Jump to content

Featured Replies

2 hours ago, binman said:

This far into this and you still think 'the vax doesn't stop the spread' 

Good lord.

Of course it is possible to get covid if you have had 2 vax, or even three.

BUT you are MUCH LESS LIKELY to get it.. 

That's to say vaccination co tinges to provide some level of protection.

So if I go to the pub and I'm yarning to someone with covid about the dees going to back back I am far less likely to be infected. Coz I'm triple vaxxed.

If I don't contract i don't infect my mate who I've visited to yarn about the dees going to back back 

So that helps stop the spread.

This from our gov health website. No mention of the vaccine stopping the transmission

 

https://www.health.gov.au/initiatives-and-programs/covid-19-vaccines/approved-vaccines/how-they-work

How the vaccines work

These vaccines will protect you from getting severely ill or dying if you get COVID-19. 

The vaccines train your immune system to recognise and clear out the virus, before it makes you seriously ill. Your body's immune system builds this protection over time.

You are best protected 7 to 14 days after your second dose. Your booster dose helps restore and extend this protection.

The virus that causes COVID-19 (called SARS-CoV-2) has spikes of protein on each viral particle. These spike proteins allow the virus to attach to cells and cause disease.

The vaccines help the body to:

  • recognise these spike proteins as a threat
  • fight the coronavirus that has these proteins.
 
7 hours ago, Wrecker46 said:

As far as I can determine the vax doesn't stop the spread.

It reduces transmission. Info confirming this is available on the health.gov.au site ... if you'd bothered to (really) look.

"a marked reduction of transmission following vaccination".

 

Edited by bing181

 
20 minutes ago, bing181 said:

It reduces transmission. Info confirming this is available on the health.gov.au site ... if you'd bothered to (really) look.

"a marked reduction of transmission following vaccination".

 

If you bothered to post the link it would be more credible.

18 minutes ago, binman said:

Jesus wept.

Saying Jesus wept is like a facepalm. Where you want to ridicule but can't articulate it.

 


On 2/1/2022 at 1:02 AM, faultydet said:

I always thought W.A was the most insular, "us versus the world" place I'd ever been to.

It's current actions do nothing to dispel that thought.

Jacinda across the Tasman is trying to rival Emperor McGowan, and Kim Jong in the isolation stakes. 

On 2/4/2022 at 9:16 AM, Bring-Back-Powell said:

I'd be flabbergasted if we got 80,000 to the Dees v Dogs game.

1) Wednesday night is a shocking timeslot even allowing for the special occasion of the flag being unfurled. The game should've been on a Friday night - would get the same amount of eye balls on the TV screen but a way bigger crowd and more $$$ in the MFC till.

2) Dogs fans prefer Marvel over the G.

3) Dogs fans won't be particularly keen to see the flag being unfurled and a reminder that they gave up in a GF at 3 qtr time.**

4) The biggest crowd between these two sides at the MCG in a home and away game was 45,000 in 2010 on a Friday night.

I predict 55K for round 1 but as many as 65K-70K for the Essendon Friday night game if both clubs start well.

** actually around 5 minutes before 3 qtr time. 

1 hour ago, bing181 said:

It reduces transmission. Info confirming this is available on the health.gov.au site ... if you'd bothered to (really) look.

"a marked reduction of transmission following vaccination".

 

Ahh ...The government website.
Bastions of truth and integrity 😂👌

 

Asymptomatic Covid population (much more likely in the Vaccinated) are less likely to transmit the virus. Herewith Lancet journal article detailing such…

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanepe/article/PIIS2666-7762(21)00059-4/fulltext

The ‘vaccinated’ are thus less likely to spread the virus. Science. 

1 hour ago, binman said:

Meta humour.

The quote is from the same Web pages as the quotes from wrecker46.

You know the one he used as evidence vaccination doesn't mitigate spread of covid.

Curious you didn't critique the veracity of that information.

Out of interest forkem  do you think vaccination helps stop the spread of covid?

Didn't look at wreckers link but  I don't need  a website for a quote or saying.

As for your question.
I know probably half a dozen people who have chosen not to be vaccinated.
None of whom have had the virus.
But I know many who are vaccinated as the 80% vax rates suggest who have had the virus and passed it among their families.
One hospitalised for a short time.
So .... How long is a piece of string?

Anyone who gobbles up unconditionally what the government or MSM feeds them is a fool.


45 minutes ago, binman said:

This post is so brilliant. Seriously. 

