The UK Government recently accepted St Helens RFC’s offer to use their Totally Wicked Stadium as a mass-vaccination centre (although with typically health-conscious BBC neutrality, they weren’t allowed to refer to its sponsored naming by an e-cig firm).
While it’s great news, I find it somewhat ironic that the people responsible for the existence of such an arena, the players of the club, won’t be hearing from the NHS for a while to come.
Despite the somewhat misleading title, I’m in no way advocating the prioritisation of fit, healthy athletes with a statistically insignificant risk to coronavirus over the vulnerable.
It’s not a case of Greg Inglis shoulder-charging Doris out of the queue, or John Bateman giving the biff to Betty.
I’m aware that the situation is different in Australia to allow for a more leisurely start to vaccination (although with billions being lost to border closures, there does seem to be some needless foot-dragging), but the situation will still apply as and when regulatory approval is granted.
There are already options for sporting bodies to bulk-buy directly from vaccine manufacturers instead of using government supplies, like the NHL suggested. Paying for batches, rather than drawing upon the state, investing in infrastructure that can later be used for public roll-out, would have benefits in the short and long-term immunisation effort.
But if such a commercial arrangement is not available, there are still good reasons for pushing athletes up the priority list.
If data out of Israel is to be believed, then receiving the vaccine should massively reduce the chances of transmission. This would alleviate the need for bi-weekly testing, with the money and resources being pumped back into the health service, as has been put forward by EPL managers.
But there also exists the reasoning of appreciation for what the players have done and continue to do.
(Ashley Feder/Getty Images)
I’ve written ad infinitum about how sport preserved what’s left of my sanity. Not above and beyond the prioritisation of everything else, but I’m sure there’s a small minority that agrees the preservation of sport should be strived for. The roll-out of vaccines to athletes and officials would go a long way to keeping the show on the road.
Once the over 70s and clinically vulnerable are jabbed, those in public-facing roles (teachers, supermarket workers, bus drivers, etc) are reportedly to be bumped up the list. Despite the existence of player bubbles of various porosity, sweating and breathing over dozens of other athletes for hours is about as interactive as you get.
There’s also a rather crude economic argument. Even behind closed doors, sports generates millions in economic revenue at a time when income streams have been decimated. From TV rights, advertising, merchandise sales and foreign investment, sport is a multi-billion-dollar industry beneficial to both health and wealth.
As much as I offer rational explanations for such an outcome, my interest is also driven by a fair degree of selfishness. The suspension of sport once again really would send me over the edge, but there are societal arguments supported by the majority that the vulnerable must be protected.
There are different arguments for different sports. NRL and AFL players could be freed of bubble life, rewarding them for their sacrifices in keeping the show on the road. But do Sheffield Shield players, engaging in the most socially distanced sport imaginable, need to be prioritised? These are difficult questions that exist in a morally ambiguous grey zone, that ultimately no one will be happy with.
There also exists the issue of vaccine refusal once they become readily available for the general population. The anti-vax movement seems to be relatively inconsequential, but one only needs to remember how Project Apollo was almost derailed by the flu vaccine hullabaloo with the Gold Coast Titans.
Should it be mandatory for players? My instincts would say no (just), but that is a decision entirely up to Australian governments and sports bodies, and I am well aware of the (so far successful) position taken against those who refuse vaccination.
There will be plenty of arguments to come in society as to how and when restrictions ease, who gets priority and why. But I for one would not be displeased if those that have kept me sane during these crazy times are rewarded and afforded every means to keep the show going on.
fiwiboy7042
Roar Rookie
Nat, injury and illness will also impact on a person's immunity system. A fit, young player who breaks a limb will be more vulnerable to the virus (and this is the non-mutated strain). The new mutant strains are apparently infecting the young more easily.
fiwiboy7042
Roar Rookie
I do have a qualm with fit elite athletes jumping the queue (which is apparently what V'landys is now proposing for the Warriors). Look at the Aust Open fiasco.
Kent Dorfman
Roar Rookie
elite athletes should be last on the list toget the vaccine.They are still playing their sport and still earning their $500,000 / year. If any deserve it 1st it should be in the food industry such as restaurants etc, they have shut down, lost their jobs, possibly lose their establishment because they can no longer pay rent for the place. Look at these "boo hoo I can't even wash my hair" tennis players and their partners - how many millions will they still be making from their sponsors etc for playing?
Tim Buck 3
Roar Rookie
Your brother is welcome to come in as long as he doesn't bring a cat with him. They are pests that are causing mass extinctions of our small marsupials. Also many birds are ground feeders that evolved with no cats. Eastern Rosellas are only seen feeding with large flocks of sulphur crested cockatoos.
