NBA protocols/Covid/Vaccine - Discussion thread

[Hsker4Life]

Nope.

https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/148/3/e2020042929

Its super wordy but let me know where you have questions or concerns with the compiled data

Ok.. whats your question? I like that RSV was included, certainly not to increase numbers, but go on

Also a source would be nice. I showed you mine.. based on 250k COVID cases in people under the age of 18 and over 2 million influenza cases.

The chart shows flu numbers separate from RSV numbers. I’m here if you need any more assistance.

[CIN-C-STAR]

Non-compliance is the only way out of this for the unvaxxed. Stand strong, make them physically assault you at your work and catch it all on camera. American's still have fundamental rights in the constitution, including freedom of movement, and right to privacy. If you are going to take away millions of dollars from me, you better believe I am going down swinging.

The government has had the power to mandate vaccines since the Supreme Court decision Jacobsen v Massachusetts in 1905.
And the mandate the Jacobson decision rests on was much more Draconian than what we are seeing today -- it was a local health mandate in Cambridge that ALL members of the public had to get vaccinated. Period.
Jacobson was a preacher with a history of adverse reactions to vaccines.
Still lost.
Check out Wickard v Filburn. You literally cant even grow your own food on your own property for your own use if the government doesn't want you to. By not having to buy the food at a store, you are impacting interstate commerce and subject to federal gov regulation.
Buck v Bell, the gov can have people sterilized if they deem it's for the common good.
Etc.
I think maybe a lot of people are just finding out they aren't really as free as they thought they were. All that land of the free stuff has always been propaganda. It's just that usually the encroachments on civil liberties only affect minorities and the poor, whereas the masks and vax requirements are affecting everyone.

[Peregrine01]

Read on Twitter

The only large scale randomized control trial suggests natural immunity is stronger (though perhaps variance exists): https://www.science.org/content/article/having-sars-cov-2-once-confers-much-greater-immunity-vaccine-vaccination-remains-vital

"In one analysis, comparing more than 32,000 people in the health system, the risk of developing symptomatic COVID-19 was 27 times higher among the vaccinated, and the risk of hospitalization eight times higher."

"“The differences are huge,” says Thålin, although she cautions that the numbers for infections and other events analyzed for the comparisons were “small.” For instance, the higher hospitalization rate in the 32,000-person analysis was based on just eight hospitalizations in a vaccinated group and one in a previously infected group. And the 13-fold increased risk of infection in the same analysis was based on just 238 infections in the vaccinated population, less than 1.5% of the more than 16,000 people, versus 19 reinfections among a similar number of people who once had SARS-CoV-2."

2 problems with this:

1) "Perhaps variance exists"? It of course exists. Immune systems are not all built the same, the same strength, the same scope.. there is an insanely large variance. Just like height, shade of skin, shade of hair color... its closer to being unique than it is finite.

2) This above study - assuming all the science is above board - would be easily repeatable data that most of medicine would get behind, as a strong natural immunity, at least relative to the vaccine, would obviously be a preferable option. So why is it when we zoom out from this study, this isnt what's being seen? Why isn't this repeatable? From the article:

In another analysis, the researchers compared more than 14,000 people who had a confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and were still unvaccinated with an equivalent number of previously infected people who received one dose of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine. The team found that the unvaccinated group was twice as likely to be reinfected as the singly vaccinated.

So I take issue with the presentation of this study being the *only* one when they literally reference a conflicting one in the article.

I think the idea is that vaccination + previous infection confers the best protection.

[FNQ]

Ok.. whats your question? I like that RSV was included, certainly not to increase numbers, but go on

Also a source would be nice. I showed you mine.. based on 250k COVID cases in people under the age of 18 and over 2 million influenza cases.

The chart shows flu numbers separate from RSV numbers. I’m here if you need any more assistance.

