Tom Lockyer - Luton captain collapses during their match against Bournemouth.

[dennishasdoneit]

Plus £370k a week salary. Jesus wept.

Wow.

 

[dennishasdoneit]

Ta, very rare but the covid vaccine loons will jump on it

Wow. 1st you doubt the claim and demand to see the source
Then you quote the all so important source.... incorrectly
Read it again. It said rare. You turned that into very rare
Which one is it?
Think we need a number cruncher back on BM to count the cases
Can you think of anyone Kaz?

 

[Aba452]

A shame for the guy but he'll need to look to his health and being there for his family.

Coaching and match analysis work might be a way forward.

 

[A Badger Is Not A Beaver]

MSN

"While AstraZeneca has contested these claims, it admitted for the first time in one of the court documents that the vaccine can “in very rare cases, cause TTS”

Very rare.

 

[youngbob]

I find it funny whenever anti-vaxxers think that literally any adverse effect from a vaccine is concrete evidence of their conspiratorial thinking, as though vaccines haven't already been causing adverse effects and deaths for more than a century. When it comes to viruses and vaccines, science isn't about cheating death or preventing death outright, it's about weighing up which option causes more deaths and going ahead with the one that causes less - in the case of Covid vaccines, significantly less. People who make vaccines are always careful to mention this.

For instance, science established that, in the UK, for every 100,000 people during the pandemic, 114 of them died from Covid. For every 100,000 people who took the vaccine, roughly 1 person has suffered an "adverse effect" (that's anything from death, to a stoke, to an upset stomach). In the US they've confirmed that an average of 0.4 people per 100,000 died after taking the vaccine with a booster (and that's not necessarily to say they died as a result of the vaccine, just that they died after having received it).

So, science looks at the figures. Would it rather 114 people died out of every 100,000, or 0.4 people per 100,000? Science will pick the smaller number of deaths every time. It's cold and objective, but science thinks it's worth sacrificing 1 person out of every 500,000 if it saves the lives of 570 people at the same time (114 x 5).

It should be up to people to make their own choice about whether they get the vaccine. It's why I didn't agree with vaccine passports or ostracising people who decided not to get a booster. As far as I'm concerned, I get my vaccine so other people don't have to. But, by the same token, if people have done the reading and are making an informed decision about their heath and they want to go ahead and get the vaccine, smug anti-vaxxers pointing at literally any medical complaint these days and saying we should get rid of all vaccines and inoculations is pathetic behaviour. Footballers have been collapsing and having heart attacks since way before anyone knew what Covid was.

Funnily enough, Marc Vivien Foe should have been 49 today. Should we track down his family and ask if he was vaxxed when he collapsed and died on the pitch? Thought not.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

I find it funny whenever anti-vaxxers think that literally any adverse effect from a vaccine is concrete evidence of their conspiratorial thinking, as though vaccines haven't already been causing adverse effects and deaths for more than a century. When it comes to viruses and vaccines, science isn't about cheating death or preventing death outright, it's about weighing up which option causes more deaths and going ahead with the one that causes less - in the case of Covid vaccines, significantly less. People who make vaccines are always careful to mention this.

For instance, science established that, in the UK, for every 100,000 people during the pandemic, 114 of them died from Covid. For every 100,000 people who took the vaccine, roughly 1 person has suffered an "adverse effect" (that's anything from death, to a stoke, to an upset stomach. In the US they've confirmed that an average of 0.4 people per 100,000 died after taking the vaccine with a booster (and that's not necessarily to say they died as a result of the vaccine, just that they died after having received it).

So, science looks at the figures. Would it rather 114 people died out of every 100,000, or 0.4 people per 100,000? Science will pick the smaller number of deaths every time. It's cold and objective, but science thinks it's worth sacrificing 1 person out of every 500,000 if it saves the lives of 570 people at the same time (114 x 5).

It should be up to people to make their own choice about whether they get the vaccine. It's why I didn't agree with vaccine passports or ostracising people who decided not to get a booster. As far as I'm concerned, I get my vaccine so other people don't have to. But, by the same token, if people have done the reading and are making an informed decision about their heath and they want to go ahead and get the vaccine, smug anti-vaxxers pointing at literally any medical complaint these days and saying we should get rid of all vaccines and inoculations is pathetic behaviour. Footballers have been collapsing and having heart attacks since way before anyone knew what Covid was.

Funnily enough, Marc Vivien Foe should have been 49 today. Should we track down his family and ask if he was vaxxed when he collapsed and died on the pitch? Thought not.

I’m highly allergic to the tetanus vaccine. I was off school for 3 weeks the only time I had it.

I’ve decided, having taken medical advice, to not have it again. I haven’t tried to get the vaccine removed from society though.

