Nakhi Wells?

[Dullmoan Tone]

1 hour ago, Wealwayseatcheese said:

At this moment in our season , give me Weimann and Semenyo everytime. 

Surely him, Semenyo and Weimann could be a brilliant partnership - Martin battled but did little last night, thought his touch was poor - he held up nothing but momentum!

[Numero Uno]

23 minutes ago, Dullmoan Tone said:

Surely him, Semenyo and Weimann could be a brilliant partnership - Martin battled but did little last night, thought his touch was poor - he held up nothing but momentum!

Second goal?

[maxjak]

1 hour ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

To be fair to him, whether he's vaccinated or not doesn't affect his chances of catching covid/testing positive. Being vaccinated just gives him the best chance of not becoming horribly ill/hospitalised/dead. 

Your entitled to your opinion.........   But please explain what is the vaccination for, if it is not to prevent  individuals from becoming infected  and   lessening the likelihood of infecting others?

[Merrick's Marvels]

33 minutes ago, maxjak said:

Your entitled to your opinion.........   But please explain what is the vaccination for, if it is not to prevent  individuals from becoming infected  and   lessening the likelihood of infecting others?

Yeah, an opinion based on fact. Which makes it a worth while one, unlike most opinion found on the internet.

Try this: https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/how-to-avoid-catching-and-spreading-coronavirus-covid-19/

What the hell do the NHS know, eh? Muppets. 

 

Here's the relevant bit:

 

How to avoid catching and spreading coronavirus (COVID-19)

While there are cases of coronavirus (COVID-19) in the UK, there is a risk you can catch it or pass it on. You could still catch or spread it even if you're fully vaccinated or have had the virus before.

Edited February 10, 2022 by Merrick's Marvels

[petehinton]

22 hours ago, Fordy62 said:

For being a waste of money. 

Nice 

[EmissionImpossible]

I think he’s a decent player but his lack of effort on occasion has been poor. Don’t think city have given him that much of a chance. 

[IAmNick]

26 minutes ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

Yeah, an opinion based on fact. Which makes it a worth while one, unlike most opinion found on the internet.

Try this: https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/how-to-avoid-catching-and-spreading-coronavirus-covid-19/

What the hell do the NHS know, eh? Muppets. 

 

Here's the relevant bit:

 

How to avoid catching and spreading coronavirus (COVID-19)

While there are cases of coronavirus (COVID-19) in the UK, there is a risk you can catch it or pass it on. You could still catch or spread it even if you're fully vaccinated or have had the virus before.

You can catch it. Nobody said it made you immune to catching it, just that it reduces the chance.

https://www.bmj.com/company/newsroom/study-finds-gradual-increase-in-covid-infection-risk-after-second-vaccine-dose/

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00460-6/fulltext

So therefor the more people who get vaccinated, the less people who catch it - or if you are vaccinated, you have less chance of catching it.

  

2 hours ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

To be fair to him, whether he's vaccinated or not doesn't affect his chances of catching covid/testing positive. Being vaccinated just gives him the best chance of not becoming horribly ill/hospitalised/dead. 

So it provably does affect his chances of catching it.

Nothing is perfect of course. Some will be jabbed, catch it, and die. That's life.

I notice you missed this bit:

But what do the NHS know eh?

Edited February 10, 2022 by IAmNick

[chinapig]

11 minutes ago, IAmNick said:

You can catch it. Nobody said it made you immune to catching it, just that it reduces the chance.

https://www.bmj.com/company/newsroom/study-finds-gradual-increase-in-covid-infection-risk-after-second-vaccine-dose/

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/article/PIIS1473-3099(21)00460-6/fulltext

So therefor the more people who get vaccinated, the less people who catch it - or if you are vaccinated, you have less chance of catching it.

  

So it provably does affect his chances of catching it.

Nothing is perfect of course. Some will be jabbed, catch it, and die. That's life.

I notice you missed this bit:

But what do the NHS know eh?

I'm not sure @Merrick's Marvelswas implying there is no need to be vaccinated because you can still be infected but ,yes, the point some people miss is that vaccinations significantly mitigate risk they don't eliminate it and don't claim to.

Failure to understand this basic point can lead to bogus anti vax arguments.

[maxjak]

42 minutes ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

Yeah, an opinion based on fact. Which makes it a worth while one, unlike most opinion found on the internet.

Try this: https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/coronavirus-covid-19/how-to-avoid-catching-and-spreading-coronavirus-covid-19/

What the hell do the NHS know, eh? Muppets. 

