Vaccine and the return of Fans to Football

[Eyrie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Can’t say I agree with that. So the older folk that we’ve all been trying to protect will get the vaccine first so they can swan off on holiday whilst the rest of us have to sit and wait months/ potentially years?

So how would you prioritise the vaccine if you don't want those most at risk to get it first?

[jacomo]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

With the great news we got yesterday, and with the imminent arrival of a vaccine, where does this leave us, with getting back into see our team
From what I can gather, the elderly and vulnerable with get the vaccine 1st, think at my age I’m no 8 on the list, and as it stands I believe, nothing planned for the under 50’s

So what are the chances of getting in, say in Feb, with vaccines and mass testing in Scotland’s cities

Would be something to look forward too!

Roll out expected to start by Christmas, if all goes well, and take months from there. Doesn’t meet my definition of imminent.

[G B Young]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Personally I'm not that bothered now, I get it that some folk want back yesterday, but I can wait now and if its next season then so be it.

I wonder how many football fans will end up not going back even when we get the go-ahead to do so. This pandemic will have changed the mindset/behaviour of a lot of people.

[kaimendhibs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don't want no micro-chip implanted in me with this vaccine for a FAKE NEWS virus!

Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk

[The Tubs]

Once the vulnerable are protected, surely the rest of us can just take our chances.

[erin go bragh]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I wonder how many football fans will end up not going back even when we get the go-ahead to do so. This pandemic will have changed the mindset/behaviour of a lot of people.

I wonder what the f, non footballing fans do every weekend .
The crowds will be back with a vengeance, once allowed back in and I’ll be right at the front . Cannie wait 🤞

[ScottB]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Young people who the virus poses a serious risk too will be vaccinated.

Considering those I know who’ve got it, are still ill months later, and weren’t at serious risk, I’m not going to be rushing back into crowds just because it’ll be safe for the oldies...

[H18 SFR]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I wonder how many football fans will end up not going back even when we get the go-ahead to do so. This pandemic will have changed the mindset/behaviour of a lot of people.

Opposite for me. I’d go into a covid infested cesspit to watch hibs.

[AugustaHibs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So how would you prioritise the vaccine if you don't want those most at risk to get it first?

No of course I want most at need to get it first. But I don’t agree that you’ll only be allowed to go on holiday etc if you’ve been vaccinated

[CropleyWasGod]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

No of course I want most at need to get it first. But I don’t agree that you’ll only be allowed to go on holiday etc if you’ve been vaccinated

Vaccinations are required by many countries as it stands.

[Jones28]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

No of course I want most at need to get it first. But I don’t agree that you’ll only be allowed to go on holiday etc if you’ve been vaccinated

Personally I'd rather we did it sensibly and only let people who have been vaccinated travel, instead of letting impatient people travel, potentially get ill and carry the virus home again.

[malcolm]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Vaccinations are required by many countries as it stands.

If you exclude what is required for immigration then that probably leaves yellow fever vaccinations that follow international health regulations. In the scenario where the level of vaccinations is strictly limited then any country where tourism is a key part of the economy, is unlikely to look to limit entry only on the basis of vaccinations. It will be a balance of vaccination evidence, negative tests and accepting some countries with no such proof (informed risk taking).

For football, allowing entry into games will probably take an informed risk taking approach. Informed no doubt by the levels of vaccinations and prevalence of infections whether indicated by mass rapid or symptom driven testing. Spring will help by reducing inside gatherings and hopefully will bring into play other vaccination candidates that are available in greater dose numbers and perhaps without some of the logistic challenges of the current great *white hope (though it’s mRNA approach offers exciting potential for vaccine development in future). *other shades are available

I’m looking optimistically at the hope of a first big crowd in the sun in May and then getting my dual flu/COVID jab in autumn with crowds all back to normal. But don’t wake me up yet it’s a nice dream.

[TheGog]

Not one of those who's anti vaccine... But it takes at least 10 years to test a vaccine and for the side affects to take place this has been made in 8months. Not to mention the company Pfizer have paid the highest compensation ever seen in a court of law for disruption of deadly vaccines.

