(07-23-2021, 08:06 AM)Mikey Wrote: [ -> ] (07-22-2021, 09:26 PM)MoJagFan Wrote: [ -> ]If they aren't hospitalized or really sick what difference does it make? The constant harping on this is stupid.
In my life....
Hey guess what I have pneumonia again you think it will make the news? Only if the hospital counts it as a covid case.
It's only news if you chose not to get vaccinated for pneumonia and this potentially could lead to you losing your job. Luton was already good as gone, this ain't gonna do him any favors.
Where have we been told he wasn't vaccinated?
And who is getting tested now days unless you're feeling sicker than a normal cold?
(07-23-2021, 02:35 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (07-23-2021, 02:24 PM)Jaguar Warrior Wrote: [ -> ]The vaccinated are already getting infected, you just won't hear it on Fox or CNN. All you hear about is the unvaccinated.
The number of vaccinated getting sick is very, very small in comparison to the unvaccinated. The vaccinated who do get sick most likely have comorbidities or immunity issues.
Make no mistake, the number of people getting sick are the unvaccinated by a huge margin.
There's a difference between sick and infected. If a virus is so dangerous that you only know you have it when you test for it then you're not sick. The vaccinated will continue to contract the virus, their immune systems will simply be primed to fight it off so it will be fought off with far fewer (or no) side effects. A vaccine is not like a plastic bubblewrap that prevents all exposure.
(07-24-2021, 06:43 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (07-24-2021, 05:04 PM)americus 2.0 Wrote: [ -> ]So, if a vaccinated player becomes infected by his wife/partner or kids who has tested positive, what then? Is the NFL going to require every single family member get vaccinated?
Or if the vaccinated gets infected by anyone? Can the NFL prove it was by an unvaccinated player who tested positive? No they can't.
I just tested positive for it but my husband, who was sick before I was, tested negative but he could have tested too early. He is the only person I've had long term or continuous contact with. The likelihood of catching it from someone else is slim but it could happen. So who did I get it from? There is no test that tells you if you got it from someone who has been vaccinated or someone who hasn't.
There are way too many variables in this equation.
The penalties are for unvaccinated players.
Yeah, I went on a rant. But I think it's BS. Vaccinated players can still get the virus. Penalizing someone and entire teams is total BS.
#BecauseJaguars will always uhh find a way. We need a vaccine to cure it....
(07-23-2021, 03:08 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ] (07-23-2021, 03:03 PM)The Real Marty Wrote: [ -> ]We made it through the season last year. What were the rules and procedures last year?
Testing, testing, testing. However, the vaccine has introduced a twist and a turn to who should get tested and how often. If they're going to forfeit games, then they might as well go back to what they were doing last season until they can figure out if people who are vaccinated but test positive are actually infectious.
And what about all the players (and regular folks) who have already had covid? Victims of SARS-COV-1, the outbreak in 2003, continued to produce anti-bodies at least 12 years after infection.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/...20021386v1
SARS-COV-2 infections continue to produce antibodies in the relatively short time available to study the post-infection immune behaviour.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34113953/
Anyways, if your kid gets chickenpox then your doctor is unlikely to recommend they also get the chickenpox vaccine. It seems the panic over covid, a virus with relatively minor symptoms compared to most of the bugs we have created vaccines for, is a bit out of proportion.
(07-23-2021, 10:09 PM)MojoKing Wrote: [ -> ]so incredible that this vaccine is this polarizing. I wonder if it were a polio pandemic we’d have the same thing.
Anyways I got it - I agree with the NFLs decision and I also agree that if the players/coaches don’t want to take the vaccine that they should able to quit without a bad stamp on their reputation. Everyone is entitled to their belief.
