How much will Coronavirus (COVID-19) impact Aston Villa's season?

[Footy-Vill]

The South America international in September October Novemebr as red list countries meaning Martinez , Buendia, Luiz will miss fixtures as will Bailey because he has to go to red list countries Costa Rica and Mexico. Plus Carribbean countries sent to be red listed anyway.
Though Premier League chiefs are lobbying to the government in an attempt to receive quarantine exemptions
We could see players miss up to 6 matches 2 in each of
September, October and November because of the international matches

[ChicagoLion]

You are aware you can catch it off someone vaccinated too right? So you could be sitting next to bob who hasnt been vaccinated or jill who has and you could get it off jill.

The point of the vaccine is to stop you from getting very sick. It doesnt unfortunately stop passing it on. So for me i have no issue with someone non vaccinated being allowed in.

But it significantly reduces transmission.
So people who decide not to be vaccinated should not expect to endanger others.

Not attending social events (particularly indoor ones) significantly reduces transmission. Does that mean we shouldn't expect social events to be allowed? Why is this no longer seen as such a moral issue (where once it was) because of vaccination? Should we be castigating those who choose to drink in pubs to a similar degree as those who choose not to get vaccinated? It seems the moral high ground has shifted from self-isolation to vaccination, but I'm not entirely clear why.

if you choose not to be vaccinated when you can, then you have a higher potential to transmit the disease to someone that could die or become seriously ill.

Can you show us the percentage of how much more that is then as you seem to know everything?

Risso posted a link which you obviously ignored, there is plenty of scientific research out there, but people like you are not going to be persuaded because you have already made up your mind.

[Drummond]

The issue for me is that the people who clearly want to carry on with life 'as normal' are the ones who won't wear a mask because they don't have to, rather than thinking about why they mightn't. I choose to wear a mask still, whenever I'm in a busy place. So I will be when I'm at Villa Park on Saturday, whether that's in the shop, in the concourses or moving about. When I'm in my seat, I'll make a choice as it will be outside and there will be far less risk as a result.

I still wear a mask in shops, cafes and at work in the office (until I'm sat at my desk which has a window nearby and is 3m+ away from anyone else.

I am vaccinated, not because I particularly want to have a needle stuck in my arm but because I know it's the right thing to do. I'm getting closer to being in the higher risk group as I'm 50 (holy fuck) but the reality is, instead of fighting for my rights, I think about other people and society as a whole because I'm not a selfish twat.

The vaccine is safe and in my view, everyone eligible should get it. It is absolutely their choice, but if they don't they should recognise there are other people making choices too, and that might be the choice to not let an unvaccinated person near them. You can't have it all in this life and all that's being suggested is to make a small sacrifice for the greater good.

The studies are clear, the vaccination reduces the risk of catching the thing, reduces the effects if you do catch it, reduces the risk of transmission and therefore reduces the risk to everyone, not just the person receiving it. The side-effects are minimal and for a very limited period of time. So if you don't want to do it, then frankly you don't deserve the nice things in life either.

[Demitri_C]

You are aware you can catch it off someone vaccinated too right? So you could be sitting next to bob who hasnt been vaccinated or jill who has and you could get it off jill.

The point of the vaccine is to stop you from getting very sick. It doesnt unfortunately stop passing it on. So for me i have no issue with someone non vaccinated being allowed in.

But it significantly reduces transmission.
So people who decide not to be vaccinated should not expect to endanger others.

Not attending social events (particularly indoor ones) significantly reduces transmission. Does that mean we shouldn't expect social events to be allowed? Why is this no longer seen as such a moral issue (where once it was) because of vaccination? Should we be castigating those who choose to drink in pubs to a similar degree as those who choose not to get vaccinated? It seems the moral high ground has shifted from self-isolation to vaccination, but I'm not entirely clear why.

if you choose not to be vaccinated when you can, then you have a higher potential to transmit the disease to someone that could die or become seriously ill.

Can you show us the percentage of how much more that is then as you seem to know everything?

Risso posted a link which you obviously ignored, there is plenty of scientific research out there, but people like you are not going to be persuaded because you have already made up your mind.

