The Way a Packers Forum Should Be
https://packers-huddle.com/phpBB/
The only thing we know is that he tested positive for the presence of some virus. We don't know if he is actually sick. Those are 2 different things
The sad part is he will still be treated as unvaccinated when he returns even though his antibodies will in all likelihood be better than any vaccinated player or coach.Labrev wrote: ↑03 Nov 2021 16:11Vaccinations may not prevent getting the virus but by all accounts, it lessens the severity of the symptoms
What's done is done, we've lost him for at least a week, quite possibly two. But now what I'm worried about is how he'll look after he comes back. Some guys have had it and it seemed to affect their performance when they got back -- weaker, tiring out more easily, etc.
Dammit Aaron!
This is verifiably false information and has ZERO to do with this subjected. Take it back to your home in the politics forum.Raptorman wrote: ↑03 Nov 2021 16:19The sad part is he will still be treated as unvaccinated when he returns even though his antibodies will in all likelihood be better than any vaccinated player or coach.Labrev wrote: ↑03 Nov 2021 16:11Vaccinations may not prevent getting the virus but by all accounts, it lessens the severity of the symptoms
What's done is done, we've lost him for at least a week, quite possibly two. But now what I'm worried about is how he'll look after he comes back. Some guys have had it and it seemed to affect their performance when they got back -- weaker, tiring out more easily, etc.
Dammit Aaron!
If this is the case with AR, they should allow him to play. Unless he actually has the 19.YoHoChecko wrote: ↑03 Nov 2021 10:41Rodgers says he's "immunized." League says he's not vaccinated. So to me, it sounds like he's one of those "I had the virus and developed natural antibodies, so I consider myself safe/"immunized" and don't need the vaccine" types.
Which is a statement trying to parse the language and the implications of it, rather than an invitation to discuss the science or politics behind it.
He tested positive. And he is also not vaccinated.JKB wrote: ↑03 Nov 2021 16:26If this is the case with AR, they should allow him to play. Unless he actually has the 19.YoHoChecko wrote: ↑03 Nov 2021 10:41Rodgers says he's "immunized." League says he's not vaccinated. So to me, it sounds like he's one of those "I had the virus and developed natural antibodies, so I consider myself safe/"immunized" and don't need the vaccine" types.
Which is a statement trying to parse the language and the implications of it, rather than an invitation to discuss the science or politics behind it.
AgreedRaptorman wrote: ↑03 Nov 2021 16:19The sad part is he will still be treated as unvaccinated when he returns even though his antibodies will in all likelihood be better than any vaccinated player or coach.Labrev wrote: ↑03 Nov 2021 16:11Vaccinations may not prevent getting the virus but by all accounts, it lessens the severity of the symptoms
What's done is done, we've lost him for at least a week, quite possibly two. But now what I'm worried about is how he'll look after he comes back. Some guys have had it and it seemed to affect their performance when they got back -- weaker, tiring out more easily, etc.
Dammit Aaron!
RaptOk thanks, I missed the positive test part thought it was he was the around other positive people.go pak go wrote: ↑03 Nov 2021 16:27He tested positive. And he is also not vaccinated.JKB wrote: ↑03 Nov 2021 16:26If this is the case with AR, they should allow him to play. Unless he actually has the 19.YoHoChecko wrote: ↑03 Nov 2021 10:41Rodgers says he's "immunized." League says he's not vaccinated. So to me, it sounds like he's one of those "I had the virus and developed natural antibodies, so I consider myself safe/"immunized" and don't need the vaccine" types.
Which is a statement trying to parse the language and the implications of it, rather than an invitation to discuss the science or politics behind it.
So kind of a double whammy there.
Sorry, this has everything to do with it. This isn't politics, it's science. When Rodgers returns, he will be treated once again as unvaccinated. You can't separate that from the thread because you think it's not relevant. What part of that is not relevant? He was unvaccinated before and still is. So, in the future, he will be treated the same by the team and the NFL if he gets covid again. Unless he is vaccinated.Pckfn23 wrote: ↑03 Nov 2021 16:25This is verifiably false information and has ZERO to do with this subjected. Take it back to your home in the politics forum.Raptorman wrote: ↑03 Nov 2021 16:19The sad part is he will still be treated as unvaccinated when he returns even though his antibodies will in all likelihood be better than any vaccinated player or coach.Labrev wrote: ↑03 Nov 2021 16:11Vaccinations may not prevent getting the virus but by all accounts, it lessens the severity of the symptoms
What's done is done, we've lost him for at least a week, quite possibly two. But now what I'm worried about is how he'll look after he comes back. Some guys have had it and it seemed to affect their performance when they got back -- weaker, tiring out more easily, etc.
Dammit Aaron!
States they still must have at least one vaccine shot to qualify. So, What part is verifiably false?The NFL considers a player fully vaccinated if they fall into one of the two following categories. They either are 14 days removed from their final dose of Pfizer, Moderna or the Johnson & Johnson vaccine or they previously contracted COVID and are 14 days removed from a single dose of any vaccine.