Polio vaccination was greatly resisted. Polio vaccination was almost litigated out of existence until manufacturers were given legal protections.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1383764/
Even the smallpox vaccine was resisted despite the disease having a 30% mortality rate (unlike covid's 0.1% mortality rate)
https://www.forbes.com/sites/peterubel/2...e190194402
(07-25-2021, 04:57 PM)OzJohnnie Wrote: [ -> ] (07-23-2021, 10:09 PM)MojoKing Wrote: [ -> ]so incredible that this vaccine is this polarizing. I wonder if it were a polio pandemic we’d have the same thing.
Anyways I got it - I agree with the NFLs decision and I also agree that if the players/coaches don’t want to take the vaccine that they should able to quit without a bad stamp on their reputation. Everyone is entitled to their belief.
Polio vaccination was greatly resisted. Polio vaccination was almost litigated out of existence until manufacturers were given legal protections.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1383764/
Even the smallpox vaccine was resisted despite the disease having a 30% mortality rate (unlike covid's 0.1% mortality rate)
https://www.forbes.com/sites/peterubel/2...e190194402
Yep, stupidity borne of ignorance is definitely not a recent phenomenon.
(07-25-2021, 05:09 PM)MarleyJag Wrote: [ -> ] (07-25-2021, 04:57 PM)OzJohnnie Wrote: [ -> ]Polio vaccination was greatly resisted. Polio vaccination was almost litigated out of existence until manufacturers were given legal protections.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1383764/
Even the smallpox vaccine was resisted despite the disease having a 30% mortality rate (unlike covid's 0.1% mortality rate)
https://www.forbes.com/sites/peterubel/2...e190194402
Yep, stupidity borne of ignorance is definitely not a recent phenomenon.
And is sure as hell ain't going away. In fact, it seems to be as contagious as this latest bug.
(07-25-2021, 03:32 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ] (07-25-2021, 12:13 PM)p_rushing Wrote: [ -> ]There are court cases going on now for this, but a this isn't a FDA approved vaccine yet. Generally you can say you are required to have the vaccine to say enter the building or something similar. They also need to provide alternatives for people with legal exemptions, like work from home.
The NFL did not mandate the vaccine. They put rules in place that have no factual basis. They are punishing the unvaccinated players. They also have threatened the unvaccinated players with forfeiting games. All of this is illegal.
Vaccinated players can spread the virus but they say it doesn't matter, once you test negative 2 times you are good.
They also say if a unvaccinated player test positive, they will not reschedule a game. How do they know where the unvaccinated player got it? Did he get it from one of the vaccinated players?
The NFL was fine until they started setting up different rules to punish players.
Sent from my SM-G781U using Tapatalk
Would you please cite your precedent to differentiate an Emergency Use Authorization from an FDA Approval during a declared Public Health Emergency?
The simple fact is that the EUA does everything needed to make what the NFL is doing perfectly legal. As far as vaccinated players go they shouldn't be testing them at all, there's no point to it. Just keep the record of the unvaccinated and when they get the virus then quarantine and fine them.
(07-25-2021, 02:11 PM)p_rushing Wrote: [ -> ]Then why only punish the unvaccinated? They should do the same thing for both if they cared about protecting their money. They are using it as a work around instead of mandating the vaccine.
A vaccinated player can still get and spread covid, so why are they allowing separate rules for them? The same 24 hour or 10 day rule should apply to both. The league is basically saying it doesn't matter if you have covid now, you can spread it to the whole team.
Sent from my SM-G781U using Tapatalk
Because unvaccinated players are refusing to take the proper step necessary to protect the League and game therefore when the inevitable happens there should and will be consequences.
It's never been legal to force it on people who have an exemption, medical or religious, even with an approved vaccine. The FDA is also ignoring rules around # of adverse events, they pulled the previous vaccine after 25 deaths. You can't get a medical one because if they give it to you they will be attacked from above. Plenty of doctors will say don't take it but they won't sign an exemption. They also are ignoring religious exemptions.