Speculation on your part as i did read it

Lets keep this on subject

[Ad@m]

Having the vaccine reduces the chances of transmission, so the more people have it, the lower the chances of transmission. It can’t be eliminated at present, but it is the responsible thing to reduce transmission as much as possible.

By insisting that everyone who can have the vaccine does so before going to Villa Park, the club would be offering the most protection they can to those who cannot have the vaccine.

The people who cannot have the vaccine are the ones who should not be discriminated against. They actually have a protected characteristic under the Disability Discrimination Act and Sexual Discrimination Act (pregnant women) - therefore the club potentially could be considered to have broken discrimination laws by not doing all they could to protect them, and expecting them to ‘stay away if they are worried’.

People who have health vulnerabilities are entitled to be offered the most viable choice they can be given, to have risk the risk reduced as much as possible, because they don’t have the choice to take the vaccine. People who won’t take the vaccine have taken their choice, and if the club decide they can’t come in, then they will still have a choice - to take the vaccine or stay away.

The other bit to mention on this is the staff.  We've focused on the impact on fans who can't have the vaccine but for staff, especially those who work in indoor parts of the ground, be that the concourse areas or the hospitality sections, it would be a much more responsible stance for the Villa to take to require proof of vaccination for all fans attending (where possible) rather than expose those staff to lots of unvaccinated people.  Especially as the Villa have a general obligation to ensure the health & safety of anyone employed at the ground.

[ChicagoLion]

You are aware you can catch it off someone vaccinated too right? So you could be sitting next to bob who hasnt been vaccinated or jill who has and you could get it off jill.

The point of the vaccine is to stop you from getting very sick. It doesnt unfortunately stop passing it on. So for me i have no issue with someone non vaccinated being allowed in.

But it significantly reduces transmission.
So people who decide not to be vaccinated should not expect to endanger others.

Not attending social events (particularly indoor ones) significantly reduces transmission. Does that mean we shouldn't expect social events to be allowed? Why is this no longer seen as such a moral issue (where once it was) because of vaccination? Should we be castigating those who choose to drink in pubs to a similar degree as those who choose not to get vaccinated? It seems the moral high ground has shifted from self-isolation to vaccination, but I'm not entirely clear why.

if you choose not to be vaccinated when you can, then you have a higher potential to transmit the disease to someone that could die or become seriously ill.

Can you show us the percentage of how much more that is then as you seem to know everything?

Risso posted a link which you obviously ignored, there is plenty of scientific research out there, but people like you are not going to be persuaded because you have already made up your mind.

Speculation on your part as i did read it

Lets keep this on subject

there are lots of genuine scientific based studies out there.
None has come up with the idea that vaccines do not reduce transmission.
But of course you know better.

[Demitri_C]

You are aware you can catch it off someone vaccinated too right? So you could be sitting next to bob who hasnt been vaccinated or jill who has and you could get it off jill.

The point of the vaccine is to stop you from getting very sick. It doesnt unfortunately stop passing it on. So for me i have no issue with someone non vaccinated being allowed in.

But it significantly reduces transmission.
So people who decide not to be vaccinated should not expect to endanger others.

Not attending social events (particularly indoor ones) significantly reduces transmission. Does that mean we shouldn't expect social events to be allowed? Why is this no longer seen as such a moral issue (where once it was) because of vaccination? Should we be castigating those who choose to drink in pubs to a similar degree as those who choose not to get vaccinated? It seems the moral high ground has shifted from self-isolation to vaccination, but I'm not entirely clear why.

if you choose not to be vaccinated when you can, then you have a higher potential to transmit the disease to someone that could die or become seriously ill.

Can you show us the percentage of how much more that is then as you seem to know everything?

Risso posted a link which you obviously ignored, there is plenty of scientific research out there, but people like you are not going to be persuaded because you have already made up your mind.

Speculation on your part as i did read it

Lets keep this on subject

there are lots of genuine scientific based studies out there.
None has come up with the idea that vaccines do not reduce transmission.
But of course you know better.

again i ask you to keep this on discussion as its a football related thread.

