Whats happening? Camps open in a few weeks.

[OHLTG]

To me, your last sentence is what I have a problem with. Nothing we do has any meaning if there is no sort of real goal. You can’t play carrot and stick with no carrot.

The Govt had a black-and-white goal that was lined out in multiple publications. The issue is hospitals are getting populated by the unvaccinated (which is easily found online), and it's causing a big debate at the higher levels. Thus, at some point, a decision needs to be made. The vaccinated people did their part; it's the rest that are causing this.

 

[OMG67]

The Govt had a black-and-white goal that was lined out in multiple publications. The issue is hospitals are getting populated by the unvaccinated (which is easily found online), and it's causing a big debate at the higher levels. Thus, at some point, a decision needs to be made. The vaccinated people did their part; it's the rest that are causing this.

It’s not black and white because they use the term “plus key public health and health care indicators” as their safety net to stop anything they want.

The issue is simple. The goal is to get as many people vaccinated as possible BUT we don’t know how effective it truely will be and we don’t know how often vaccination boosters will be required. We don’t know if they truly care about infection rate etc or whether they care about hospitalizations.

As of right now, their stance is if you are vaccinated, you are safe and you are not likely to be infected. But, if you look at the data, that is not entirely true. You are LESS likely to be infected BUT there is also a waning effect of the Vaccine. It is highly likely there will be a call out to at least the vulnerable and elderly to get a third dose before Winter. Does that then make them fully vaccinated if they only have two doses?

There’s a lot of grey area and questions with no answers or direction. People simply DO NOT have the required information to make a decision as to whether a vaccine passport is valid, nor do they have the information to process whether they should support it and at what type of business should it be required.

If the Government wants to do a vaccine passport, it should be announced and properly defined. If they don’t want to do a passport, they should bar businesses from requiring it. There should be consistency levied through the business community so anything done will be consistent across the board.

This concept of the government just keeping quiet and letting businesses do their own thing is ridiculous and should NOT be applauded.

 

[rangersblues]

It’s not black and white because they use the term “plus key public health and health care indicators” as their safety net to stop anything they want.

The issue is simple. The goal is to get as many people vaccinated as possible BUT we don’t know how effective it truely will be and we don’t know how often vaccination boosters will be required. We don’t know if they truly care about infection rate etc or whether they care about hospitalizations.

As of right now, their stance is if you are vaccinated, you are safe and you are not likely to be infected. But, if you look at the data, that is not entirely true. You are LESS likely to be infected BUT there is also a waning effect of the Vaccine. It is highly likely there will be a call out to at least the vulnerable and elderly to get a third dose before Winter. Does that then make them fully vaccinated if they only have two doses?

There’s a lot of grey area and questions with no answers or direction. People simply DO NOT have the required information to make a decision as to whether a vaccine passport is valid, nor do they have the information to process whether they should support it and at what type of business should it be required.

If the Government wants to do a vaccine passport, it should be announced and properly defined. If they don’t want to do a passport, they should bar businesses from requiring it. There should be consistency levied through the business community so anything done will be consistent across the board.

This concept of the government just keeping quiet and letting businesses do their own thing is ridiculous and should NOT be applauded.

I think for any goal to have meaning, it first has to be attainable. If the goal isn't attainable, a certain amount of people automatically fall into the "why bother" category.

The ultimate goal would be 100% of people who are eligible to be vaccinated. Obviously that will never happen. Herd immunity is theoretically 75% I believe - if the vaccine is 100% effective, which it isn't.

I'm unsure how it's possible to set any goal in stone. The goal is as many as possible. Pfizer has just received Full FDA Approval. Hopefully that helps.

 

[HockeyPops]

If the Government wants to do a vaccine passport, it should be announced and properly defined.

agree

If they don’t want to do a passport, they should bar businesses from requiring it.

disagree

This concept of the government just keeping quiet and letting businesses do their own thing is ridiculous and should NOT be applauded.

disagree

The OHL has seen the writing on the wall, and is making sure they get set up for proof of vaccination for the season. To wait for the government and then try to implement something with short notice and on the fly mid-season would be a disaster. They are likely also trying to apply for a capacity increase with these additional measures in place. They know that they need to do whatever they can to try to facilitate as many ticket sales as possible. For all these reason the OHL should be applauded. Businesses do their own thing all the time (within the law); this is not ridiculous.