 

Here's the relevant bit:

 

How to avoid catching and spreading coronavirus (COVID-19)

While there are cases of coronavirus (COVID-19) in the UK, there is a risk you can catch it or pass it on. You could still catch or spread it even if you're fully vaccinated or have had the virus before.

OPERATIVE WORD............COULD.   Sorry life is too short to trade dialogue or debate with someone who has not bothered to educate themselves?   Of course you  can still catch it, but as a responsible citizen it is extremely wise to vaccinate yourself, so as  to greatly reduce the chance of contracting it .  if nobody had bothered to become vaccinated, we would be back where we were  last summer, with the NHS unable to cope?         

[Red-Robbo]

Let's not forget Wells went a little beyond just not having a vaccine.  As people were dying throughout the world, he shared memes to his 41,000 Twitter followers falsely claiming the vaccines contain aborted foetus cells, will inevitably cause side effects and are being masterminded by Bill Gates for some sinister reason yet to be revealed.

He pushed dangerous nonsense. 

It would be ironic if it hits him really hard. I don't wish anyone harm, but some people don't help themselves. 

[Merrick's Marvels]

38 minutes ago, maxjak said:

OPERATIVE WORD............COULD.   Sorry life is too short to trade dialogue or debate with someone who has not bothered to educate themselves?   Of course you  can still catch it, but as a responsible citizen it is extremely wise to vaccinate yourself, so as  to greatly reduce the chance of contracting it .  if nobody had bothered to become vaccinated, we would be back where we were  last summer, with the NHS unable to cope?         

You appear to have completely misunderstood my point. 

To be clear, I am pro vaccination. Try reading my post again.

You seemed to be saying "if only he'd got vaccinated, he wouldn't have caught covid". My reply was "that's not necessarily true". Perhaps we're talking at cross purposes. 

Edited February 10, 2022 by Merrick's Marvels

[italian dave]

3 hours ago, Merrick's Marvels said:

To be fair to him, whether he's vaccinated or not doesn't affect his chances of catching covid/testing positive. Being vaccinated just gives him the best chance of not becoming horribly ill/hospitalised/dead. 

Vaccination DOES affect his chances of catching covid. A booster dose would have meant he’s almost 40% less likely to catch it.
According to two recent studies reported here https://www.forbes.com/sites/johndrake/2022/02/01/vaccine-effectiveness-in-the-omicron-wave/?sh=346c2eba4ee6

[bbew]

37 minutes ago, maxjak said:

OPERATIVE WORD............COULD.   Sorry life is too short to trade dialogue or debate with someone who has not bothered to educate themselves?   Of course you  can still catch it, but as a responsible citizen it is extremely wise to vaccinate yourself, so as  to greatly reduce the chance of contracting it .  if nobody had bothered to become vaccinated, we would be back where we were  last summer, with the NHS unable to cope?         

Is the vaccine fantastic? yes.

Do I agree people should get vaccinated? yes.

'Greatly reduce the chances of contracting it' - do you genuinely believe that?  Do your experiences in the real world of people you know catching covid genuinely back up that claim?

The tens/hundreds of thousands catching covid each day, the majority who are vaccinated, does that really back up that claim?

I find it amazing that people almost dismiss what they are seeing with their own eyes and choose to believe what they feel they should.

They believe Joe Biden when he said if you have the vaccine you will not get covid, when that is simply not true.

The vaccine is fantastic at stopping people getting seriously ill, but stopping people getting covid and passing it on is much more up for debate.

Edited February 10, 2022 by bbew

[Merrick's Marvels]

1 minute ago, italian dave said:

Vaccination DOES affect his chances of catching covid. A booster dose would have meant he’s almost 40% less likely to catch it.
According to two recent studies reported here https://www.forbes.com/sites/johndrake/2022/02/01/vaccine-effectiveness-in-the-omicron-wave/?sh=346c2eba4ee6

Yes. My point was rather he can still get it and more importantly the vaccine makes it less likely he'd be seriously ill. Could have worded that more precisely. 

[Red-Robbo]

2 minutes ago, bbew said:

Is the vaccine fantastic - yes.

Do I agree people should get vaccinated - yes.

'Greatly reduce the chances of contracting it' - do you genuinely believe that?  Do your experiences in the real world of people you know catching covid genuinely back up that claim?

The tens/hundreds of thousands catching covid each day, the majority who are vaccinated, does that really back up that claim?

