Injury/Covid infection Update Thread 20/21

[CCTV]

1-At this stage, it's something of a moot point whether either (Trump rallies or BLM protests) played any role in making the spread worse and/or increasing deaths.

1 the point of posting trump v blm rallies, or blm v anti-lockdown rallies in both the usa/uk(obs no trump rallies) is to demonstrate how medical/scientific people have provided separate analysis of similar events with wildly different conclusions.
It would seem that the predictor variable would be that if it's to the right, it's bad and kills people, yet if it's to the left, nothing to see or even worth the risk of death to others.
I'm not sure how an objective criteria can be applied to actions based on the political ideation.

On the one hand, some of the hardest hit areas in the US in recent weeks and have seen the biggest increases in infections actually saw MORE support for Trump at the elections and in the final vote tally - and not less.
Which would imply that his supporters simply didn't care whether or not the pandemic was having the effect it was claimed to be having nor if it was getting worse).

On the other hand, areas that saw a lot of the BLM protests (i.e. urban areas and the larger dense cities) are typified by the kind of demographics that wouldn't have supported Trump regardless of which way the pendulum swung in terms of how bad the virus infections were getting or if they was improvement.

2) I'm not sure why you are referring to trump in both cases. I'm not sure I agree with your implications regarding the recent weeks of covid related stats. But I'd need more time to ponder on the matter. Is it a confounding variable to an otherwise natural spread of disease ? Over here the spread to more rural less normally connected counties has occurred, I'm not sure that has anything to do with Trump supporters or BLM protests.

And most importantly of course,....the virus simply doesn't, and didn't care.
Whether you're a Trump supporter or not.
Or whether you're an adherent of the Church of the Great Spaghetti Monster in the Sky.

3) True. I'm kind of laughing at this point about your (minor dont read too much) defining what I'd deem/guess your other first and consistently.

One could be a religious church attending person wondering how you can't get to church, but others can buy weed, drink booze and access abortion services whilst responsibly adhering to lockdown measures.
Can't go to mass and pray or sing, but can chant at a BLM protest.

[CCTV]

]It is clear that the day after the declaration the world can celebrate the Great win by “science” - which will become a gigantic cash cow for big pharma in the west

CC you are completely correct.

We might finally have found a way out of the Covid Nightmare.. who would have guessed.?

Life will start returning to normal by spring, says government adviser after vaccine news


https://www.independent.co.uk/news/h...-b1719683.html


Well aren’t we just so very lucky...?

Back to normal in Spring, great news. Concerts, vaccine announced, back to the old normal. Great news

[Balinkay]

Back to normal in Spring, great news. Concerts, vaccine announced, back to the old normal. Great news

Weren't there those who said something similar about the spring past?

[teesred]

Bloody awful news on Trent and Thiago hmm - sounds like one that could run and run... the injury that is..

Bloody hell - we have done so well on the injury front for so long - it was always likely to come back with a vengeance, but feels like we are getting more than our fair share right now.

What's been said about Thiago?
I read that Joyce tweet about Trent being out for 4 weeks. All of our luck with injuries the last few years is kicking our arses now.

[Steveo]

What's been said about Thiago?
I read that Joyce tweet about Trent being out for 4 weeks. All of our luck with injuries the last few years is kicking our arses now.

Not sure tees but saw dicko’s breakdown of injuries - Thiago’s return prognosis as “unknown”... and it does seem consistent with the increasing amount of games he is missing with no projected recovery time frame.


Sadly our fortune on the injury front cannot be overstated. Something I highlighted at the end of the CL winning season and the reason for my concern when we didn’t add like we belatedly did this summer. I actually said - it might galvanise the team AND we might even win the league BUT it is a huge mistake - players will suffer..

Remember we fooked off all domestic cups since 2017/18 too - so were competing on just 2 fronts. The first team squad was always thin in crucial areas. .

Summer 2019 - the summer we had to “pay the bills“. That resting on laurels..That is where we took the piss out of the current crop. They have been over used. The only real surprise is that the injuries didn’t pile up this time last year. Our fitness team must be superb BUT players are human beings and it so easily could.