My bad there - I guess the death aspect is all you were looking at, not the hospitalizations

Again, source? I'm sure its legitimate, not like some random substack or something. Because to compile that kind of data and have it be legitimate there'd have to be some sort of peer reviewed study, right?

Its just so wildly different than all the legitimate studies I've seen from my former employer and all the peer reviewed studies

[Harry Garris]

I don't think it's fair to call them stupid. I have close relatives who are strongly against getting vaccinated that aren't stupid people. People who want everyone to get vaccinated have to understand the motivations of those who are resisting it. In my family's case it is a deep seeded fear and mistrust of the federal government that is the primary cause of their resistance. And people calling them stupid or ignorant has only caused them to dig in their heels more and become further entrenched in their beliefs.

I don't have the answer for how to open up real dialogue with guys like Wiggins and Beal, but if the goal is to get them vaccinated, insulting them is having the opposite of the desired result.

Lucky for them nobody thought like them when the polio and smallpox vaccines were developed.

The mistrust and fear of the Feds is odd to me, unless these people are going to completely live off the grid. If not, the Feds are pretty much in your life whether you like it or not.

People who get the polio and smallpox vaccines don't get infected by and spread smallpox and polio!

Jesus, you vax crusaders get this vaccine which you say protects you, but then are afraid you might get sick from unvaxxed people. Then you demand they get a vax shot that you obviously have zero confidence in. It's insanity.

The vaccine doesn't prevent you from getting covid. It prevents you from a serious infection that can lead to long term hospitalization or death. I'm aware that there are two extremes to this issue and it is easy to find people on the extreme pro vax side who also use fear mongering tactics to try to get everyone to get the jab, and that is wrong. The vaccine also isn't a miracle drug that would immediately stop the pandemic if only everyone took it. This is why if you want to know the reality of an issue you can't look at the extremes. Extreme political opinions are driven by anger and emotion and hold nothing of real substance.

But at this point the results are undeniable that vaccination makes a marked improvement on health outcomes. There's a large body of evidence as over 150 million people in the US are fully vaccinated and many more hundreds of millions are worldwide. Covid really hasn't been a big issue for that portion of the population. That's not a politically slanted opinion, that's just what the results of vaccination has been. Pretty much exactly what health experts predicted going into this thing.

[FNQ]

Is that all you got?

I mean, its a far better counter than "I dont like one of their other opinions, so this hard data you're presenting doesn't count"

Because what I'm showing is that you are working backwards from the answer you want it to be in both cases, and then denying it if the data doesnt line up with your misguided hopes. Whereas I'm just following the data.

Do you deny that blacks are by far the most against this vax? And thus they will be by far the most punished by these mandates? Doesn't that qualify as racism with the BLM crowd?

https://www.kff.org/coronavirus-covid-19/issue-brief/latest-data-on-covid-19-vaccinations-race-ethnicity/

No, I'm fine with data, it just has to be legitimate. Like the PhD thing.. is not.

If you perceive a public health mandate as punishment, then sure, call it racist. But that's giving credence to the opinion that public health laws are punitive, when they are not. Private businesses and local authorities have the ability to enforce health regulations. These mandates are location or job specific and are not punitive to any race, gender, religion or anything else. Glad to see you're anti-racism though. I like Kaep as well..

[Hsker4Life]

https://www.news-medical.net/news/20210614/Study-suggests-COVID-19-in-children-is-milder-than-the-flu.aspx

[FNQ]

https://www.news-medical.net/news/20210614/Study-suggests-COVID-19-in-children-is-milder-than-the-flu.aspx

The study included 175 children less than 18 years old who had COVID-19 confirmed by RT-PCR tests. The children were hospitalized between March and November 2020. The study also included 69 hospitalized patients who were diagnosed with influenza A or B between January 2016 and November 2020. The authors analyzed their medical records to conduct their study.

