sheep" are all walking zombies, you'll have the last laugh.....😜

“Mesa” candidates? 🌵🤔

[Brueggs]

2 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

There are different protocols because vaccinated people do not pass the virus along as readily as unvaccinated nor do they get as seriously ill as one can get if unvaccinated.

 

I still think the league should have mandated vaccines as soon as they were FDA approved.  Players would then have had free choice to be vaccinated or seek other employment.  This is a public health issue; deciding that you simply don’t want to follow rules as Beasley seems to be doing is basically saying you don’t care about the guy next to you.

Thats what we have been told, but that article, unintentionally, doesn't support that theory at all.  The vast majority are vaccinated.

I disagree with a mandate.  If someone can contract covid from a vaccinated person, or Beasley, is one really worse than the other?  People need to at least be open minded enough to think that Beasley might not be wrong here.  In reality, none of us can be 100 percent certain about any of it...

 

[oldmanfan]

Just now, Brueggs said:

Thats what we have been told, but that article, unintentionally, doesn't support that theory at all.  The vast majority are vaccinated.

I disagree with a mandate.  If someone can contract covid from a vaccinated person, or Beasley, is one really worse than the other?  People need to at least be open minded enough to think that Beasley might not be wrong here.  In reality, none of us can be 100 percent certain about any of it...

 

Ok, I keep going over and over this, but I’ll try again:

 

There is a difference between what the virus does between unvaccinated and vaccinated people.  The virus is passed in respiratory droplets and aerosols.  The virus initially takes hold in the upper respiratory tract.  We don’t generate an immune response against that colonization; what the vaccine does do is keep the virus from invading the lungs and other tissues and causing havoc. In vaccinated people the virus can hang around for around 2-5 days; in unvaccinated it hangs around a lot longer and can cause much more serious illness.  That is why the hospitals are filled with unvaccinated vs. vaccinated folks.  That is also why vaccinated folks test negative more quickly, and why they now are thinking vaccinated but asymptomatic people can play, because their likelihood of transmission is low.

 

Is Beasley wrong?  Yes.  He’s wrong because the league set rules, he decided not to get vaccinated, and now instead of recognizing he pays the consequence he keeps railing about it being the rules.  It would be akin to your telling your 5 year old he’s not allowed to do something in your house, he does so anyway, and you let him off without punishment because he didn’t like your rule.

 

Mandates would have addressed all this stuff.  You either get vaccinated or not play.  There’s your freedom.  I would wager large sums of money that Beasley has been vaccinated against a lot of stuff, gets his tetanus boosters and such.  He and others have made the choice to take a public health crisis and turn it into a political game.  And to me that is the truly ridiculous part of the last two years.

[HomeskillitMoorman]

29 minutes ago, Brueggs said:

Based on that alone, it would make sense to take a wait and see approach rather than do something that can't be undone, at least to me.  

There are many instances of negative responses to the vaccine, which is something that can be expected given the volume.  

I see guys on here arguing about what their doctor said.  I know two doctors that are completely against it, and one doctor that has taken it, but refuses to let her children get it.  Speaking out against the vaccine publicly comes at a price, and that is even more concerning.  

With the playoffs looming in the very near future, I think the league should level out the playing field on the protocols.  There just isn't enough evidence out there to support the discrimination.  

 

Ultimately what it came down to for the players was weighing the desire to do what’s best for the team vs the fear of taking the shot. 
 

Not saying one is wrong inherently right or wrong, that’s just what it boiled down to. 

[oldmanfan]

5 minutes ago, BUFFALOBART said:

In the 1950's (when I grew up) such denial meant you were not going to be attending Grade School.

In 1941, if this sort of attitude was prevalent, we'd all be speaking German.

There is such a thing called 'Civic Duty', and being considerate of your fellow men, and women.

Deferring such concepts during an international crisis, because you read something on 'The Innernet', is moronic, to say the least...

Other than Vietnam, which understandably caused turmoil of opinions, and of course the Civil War, has there ever been another example of a national crisis (war, health crisis, hurricanes and other natural disasters,  etc.) where everyone did not pull together for the common good?

[djp14150]

23 minutes ago, Brueggs said:

Thats what we have been told, but that article, unintentionally, doesn't support that theory at all.  The vast majority are vaccinated.

I disagree with a mandate.  If someone can contract covid from a vaccinated person, or Beasley, is one really worse than the other?  People need to at least be open minded enough to think that Beasley might not be wrong here.  In reality, none of us can be 100 percent certain about any of it...