 

[youngbob]

I’m highly allergic to the tetanus vaccine. I was off school for 3 weeks the only time I had it.

I’ve decided, having taken medical advice, to not have it again. I haven’t tried to get the vaccine removed from society though.

Yep. And that's completely fair enough! I was uneasy about getting the Covid vaccine in 2021 because we didn't know much about its long-term effects that might arise after 2/3 years, or even a decade. But I'm immunocompromised and I had to make a decision as to whether I tangled with the vaccine or tangled with the virus itself, and I decided to tangle with the vaccine. I managed to avoid catching Covid until after I'd had my second vaccine and it was honestly milder than some coughs and colds I've had down the years. My symptoms may have been exactly the same if I'd never received the vaccine in the first place, but when the virus first broke out I was being 50% tube-fed and dangerously underweight - I didn't really fancy my chances, if I'm being honest. Things are much better now and I'm much stronger in myself so I could fight the virus off. But, weighing up my options at the time, the vaccine was just less likely to kill me. I wasn't exactly happy to get it, but I was more reassured once it was over. That doesn't make me a sheep, it just made me someone who assessed their situation and chose one option over the other to keep myself alive.

 

[Vienna_70]

I find it funny whenever anti-vaxxers think that literally any adverse effect from a vaccine is concrete evidence of their conspiratorial thinking, as though vaccines haven't already been causing adverse effects and deaths for more than a century. When it comes to viruses and vaccines, science isn't about cheating death or preventing death outright, it's about weighing up which option causes more deaths and going ahead with the one that causes less - in the case of Covid vaccines, significantly less. People who make vaccines are always careful to mention this.

For instance, science established that, in the UK, for every 100,000 people during the pandemic, 114 of them died from Covid. For every 100,000 people who took the vaccine, roughly 1 person has suffered an "adverse effect" (that's anything from death, to a stoke, to an upset stomach). In the US they've confirmed that an average of 0.4 people per 100,000 died after taking the vaccine with a booster (and that's not necessarily to say they died as a result of the vaccine, just that they died after having received it).

So, science looks at the figures. Would it rather 114 people died out of every 100,000, or 0.4 people per 100,000? Science will pick the smaller number of deaths every time. It's cold and objective, but science thinks it's worth sacrificing 1 person out of every 500,000 if it saves the lives of 570 people at the same time (114 x 5).

It should be up to people to make their own choice about whether they get the vaccine. It's why I didn't agree with vaccine passports or ostracising people who decided not to get a booster. As far as I'm concerned, I get my vaccine so other people don't have to. But, by the same token, if people have done the reading and are making an informed decision about their heath and they want to go ahead and get the vaccine, smug anti-vaxxers pointing at literally any medical complaint these days and saying we should get rid of all vaccines and inoculations is pathetic behaviour. Footballers have been collapsing and having heart attacks since way before anyone knew what Covid was.

Funnily enough, Marc Vivien Foe should have been 49 today. Should we track down his family and ask if he was vaxxed when he collapsed and died on the pitch? Thought not.

Even a bit of pain at the injection site is classed as a side-effect nowadays.

Bloody ridiculous.

 

[Alan Harper's Tash]

Yep. And that's completely fair enough! I was uneasy about getting the Covid vaccine in 2021 because we didn't know much about its long-term effects that might arise after 2/3 years, or even a decade. But I'm immunocompromised and I had to make a decision as to whether I tangled with the vaccine or tangled with the virus itself, and I decided to tangle with the vaccine. I managed to avoid catching Covid until after I'd had my second vaccine and it was honestly milder than some coughs and colds I've had down the years. My symptoms may have been exactly the same if I'd never received the vaccine in the first place, but when the virus first broke out I was being 50% tube-fed and dangerously underweight - I didn't really fancy my chances, if I'm being honest. Things are much better now and I'd have more to fight against the virus but, weighing up my options at the time, the vaccine was less likely to kill me. That doesn't make me a sheep, it just made me someone who assessed their situation and chose one option over the other to keep myself alive.

I had a similar conversation with my GP because of my history of vaccine reaction and like you, decided on the balance of probability, that it made more sense to have it.

I’m still here, and beyond my 18 inch cock and my new found tendency to over exaggerate, I’m alright.

Hopefully you are too.

 

[kaz7]

Wow. 1st you doubt the claim and demand to see the source
Then you quote the all so important source.... incorrectly
Read it again. It said rare. You turned that into very rare
Which one is it?
Think we need a number cruncher back on BM to count the cases
Can you think of anyone Kaz?

I asked for the source , read it and it said very rare , in comparison to the millions given in this country blood clots were very rare

Knew you would appear , you are the anti vax loon i was referring to

You are thinking of @Healdplace