I find it amazing that people almost dismiss what they are seeing with their own eyes and choose to believe what they feel they should.

They believe Joe Biden when he said if you have the vaccine you will not get covid.

The vaccine is fantastic at stopping people getting seriously ill, but stopping people getting covid and passing it on is much more up for debate.

 

The vast majority of the UK is vaccinated, so of course the majority of cases will be from among that 90% of adults.  However, if you're in the 10% who aren't jabbed, you have a higher risk of catching it and a higher risk of getting ill if you do. 

[italian dave]

3 minutes ago, bbew said:

Is the vaccine fantastic - yes.

Do I agree people should get vaccinated - yes.

'Greatly reduce the chances of contracting it' - do you genuinely believe that?  Do your experiences in the real world of people you know catching covid genuinely back up that claim?

The tens/hundreds of thousands catching covid each day, the majority who are vaccinated, does that really back that up claim?

I find it amazing that people almost dismiss what they are seeing with their own eyes and choose to believe what they feel they should.

The vaccine is fantastic at stopping people getting seriously ill, but stopping people getting covid and passing it on is much more up for debate.

Yes some of us do believe it.

Of course it’s impossible to prove that any single individual hasn’t got covid because they’ve been vaccinated and would have done otherwise. It’s like trying to prove any negative.

But I find it equally amazing that people can’t see the possibility (evidenced by studies) that 100,000 vaccinated people catching covid somehow precludes the possibility that 140,000 people would have caught it without vaccinations. 

[chinapig]

Just now, Red-Robbo said:

 

The vast majority of the UK is vaccinated, so of course the majority of cases will be from among that 90% of adults.  However, if you're in the 10% who aren't jabbed, you have a higher risk of catching it and a higher risk of getting ill if you do. 

Another basic point some people still don't get. Like saying the majority of people killed in road accidents were wearing seat belts therefore seat belts don't work.

[bbew]

1 minute ago, Red-Robbo said:

 

The vast majority of the UK is vaccinated, so of course the majority of cases will be from among that 90% of adults.  However, if you're in the 10% who aren't jabbed, you have a higher risk of catching it and a higher risk of getting ill if you do. 

A higher risk - yes completely agree.

A greatly higher risk - not so sure.

18 million people in the UK have had covid, a significant proportion after being vaccinated. I'm not so sure you can say it greatly reduces your risk greatly.

[bbew]

2 minutes ago, italian dave said:

Yes some of us do believe it.

Of course it’s impossible to prove that any single individual hasn’t got covid because they’ve been vaccinated and would have done otherwise. It’s like trying to prove any negative.

But I find it equally amazing that people can’t see the possibility (evidenced by studies) that 100,000 vaccinated people catching covid somehow precludes the possibility that 140,000 people would have caught it without vaccinations. 

But Israel, Ireland and Gibraltar have very, very high vaccination rates, and had some if the highest cases numbers in the world.

[chinapig]

8 minutes ago, bbew said:

Is the vaccine fantastic - yes.

Do I agree people should get vaccinated - yes.

'Greatly reduce the chances of contracting it' - do you genuinely believe that?  Do your experiences in the real world of people you know catching covid genuinely back up that claim?

The tens/hundreds of thousands catching covid each day, the majority who are vaccinated, does that really back up that claim?

I find it amazing that people almost dismiss what they are seeing with their own eyes and choose to believe what they feel they should.

They believe Joe Biden when he said if you have the vaccine you will not get covid, when that is simply not true.

The vaccine is fantastic at stopping people getting seriously ill, but stopping people getting covid and passing it on is much more up for debate.

Anecdotes are no substitute for systematic evidence. Knowing people who smoked all their lives and lived to a ripe old age doesn't mean that smoking doesn't kill for instance.

Bear in mind also that omicron is more infectious but less severe than delta.

Plus once you start removing mitigations like masks and social distancing a spike in infections is exactly what you would expect.

[Red-Robbo]

4 minutes ago, bbew said:

A higher risk - yes completely agree.

A greatly higher risk - not so sure.

18 million people in the UK have had covid, a significant proportion after being vaccinated. I'm not so sure you can say it greatly reduces your risk greatly.

 40% higher research suggests and who are any of us to doubt that.

IF Pearson has a downer on Wells over the Covid thing however, I imagine it's more down to the conspiracy crap he posted than just him catching it.

However, I suggest a much bigger factor would be his work and scoring rate. 