 

Employers are allowed to require vaccines and other health criteria for employment.  They usually have a religious exemption and medical exemption.  In the past with vaccinations this was in general a very very small number of people. In Covid people are claiming exemption far to broadly when they didn’t do this before.

[Brueggs]

10 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

Ok, I keep going over and over this, but I’ll try again:

 

There is a difference between what the virus does between unvaccinated and vaccinated people.  The virus is passed in respiratory droplets and aerosols.  The virus initially takes hold in the upper respiratory tract.  We don’t generate an immune response against that colonization; what the vaccine does do is keep the virus from invading the lungs and other tissues and causing havoc. In vaccinated people the virus can hang around for around 2-5 days; in unvaccinated it hangs around a lot longer and can cause much more serious illness.  That is why the hospitals are filled with unvaccinated vs. vaccinated folks.  That is also why vaccinated folks test negative more quickly, and why they now are thinking vaccinated but asymptomatic people can play, because their likelihood of transmission is low.

 

Is Beasley wrong?  Yes.  He’s wrong because the league set rules, he decided not to get vaccinated, and now instead of recognizing he pays the consequence he keeps railing about it being the rules.  It would be akin to your telling your 5 year old he’s not allowed to do something in your house, he does so anyway, and you let him off without punishment because he didn’t like your rule.

 

Mandates would have addressed all this stuff.  You either get vaccinated or not play.  There’s your freedom.  I would wager large sums of money that Beasley has been vaccinated against a lot of stuff, gets his tetanus boosters and such.  He and others have made the choice to take a public health crisis and turn it into a political game.  And to me that is the truly ridiculous part of the last two years.

OK.  But aren't we talking about transmission here?  Aren't both groups equally contributing on that front?  If so, the protocol is discriminatory. 

I can agree to disagree about Beasley and mandates.  Look at all the front line healthcare workers that went above and beyond during the initial brunt of the pandemic.  They were operating with a lot less information that we have now, with a much more real fear.  Those same people, who chose not to be vaccinated were rewarded with the  threat of termination.  Sorry, but I can never agree with those types of tactics.  Using financial leverage to try and force someone to go against what they believe is not right.  I understand these are unusual times, but these rules are being made up as we go along.  

Im not aware of Beasley making this a political game, but I do agree that this has been politicized from the very start.

[Brueggs]

22 minutes ago, djp14150 said:

Employers are allowed to require vaccines and other health criteria for employment.  They usually have a religious exemption and medical exemption.  In the past with vaccinations this was in general a very very small number of people. In Covid people are claiming exemption far to broadly when they didn’t do this before.

OK, but they didn't.   Instead they set a protocol that discriminates, and has virtually no effect on transmission.  

7 minutes ago, Dr. Who said:

Don't bother. You are a disgraceful idiot, just read the self-congratulatory back and forth of the perplexed. I don't think those fellas are actually perplexed. The condescension and moral smugness in this thread is worthy of PPP where it properly belongs. The issue may be concern over a rapidly developed vaccine or may have prudential relation to an individual's specific health situation, but I suspect a lot of it is hostility to coercion regarding what folks consider a private decision. It's not just vaccination, but a whole range of policies where personal liberties have been restricted for over eighteen months. For extended periods of time public gatherings were arbitrarily sanctioned or allowed. Church was treated as non-essential, while a wide range of behaviors not evidently essential were allowed. Privacy is made paramount in certain areas like abortion and then dismissed as misinformation and not caring about others with Covid vaccination. There are dissenting opinions on the science, omicron does not act precisely like other variants so far as I can tell, though I'm not an expert. The essence of tolerant discussion requires treating conversation partners with dignity and respect. That isn't happening here or across the country, for that matter. 

You want to end your rant about tolerant discussion by starting it calling me a disgraceful idiot?  Hypocritical much?

Edited December 25, 2021 by Brueggs

[Dr. Who]

1 minute ago, Brueggs said:

OK, but they didn't.   Instead they set a protocol that discriminates, and has virtually no effect on transmission.  

You want to end your rant with tolerant discussion by starting it by calling me a disgraceful idiot?  Hypocritical much?

Fella, I'm telling you what the folks who disagree with you are implying in the posts that follow yours. But you know what, you're on your own. I'll delete the post.

Edited December 25, 2021 by Dr. Who

[oldmanfan]

1 hour ago, Brueggs said:

OK.  But aren't we talking about transmission here?  Aren't both groups equally contributing on that front?  If so, the protocol is discriminatory. 