Eelsalmighty
Roar Rookie
I get all of that. Bottom line, the point/s I was trying to get across was we need to put some context around the problem/our response. In theory we could feed the world with what we (the developed world) throw away, get it to the starving people, have it cooked by a celebrity chef and still get enough "change" to create a new nation from what the world's spent/lost from COVID to date. Is the world overpopulated (of course) can it continue as is (definitely not), are we going to do anything about it (even more clearly, definitely not). I agree with your comments on AIDS, but that was the "OMG" of the eighties, but now that we (the developed world) have a (semi) solution it's not an issue any more. Just from a "context" perspective, we have a vaccine, and treatment for the flu, and have had it (them) for decades and the death toll is still around a quarter of that from COVID (I know, and I'd shoot that argument down myself) but back to sport. Should a professional sportsperson/s get the vaccine before me, I think yes. Will COVID still be around in a year, 3,or 5 years, I also think yes. Will you/the average person care in 3 or 5 years, I think no.
Eelsalmighty
Roar Rookie
Maybe we're closer to being on the same page than I thought. I think the timeframe (year) from a health perspective isn't a problem. I would quite happily wait a year, or more, to be vaccinated, and not be concerned about my health. That said, I'm all for getting those at (serious) risk vaccinated ASAP (no queue jumping in front of the aged/seriously at risk). It's the economy/macro social implications I'm most concerned about. I don't need to be vaccinated to do my job, but if a professional sportsperson does, and they certainly need to more than I do (at least from a public perspective) then give them priority. That was my point. I'm not worried about getting COVID, nor am I worried about getting a vaccination, what actually worries me is the social/financial cost of "our limbo". I live in WA, and I have never been more embarrassed/ashamed to call myself a "WestAussie". Our Premier is playing the COVID card to a chorus of "trained monkeys" (banging their symbols together in rapid cessation) and his approval rating is going/has gone through the roof as a result of a "close the border" for at least a month/back date incarceration, to Australia/all Australians if there's even a single case (anywhere). So, if a sporting club is prepared to purchase enough vaccinations for their players/staff/volunteers etc and administer those vaccinations with their own medical staff ahead of the national rollout, I'm all for it, and if someone who is in the public eye gets it before me, I'm all for that too.
Big Daddy
Guest
Brendon, your last line just about sums it up. It's been about 12 months since this pandemic started and all sporting codes have been getting preferential treatment at the public's expense. It's about time all government's federal and state stepped in and drawn a line in the sand. The health and economy of this country far outweighs the greedy demands of all sporting codes.
Brendon
Roar Rookie
Common idiot...isn't she married to an ex-NRL player?
Brendon
Roar Rookie
Ok, I'll give it a go. AIDS (not being a respitory disease) is entirely different in that its transmission can be controlled. In 2019, an estimated 690000 people dies as a result of AIDS (wikipedia). To date (so 12 months) 2.06M people have died of Covid. So Covid-19 is currently mopre deadly. AIDS can be treated (not cured) and an estimated 6.6 million people get this treatment. General survirability of AIDS with no treatment is 19 months, with treatment is 40 years. So by taking preventative measure (we all wrap it up right?) you can reduce chance of infection by 80% and by taking curative measures, you increase lifespan by around 39 years. Covid can kill you right now without treatment or with treatment (as there is no real treatment) and there is no way of preventing it. Lets compare to the Flu (because its always the go to, its just another Flu). In 2019-2020 (pre-covid) Influenze killed 62000 in the US. Covid in 2020 is at 402K. Thats a little over a 6 fold increase, and given we aren't 12 months yet, and the figures are rising, thats terrifying. Onto treatable diseases, thats a tricky one, simply because how do you resolve it? Starvation is not cheaper or easier. There are limited resources, and too many people. According to the UN, 25,000 people die of hunger a day but its hard to truly quantify. The question is, how do you fix it? You need to rapidly develop these countrys (a well in a village isn't going to help) to make them 100% self sustaining. Thats not cheap and easy, and even if it was, who does it? Governments? Me and you? There are no private sectors related to this, so how easy is it to fix? Then you have to consider the areas where a lot of this happens are in war, not the most environmentally stable locations, and as horrible as it is to say, over populated. The only way to truly reduce starvation is to reduce population. That being said, the portion of people starving is decreasing. The raw number may increase but as a percentage its going down (10.7% in 2017).