The government continues to drag their feet on vaccine passports for some unknown reason. I don't believe anyone here is suggesting we applaud the government for that. The government is currently debating delaying the return to in person learning as cases continue to rise. I personally think it's more important to allow unvaccinated <12 year old children to get back in the classroom, than it is to allow >12 unvaccinated people to attend large sporting events. And so I applaud the OHL for moving in the direction we need to go, even if the government hasn't yet embraced that direction.

 

[WaW]

It’s not black and white because they use the term “plus key public health and health care indicators” as their safety net to stop anything they want.

The issue is simple. The goal is to get as many people vaccinated as possible BUT we don’t know how effective it truely will be and we don’t know how often vaccination boosters will be required. We don’t know if they truly care about infection rate etc or whether they care about hospitalizations.

As of right now, their stance is if you are vaccinated, you are safe and you are not likely to be infected. But, if you look at the data, that is not entirely true. You are LESS likely to be infected BUT there is also a waning effect of the Vaccine. It is highly likely there will be a call out to at least the vulnerable and elderly to get a third dose before Winter. Does that then make them fully vaccinated if they only have two doses?

There’s a lot of grey area and questions with no answers or direction. People simply DO NOT have the required information to make a decision as to whether a vaccine passport is valid, nor do they have the information to process whether they should support it and at what type of business should it be required.

If the Government wants to do a vaccine passport, it should be announced and properly defined. If they don’t want to do a passport, they should bar businesses from requiring it. There should be consistency levied through the business community so anything done will be consistent across the board.

This concept of the government just keeping quiet and letting businesses do their own thing is ridiculous and should NOT be applauded.

Here's an idea. Why don't you lay your cards on the table? Give everyone a sense of what your take is on mandatory vaccines for fans, instead of arguing with everyone else commenting on the matter. I'm looking through this last page and it's the same pattern of everyone celebrating the news, and then you arguing with them.

 

[OMG67]

agree


disagree


disagree

The OHL has seen the writing on the wall, and is making sure they get set up for proof of vaccination for the season. To wait for the government and then try to implement something with short notice and on the fly mid-season would be a disaster. They are likely also trying to apply for a capacity increase with these additional measures in place. They know that they need to do whatever they can to try to facilitate as many ticket sales as possible. For all these reason the OHL should be applauded. Businesses do their own thing all the time (within the law); this is not ridiculous.

The government continues to drag their feet on vaccine passports for some unknown reason. I don't believe anyone here is suggesting we applaud the government for that. The government is currently debating delaying the return to in person learning as cases continue to rise. I personally think it's more important to allow unvaccinated <12 year old children to get back in the classroom, than it is to allow >12 unvaccinated people to attend large sporting events. And so I applaud the OHL for moving in the direction we need to go, even if the government hasn't yet embraced that direction.

The main reason why the Government is hesitant to go down the Vaccine passport road is because it isn’t needed and no place that has instituted them have done so with any success. It would be a costly experiment that isn’t proven to stop the spread or save lives.

For a vaccine Passport to be effective it needs to be accurate, reliable and secure. Equitable access also requires both paper and electronic forms of a passport which doubles the problematic nature of ensuring privacy, reliability and security. Paper increases the risk of duplication and electronic increases the risk of large scale data breaches of private Health Records.

In theory, the user of the passport needs to be authenticated. If you look at a Drivers License or a real passport, it has a photo and is on highly effective non-duplicatable material. You have to go to great lengths to duplicate these types of documents. What will the OHL require as proof? Anyone know? Who is going to authenticate the proof? Are those that are authenticating the proof properly trained and/or vetted?