I can agree to disagree about Beasley and mandates.  Look at all the front line healthcare workers that went above and beyond during the initial brunt of the pandemic.  They were operating with a lot less information that we have now, with a much more real fear.  Those same people, who chose not to be vaccinated were rewarded with the  threat of termination.  Sorry, but I can never agree with those types of tactics.  Using financial leverage to try and force someone to go against what they believe is not right.  I understand these are unusual times, but these rules are being made up as we go along.  

Im not aware of Beasley making this a political game, but I do agree that this has been politicized from the very start.

I work in health care.  Our first responsibility is to our patient’s well being.  That’s why we have always had to get flu vaccines and Hep B vaccines.  The refusal to get the Covid vaccine for health care workers is: 1. overblown; in most health care centers I’ve seen it’s maybe 1% of the workforce, and 2.  Has nothing to do with religious rights or freedom, rather it is a stupid political game as I indicated before.  If it had to do with the former we’d lose people every time the mandatory flu vaccines come up and we don’t.

 

As to rules changing, it’s because the virus changes, and our knowledge base expands the more we learn about treatment strategies and such.  You should welcome the fact that rules change as it means we’re gaining valuable information.

58 minutes ago, Meatloaf63 said:

Plenty of evidence there are harmful side effects, the mainstream news and government chooses to ignore it.

This is not true, vaccinated spread Covid at the same rate but for a shorter period of time. And at this point there isn’t enough data to be certain what happens with the Omicron variant.

Because they shed it for a much shorter time period they are not as infectious as those who shed it for longer periods.  That is math.  And I’m sorry but this stuff about having all these unknown side effects is silly.  The FDA and CDC by law have to follow up on every post to the VAERS data base and the reported side effects are very rare.  I do agree that the omicron variant data is uncertain, but hopefully it is more infectious but less harmful.  That is how viral mutations often go, and if so it gets us closer to where we can live with this virus. 
 

You can’t just claim there are a bunch of side effects with absolutely no proof.  That adds nothing to the discussion and spreads irrational fear that ultimately makes it harder to beat this virus.

Edited December 26, 2021 by oldmanfan

[BigDingus]

Ugh... I hope at this point any "on the fence" people just get vaxxed, & those that are get the booster as soon as they can.

 

Obviously, with all the variants it can still spread, but any extra help to prevent these situations would be huge! We hear it all the time, the best ability is availability...

 

Some of the players probably thought like me & many fans before the season, assuming we'd pick up where we left off & cruise to the playoffs. The risk of missing 1 or 2 guys missing a game or two due to COVID protocols/testing positive didn't seem all that bad looking at the schedule. Who would've thought how razor thin the gap is not only for the division title, but even a WC spot! 

 

Alas, we're not just losing 1 or 2 guys for some crappy Jags game (oof), but many key players, all while each game becomes exponentially more important 😟

[pennstate10]

16 hours ago, Meatloaf63 said:

Plenty of evidence there are harmful side effects, the mainstream news and government chooses to ignore it.

This is not true, vaccinated spread Covid at the same rate but for a shorter period of time. And at this point there isn’t enough data to be certain what happens with the Omicron variant.

Your last sentence is true. But it is also true that there are no certainties in any area of medicine. Doctors and public health officials have decades of experience in making the best decision based on all available data. 
 

your next to last sentence is, literally, nonsense. In that it makes no sense.  It’s a logical fallacy. 
 

if I make $1000/day for seven days, and you make $1000/day for one day, who has more money at the end of a week?

[Brueggs]

16 hours ago, Dr. Who said:

Fella, I'm telling you what the folks who disagree with you are implying in the posts that follow yours. But you know what, you're on your own. I'll delete the post.

Keep your post.  I have no intention of offending anyone.  I am not calling anyone names here...

I realize this is a topic that has a lot of people divided.  If my opinion is what offends you, I can only change my opinion, or be silent.  If I change it to protect other peoples feelings, I am not being honest.  If I am silent, I allow those of dissenting opinions to propagate what I disagree with.  If I change my opinion based on evidence that changes my perspective, the debate creates growth and everyone benefits...as it should be.

 

Being that this is about football, and the availability of some players based on vaxx status, I was simply pointing out, based on the information in that article, that the vast majority appear to be vaccinated.  The different protocols don't make sense.  In fact, the argument could be made that the less frequent testing of the vaccinated has contributed to the spread.  I understand the argument about the unvaxxed potentially having greater complications to the individual, but I have yet to hear anyone explain how the transmission rate is any different from one to the other...hence the need for the NFL to provide equal protocols.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

21 hours ago, YoloinOhio said:

It’s actually only very few

 

True, but they're fairly key players.

Lotulelei.  Brown.  Beasley.  Davis.  Klein.   probably Boettger but not sure.  One or two more.