Just because everyone is just going along with it doesn't make it legal. You could easily sign your right to sue away if you got sick and there is no reason for the mandates. Why does everyone have to have the vaccine if those with the vaccine are protected? Vaccinated people still get and transmit virus but they are ignoring that and only saying we will fine, force you to sit out 10 days, and not pay you for unvaccinated players.
Sent from my SM-T970 using Tapatalk
(07-25-2021, 07:02 PM)p_rushing Wrote: [ -> ] (07-25-2021, 03:32 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]Would you please cite your precedent to differentiate an Emergency Use Authorization from an FDA Approval during a declared Public Health Emergency?
The simple fact is that the EUA does everything needed to make what the NFL is doing perfectly legal. As far as vaccinated players go they shouldn't be testing them at all, there's no point to it. Just keep the record of the unvaccinated and when they get the virus then quarantine and fine them.
Because unvaccinated players are refusing to take the proper step necessary to protect the League and game therefore when the inevitable happens there should and will be consequences.
It's never been legal to force it on people who have an exemption, medical or religious, even with an approved vaccine. The FDA is also ignoring rules around # of adverse events, they pulled the previous vaccine after 25 deaths. You can't get a medical one because if they give it to you they will be attacked from above. Plenty of doctors will say don't take it but they won't sign an exemption. They also are ignoring religious exemptions.
Just because everyone is just going along with it doesn't make it legal. You could easily sign your right to sue away if you got sick and there is no reason for the mandates. Why does everyone have to have the vaccine if those with the vaccine are protected? Vaccinated people still get and transmit virus but they are ignoring that and only saying we will fine, force you to sit out 10 days, and not pay you for unvaccinated players.
Sent from my SM-T970 using Tapatalk
The NFL is a private business. They have a right to enforce whatever rules they want with their employees. My company is doing it.
Aside from that, how the [BLEEP] is this thread still open? This has nothing to do with Luton and there's a thread dealing with this [BLEEP] in the political session. If you want to argue about this, go there. Don't pollute this forum with the swill from that one.
(07-25-2021, 05:10 PM)NYC4jags Wrote: [ -> ] (07-25-2021, 05:09 PM)MarleyJag Wrote: [ -> ]Yep, stupidity borne of ignorance is definitely not a recent phenomenon.
And is sure as hell ain't going away. In fact, it seems to be as contagious as this latest bug.
Stupid is as stupid does. The '76 swine flu vaccine was pulled from the market because of adverse effects after it was rushed out for fear that strain would be a repeat of the 1918 event.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-new...180961994/
And more recently the only Lyme disease vaccine was pulled from the market amid concerns about undetected side effects and inconclusive results in terms of overall Lyme occurences.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2870557/
I'm not saying getting this vaccine is stupid or not. I'm merely pointing out that in similar situations, both in terms of public panic and rushed development, vaccines have proven to be a bad choice, so much so that the FDA has removed them from the market. Does that mean this one is bad? No. But it does mean that those with concerns about the vaccine who would rather take a chance with covid are not prima facia "stupid".
(07-25-2021, 07:50 PM)RicoTx Wrote: [ -> ] (07-25-2021, 07:02 PM)p_rushing Wrote: [ -> ]It's never been legal to force it on people who have an exemption, medical or religious, even with an approved vaccine. The FDA is also ignoring rules around # of adverse events, they pulled the previous vaccine after 25 deaths. You can't get a medical one because if they give it to you they will be attacked from above. Plenty of doctors will say don't take it but they won't sign an exemption. They also are ignoring religious exemptions.
Just because everyone is just going along with it doesn't make it legal. You could easily sign your right to sue away if you got sick and there is no reason for the mandates. Why does everyone have to have the vaccine if those with the vaccine are protected? Vaccinated people still get and transmit virus but they are ignoring that and only saying we will fine, force you to sit out 10 days, and not pay you for unvaccinated players.
Sent from my SM-T970 using Tapatalk
The NFL is a private business. They have a right to enforce whatever rules they want with their employees. My company is doing it.