With Thiago I sense the slightest whiff of a panic buy ( I absolutely love the transfer but ) - a realisation that the midfield has been neglected a bit in terms of technical ability over athleticism and miles covered - a need to change the type of football especially for certain games - sadly he isn’t a young fella and is a little injury prone.

Let’s hope he can get fit and play a key role - boy do we need him.

[teesred]

Agree fully. There was definitely concern over his injury record. We have more than our fair share of treatment table residents, some of which need moving on in my opinion.

[southernboy]

Liverpool play down claims Trent Alexander-Arnold could be out for a month

https://www.thisisanfield.com/2020/11/liverpool-play-down-claims-trent-alexander-arnold-could-be-out-for-a-month/

The only person I heard giving any kind of timeframe was Pep when he said 4 to 6 weeks... as if he knew. The club have said nothing regarding the scan results. I also can't find anything saying how Thiago will be out for.

[Balinkay]

I heard 2-4 weeks.

[ianlfc]

Trent like Virgil is another one who's played near every week for the past few years.
The rest might do him the world of good.

[CCTV]

I did not say that.

I specifically said that the Pfizer CEO ( Albert Bourla) said (in an interview on CNN, that sadly is not available on their site and therefore I can't link to, but also in a memo to employees linked below) that he did not want the vaccine nor its development by their company politicised.
By either side.

That's not the same as saying he did not want Trump to get the credit. These are two separate and different things.
The inference that Trump would try to claim credit if they released the news before the election goes without saying and is backed by what he's done in the past with other issues.

Whether or not he specifically wanted to avoid that particular outcome (Trump claiming credit for it) by doing so, is up for speculation as it's not what he said -....directly or specifically - nor did I suggest it was.

The logic for why should be obvious.
Politicising this (or any) vaccine runs the risk of undermining public confidence in it wherein half the population (or thereabouts) that love the president would gladly take it while the other half that hates him wouldn't trust it enough to take it, thus undermining its efficacy since that depends on as many people in the population taking the vaccine to achieve some level of herd immunity.

I did speculate and guess (and clearly stated I was doing so) that the release was timed for after the election to avoid tying it to Trump (who has been promising a vaccine before the election all along) to avoid thus unintentionally politicizing it whether or not they believed he deserved any credit for it, or that the perception that he does would be
mistakenly inferred by the public.
Again, you risk undermining the efficacy of the vaccine if it's tied (in the eyes of the public) to a clearly polarising figure such as Trump with stark credibility and trust issues.


Links:-

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/01/pfizer-ceo-criticizes-us-politicizing-coronavirus-vaccine-processsays-us-presidential-debate-was-disappointing-in-memo-to-employees-that-.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=99a7T6--cVc&ab_channel=CNBCTelevision
https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2020-10-01/pfizer-ceo-pushes-back-against-trump-claim-on-vaccine-timing
https://www.pharmamanufacturing.com/industrynews/2020/pfizer-ceo-expresses-frustration-with-vaccine-politicization/

Heres a piece from CNN...

"Jansen was quoted Monday by The New York Times as saying, "We were never part of the Warp Speed. We have never taken any money from the U.S. government, or from anyone."
The real story is more nuanced than both Pence's tweet and Jansen's comment made it sound.
Facts First: Pfizer's vaccine progress is certainly not solely attributable to the Trump administration's Operation Warp Speed public-private partnership program. But it was not accurate for Pfizer to suggest that it is operating entirely apart from Operation Warp Speed; the company has a major agreement to sell at least 100 million doses of its vaccine to the federal government, and Pfizer acknowledged in a Monday statement to CNN that it is in fact "participating" in Operation Warp Speed through this deal. Also, at least some independent experts say the Trump administration deserves partial credit for Pfizer's progress."

3 of 4 experts supported that last assertion, there was a Harvard expert who disagreed.
The report documents the 1.95billion dollar agreement for 100 million vaccines and states that these Pfizers partner BioNTech did receive significant funding from the German government and elsewhere reports of funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foudnatiom.