There is a covid thread for this kind of talk your referring. If you want to discuss there fine. I dont wanna take this off subject like yesterday. And please stop with your condescending remarks like your last sentence.

[German James]

you me jeffrey whoever can still transmit the disease just like a un vaccinated person. It might be slightly lower BUT can still be passed on.

Reason enough to get vaccinated!

you me jeffrey whoever can still transmit the disease just like a un vaccinated person. It might be slightly lower BUT can still be passed on.

... to someone who, at the very least, is much less likely to become seriously ill, if they've been vaccinated. Reason enough to get the vaccination!

[rjp]

This article was written in May 2020 and it's about HIV but I found it really interesting.  Particularly the part about viral loads in the very early stages of infection.  I wonder if any of this bit applies to Covid and if the vaccine would make a difference.

People are most infectious in the earlier stages of contracting HIV, and therefore more likely to pass it on. Ordinarily, the viral load of HIV-positive people not on treatment is counted in the tens of thousands, while the figure for one patient of McOwan’s who had recently contacted HIV was 520bn. “As very few people right now have recently caught HIV,” says McOwan. “There are far fewer of those very infectious people around.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/may/13/covid-19-crisis-raises-hopes-of-end-to-uk-transmission-of-hiv

[Demitri_C]

This article was written in May 2020 and it's about HIV but I found it really interesting.  Particularly the part about viral loads in the very early stages of infection.  I wonder if any of this bit applies to Covid and if the vaccine would make a difference.

People are most infectious in the earlier stages of contracting HIV, and therefore more likely to pass it on. Ordinarily, the viral load of HIV-positive people not on treatment is counted in the tens of thousands, while the figure for one patient of McOwan’s who had recently contacted HIV was 520bn. “As very few people right now have recently caught HIV,” says McOwan. “There are far fewer of those very infectious people around.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/may/13/covid-19-crisis-raises-hopes-of-end-to-uk-transmission-of-hiv

I think that ia a very interesting point personally

[Sexual Ealing]

This article was written in May 2020 and it's about HIV but I found it really interesting.  Particularly the part about viral loads in the very early stages of infection.  I wonder if any of this bit applies to Covid and if the vaccine would make a difference.

People are most infectious in the earlier stages of contracting HIV, and therefore more likely to pass it on. Ordinarily, the viral load of HIV-positive people not on treatment is counted in the tens of thousands, while the figure for one patient of McOwan’s who had recently contacted HIV was 520bn. “As very few people right now have recently caught HIV,” says McOwan. “There are far fewer of those very infectious people around.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2020/may/13/covid-19-crisis-raises-hopes-of-end-to-uk-transmission-of-hiv

I remember reading that at the time. 520bn! Shudder.

[ozzjim]

I still think masks should be mandatory for any indoor spaces where distancing is not possible. I also think all people allowed into a football match should have to be vaccinated. It isn't a moral high ground issue, it is a public health one. My other half has a rare long term illness so vaccines are about half as effective on her so she masks up and is careful where she goes. She won't go to large indoor gatherings etc, and has not been on a plane etc this summer, but hopes to in future. The research suggests that the vaccine makes you less likely to catch it or pass it on. We should all be doing what we can to safely protect other people where possible.

[ChicagoLion]

I still think masks should be mandatory for any indoor spaces where distancing is not possible. I also think all people allowed into a football match should have to be vaccinated. It isn't a moral high ground issue, it is a public health one. My other half has a rare long term illness so vaccines are about half as effective on her so she masks up and is careful where she goes. She won't go to large indoor gatherings etc, and has not been on a plane etc this summer, but hopes to in future. The research suggests that the vaccine makes you less likely to catch it or pass it on. We should all be doing what we can to safely protect other people where possible.

a good illustration of why the club should do the right thing.

[LukeJames]

No Premier League players to be released for International games in Red listed countries. I think this will affect a few of ours.

[Dave P]

No Premier League players to be released for International games in Red listed countries. I think this will affect a few of ours.

Martinez, Buendia and Luiz I think. Not sure about AFCON