PHIPA is the Personal Health Information Protection act 2004. The purpose of this Act is to establish rules for the collection, use and disclosure of information related to personal health information about individuals that protect the confidentiality of that information and the privacy of the individuals with respect to that information while facilitating the effective provision of health care. Showing a Proof of Vaccination document to access a business is not a provision of Health Care BUT there still is an obligation on behalf of the business to not disclose information. This is a rather difficult hurdle. Most businesses that require Proof of Vaccination have an HR Department or contract HR services to ensure there is a level of privacy attached. I am not too sure how this will be affected for patrons at an OHL game. I don’t think anyone is going to challenge it BUT if there is some sort of data breach on behalf of the business requiring the proof, whether it be employees or customers, there is a Mental Anguish Remedy that is not to exceed $10,000 per person. There is some ambiguity with respect to whether the OHL is considered a custodian of Personal Health Information though. I can see it if the teams are only providing access to Season Ticket Holders and the season ticket holders are requested to provide Proof of Vaccination and there is a record kept on file BUT this could also be used in an effort to Authorize non-season ticket holders as well. Who knows.

But, back to the main point, a Policy is only as effective as its plan. As far as I can see, there is no plan other than an announcement. The Government does not plan on issuing official documentation or administer an accessible central database; therefore, the only documentation available is the receipt we were given at the time of injection as well as a possible e-mail sent to conform the vaccination. Text in Emails can be doctored easily. Paper copies can be scanned, Photoshopped, and reprinted. It is not like we will carry around our original receipt everywhere we go for an unspecified length of time. It is relatively easy to alter the documentation. As far as I am aware, falsifying a document to get into a hockey game isn’t a significant crime, if a crime at all. If you are an unvaccinated person and want to go to a hockey game, all you need to do is download a template (which I assume is already readily available on the internet), and either create your copy within a few minutes or simply scan and doctor a copy and reprint it.

This OHL announcement with respect to ticket buying fans, is a sham of a policy as far as I can see. Its authentication process will likely be a joke since there is no central database that the teams can access in an effort to authenticate pre-sales of tickets. And even if they could, it would require an assigned name to be on the ticket to authenticate with photo ID at the entrance.

The way I see it, the OHL will probably check a vaccine receipt or email at the door when they scan the ticket and if it looks ok, they will let you in. The end. No muss, no fuss. The fans will feel safe and the League will look like it is doing something. But, without a real Government run Identification program, I can’t see this being worth a damn, especially when you consider how many people will have been fully vaccinated by the time the season starts. It will be virtually irrelevant.

 

[OMG67]

Here's an idea. Why don't you lay your cards on the table? Give everyone a sense of what your take is on mandatory vaccines for fans, instead of arguing with everyone else commenting on the matter. I'm looking through this last page and it's the same pattern of everyone celebrating the news, and then you arguing with them.

The point is what are you celebrating? The concept presented by the OHL or an actual Plan that will ensure unvaccinated people will not enter the building? I don’t see a plan. I see a statement that says unvaccinated “fans” will not be granted access.

My personal opinion is irrelevant. I want the Government to make a decision for its population and we, as citizens, should follow it just like we’ve followed the regulations handed down for the last 18 months. Businesses that went the other direction contravening the regulations were punished. I’m not asking for anything more or less in this case.

If a business wants to suggest they will not let in unvaccinated people then they better damn well guarantee it. The way I see it, there is a zero chance in hell of them being able to guarantee it. It is irresponsible for any business to make these sorts of policies when they don’t have the means to properly authenticate it.

 

[HockeyPops]

An announcement is not a policy. The league has implemented a longer pre season to help them with the additional work required to get ready for the regular season, including developing and implementing this policy. Instead of assuming the policy will be full of holes, how about we wait until we see it.

The point is to have the best chance of being granted an increase in maximum attendance. The point is not to stop Jane Smith from forging a vaccination receipt and sneaking into a game anyway.

 

[OMG67]

I think for any goal to have meaning, it first has to be attainable. If the goal isn't attainable, a certain amount of people automatically fall into the "why bother" category.