Brendon
Roar Rookie
Quite simply put, no. I appreciate you taking the time to write the article, but honestly, it doesn't work. Working for a large company that is in the vaccine field (not Pfizer or Astra, I think ours is 3rd one out) I can tell you the logistics alone are impossible. You have so many lines manufacturing so many doses, thats the hold up. Its not the government, its not the ability to inject people, its the manufacturing and logistics process. Off your suggestion, you need to either half the supply to the general public or increase production which, if it was possible, would have happened. You then need to increase logistics which is already incredibly difficult (due to limited air travel, reducing flight capacities, preventing the distribution of products). Then you need to be able to get it to the athletes, at which stage you are giving health priority to the rich, and turning AU into the USA. Assuming a company does agree to doing this with the NRL (which would be a hard sell as you are setting up an entire manufacturing and supply chain line for 300-500 people, when standard would be in the millions range) I assume that'd charge more than the $30 per dose, so I'd question if the NRL could afford it anyway. So from a logistical and supply chain stand point, I disagree. Now from a moral stand point, we may as well give in to Novaks demands at the AO, because you are suggesting that a bunch of entertainers should be able to purchase priority over the benefit to the rest of mankind. Even if they do set up their own supply chain, they are taking resources to make the vaccine. That impacts the general public. Taking the time of manufactueres, impacts the public, taking time for the guy receiving the goods, that impacts the public. There is no possible way this is a fair outcome, when you have doctors, nurses, teachers, scientists, the elderly, and pretty much every day people who should be able them. I would honestly go so far as to argue the exact opposite. 2020 showed us that they can still profit in their lives despite being in quarantine. They still played their game, earnt their money, while there are cafe workers, tradies, hair dressers,etc who couldn't operate for weeks/months on end due to closures. They need it first. There are doctors getting sick from Covid, they need it first, and there are old people dying. They need it first. Athletes really should be the bottom of the food chain.
Big Daddy
Guest
Just reading the government is saying it's not mandatory. If that's the case it will be interesting to see if the NRL make it mandatory. Still people that don't believe in vaccination so some people may end up in court - who knows.
mushi
Roar Guru
Not offensive at all Sam, and to be honest I get the personal reason for sport. A lot of what you suggest would be of benefit to me personally.
Sam Drew
Roar Guru
No that's more than fine, a bit of normal online criticism, so long as it's in good faith and respectful, should be taken in good stead. And I do actually agree with your idea that we need to get back to 'normal' ASAP, and hope that rollout gathers enough pace that talk of prioritisation becomes moot. I'm just imbued with cynicism that my government (not necessarily the Australian gov.) will cock it up that we eventually need these unnecessary conversations about rankings and jab queues.
Sam Drew
Roar Guru
Hi Mushi, thank you for sharing, and although they're just words, I truly am sorry for your loss and the circumstances you found/find yourself in. As much as I try to keep up with SMH and 9 News, I know the situations in our respective countries makes it hard for me to truly understand the situation on the ground and local context. I am sorry if my suggestion is a bit on the nose.
mushi
Roar Guru
But I take your point on if this is a cathartic exercise for Sam I should not hold it to the normal rules of open criticism. So I'll scurry off on this topic now...
mushi
Roar Guru
It's actually not that raw - the QLD police thing is as that was just incompetence and makes me query the rest of the processes - only the saying I bordered on needing "perspecitve". I can't unring the bell and I deliberately chose not to use a loophole and run the risk of our social workers losing access. My view is that Sam's focus point is like focusing on pain killers for his pain rather than getting the operation that will fix his most pressing issue. I get and, to an extent sympathise with his plight. To be fair every ones reaction is different, people that thrive on interaction could be struggling more from sydney restrictions than I did from my situation. The world was actually in a pretty terrible place economically and geopolitically to start 2020. We need to get back to global "normal" ASAP to avoid long term damage that will be way more disruptive than COVID. We still haven't structurally repaired the economy from the GFC so to me anything not focused on that is wasteful.
Nat
Roar Rookie
I'm very sorry to hear that mate, my very best wishes to you and yours. In no way do I want to diminish your hurt nor make excuses for the Govt (I've been quite harsh on the politicising of the issue for the sake of an election). I've done 1x 14 day stint for similar reasons but I haven't lost anyone so I can only empathise. Thank you for sharing, it provides a better insight to your perspective. As for Sam's biggest issue - his brother, surely with your community work you know that acceptance is a stage of grief. He wants for his brother what he cannot have for himself. Anyway, I can see this is raw for you so I'll leave it alone. We've agreed and disagreed on 100 topics in the past and this can be another.
mushi
Roar Guru
There definitely is a supply pipeline, if you take the whole forecast 2021 production there will be enough for most of the world. and as you point out the supply then meets logistics. As CSL pointed out when asked to produce the new vaccine they just don't have local capacity. But a year is still a long time for economies to be shut and propped up with welfare. If, in your view, it isn't a long time then why talk about prioritisation at all. So either the time frame matters and so does prioritisation or it doesn't and the discussion on prioritisation is redundant. As to being concerned I'm technically an essential worker but I'm happy to give it up to others at median income or below who are more concerned about the virus as it is likely to change their behaviour, and the economic outcomes, more.
mushi
Roar Guru
But when there is no constraint there is no priority list...
mushi
Roar Guru
1 in 100 but hey proof reading was never my strong suit