And from mine:

A total of 242 158 children and adolescents diagnosed and 9769 hospitalized with COVID-19 and 2 084 180 diagnosed with influenza were studied. Comorbidities including neurodevelopmental disorders, heart disease, and cancer were more common among those hospitalized with versus diagnosed with COVID-19. Dyspnea, bronchiolitis, anosmia, and gastrointestinal symptoms were more common in COVID-19 than influenza. In-hospital prevalent treatments for COVID-19 included repurposed medications (<10%) and adjunctive therapies: systemic corticosteroids (6.8%–7.6%), famotidine (9.0%–28.1%), and antithrombotics such as aspirin (2.0%–21.4%), heparin (2.2%–18.1%), and enoxaparin (2.8%–14.8%). Hospitalization was observed in 0.3% to 1.3% of the cohort diagnosed with COVID-19, with undetectable (n < 5 per database) 30-day fatality. Thirty-day outcomes including pneumonia and hypoxemia were more frequent in COVID-19 than influenza.

Your odds were based on 250 cases, total. So clearly, a local study done in geographically stable area, measuring a small amount and also using a very suspect window of data for COVID

EDIT: Actually, even 250 was an overstatement!

This retrospective study included 164 children with COVID-19, as well as 46 children with Influenza. The two groups were compared with respect to clinical and laboratory parameters and the rates of intensive care and mechanical ventilation requirement.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ijcp.14466

So this study, which somehow decided to throw in hospitalization numbers when 100% of the cases studied were hospitalized in the ICU, was built off of only 200 people regionally.

[FNQ]

https://www.news-medical.net/news/20210614/Study-suggests-COVID-19-in-children-is-milder-than-the-flu.aspx

Also, your image from before? Its not listed there. Whered you get it?

[First Step]

Non-compliance is the only way out of this for the unvaxxed. Stand strong, make them physically assault you at your work and catch it all on camera. American's still have fundamental rights in the constitution, including freedom of movement, and right to privacy. If you are going to take away millions of dollars from me, you better believe I am going down swinging.

The government has had the power to mandate vaccines since the Supreme Court decision Jacobsen v Massachusetts in 1905.
And the mandate the Jacobson decision rests on was much more Draconian than what we are seeing today -- it was a local health mandate in Cambridge that ALL members of the public had to get vaccinated. Period.
Jacobson was a preacher with a history of adverse reactions to vaccines.
Still lost.
Check out Wickard v Filburn. You literally cant even grow your own food on your own property for your own use if the government doesn't want you to. By not having to buy the food at a store, you are impacting interstate commerce and subject to federal gov regulation.
Buck v Bell, the gov can have people sterilized if they deem it's for the common good.
Etc.
I think maybe a lot of people are just finding out they aren't really as free as they thought they were. All that land of the free stuff has always been propaganda. It's just that usually the encroachments on civil liberties only affect minorities and the poor, whereas the masks and vax requirements are affecting everyone.

The point is the punishment for violating a vaccine mandate is not criminal and the consequence is only a ticket. I'm not saying that mandates aren't a thing, but rather because of their civil nature, you can ignore them without much resistance outside a fine. It's like parking in a handicap spot... at the end of the day you can do it, but you might get socially shunned and fined. Other than that, nobody can stop you for doing it.

Since the NBA does not require an NBA player to be vaccinated to work, Kyrie would only be subjected to state punishment for violating the mandate, which appears to be is a 1-5k fine.

Kyrie can say "give me the ticket, I will fight it in court, and don't deny me my right to earn a living until I'm found guilty to pay the fine". The NBA would then be in a position to unlawfully prevent Kyrie from playing

[FNQ]

I think the idea is that vaccination + previous infection confers the best protection.

Well absolutely, I think most people would agree with that. I'm only talking about the assertion that you can say, in a general sense, that natural immunity > vaccine immunity, or even vice versa, simply because of the wide scope of outcomes from the natural immunity side

[Pointgod]

Non-compliance is the only way out of this for the unvaxxed. Stand strong, make them physically assault you at your work and catch it all on camera. American's still have fundamental rights in the constitution, including freedom of movement, and right to privacy. If you are going to take away millions of dollars from me, you better believe I am going down swinging.

