Premier League 2021/22 Thread

[Lcfc82]

27 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

I believe  that the issue is that their cases are ‘live’ and ongoing - hence players and staff are becoming positive as already infected. To travel to London and go to a hotel and then a stadium is a big risk for all those that they will inevitably come into contact with. 

Send them home to take tests then ? It’s ongoing for everyone. 
 

We had cases and played. As another poster has said they have forced the PL into it. There needs to be a tougher stance on it for me.

 

[Guest Col city fan]

Pretty sure this’ll be off. Covid‘s all over the bloody place again

[foxinsocks]

Given that two jabs has no protection I can see the gov moving to pre game lfts for all in jan.  That's why they are pushing booster now.

[st albans fox]

12 minutes ago, Lcfc82 said:

Send them home to take tests then ? It’s ongoing for everyone. 
 

We had cases and played. As another poster has said they have forced the PL into it. There needs to be a tougher stance on it for me.

 

I suspect we are in no hurry to highlight our particular covid circumstances….

 

those affected were bubbled away and we were not having cases appearing the day before we were due to play ….

[SpacedX]

6 minutes ago, foxinsocks said:

Given that two jabs has no protection 

That isn't true. Protection is severely depleted in the case of Oxford/AstraZeneca. Those who had the second jab 25 or more weeks ago may have as little as 10% protection against Omicron, and only 40% against Delta. In the same time period, Pfizer is believed to offer 40% protection and 60% against Delta. However, there is huge uncertainty around these figures given the small sample studied and the fact that the Oxford/AstraZeneca jab tended to be administered to older or more vulnerable people.

[Cadno'r Cymoedd]

39 minutes ago, Line-X said:

That isn't true. Protection is severely depleted in the case of Oxford/AstraZeneca. Those who had the second jab 25 or more weeks ago may have as little as 10% protection against Omicron, and only 40% against Delta. In the same time period, Pfizer is believed to offer 40% protection and 60% against Delta. However, there is huge uncertainty around these figures given the small sample studied and the fact that the Oxford/AstraZeneca jab tended to be administered to older or more vulnerable people.

This is based on antibody production which is just one part (albeit very important) of the immune response. Cellular T cell responses are very important too but more difficult to measure. Their responses from the first two jabs of whichever type might be less impacted and so continue to confer some protection; mRNA vaccines do seem more potent in eliciting this. 

Edited 14 December 2021 by Cadno'r Cymoedd

[SpacedX]

2 minutes ago, Cadno'r Cymoedd said:

This is based on antibody production which is just one part (albeit very important) of the immune response. Cellular T cell responses are very important too but more difficult to measure. Their responses from the first two jabs of whichever type might be less impacted and so continue to confer some protection; mRNA vaccines do seem more potent in eliciting this. 

Completely. Even as antibody levels wane against the new variant, the immune system may still be primed by vaccines or from previous infections to "remember" the virus. The focus now is on whether the parts of the immune system that power this long-term protection, primarily T cells, will hold up against omicron. If that's the case, immune responses could ramp up quickly after infection and protect people from the worst effects of the virus.

[foxinsocks]

Many of us have had covid... there was a guy on the bbc yesterday saying that this was reasonable protection against omicron...but I cant find any data.

[foxinsocks]

48 minutes ago, Line-X said:

That isn't true. Protection is severely depleted in the case of Oxford/AstraZeneca. Those who had the second jab 25 or more weeks ago may have as little as 10% protection against Omicron, and only 40% against Delta. In the same time period, Pfizer is believed to offer 40% protection and 60% against Delta. However, there is huge uncertainty around these figures given the small sample studied and the fact that the Oxford/AstraZeneca jab tended to be administered to older or more vulnerable people.

Yes I was inaccurate.  2 jabs 10%. 

[SpacedX]

Just now, foxinsocks said:

Yes I was inaccurate.  2 jabs 10%. 

Not necessarily. It may be as low as that for Oxford/AZ, whilst Pfizer could still offer 40% - as I said, we don't know the exact figures because studies have not been extensive enough and there are many variables. Also, as @Cadno'r Cymoedd points out, this simply pertains to levels of antibodies. 

 

5 minutes ago, foxinsocks said:

Many of us have had covid... there was a guy on the bbc yesterday saying that this was reasonable protection against omicron...but I cant find any data.

 

Yes, but many still haven't. 

 

It's a very good point though. If you are getting Omicron on the back of having previously been infected, you are afforded with a level of natural immunity. So, one of the reasons you are getting milder symptoms in such cases is because the immune response already generated is helping to clear the virus quicker than it normally would in a 'naïve' person. This may be a very significant factor in the data from South Africa and an important caveat - where approximately 80% of the population have already been infected by Delta or another variant. 

[foxinsocks]

Just now, Line-X said:

Not necessarily. It may be as low as that for Oxford/AZ, whilst Pfizer could still offer 40% - as I said, we don't know the exact figures because studies have not been extensive enough and there are many variables. Also, as @Cadno'r Cymoedd points out, this simply pertains to levels of antibodies. 