It will come but we can't rush this and this to me looks very dangerous

[whiskyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Not one of those who's anti vaccine... But it takes at least 10 years to test a vaccine and for the side affects to take place this has been made in 8months. Not to mention the company Pfizer have paid the highest compensation ever seen in a court of law for disruption of deadly vaccines.

It will come but we can't rush this and this to me looks very dangerous

The world doesn’t have at least 10 years to wait for this, all reasonable precautions must be taken, but some of the rules and regulations about bringing medicines to the market are designed to protect the interests of Big Pharmaceuticals

[malcolm]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Not one of those who's anti vaccine... But it takes at least 10 years to test a vaccine and for the side affects to take place this has been made in 8months. Not to mention the company Pfizer have paid the highest compensation ever seen in a court of law for disruption of deadly vaccines.

It will come but we can't rush this and this to me looks very dangerous

It’s @ 400 miles between Leith and London doing this by stage coach or horse in the mid 19th century might have sped along at say 5 miles an hour taking without rest over 3 days and more likely 4 or 5 days. You can do it a bit quicker today than say when Edward Jenner pioneered the early concept of vaccinations.

To say definitely that it takes at least 10years to produce and test a vaccine, because historically it did, is at best unhelpful misinformation. In contrast the WHO https://www.who.int/news/item/06-08-...s-and-timeline say it takes 6 months to produce a vaccine when a new type A or B flu virus is identified. As this is a novel SARS virus there is a whole front end missing from that production line example as it were, so it would also be misinformation to say they should produce a COVID vaccine in 6 months.

But science and medical knowledge is built up on what is already known and the pandemic has concentrated minds and attracted unprecedented resources to come up with new approaches and move on from what was apparently little changed from what Jenner identified. There is a lot of money to be made for the companies that get it right and safety will be paramount as there is a lot to be lost if they get it wrong. Safety is also paramount for society and governments it has to be. Getting back to normal may require sufficient uptake of vaccination and spreading trump like unfounded doubts is not helpful to anyone.

[JXM73]

90% effective eh? How do you know you're ok, putting what equates to the population of scotland at risk of still getting the virus in the uk.... how many have been infected so far in uk 1%.... effective rate needs to be higher..

[nonshinyfinish]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

90% effective eh? How do you know you're ok, putting what equates to the population of scotland at risk of still getting the virus in the uk.... how many have been infected so far in uk 1%.... effective rate needs to be higher..

On a nationwide scale, the purpose of a vaccine is not to prevent every single case, but to generate sufficient immunity to severely limit transmission of the virus. Look up herd immunity.

If a 90%-effective vaccine was widely rolled out, the R number would plummet. It's simply not accurate to say that the remaining 10% would be at risk in the way people are currently at risk of getting Covid.

[jacomo]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

90% effective eh? How do you know you're ok, putting what equates to the population of scotland at risk of still getting the virus in the uk.... how many have been infected so far in uk 1%.... effective rate needs to be higher..

I think you are misunderstanding statistics and risk here.

Key thing is to stop transmission of the disease to those who are vulnerable. This is what the lockdowns have been about. If those vulnerable groups are 90% less likely to suffer from Covid, it is a game changer.

[whiskyhibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It’s @ 400 miles between Leith and London doing this by stage coach or horse in the mid 19th century might have sped along at say 5 miles an hour taking without rest over 3 days and more likely 4 or 5 days. You can do it a bit quicker today than say when Edward Jenner pioneered the early concept of vaccinations.

To say definitely that it takes at least 10years to produce and test a vaccine, because historically it did, is at best unhelpful misinformation. In contrast the WHO https://www.who.int/news/item/06-08-...s-and-timeline say it takes 6 months to produce a vaccine when a new type A or B flu virus is identified. As this is a novel SARS virus there is a whole front end missing from that production line example as it were, so it would also be misinformation to say they should produce a COVID vaccine in 6 months.

But science and medical knowledge is built up on what is already known and the pandemic has concentrated minds and attracted unprecedented resources to come up with new approaches and move on from what was apparently little changed from what Jenner identified. There is a lot of money to be made for the companies that get it right and safety will be paramount as there is a lot to be lost if they get it wrong. Safety is also paramount for society and governments it has to be. Getting back to normal may require sufficient uptake of vaccination and spreading trump like unfounded doubts is not helpful to anyone.