The ultimate goal would be 100% of people who are eligible to be vaccinated. Obviously that will never happen. Herd immunity is theoretically 75% I believe - if the vaccine is 100% effective, which it isn't.

I'm unsure how it's possible to set any goal in stone. The goal is as many as possible. Pfizer has just received Full FDA Approval. Hopefully that helps.

There’s a lot of grey area in that but I agree with you. The goal should be attainable but there has to be a tangible reward as well. In this case, getting to 85% doesn’t guarantee very much if the goal posts constantly change.

Regarding your 75% based on 100% effectiveness, that is true BUT there are those with natural immunity as well. The lowest level projected was 20% and up to 60%. Even if we suggest it is the lowest level at 20%, it would mean that 20% of the remaining 25% unvaccinated would be immune which would add an additional 5%. So, if we get to 85%, we are probably at closer to 90% in real immunity and that doesn’t factor in the people deciding to not get vaccinated because they were infected who will also have certain levels of natural immunity. The numbers are, at best, an educated guess based on our current understanding. That understanding changes often as we learn more.

There’s also the issue of waning effectiveness over time. This is just starting to be measured and is resulting in the probable requirement for at least the elderly and more vulnerable requiring a 3rd dose before the winter. Again, a lot of grey area. What may be fully vaccinated for one person (two shits) may not be fully vaccinated for another cohort that requires three shots.

This is why I suggest that any business requires proof of a vaccine to enter, it needs to be authenticated properly. Whether I agree or disagree with them being required is irrelevant to the topic of authentication.

 

[HockeyPops]

What may be fully vaccinated for one person (two shits)

Freudian slip?

 

[OMG67]

An announcement is not a policy. The league has implemented a longer pre season to help them with the additional work required to get ready for the regular season, including developing and implementing this policy. Instead of assuming the policy will be full of holes, how about we wait until we see it.

The point is to have the best chance of being granted an increase in maximum attendance. The point is not to stop Jane Smith from forging a vaccination receipt and sneaking into a game anyway.

But, that is my point. This isn’t about stopping unvaccinated people from entering games. It is about posturing for the facade of it for whatever advantage the OHL can get out of it.

The people on here are mostly applauding it because they think this makes it safer to go to games because unvaccinated people will be barred entry. Nothing is farther from the truth. This is why I’ve stated my personal opinion of whether they should or should not check Vaccination status is irrelevant because that is not what I m trying to convey. It is about authentication and some of the other hurdles the League may face implementing such a Policy.

Authenticating will be impossible without some form of centralized database that businesses have access to. If there were a centralized database, then I could see advanced ticket sales where teams have the time and means to authenticate vaccination status. But, the Government has stated they have no interest in creating this. THEREFORE, the only logical option is to demand a copy of their onsite receipt at time of vaccination or the email confirming. Both are easily doctored.

If this is all about trying to get full rinks and this strategy works for the OHL, I am all for it. Good for them. But if this is for some form of altruistic sense of safety for those attending games or participating in them, I am sorry but that is simply not possible.

 

[OMG67]

Freudian slip?

HAHA YES!

(Two Shots)

 

[HockeyPops]

The people on here are mostly applauding it because they think this makes it safer to go to games because unvaccinated people will be barred entry. Nothing is farther from the truth.

You can't believe that every single unvaccinated individual that would have attended games will now under the new policy fabricate a vaccination receipt and still attend. No, the vast majority will either get vaccinated so they can attend, or simply boycott the games. This policy will significantly reduce the spread and make attending these games safer.

Will it be hard for the OHL to implement an effective policy? Probably. But just because something is hard, does not mean it should not be done.

 

[WaW]

The point is what are you celebrating? The concept presented by the OHL or an actual Plan that will ensure unvaccinated people will not enter the building? I don’t see a plan. I see a statement that says unvaccinated “fans” will not be granted access.

My personal opinion is irrelevant. I want the Government to make a decision for its population and we, as citizens, should follow it just like we’ve followed the regulations handed down for the last 18 months. Businesses that went the other direction contravening the regulations were punished. I’m not asking for anything more or less in this case.