I struggle, as my posting history attests, to make my points brief and punchy. As such i know they lose their value in terms of getting cut through.

This post should be my template.

In just a few words, it so clearly articulates the anti science perspective that has so infected the whole response to Covid in Australia (cue a whole lot of whataboutism - what about masks, what about hospital rates etc etc). 

Thankfully such views, unlike in America, are held by a very, very small minority here in Australia.

But maybe i should give that game a go.

I only have two close friends that have had covid and one lives in Spain. Based on that i don't believe the government's propaganda about case numbers. 

By the by, am i to assume that, based on your anecdotal evidence, the answer to my very simple question is that you don't think vaccination helps stop the spread of covid?

 

 



Brief and punchy eh .... Your posts ramble on like few others.
Know all, know nothin'.

And you seriously only know 2?
Must hide in ya mums basement hangin' out on her internet with another resident peanut Lord Nev and your spanish mate.
Which wouldn't surprise me in the slightest.

 

Edited by Fork 'em

33 minutes ago, binman said:

In just a few words, it so clearly articulates the anti science perspective that has so infected the whole response to Covid in Australia (cue a whole lot of whataboutism - what about masks, what about hospital rates etc etc)

The sad truth, binman, is that ‘personal experience’, which is the very definition of ‘anecdote’, will always defeat science in the minds of some, albeit as you say, a gratefully lower number in Australia than US. Science is theory and observation made specific, analytical, reproducible practice. For those unfamiliar with its methods, that’s an unknown, elusive thing, thus mysterious, untrustworthy. “What they’re telling me can’t be true, because my mates and their mates and family have had ‘these’ experiences” will always defy the rigour and analysis than some don’t/can’t/don’t want to try to understand. I take heart in the fact that Australia, objectively more than any other country (Vax rates) rejects this approach. 

Where's a good moderator when you need one?*. Some cleansing of this thread of non-football material might be in order.

 

*(No disrespect intended to our wonderful crew of site moderators and administrators. They do a wonderful job.) 


9 minutes ago, La Dee-vina Comedia said:

Where's a good moderator when you need one?*. Some cleansing of this thread of non-football material might be in order.

 

*(No disrespect intended to our wonderful crew of site moderators and administrators. They do a wonderful job.) 

Point taken.

Posts deleted.

:jakovich:

Edited by binman

@daisycutter and @binman

You both make valid points about vaccination and transmission.

This is not an argument about the efficacy for keeping people better off and out of hospital when they get Covid.

I just think that all the evidence suggests that the vaccine doesn't mitigate against the spread.

I encourage you to look into the furin cleavage site (fcs) not a website just the scientific name.

There are a sequence of 19 nucleotides within the approx 29,000 in Covid that make it highly contagious between humans. HIV has a similar sequence and after decades we still can't stop the spread with vaccines but we can with anti bodies.

Moderna took out a patent on the sequence 3 years before the first reported case of Covid. They don't know how to stop the spread yet but they will work it out and it will work for HIV, Sars and Ebola.

 


9 hours ago, Demonland said:

 

What is the rationale given that these clubs already have "reserve" teams in their home States.

Gives them 3 teams to pick from as against the other teams who only have one.

Am I missing something ?

 
21 minutes ago, Demonland said:

 

So as Sam Edmund reports:-

• Clubs must nominate a 20-player "Covid contingency list" by Friday.

• A player can be taken from this pool to train - only if fewer than 30 players are available due to Covid & injuries. That player can only play if less than 28 are available.

• The 20-player pool must be selected from aligned state league/2nd tier playing list, NGA/Northern Academy or designated standalone state league listed players.

• If a club has less than 30 AFL listed players available, but this is not due to any player being subject to COVID Health & Safety Protocols, then the club will NOT be able to activate a COVID Contingency player.

On 3/3/2022 at 8:17 PM, Cards13 said:

NFL has removed all covid protocols, it’s just business as usual in the US now. 

Yep, only 500+ per day dying now. All good.


Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

Featured Content

  • NON-MFC: Round 13

    Follow all the action from every Round 13 clash excluding the Dees as the 2025 AFL Premiership Season rolls on. With Melbourne playing in the final match of the round on King's Birthday, all eyes turn to the rest of the competition. Who are you tipping to win? And more importantly, which results best serve the Demons’ finals aspirations? Join the discussion and keep track of the matches that could shape the ladder and impact our run to September.

