The Observer
New member
Slight infiltration of lungs is something that most bronchitis patients get, yet you concluded some Long Covid and career ending phantasies based on him not playing the 2 remaining games of the year. I'm out.
Joshua Kimmich
- Thread starter Butaan4barca
- Start date
Birdy
Senior Member
Oh Gosh, you are something, aren't you?
From your MEssi posts I could see that you don't get much about football, but now you have upgraded to a whole new level with your Covid 'views'.
Why are you pretending to know medical shit?
- 'Slight' is a formulation by the player in a public statement. How slight or how NOT slight, time will only tell. And even if he was suspecting something more serious, he wouldn't come out to say it publicly at this point.
- Long-Covid if you don't know encompasses all side-effects, from milder to more severe, resulting from Covid infection, ADN last long after the person tests negative
- It's not just 'not playing 2 remaining games'
It's that he is out for now, and we will see for how long...
Nice try to downplay the importance of the infection, and push your anti-vax, conspiracist, agenda.
Try better next time
jairzinho
Senior Member
"I'm happy my self-isolation caused by the coronavirus has ended," Kimmich said in a team release. "I'm doing very well, but I'm not yet able to train fully due to slight infiltrations in my lungs. I'll therefore do some rehabilitative training and can't wait to be fully back in action in January."
Those are HIS words, not mines or yours. He isn't facing any long term cataclysmic lung related issue as some would have us believe. The simple fact is there are persons, BOTH vaccincated and unvaxxed who experience mild symptoms after contracting the virus. He was already given a rehabilitative recovery window of one month. Simple as that.
At the end of the day he has chosen not to be vaxxed and is already being personally attacked which is unsurprising. It's unfortunate that most people are not instead angry at the fact that manufacturers of vaccines refused to produce it unless every government shielded them from liability. It means they can't be sued in the event their are long term issues.
Those are HIS words, not mines or yours. He isn't facing any long term cataclysmic lung related issue as some would have us believe. The simple fact is there are persons, BOTH vaccincated and unvaxxed who experience mild symptoms after contracting the virus. He was already given a rehabilitative recovery window of one month. Simple as that.
At the end of the day he has chosen not to be vaxxed and is already being personally attacked which is unsurprising. It's unfortunate that most people are not instead angry at the fact that manufacturers of vaccines refused to produce it unless every government shielded them from liability. It means they can't be sued in the event their are long term issues.
Birdy
Senior Member
Did I say 'cataclysmic' or something like that?
I listed 4-5 questions we don't know yet, from milder side-effects to more serious ones.
It can be anything in there.
From his statements, we don't know that 'it's nothing' as you say, rather we know that there is 'something there' ("slight infiltration" he called it), which we don't know yet how and when it will end.
Long-Covid, BY DEFINITION, encompasses such events, even if slight.
Now your last paragraph is another thing.
Don't go there, it's off-topic.
Our discussion is if Kimmich was right not to get vaccinated on medical-scientific based, and not the economic and socio-political aspect of vaccine production and administration
Look, if its his freedom to not be vaccinated, its also mine, and others freedom to call him a dumbass for it.
jairzinho
Senior Member
All of that possible 'something is there' is just mere speculation. The player himself said there is nothing to worry about based on medical examination. It's his freedom to make his own choices instead of blindly following the herd. Maybe he might change his mind, who knows?
My belief in Barcaforum was crushed when reading around in the Corona thread.
On what you just said, it's such a bizarre development how recently there seems to be a movement that associates science and following science-based recommendations with "blindly following the herd", "sheeple", etc. The perversion of this idea is complete when some even quote Kant or enlightenment philosophy ("sapere aude!") to argue that you should DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH and THiNK FOR YOURSELF about matters for which we have well-documented, peer-reviewed scientific insights that no google or newspaper reading can make up for. It completely perverts the original idea of enlightenment.
El Gato
Villarato!
I'm going to be as charitable to this as possible.
a) Of course there are risks to auto-immune disease. About 7.8 in a million cases to be precise. Less than myocarditis. You're more likely to be struck by lightning each passing year in America. Why is this still an argument?
b) Nobody says you need to get vaccinated annually.
Where did this argument even come from?
I'm guessing this assumption comes from the fact that we're in the middle of the pandemic where we're trying to achieve herd immunity and we physically CAN'T and WON'T with the current attitudes
The goal obviously isn't to stick a needle into you on a yearly basis.
It's to expand the community immunity chain in order for the subsequent viruses (which mutate down in severity and up in transmissibility) to become as harmless as possible.
So that you CAN go to the shop and sneeze on fruit that a granny from a flat across the street can still eat and not die/get hospitalized
Right now it's not the fucking case. Hence boosters.
Why is it so hard to understand?
"Science told you 2 doses is enough" - bullshit. They never did. All epidemiologists continually claim that Covid is there to stay. And that includes imposing measures, such as vaccinations and lockdowns, until we reach the point at which it is harmless.