If a business wants to suggest they will not let in unvaccinated people then they better damn well guarantee it. The way I see it, there is a zero chance in hell of them being able to guarantee it. It is irresponsible for any business to make these sorts of policies when they don’t have the means to properly authenticate it.

1. We're celebrating the announcement, which absolutely carried the right message if you believe (as most of us do) that the science of the vaccines and encouraging people to get vaccinated, and the pro-vaccine culture in general is the way forward.

2. Foolproof strategies are a myth. The blind idealism that results from finding loopholes in absolutely everything and pretending like there is a perfect solution is nothing more than a fairy tale. In addition to this, there are always loopholes, but assuming that the majority of the dissenting masses are all going to jump through all of the hoops necessary to exploit them is simply beyond unrealistic.

3. I think HockeyPops said it best in his post as to the importance in distinguishing an announcement from a strategy/policy. Probably the best post in this thread.

 

[OMG67]

1. We're celebrating the announcement, which absolutely carried the right message if you believe (as most of us do) that the science of the vaccines and encouraging people to get vaccinated, and the pro-vaccine culture in general is the way forward.

2. Foolproof strategies are a myth. The blind idealism that results from finding loopholes in absolutely everything and pretending like there is a perfect solution is nothing more than a fairy tale. In addition to this, there are always loopholes, but assuming that the majority of the dissenting masses are all going to jump through all of the hoops necessary to exploit them is simply beyond unrealistic.

3. I think HockeyPops said it best in his post as to the importance in distinguishing an announcement from a strategy/policy. Probably the best post in this thread.

I understand the sentiment of the opinions expressed here. I also understand the potential need for some form of safety requirements moving forward. Whether they are “required” is where the debate can happen elsewhere. I am not interested in whether they are required.

We’ve been through a lot and so many businesses “sound” altruistic in their approach but really that isn’t their primary objective. My personal opinion is the OHL is operating saying one thing and really doing another. That is my issue with a lot of these sorts of announcements or proclamations. Call me skeptical but I am sort of tired of businesses and organizations stating what THEY feel is right for everyone. It is not their place to make these assessments. Our Government comprises elected officials and their designates that set standards for businesses (and individuals) to follow. In that regard, I believe it should be up to the Government to decide what is and is not allowed. As of right now, the Government does not require proof of vaccination for large events. As of right now, the OHL has not secured additional attendance based on their policy. To me, they are operating outside the purview of their responsibility.

On the other hand, if the OHL has officially requested permission from the Provincial Government to ask for Proof of Vaccination and they have been granted that permission, that is a different story. That authentication process would need to be properly vetted of course. It is my understanding that the OHL has not done that and the Province is simply ignoring it because they don’t care. To me, that is the wrong approach. We have set standards in this Province/Country that are properly vetted and fair. We shouldn’t be simply throwing them out the window and allow businesses to essentially go rogue and operate against the Government stance on what is and is not safe.

As of right now, the Province of Ontario states it is safe to attend indoor events for up to XXX number of people provided additional safety standards are implemented. The Federal and Provincial Government have unequivocally stated that once we reach the 85% vaccination, we are relatively safe and there is no need for a vaccine passport for domestic applications. This is because the risk of serious illness is minimal and there is no significant evidence that those that are vaccinated can end up requiring Acute Hospital care upon infection. Over 90% of the elderly and Vulnerable population cohorts are fully vaccinated and that is a significant factor for their current approach. Current hospitalization data suggests the vaccines are working and are keeping serious illness numbers at bay. Based on this data, the Government has made their decision not to implement a vaccine Passport for Domestic application.

So, if the Government says we are safe, and we are vaccinated, why would any business need to go beyond what the Government has set as standards. And, keep in mind, the Province of Ontario has amongst the most stringent standards and protocols anywhere in the entire world. Yet, somehow the OHL feels they need to do more? I don’t buy it unless it is for non-altruistic reasons that have not a heck of a lot to do with Health.

