Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

 

Full Capacity Stadiums set to be allowed in England for new season

Is it time to open the stadiums at full capacity?

  • I'm thrilled about it, it is time for the country to move forward

    Votes: 166 54.6%

  • It is too soon to have stadiums at full capacity but I'll will be attending

    Votes: 61 20.1%

  • I'm concern and will stay away from a full stadium for a bit longer

    Votes: 55 18.1%

  • I'm not going to a full stadium to watch Everton until Benitez is gone

    Votes: 22 7.2%
  • Total voters
    304
Status
Not open for further replies.
Tigger said:
Small sample size I know, but I know more people that are jabbed testing positive in the last month than the rest of the pandemic before the vaccinations.
Unreal last few weeks how many have got it round here.
Click to expand...
This isnt true, you have made this up and look very foolish
 
The Lancet letter signed by a battery of scientists has stated regarding re-openings: "We believe the government is embarking on a dangerous and unethical experiment, and we call on it to abandon mitigation on July 19th, 2021".

I'd like to think that Everton FC would pay heed to that and not be a facilitator to that 'experiment'.
 
davek said:
Isn;t that why we have government's though?

There needs to be mandatory vaccinations. If these lunatics are reopening everything and dropping social distancing and mask wearing, they should be introducing a mandatory vaccination programme to make sure that infection cant be spread as much.
Click to expand...

You are saying this like the vaccine is there to protect others, when it's not. The vaccine reduces the impact of the virus on the individual.

The problem with this is that the vaccine does not prevent infection or transmission. And with the governments policy that going forward, vaccinated people no longer need to self isolate, coupled with a vaccinated person having reduced symptoms, they could actually spread the virus more readily than those who are not vaccinated. Especially so given the supposed numbers of infections caused by Asymptomatic spreaders. This is essentially the same thing.

4737carlin said:
This isnt true, you have made this up and look very foolish
Click to expand...

I happen to know a number of people who contracted it after double vaccinations. The other guy didn't quote hospital numbers, he spoke of his own experience. I think it's a bit harsh to say he is wrong and foolish for having encountered it when you have absolutely no idea of his own personal experience.
 

MikelsGoat said:
Dont suppose you have a link to these figures do you?

Im gonna guess you dont, cos you are a
Click to expand...

MikelsGoat said:
Dont suppose you have a link to these figures do you?

Im gonna guess you dont, cos you are a wham chatting ant-vax ferret.
Click to expand...
here's a bit of anti vax wham lad!

I'm not anti vaxx BTW!

Just cautious about untested medicine given emergency use authority. Most vaccines are hugely beneficial, I and all my family are very much pro, in fact o take over 12 medications per day, most of which your uninformed type will never even have heard of, I have contraindications that potentially stopp this vaxx being administered on sound medical advice but hey we're all anti vaxx!






 
Kever10 said:
You are saying this like the vaccine is there to protect others, when it's not. The vaccine reduces the impact of the virus on the individual.

The problem with this is that the vaccine does not prevent infection or transmission. And with the governments policy that going forward, vaccinated people no longer need to self isolate, coupled with a vaccinated person having reduced symptoms, they could actually spread the virus more readily than those who are not vaccinated. Especially so given the supposed numbers of infections caused by Asymptomatic spreaders. This is essentially the same thing.
Click to expand...
Whoa.

I think you need to do a bit more reading.
 

davek said:
Whoa.

I think you need to do a bit more reading.
Click to expand...
Why? Because I disagree with you?

By all means, point the way.

60% of all Delta variant deaths have been vaccinated at least once, 70% of those have been vaccinated twice.

I'm aware that this does not mean that the vaccine makes it more likely you will contract it or die, and that the majority of people who were vaccinated 1st were potentially more vulnerable in the 1st place, but this does point to the fact that while the vaccine may reduce the chances of contracting it, and while it may reduce symptoms, it is certainly by no means a case of the vaccination being the end of this.

It's about risk reduction, which is entirely your point to begin with.
 
Kever10 said:
Why? Because I disagree with you?

By all means, point the way.

60% of all Delta variant deaths have been vaccinated at least once, 70% of those have been vaccinated twice.

I'm aware that this does not mean that the vaccine makes it more likely you will contract it or die, and that the majority of people who were vaccinated 1st were potentially more vulnerable in the 1st place, but this does point to the fact that while the vaccine may reduce the chances of contracting it, and while it may reduce symptoms, it is certainly by no means a case of the vaccination being the end of this.

It's about risk reduction, which is entirely your point to begin with.
Click to expand...
None of that means that the vaccines 'dont prevent infection or transmission'. It means that they dont offer a complete shield against infection and transmission.
 
davek said:
None of that means that the vaccines 'dont prevent infection or transmission'. It means that they dont offer a complete shield against infection and transmission.
Click to expand...
Which is different how?

Not offering a complete shield, ie, not preventing infection or transmission.

If I had said it had no effect at all, or that it caused infection or transmission, you might have a case here, but I didn't and you clearly don't. It's semantics.

The NHS own website says that the vaccine "reduces risk" but "There is a chance you might still get or spread COVID-19 even if you have a vaccine, so it's important to continue to follow all social distancing guidance."

So again, point to where I was wrong.
 
Kever10 said:
Which is different how?

Not offering a complete shield, ie, not preventing infection or transmission.

If I had said it had no effect at all, or that it caused infection or transmission, you might have a case here, but I didn't and you clearly don't. It's semantics.

The NHS own website says that the vaccine "reduces risk" but "There is a chance you might still get or spread COVID-19 even if you have a vaccine, so it's important to continue to follow all social distancing guidance."

So again, point to where I was wrong.
Click to expand...
Your words were: "The problem with this is that the vaccine does not prevent infection or transmission." Not that they also do prevent infection and transmission.

You basically rowed back on your initial position.

That's not semantics - it's a fact.
 
davek said:
Your words were: "The problem with this is that the vaccine does not prevent infection or transmission." Not that they also do prevent infection and transmission.

You basically rowed back on your initial position.

That's not semantics - it's a fact.
Click to expand...
I know that's what I said, and you said I was wrong, and now you are twisting both my initial meaning of the point, and the clarification, both of which were the same.

Are you deliberately trolling me? Or do you just not understand what the word prevent means?
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register
Back
Top