You think that Kyrie showing up violating state and local laws makes Kyrie look good? You’re in your own little world

[First Step]

Non-compliance is the only way out of this for the unvaxxed. Stand strong, make them physically assault you at your work and catch it all on camera. American's still have fundamental rights in the constitution, including freedom of movement, and right to privacy. If you are going to take away millions of dollars from me, you better believe I am going down swinging.

You think that Kyrie showing up violating state and local laws makes Kyrie look good? You’re in your own little world

If you pay me, I will stay home. If you want to doc my salary 41 times, I am taking a stand and standing up for my rights.

[Curmudgeon]

The point is the punishment for violating a vaccine mandate is not criminal and the consequence is only a ticket. I'm not saying that mandates aren't a thing, but rather because of their civil nature, you can ignore them without much resistance outside a fine. It's like parking in a handicap spot... at the end of the day you can do it, but you might get socially shunned and fined. Other than that, nobody can stop you for doing it.

Since the NBA does not require an NBA player to be vaccinated to work, Kyrie would only be subjected to state punishment for violating the mandate, which appears to be is a 1-5k fine.

Kyrie can say "give me the ticket, I will fight it in court, and don't deny me my right to earn a living until I'm found guilty to pay the fine". The NBA would then be in a position to unlawfully prevent Kyrie from playing

No, the city would go after the team for letting him play and pull the occupancy permit for the building. It would be like closing a restaurant for noncompliance with the health codes.

[CIN-C-STAR]

Non-compliance is the only way out of this for the unvaxxed. Stand strong, make them physically assault you at your work and catch it all on camera. American's still have fundamental rights in the constitution, including freedom of movement, and right to privacy. If you are going to take away millions of dollars from me, you better believe I am going down swinging.

The government has had the power to mandate vaccines since the Supreme Court decision Jacobsen v Massachusetts in 1905.
And the mandate the Jacobson decision rests on was much more Draconian than what we are seeing today -- it was a local health mandate in Cambridge that ALL members of the public had to get vaccinated. Period.
Jacobson was a preacher with a history of adverse reactions to vaccines.
Still lost.
Check out Wickard v Filburn. You literally cant even grow your own food on your own property for your own use if the government doesn't want you to. By not having to buy the food at a store, you are impacting interstate commerce and subject to federal gov regulation.
Buck v Bell, the gov can have people sterilized if they deem it's for the common good.
Etc.
I think maybe a lot of people are just finding out they aren't really as free as they thought they were. All that land of the free stuff has always been propaganda. It's just that usually the encroachments on civil liberties only affect minorities and the poor, whereas the masks and vax requirements are affecting everyone.

The point is the punishment for violating a vaccine mandate is not criminal and the consequence is only a ticket. I'm not saying that mandates aren't a thing, but rather because of their civil nature, you can ignore them without much resistance outside a fine. It's like parking in a handicap spot... at the end of the day you can do it, but you might get socially shunned and fined. Other than that, nobody can stop you for doing it.

Since the NBA does not require an NBA player to be vaccinated to work, Kyrie would only be subjected to state punishment for violating the mandate, which appears to be is a 1-5k fine.

Kyrie can say "give me the ticket, I will fight it in court, and don't deny me my right to earn a living until I'm found guilty to pay the fine". The NBA would then be in a position to unlawfully prevent Kyrie from playing

First off, they can do more than ticket you for parking in a handicap spot. They can impound your car.
Similarly, if you are asked to leave a building you are not allowed to be in and refuse, that's criminal trespassing. If you don't leave you can be forcefully removed from the property.
The Nets lease the Barclay Center btw, not own it, and I'm sure the owners want to be in compliance with local laws and I'm sure the lease agreement requires users to be in compliance with local laws and health regulations.
So, again, your idea rests entirely on awful legal advice that ignores multiple real aspects of the situation.
It's just a dumb idea no matter your stance on vaccines dude, sorry.