 

[OMG67]

You can't believe that every single unvaccinated individual that would have attended games will now under the new policy fabricate a vaccination receipt and still attend. No, the vast majority will either get vaccinated so they can attend, or simply boycott the games. This policy will significantly reduce the spread and make attending these games safer.

Will it be hard for the OHL to implement an effective policy? Probably. But just because something is hard, does not mean it should not be done.

All I am saying is if a person is unvaccinated and wants to attend an OHL game, it wouldn’t take too much for them to shirk the system. In addition, because of other factors most do not consider, there may be breaches of privacy laws that need to be factored in.

Again, if the NHL were to implement this (or the Leafs/Senators because they are in Ontario), I think the debate would be more fervent and productive…or unproductive depending on how you look at it. But, because it is the OHL and very few people care at all about the OHL, the debate is pretty much a non-factor.

That said, the debate is going to pick up when school requirements etc are implemented. It has already stated with the Hospitals and all the loopholes in their plan to require all staff to be vaccinated as well as contract staff, and other on site contractors etc. It is a shit show because the government isn’t making a decision one way or the other and it is only going to get worse the further we go into the Fall.

 

[Purple Phart]

Is there not a requirement under law to disclose certain health status if asked ? I'm thinking specifically about HIV/AIDS disclosure.
Covid-19 vaccination status or misrepresentation of one's situation is somewhat related, in that the unvaccinated have the potential to infect many with this virus. Faking a vaccination document would probably expose the individual inclined to do do, to some serious litigation and/or criminal charges. Is attendance at a hockey game worth that risk ?

 

[HockeyPops]

I don’t buy it unless it is for non-altruistic reasons that have not a heck of a lot to do with Health.

I re-read the OHL announcement, just in case I had missed something on the first reading. Nope. No altruistic intentions claimed. In fact, no reasoning given for the policy change at all. But that's ok because we all know why they are doing it - the almighty $$$. I think we are both in agreement with that being the reason?

 

[OMG67]

I re-read the OHL announcement, just in case I had missed something on the first reading. Nope. No altruistic intentions claimed. In fact, no reasoning given for the policy change at all. But that's ok because we all know why they are doing it - the almighty $$$. I think we are both in agreement with that being the reason?

If I took out my crystal ball and made a prediction, I don’t think doing it or not doing it will make any difference at all financially. The Ontario Government isn’t going to reverse course on their documented plans to satisfy the OHL because they are doing this. I don’t think they will be granted additional capacity because they are only allowing Vaccinated people in the rink.

I say this because the Government currently is on record saying they are against Covid Passports. Why would they incentivize them? The OHL is not impactful enough to make any sort of difference either way with respect to how the Government operates.

I think their PRIMARY reason for doing it is the optics for the parents of kids playing in the league. Like those commenting on this thread, the vast majority of people seem to be in favour of Vaccine Passports. Or, at least they are in favour of the concept of Vaccine Passports. As such, that would also extend to a majority of player parents. I think the League has probably fielded concerning questions and comments from players parents and decided this would have a net benefit with respect to players reporting. The concept of player safety has been paramount for the League. I think this is an extension of that even if I consider it meaningless in operation.

Don’t get me wrong, I think there is a net benefit for the OHL requiring Proof of Vaccination. However, if the Government mandated either Proof or no Proof, I think the OHL would not have any blood on their hands either way and they would benefit more from following the Government direction (whichever way they decided to go).

My point has been very simple from the beginning of this discussion. The Government needs to make the decision and institute a policy. Either asking for Proof of Vaccination is acceptable and they have a proper means to authenticate it or asking for Proof of Vaccination is not ok for businesses. It takes the pressure off businesses to make the decision for themselves and eliminates all the risks associated to having to make that value decision.

I do not applaud the OHL for implementing this policy because it should be the Government that makes that decision and the OHL should be following the regulations not just making up their own.

 

[OMG67]

Is there not a requirement under law to disclose certain health status if asked ? I'm thinking specifically about HIV/AIDS disclosure.
Covid-19 vaccination status or misrepresentation of one's situation is somewhat related, in that the unvaccinated have the potential to infect many with this virus. Faking a vaccination document would probably expose the individual inclined to do do, to some serious litigation and/or criminal charges. Is attendance at a hockey game worth that risk ?