Part of your statement is verifiably false. Not the place to discuss. Take your politics back to the Politics forum. Rising from the muck with any crack and only settle back down when pushed back:Raptorman wrote: ↑03 Nov 2021 17:10Sorry, this has everything to do with it. This isn't politics, it's science. When Rodgers returns, he will be treated once again as unvaccinated. You can't separate that from the thread because you think it's not relevant. What part of that is not relevant? He was unvaccinated before and still is. So, in the future, he will be treated the same by the team and the NFL if he gets covid again. Unless he is vaccinated.
But if you say it is verifiably false, please explain what part of NFL vaccine protocols deals with unvaccinated covid positive in the past players.
States they still must have at least one vaccine shot to qualify. So, What part is verifiably false?The NFL considers a player fully vaccinated if they fall into one of the two following categories. They either are 14 days removed from their final dose of Pfizer, Moderna or the Johnson & Johnson vaccine or they previously contracted COVID and are 14 days removed from a single dose of any vaccine.
https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/new ... g3gtdctcdz
What part is false? This isn't political. This is science.Pckfn23 wrote: ↑03 Nov 2021 17:18Part of your statement is verifiably false. Not the place to discuss. Take your politics back to the Politics forum. Rising from the muck with any crack and only settle back down when pushed back:Raptorman wrote: ↑03 Nov 2021 17:10Sorry, this has everything to do with it. This isn't politics, it's science. When Rodgers returns, he will be treated once again as unvaccinated. You can't separate that from the thread because you think it's not relevant. What part of that is not relevant? He was unvaccinated before and still is. So, in the future, he will be treated the same by the team and the NFL if he gets covid again. Unless he is vaccinated.
But if you say it is verifiably false, please explain what part of NFL vaccine protocols deals with unvaccinated covid positive in the past players.
States they still must have at least one vaccine shot to qualify. So, What part is verifiably false?The NFL considers a player fully vaccinated if they fall into one of the two following categories. They either are 14 days removed from their final dose of Pfizer, Moderna or the Johnson & Johnson vaccine or they previously contracted COVID and are 14 days removed from a single dose of any vaccine.
https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/new ... g3gtdctcdz
You turned it into politics when you ignored science with your statement. Go back to our cesspool if you want to discuss it.Raptorman wrote: ↑03 Nov 2021 17:20What part is false? This isn't political. This is science.Pckfn23 wrote: ↑03 Nov 2021 17:18Part of your statement is verifiably false. Not the place to discuss. Take your politics back to the Politics forum. Rising from the muck with any crack and only settle back down when pushed back:Raptorman wrote: ↑03 Nov 2021 17:10
Sorry, this has everything to do with it. This isn't politics, it's science. When Rodgers returns, he will be treated once again as unvaccinated. You can't separate that from the thread because you think it's not relevant. What part of that is not relevant? He was unvaccinated before and still is. So, in the future, he will be treated the same by the team and the NFL if he gets covid again. Unless he is vaccinated.
But if you say it is verifiably false, please explain what part of NFL vaccine protocols deals with unvaccinated covid positive in the past players.
States they still must have at least one vaccine shot to qualify. So, What part is verifiably false?
https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/new ... g3gtdctcdz
YoHoChecko wrote: ↑03 Nov 2021 17:24Sal jinxed it by congratulating people...
Look, here's the thing. Your opinions or facts about COVID and how people should or shouldn't be treated do not matter in this case. You can say it matters all you want, but it does not. It doesn't matter if you like the rules or you don't; or if the rules are scientifically verified or they aren't.
The NFL does not allow marijuana, which has extensively researched medical benefits and is legal medicinally or recreationally, as well as tested as safe, in most of the country. That's a medical decision the league takes out of their hands.
The NFL has a very, very extensive list of banned substances to put in your body. Some of those are FDA approved, many are proven safe, and many are effective for various different purposes. Those are medical decisions taken out of players' hands.
A company and its union agreed to a set of rules and Rodgers has to follow them, and it doesn't matter if you think it's unfair that he be treated as unvaccinated when his antibodies are whatever. As was said, that has NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS FOOTBALL THREAD.
what matters is
- a) how the rules say he should be treated
- b) did he break any rules
- c) when can he come back
Your little vendettas don't mean anything to me or the Packers. Your notions that the NFL treats it's fans differently than its players is the most asinine thing I've ever heard because of course the NFL does not take responsibility for people that do not work for them as the people who do. And your theories on what treatments work or don't can fall like crocodile tears on my medical marijuana prescription's impact on my ability to hold a security clearance.
- d) health and symptom updates
So you have nothing. Got it. There are only two possibilities.Pckfn23 wrote: ↑03 Nov 2021 17:26Go back to the political forum if you want to push you politics! You can spread whatever you want in there.Raptorman wrote: ↑03 Nov 2021 17:25What part of my statement is false and/or political?
Here it is again. Explain or shut the hell up.
The sad part is he will still be treated as unvaccinated when he returns even though his antibodies will in all likelihood be better than any vaccinated player or coach.