[haosmoove]

Non-compliance is the only way out of this for the unvaxxed. Stand strong, make them physically assault you at your work and catch it all on camera. American's still have fundamental rights in the constitution, including freedom of movement, and right to privacy. If you are going to take away millions of dollars from me, you better believe I am going down swinging.

You think that Kyrie showing up violating state and local laws makes Kyrie look good? You’re in your own little world

If you pay me, I will stay home. If you want to doc my salary 41 times, I am taking a stand and standing up for my rights.

First of all, if you are breaking the law while employed, it only gives your employer the right to revoke your contract and your pay.

You clearly have misunderstanding on freedom, it's caveat on not infringing the freedom of others. For example, I can't show up and stay in your house uninvited because I have "freedom of movement". Same with unvaxxed players don't have the freedom to spread virus to everyone else in the building.

[First Step]

You think that Kyrie showing up violating state and local laws makes Kyrie look good? You’re in your own little world

If you pay me, I will stay home. If you want to doc my salary 41 times, I am taking a stand and standing up for my rights.

First of all, if you are breaking the law while employed, it only gives your employer the right to revoke your contract and your pay.

You clearly have misunderstanding on freedom, it's caveat on not infringing the freedom of others. For example, I can't show up and stay in your house uninvited because I have "freedom of movement". Same with unvaxxed players don't have the freedom to spread virus to everyone else in the building.

Except Kyrie wouldn't be "breaking the law while employed". He is not even breaking the law. Law requires legislation between the house and the senate. A mandate is a power granted to the governor.

When you enter someone's private property uninvited, that is a crime, and you do not have a right to be there. I think it is you that has the misunderstanding here.

They want to trick Kyriie into voluntarily not showing up to games so they don't have to pay him. I have a hard time believing these mandates will stand up to the scrutiny of the supreme court. To deny someone the ability to monetize their labor, without offering any alternatives to the vaccine seems like a gross encroachment on fundamental rights. Kyrie could easily prove he's not infected through a test.

[dhsilv2]

You guys are aware that by far the most vax resistant group is the black community, right? Because through experience they (rightly) don't trust the government. And breaking things down by education level, the most resistant are people with PhDs. The next most are just HS graduates. The people in the middle are just eating this crap up. Just goes to show that a little education is a dangerous thing.

If you believe a "study" for an online poll where respondents self identified education level and even then it is indicating that ~20% of a population of 1% of the country are in this "most skeptical" group.

I'm sure you just lap up any studies that agree with your beliefs.

I don't generally go into a topic with an opinion. Nobody's perfect, but no I don't go around looking for studies that agree with my beliefs. That's idiotic. I also don't take study like this which is tracking changes in vaccine hesitation and then focus on one obscure tiny data set which is what has been done with that one.

[Hsker4Life]

https://www.news-medical.net/news/20210614/Study-suggests-COVID-19-in-children-is-milder-than-the-flu.aspx

Also, your image from before? Its not listed there. Whered you get it?

https://docs.google.com/document/u/0/d/1bg53MVk44zktdNZWsgppJ98F6qoKFej3HJxL2CiEbgw/mobilebasic

I think we can agree that major complications in children from COVID are rare. Coupling that with masks in schools not significantly slowing the spread of COVID amongst students, forcing children (as young as 3 years old) to wear masks is senseless.

[Curmudgeon]

LOL, Maybe the Nets can go back to Exit 15W in New Jersey to avoid the NYC health codes.

Let's make it clear. This isn't about Kyrie, who is just an attention whore. It's about the NETS. The NETS are the ones that have to comply with city ordinances, which do indeed have the force of law. If you don't believe me, try opening a liquor store or a restaurant without a license and see what happens. The city isn't going to give a ticket to the chef. It's going to close the restaurant. The police are going to come by with a big roll of yellow tape and cordon it off.