Who is allowed to ask?

 

[OMG67]

Blue Jays will ask for proof of vaccination OR negative COVID test for fans. Same for MLSE events.

the key here is they will allow unvaccinated provided they prove they are COVID negative.

to me, this is a reasonable compromise of sorts but the fact remains that businesses are left to make their own rules.

 

[RayzorIsDull]

Who is allowed to ask?

HIV is totally different and in Canada you do that also deals with the fact you would be having contact with a single individual at the time. In the states it varies where you are due to partner notification law. In the future if you suffer from diabetes should you inform your waiter before making dessert choices?

I have a hard time believing that vaccination status would be included in such categories here in Canada/Ontario. One being the fact that you can show a negative COVID test for entry into an event. Second of all we still see approximately 30% of cases involve vaccinated people. If there are any cases with vaccinated people attending games and getting COVID will they reconsider fans being allowed at games?? Any STH that have already made their payment but are not vaccinated will they get a full refund or will organizations demand that STH get vaccinated as they have already paid??

I would agree with you it's about perception and optics.

 

[PuckStop75]

HIV is totally different and in Canada you do that also deals with the fact you would be having contact with a single individual at the time. In the states it varies where you are due to partner notification law. In the future if you suffer from diabetes should you inform your waiter before making dessert choices?

I have a hard time believing that vaccination status would be included in such categories here in Canada/Ontario. One being the fact that you can show a negative COVID test for entry into an event. Second of all we still see approximately 30% of cases involve vaccinated people. If there are any cases with vaccinated people attending games and getting COVID will they reconsider fans being allowed at games?? Any STH that have already made their payment but are not vaccinated will they get a full refund or will organizations demand that STH get vaccinated as they have already paid??

I would agree with you it's about perception and optics.

Fully expect that the league is still looking at capacity limits, STH can get vaccinated or relinquish their ticket for refund. That will become the cost of this decision. Don’t want to prove you are vaccinated your not getting in.

 

[Purple Phart]

Who is allowed to ask?

With HIV/AIDS any potential partner is allowed to ask, and expect a truthful reply. Should that person become infected, after getting an untruthful response, they can have the individual who misrepresented their status, criminally charged.

The reason I brought this up, is that a business or venue asking for a negative covid test, or proof of vaccination, is in pretty much the same situation as that potential HIV/AIDS partner who is NOT infected. Faking a Covid-19 vaccination document is somewhat related , in that the faker is misrepresenting their status, and in doing so, is putting a lot of people at risk.

 

[rangersblues]

There’s a lot of grey area in that but I agree with you. The goal should be attainable but there has to be a tangible reward as well. In this case, getting to 85% doesn’t guarantee very much if the goal posts constantly change.

Regarding your 75% based on 100% effectiveness, that is true BUT there are those with natural immunity as well. The lowest level projected was 20% and up to 60%. Even if we suggest it is the lowest level at 20%, it would mean that 20% of the remaining 25% unvaccinated would be immune which would add an additional 5%. So, if we get to 85%, we are probably at closer to 90% in real immunity and that doesn’t factor in the people deciding to not get vaccinated because they were infected who will also have certain levels of natural immunity. The numbers are, at best, an educated guess based on our current understanding. That understanding changes often as we learn more.

There’s also the issue of waning effectiveness over time. This is just starting to be measured and is resulting in the probable requirement for at least the elderly and more vulnerable requiring a 3rd dose before the winter. Again, a lot of grey area. What may be fully vaccinated for one person (two shits) may not be fully vaccinated for another cohort that requires three shots.

This is why I suggest that any business requires proof of a vaccine to enter, it needs to be authenticated properly. Whether I agree or disagree with them being required is irrelevant to the topic of authentication.

Just saw Faucci on TV. He said nobody can honestly say what the number is because it's something we've never faced before. We'll know when we get there. Until then the goal is to get as many people vaccinated as possible.