      • Thanks
    • 62 replies
  • PREVIEW: Collingwood

    Having convincingly defeated last year’s premier and decisively outplayed the runner-up with 8.2 in the final quarter, nothing epitomized the Melbourne Football Club’s performance more than its 1.12 final half, particularly the eight consecutive behinds in the last term, against a struggling St Kilda team in the midst of a dismal losing streak. Just when stability and consistency were anticipated within the Demon ranks, they delivered a quintessential performance marked by instability and ill-conceived decisions, with the most striking aspect being their inaccuracy in kicking for goal, which suggested a lack of preparation (instead of sleeping in their hotel in Alice, were they having a night on the turps) rather than a well-rested team. Let’s face it - this kicking disease that makes them look like raw amateurs is becoming a millstone around the team’s neck.

      • Thanks
    • 1 reply
  • CASEY: Sydney

    The Casey Demons were always expected to emerge victorious in their matchup against the lowly-ranked Sydney Swans at picturesque Tramway Oval, situated in the shadows of the SCG in Moore Park. They dominated the proceedings in the opening two and a half quarters of the game but had little to show for it. This was primarily due to their own sloppy errors in a low-standard game that produced a number of crowded mauls reminiscent of the rugby game popular in old Sydney Town. However, when the Swans tired, as teams often do when they turn games into ugly defensive contests, Casey lifted the standard of its own play and … it was off to the races. Not to nearby Randwick but to a different race with an objective of piling on goal after goal on the way to a mammoth victory. At the 25-minute mark of the third quarter, the Demons held a slender 14-point lead over the Swans, who are ahead on the ladder of only the previous week's opposition, the ailing Bullants. Forty minutes later, they had more than fully compensated for the sloppiness of their earlier play with a decisive 94-point victory, that culminated in a rousing finish which yielded thirteen unanswered goals. Kicks hit their targets, the ball found itself going through the middle and every player made a contribution.

      • Thanks
      • Like
    • 1 reply
  • REPORT: St. Kilda

    Hands up if you thought, like me, at half-time in yesterday’s game at TIO Traeger Park, Alice Springs that Melbourne’s disposal around the ground and, in particular, its kicking inaccuracy in front of the goals couldn’t get any worse. Well, it did. And what’s even more damning for the Melbourne Football Club is that the game against St Kilda and its resurgence from the bottomless pit of its miserable start to the season wasn’t just lost through poor conversion for goal but rather in the 15 minutes when the entire team went into a slumber and was mugged by the out-of-form Saints. Their six goals two behinds (one goal less than the Demons managed for the whole game) weaved a path of destruction from which they were unable to recover. Ross Lyon’s astute use of pressure to contain the situation once they had asserted their grip on the game, and Melbourne’s self-destructive wastefulness, assured that outcome. The old adage about the insanity of repeatedly doing something and expecting a different result, was out there. Two years ago, the score line in Melbourne’s loss to the Giants at this same ground was 5 goals 15 behinds - a ratio of one goal per four scoring shots - was perfectly replicated with yesterday’s 7 goals 21 behinds. 
    This has been going on for a while and opens up a number of questions. I’ll put forward a few that come to mind from this performance. The obvious first question is whether the club can find a suitable coach to instruct players on proper kicking techniques or is this a skill that can no longer be developed at this stage of the development of our playing group? Another concern is the team's ability to counter an opponent's dominance during a run on as exemplified by the Saints in the first quarter. Did the Demons underestimate their opponents, considering St Kilda's goals during this period were scored by relatively unknown forwards? Furthermore, given the modest attendance of 6,721 at TIO Traeger Park and the team's poor past performances at this venue, is it prudent to prioritize financial gain over potentially sacrificing valuable premiership points by relinquishing home ground advantage, notwithstanding the cultural significance of the team's connection to the Red Centre? 

      • Thanks
    • 4 replies
  • PREGAME: Collingwood

    After a disappointing loss in Alice Springs the Demons return to the MCG to take on the Magpies in the annual King's Birthday Big Freeze for MND game. Who comes in and who goes out?

      • Thanks
    • 303 replies
  • PODCAST: St. Kilda

    The Demonland Podcast will air LIVE on Monday, 2nd June @ 8:00pm. Join Binman, George & I as we have a chat with former Demon ruckman Jeff White about his YouTube channel First Use where he dissects ruck setups and contests. We'll then discuss the Dees disappointing loss to the Saints in Alice Springs.
    Your questions and comments are a huge part of our podcast so please post anything you want to ask or say below and we'll give you a shout out on the show.
    Listen LIVE: https://demonland.com/

      • Thanks
    • 47 replies