Aside from that, how the [BLEEP] is this thread still open? This has nothing to do with Luton and there's a thread dealing with this [BLEEP] in the political session. If you want to argue about this, go there. Don't pollute this forum with the swill from that one.
I would merely like to point out that a private business does not "have a right to enforce whatever rules they want with their employees." US labor law has a very well-defined and surprisingly intrusive set of rules, regulations and laws which restrict employer-employee contracts.
https://www.eeoc.gov/prohibited-employme...spractices
Quote:Under the laws enforced by EEOC, it is illegal to discriminate against someone (applicant or employee) because of that person's race, color, religion, sex (including gender identity, sexual orientation, and pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information. It is also illegal to retaliate against a person because he or she complained about discrimination, filed a charge of discrimination, or participated in an employment discrimination investigation or lawsuit.
The law forbids discrimination in every aspect of employment.
Specific rules as to CV-19 are listed here:
https://www.eeoc.gov/wysk/what-you-shoul...r-eeo-laws
The rules are quite detailed and restrictive in terms of whether and when an employer can inquire about an employee is currently infected with CV-19. An employer may not ask about CV-19 antibody status. The EEOC is yet to publish rulings on vaccination status but you would expect vaccine rules to be similar to anti-body rules. So I would guess the EEOC will either not allow employers to enquire about vaccination status or change the antibody rules. Who knows when the gov't will publish their new rules.
(07-25-2021, 05:09 PM)MarleyJag Wrote: [ -> ] (07-25-2021, 04:57 PM)OzJohnnie Wrote: [ -> ]Polio vaccination was greatly resisted. Polio vaccination was almost litigated out of existence until manufacturers were given legal protections.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1383764/
Even the smallpox vaccine was resisted despite the disease having a 30% mortality rate (unlike covid's 0.1% mortality rate)
https://www.forbes.com/sites/peterubel/2...e190194402
Yep, stupidity borne of ignorance is definitely not a recent phenomenon.
The ignorance is not what you are intimating. If you read the article on polio, you'll find that there were four vaccine manufacturers and one of the manufacturer's vaccine was pulled from the market for causing more polio that it prevented, actually killing and paralyzing kids. Parents started suing and the whole program was thrown into doubt. The bad manufacturer was eventually shut down and the other three given legal protections and away it went. But it wasn't a resistance born of ignorance.
(07-25-2021, 08:22 PM)OzJohnnie Wrote: [ -> ] (07-25-2021, 07:50 PM)RicoTx Wrote: [ -> ]The NFL is a private business. They have a right to enforce whatever rules they want with their employees. My company is doing it.
Aside from that, how the [BLEEP] is this thread still open? This has nothing to do with Luton and there's a thread dealing with this [BLEEP] in the political session. If you want to argue about this, go there. Don't pollute this forum with the swill from that one.
I would merely like to point out that a private business does not "have a right to enforce whatever rules they want with their employees." US labor law has a very well-defined and surprisingly intrusive set of rules, regulations and laws which restrict employer-employee contracts.
https://www.eeoc.gov/prohibited-employme...spractices
Quote:Under the laws enforced by EEOC, it is illegal to discriminate against someone (applicant or employee) because of that person's race, color, religion, sex (including gender identity, sexual orientation, and pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information. It is also illegal to retaliate against a person because he or she complained about discrimination, filed a charge of discrimination, or participated in an employment discrimination investigation or lawsuit.
The law forbids discrimination in every aspect of employment.
Specific rules as to CV-19 are listed here: https://www.eeoc.gov/wysk/what-you-shoul...r-eeo-laws
The rules are quite detailed and restrictive in terms of whether and when an employer can inquire about an employee is currently infected with CV-19. An employer may not ask about CV-19 antibody status. The EEOC is yet to publish rulings on vaccination status but you would expect vaccine rules to be similar to anti-body rules. So I would guess the EEOC will either not allow employers to enquire about vaccination status or change the antibody rules. Who knows when the gov't will publish their new rules.