 

 

Yes, but many still haven't. 

 

It's a very good point though. If you are getting Omicron on the back of having previously been infected, you are afforded with a level of natural immunity. So, one of the reasons you are getting milder symptoms in such cases is because the immune response already generated is helping to clear the virus quicker than it normally would in a 'naïve' person. This may be a very significant factor in the data from South Africa and an important caveat - where approximately 80% of the population have already been infected by Delta or another variant. 

Do you know how many have had covid in total  ?

[st albans fox]

1 minute ago, foxinsocks said:

Do you know how many have had covid in total  ?

No one does 

As many as a third of cases are asymptomatic !

 

 

[foxinsocks]

As I said above  i expect that after this booster campaign, then the gov will.move to requiring LFTs for all at events 

[foxinsocks]

Just now, st albans fox said:

No one does 

As many as a third of cases are asymptomatic !

 

 

I think there are some antibody studies that would measure it

[st albans fox]

2 minutes ago, foxinsocks said:

I think there are some antibody studies that would measure it

I guess so but I don’t think these have been done widely enough to be reliable. And those who have been asymptomatic are more likely to have seen their natural antibodies wane over time. In any case, after inoculations, the vast majority have antibodies. Would be able to make a better stab via T cell analysis but that is v expensive. 

 

it could be that an under estimation of covid infection across the community is a factor in some of the modelling tending to overshoot somewhat. 

Edited 14 December 2021 by st albans fox

[PAPA LAZAROU]

12 hours ago, Bryn said:

It absolutely can stop you getting it, it’s just not guaranteed.

So it's not absolutely can then is it ?

[PAPA LAZAROU]

14 hours ago, st albans fox said:

Wrong - you are infectious for less time if you’re vaccinated  ….

I suspect you will see a lot more masks on Thursday - people will be more cautious ahead of Xmas ……

 

How long you are infected makes no difference to infecting others , it takes just seconds.

[hackneyfox]

2 minutes ago, PAPA LAZAROU said:

How long you are infected makes no difference to infecting others , it takes just seconds.

It may perhaps make a difference to how many you infect?

[reynard]

1 hour ago, UniFox21 said:

By closing Carrington and refusing to travel until speaking to the PL, they've kinda forced the game to be postponed

Exactly. it is the fact they can't train that has resulted in the cancellation not the number of positive covid tests as I understand it.

[moore_94]

Crystal Palace have announced their Covid guidelines for matches, I imagine ours will probably be announced at about 7pm on Thursday

 

https://www.cpfc.co.uk/news/information/covid-19-requirements-to-enter-selhurst-park-during-plan-b/2021-12-14/

 

To attend the fixture, you must take the following three steps:

 

1) Arrive with a valid NHS COVID Pass. Checks will be made at the turnstile, so please allow extra time.

 

2) Complete a short online Health Declaration before you attend the match.

 

3) Do not travel if you feel unwell and/or are displaying symptoms of COVID.

 

I have not been vaccinated; can I still attend?

Yes, but you will be required to have a negative lateral flow test and obtain a COVID Pass.

 

What if I am exempt?

If you are medically exempt, we recommend calling 119 to obtain an official COVID Pass (this must be done by 25th December).

This can take a little time, so if you are medically exempt, please alert the steward on arrival.

 

I have had my first jab, does that count?

No, to be considered fully vaccinated you must have had at least both doses. If you have only had your first one, then you must obtain a negative lateral flow test.

Edited 14 December 2021 by moore_94

[FoxesWalk]

Similar to spurs being criticised by Rennes for “unilaterally deciding” that their game would be cancelled. They will almost certainly forfeit that game. United arguably should too…. But won’t happen. 

[KrefelderFox666]

2 hours ago, foxinsocks said:

Given that two jabs has no protection I can see the gov moving to pre game lfts for all in jan.  That's why they are pushing booster now.

I would have no problem with testing a day or two before attending a match if it means we can keep full capacity. I test weekly again at the moment even though I am double jabbed and about to get the booster (it's just common sense and thinking about others). Although millions of tests every week would be some serious waste!

[foxinsocks]

1 minute ago, KrefelderFox666 said:

I would have no problem with testing a day or two before attending a match if it means we can keep full capacity. I test weekly again at the moment even though I am double jabbed and about to get the booster (it's just common sense and thinking about others). Although millions of tests every week would be some serious waste!

Me too. I would feel happier in  crowd of tested people. 

At the cup final, the pcrs showed that only 12 of the 20000 fans passing an lft turned out to have covid 

[Bert]

Rumour flying round that the Man City game is getting pulled too. 

[Bryn]

1 hour ago, PAPA LAZAROU said:

So it's not absolutely can then is it ?

 

It's the literal definition of "can". It can but isn't guaranteed.