This is the "aliens exist" vs "aliens don't exist" argument on full display. Not even worth entertaining this point. Especially since scientists never claim they know for sure. It's only what you hear from wherever you get your news.
The entire tone of the message as if "science" isn't what you should listen to is preposterous.
Contrast agents - what the hell?
This is just a leading observation because doesn't even explore WHY the decision was taken.
Let me ask you before we go any further - what are contrast agents made of?
And please don't give me some half-arsed answer about 'heavy metals'. When I ask what the strawberry cake is made of, I don't want to hear about strawberries. You claim to understand the harm so explain in detail where it comes from and what precisely the associated risks are.
In general this line of thinking, the attitude to "science".. it's all stemming from an irrational fear of the unknown and the perception of risk which is absolutely common in vaccine hesitancy since the dawn of time.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3906287/
Honestly read the above and have a think how many of the above apply to you?
The last bullet point always describes this type of conversation perfectly. Folks who encourage vaccination get treated like they're sheep and those who don't want to vaccinate get triggered when they're told they're ignorant - naturally mistrusting anything they're told by people who know their shit.
The fear that a 'foreign agent' in your body is bad and proceeding through the process 'naturally' is better.
Yeah, except it isn't.
When you're not vaccinated everything is worse.
From the risk of you getting really sick or dying, and the likelihood you'll need to be hospitalized during recovery, to more rapidly passing it onto others by not being careful who you pass it onto and all the way to far more severe complications to brain (damage to cells circulating blood around the brain, as shown by studies just last month), lungs and heart than if you were to get jabbed. Not to mention long covid for kids.
It's not even close.
But yeah. Some folks just won't be convinced. They'll bitch, whine, moan about their autonomy, make every argument in the book trying to prove how oh so smart they are... and when they do ultimately get it, throw kitchen sink at it. The Joe Rogan way. It's where we're at with vaccine hesitancy.
Anyway - Kimmich
Good player. Dumb guy overestimating his own ability to mine and understand data like many many others.
Last edited:
El Gato
Villarato!
PS
TBH this isn't that recent. Unless you consider this decade recent by default.
It happened the moment every average person got internet on their phone (circa 2010-2013 when telecomms networks started giving out reasonable prices for Mobile Data contracts).
Which naturally lead to every dumbass being plugged in 24/7 being able to do their own 'research' without ever being trained in scientific method (even college students can't apply it well consistently, let alone anyone who hasn't even gone to college) and being able to judge quality of the source they're accessing.
Lo and behold, look where that online revolution led in 2016...
TBH this isn't that recent. Unless you consider this decade recent by default.
It happened the moment every average person got internet on their phone (circa 2010-2013 when telecomms networks started giving out reasonable prices for Mobile Data contracts).
Which naturally lead to every dumbass being plugged in 24/7 being able to do their own 'research' without ever being trained in scientific method (even college students can't apply it well consistently, let alone anyone who hasn't even gone to college) and being able to judge quality of the source they're accessing.
Lo and behold, look where that online revolution led in 2016...
jairzinho
Senior Member
Crushed? Why should it be? Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, their own choices. I don't think that's unreasonable.
Birdy
Senior Member
[MENTION=16313]The Observer[/MENTION]
and all other 'skeptically' (sic) oriented here against vaccines:
Your last resort, which is something like the following argument: "We don't know what side-effect of the vaccine can appear in 10,20,50, 100 yrs from now (and so on)..."
has been answered by Math (of all disciplines!)
Despite the fact that medical sciences and biology say that a case of long-term effect is not possible, let's assume for the sake of the argument that it is.
Then, we have enough samples of vaccinations across the whole globe to employ what mathematicians call a Gamma distribution, and see the following:
The gist is that EVEN IF THERE WAS X HARMFUL SIDE-EFFECT from Vaccination, IT SHOULD HAVE APPEARED BY NOW even in 'small numbers' due to the gigantic number (>4 billion) of samples (vaccinated people) we have.
Source: https://twitter.com/nntaleb/status/1467855689531940867
Ls collected on all fronts, even BY fucking MATH of all sciences
Bad news for the anti-vax boys it is
and all other 'skeptically' (sic) oriented here against vaccines:
Your last resort, which is something like the following argument: "We don't know what side-effect of the vaccine can appear in 10,20,50, 100 yrs from now (and so on)..."
has been answered by Math (of all disciplines!)
Despite the fact that medical sciences and biology say that a case of long-term effect is not possible, let's assume for the sake of the argument that it is.
Then, we have enough samples of vaccinations across the whole globe to employ what mathematicians call a Gamma distribution, and see the following:
The gist is that EVEN IF THERE WAS X HARMFUL SIDE-EFFECT from Vaccination, IT SHOULD HAVE APPEARED BY NOW even in 'small numbers' due to the gigantic number (>4 billion) of samples (vaccinated people) we have.
Source: https://twitter.com/nntaleb/status/1467855689531940867
Ls collected on all fronts, even BY fucking MATH of all sciences
Bad news for the anti-vax boys it is
Home of Barca Fans