So how the [BLEEP] does this say they can't require employees to be vaccinated? Are you trying to assert it's a disability? LOL
(07-25-2021, 08:27 PM)RicoTx Wrote: [ -> ] (07-25-2021, 08:22 PM)OzJohnnie Wrote: [ -> ]I would merely like to point out that a private business does not "have a right to enforce whatever rules they want with their employees." US labor law has a very well-defined and surprisingly intrusive set of rules, regulations and laws which restrict employer-employee contracts.
https://www.eeoc.gov/prohibited-employme...spractices
Specific rules as to CV-19 are listed here: https://www.eeoc.gov/wysk/what-you-shoul...r-eeo-laws
The rules are quite detailed and restrictive in terms of whether and when an employer can inquire about an employee is currently infected with CV-19. An employer may not ask about CV-19 antibody status. The EEOC is yet to publish rulings on vaccination status but you would expect vaccine rules to be similar to anti-body rules. So I would guess the EEOC will either not allow employers to enquire about vaccination status or change the antibody rules. Who knows when the gov't will publish their new rules.
So how the [BLEEP] does this say they can't require employees to be vaccinated? Are you trying to assert it's a disability? LOL
Your anger exceeds your comprehension skills. LOL.
I specifically state that the EEOC has not yet ruled on covid vaccination obligations/permissions/rights. They have, however, published rules on covid anti-bodies and employers are NOT allowed to ask about anti-body status with an employee. As the whole purpose of vaccinations are to trigger an anti-body response before you get an infection of one virus or another, the anti-body ruling is indicative of what the EEOC may rule on vaccines.
(07-25-2021, 08:37 PM)OzJohnnie Wrote: [ -> ] (07-25-2021, 08:27 PM)RicoTx Wrote: [ -> ]So how the [BLEEP] does this say they can't require employees to be vaccinated? Are you trying to assert it's a disability? LOL
Your anger exceeds your comprehension skills. LOL.
I specifically state that the EEOC has not yet ruled on covid vaccination obligations/permissions/rights. They have, however, published rules on covid anti-bodies and employers are NOT allowed to ask about anti-body status with an employee. As the whole purpose of vaccinations are to trigger an anti-body response before you get an infection of one virus or another, the anti-body ruling is indicative of what the EEOC may rule on vaccines.
Anger? LOL!!!! Your psychic radar is way off Karnak. You just made me audibly chuckle...thanks.
(07-25-2021, 08:41 PM)RicoTx Wrote: [ -> ] (07-25-2021, 08:37 PM)OzJohnnie Wrote: [ -> ]Your anger exceeds your comprehension skills. LOL.
I specifically state that the EEOC has not yet ruled on covid vaccination obligations/permissions/rights. They have, however, published rules on covid anti-bodies and employers are NOT allowed to ask about anti-body status with an employee. As the whole purpose of vaccinations are to trigger an anti-body response before you get an infection of one virus or another, the anti-body ruling is indicative of what the EEOC may rule on vaccines.
Anger? LOL!!!! Your psychic radar is way off Karnak.
Heh. Ok. So you understand (and concede?) my entirely reasonable point but wish to deflect anyways because of Internet points or something. Fine. I guess the reasonable part of this discussion is concluded.
(07-25-2021, 08:44 PM)OzJohnnie Wrote: [ -> ] (07-25-2021, 08:41 PM)RicoTx Wrote: [ -> ]Anger? LOL!!!! Your psychic radar is way off Karnak.
Heh. Ok. So you understand (and concede?) my entirely reasonable point but wish to deflect anyways because of Internet points or something. Fine. I guess the reasonable part of this discussion is concluded.
You and reasonable are not synonymous.
You're right, concluded.
Loser.
As long as Trevor Lawrence is playing every week of the regular season and post season, then we will be just fine.
If I’m Coach Meyer, I’m doing everything within my power to keep Trevor in a bubble.