The irony is, having scored at Blackpool, he may have been in contention for a start yesterday had he not tested positive. 

[italian dave]

8 minutes ago, bbew said:

A higher risk - yes completely agree.

A greatly higher risk - not so sure.

18 million people in the UK have had covid, a significant proportion after being vaccinated. I'm not so sure you can say it greatly reduces your risk greatly.

 

5 minutes ago, bbew said:

But Israel, Ireland and Gibraltar have very, very high vaccination rates, and had some if the highest cases numbers in the world.

I didn’t think Ireland was particularly high? Israel and Gibraltar, agree, although I don’t know enough about the many other factors that affect both actual transmission and recorded numbers (restrictions on social contact, testing etc).

But the transmission rate of covid means that over two years, without any public health measures in place (lockdowns etc), pretty much the whole population would have caught it. Even allowing for a generous 1/3rd who are asymptomatic and untested, that means 50m potential cases, which suddenly makes 18m seem not quite such a large number?

I think in truth we’re probably all arguing over semantics. We agree vaccination reduces the risk, it’s just about how you define ‘greatly’. 

[Davefevs]

4 hours ago, Ivorguy said:

Don’t think the club did enough homework on Wells before splashing the cash

I thought Wells was a decent striker from his Bradford days….one whose career previously had always been one step ahead of us, e.g. he was always a bit better than our level at the time and therefore had better suitors.

The time we bought him, was purely down to sweetening the Brownhill deal.  Brownhill has a £7m release clause in summer 2020, Burnley will offer us £7m plus add-ons now.  We then say, got any players to make it sweeter?

We get Wells.  Can only guess Vydra was too dear / still part of their plans / had no interest in coming here.

We’d have been better taking the £7m plus add-ons and bringing in a different striker….there were hundreds of potential players, but we allowed ourselves to narrow it to one club.  Surely we had a list of suitable targets from a bigger pond?

Where have I seen that concept of looking in a smaller pond before?

Ah, yes, global search, you’d be surprised who we are speaking too….yes we were surprised - Dean Holden.

[IAmNick]

Just now, Tafkarmlf said:

There was some 'conspiracy style' stuff on Facebook last night that whilst, Nahki does have Covid, that Wells and NP had an altercation and that NP was having  max fac/ rhinoplasty as a result. 

I mean, there's far fetched, but that's way, way out there and far better than 'The Alien' s' take which was just as batshit. 

Rumour mill in overdrive i suspect. 

If Pearson and Wells came to blows I know who my money would be on for needing the rhinoplasty afterwards...!

[bbew]

1 hour ago, chinapig said:

Another basic point some people still don't get. Like saying the majority of people killed in road accidents were wearing seat belts therefore seat belts don't work.

But if millions of people were dieing in road accidents you would probably come to the conclusion they are not working.  In the same way the fact that millions of vannicated people are still catching covid in the UK, you would maybe question how good the vaccine is at stopping transmission.

Thankfully the vaccine is undoubtedly amazing at massively reducing serious illness.

The world health organisation said they expected 50% of Europe to catch covid.  Does that really indicate the vaccine 'greatly reduces transmission'.

It seems some people and the press always want to have someone to blame, be it on race, religion,immigration and now vaccinated status. There always seems an agenda to divide. Let's all just get along, life is precious, people will disagree, that's life,just respect others opinions and concerns. Making the jab pretty much mandatory, especially for children, and all the division it has caused just doesn't seem right to me.

Edited February 10, 2022 by bbew

[IAmNick]

9 minutes ago, bbew said:

But if millions of people were dieing in road accidents you would probably come to the conclusion they are not working.  In the same way the fact that millions of vannicated people are still catching covid in the UK, you would maybe question how good the vaccine is at stopping transmission.

Thankfully the vaccine is undoubtedly amazing at massively reducing serious illness.

The world health organisation said they expected 50% of Europe to catch covid.  Does that really indicate the vaccine 'greatly reduces transmission'.

Over 100,000 people are injured on the roads here each year - but we still all wear our seatbelts because we know it reduces our chance. There are just so many accidents that some people will still get injured, or die. That's how it works.

I don't think this is really logical. If covid is everywhere then people will be exposed so much they will still catch it at a high rate, even with the vaccine(s). What reason do you have for not believing the studies which show they do effectively reduce transmission?

[pillred]

24 minutes ago, bbew said:

But if millions of people were dieing in road accidents you would probably come to the conclusion they are not working.  In the same way the fact that millions of vannicated people are still catching covid in the UK, you would maybe question how good the vaccine is at stopping transmission.

Thankfully the vaccine is undoubtedly amazing at massively reducing serious illness.

The world health organisation said they expected 50% of Europe to catch covid.  Does that really indicate the vaccine 'greatly reduces transmission'.

It seems some people and the press always want to have someone to blame, be it on race, religion,immigration and now vaccinated status. There always seems an agenda to divide. Let's all just get along, life is precious, people will disagree, that's life,just respect others opinions and concerns. Making the jab pretty much mandatory, especially for children, and all the division it has caused just doesn't seem right to me.

I would be surprised if of the 50% that caught covid a higher proportion of them would be unvaccinated, surely any reduction in the likelihood of transmission or infection plus the known benefit of avoiding the worst of the symptoms would be reason enough to get vaccinated. 

[bbew]

33 minutes ago, IAmNick said:

Over 100,000 people are injured on the roads here each year - but we still all wear our seatbelts because we know it reduces our chance. There are just so many accidents that some people will still get injured, or die. That's how it works.

I don't think this is really logical. If covid is everywhere then people will be exposed so much they will still catch it at a high rate, even with the vaccine(s). What reason do you have for not believing the studies which show they do effectively reduce transmission?

The fact there are equal studies that show they don't make much difference. Throughout the whole pandemic it has been 'follow the science' but which science? For every scientist who says one thing, there is another scientist who will give a different opinion.  Some may get more press time but does that make them more worthy.

Remember we were told the science said masks make little difference and didn't need to wear then, then we told to wear them  despite no new science.

We were told the vaccine will stop you getting covid (by Biden and CDC), now we now that is not true.

We were told lockdowns will save hundreds of thousands of lives, now studies show they reduced the death rate by just 0.2%.

One study shows vaccination immunity is best, another that immunity after infection is best.

We are given models that there could be 6,000 deaths a day without another lockdown, then (thankfully) they are completely wrong.

Really none of us know.  People seem to pick their opinion and get evidence to suit.  I just feel labeling people 'anti vax' is just the latest way to divide people, especially when the majority of the 'anti vaxers' are not nutty loons but just genuine people with concerns of taking a drug with no medium or long term safety data (which I know is impossible to produce so doesn't mean it is not safe).  They need encouragement to get vaccinated, not punishment and condemnation.

Edited February 11, 2022 by bbew

[MarcusX]

12 minutes ago, bbew said:

The fact there are equal studies that show they don't make much difference. Throughout the whole pandemic it has been 'follow the science' but which science? For every scientist who says one thing, there is another scientist who will give a different opinion.  Some may get more press time but does that make them more worthy.

Remember we were told masks make little difference, then 'the science' changed and we were told to wear them.

We were told the vaccine will stop you getting covid (by Biden and CDC), now we now that is not true.

We were told lockdowns will save hundreds of thousands of lifes, now studies show they reduced the death rate by just 0.2%.

One study shows vaccination immunity is best, another the immunity after infection is best.

Really none of us know.  I just feel labeling people 'ant vax' is just the latest iway to divide people.

Are you suggesting science doesn’t change?

They initially thought covid might be passed by touch, that’s why we washed our hands 100x a day, covered them in sanitised and washed everything that came into our homes. Science and understanding changes.

Also two “scientists” opinions don’t necessarily hold the same weight, especially if one side of the argument has hundreds of scientists and the other only have a few - who may have ulterior motives

[Norn Iron]

11 hours ago, Jerseybean said:

Curtis Fleming has confirmed that ‘Nahki Wells' surprise absence in the squad was due to a positive Covid-19 test earlier in the week with the striker set to return on Friday.’

Having been tested positive myself for Covid the day after the Preston game, I find this Curtis quote strange. 

I have just checked and Northern Ireland rules are the same as England's. 

Even if he takes a Lateral Flow Test on Saturday night and he's positive, then that is Day Zero. The earliest he can be out of isolation is Day 6 assuming that this day (Friday) and Day 5 (Thursday) produce negative LFTs. This is assuming he had vaccinations. If he didn't, then he has to go 10 days isolation as per the rules.

So Nahki must have done a test before playing and was negative but does a test afterwards and is positive? Our medical team obviously have protocols they must adhere by but Nahki can't train etc until Tuesday 15th at the earliest.....unless he has been vaccinated all the time.