The following document is the most rigorous "science" I could find regarding the considerations of Covid vaccines for elite athletes and perhaps what Jo and her team are taking into consideration. The final summary paragraph ends:

"Until this time [widespread vaccine rollout], sports clinicians can familiarise themselves with vaccine types, likely type to be used in their setting; efficacy; and side effect profiles; and can set up vaccination protocols for their athletes (plan the timing, site, and pre-and post-vaccination training carefully through shared decision making) so they are best prepared."... which all sounds remarkably like Jo's statement.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7906689/

christ wrote:

---

Steve J wrote:

---

Covid is simply not dangerous enough for governments to be allowed to throw medical ethics and human rights in the bin. 

What medical treatments Ms. Konta chooses to have or not have are her decision and hers alone.

---

How on earth does one conceive that medical ethics have been compromised

---

Coercing people to undergo an experimental medical procedure. Abandoning the principal of informed consent.

Life is too short to bother responding to the rest of your nonsense.

christ wrote:

---

TTMan wrote:

---

The following document is the most rigorous "science" I could find regarding the considerations of Covid vaccines for elite athletes and perhaps what Jo and her team are taking into consideration. The final summary paragraph ends:

"Until this time [widespread vaccine rollout], sports clinicians can familiarise themselves with vaccine types, likely type to be used in their setting; efficacy; and side effect profiles; and can set up vaccination protocols for their athletes (plan the timing, site, and pre-and post-vaccination training carefully through shared decision making) so they are best prepared."... which all sounds remarkably like Jo's statement.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7906689/

---

 Two observations:

1) "taking time to set up vaccination protocols" is not immediately synonymous with "personal choice", although if you squint I can see the vague similarity

2) All of that science in the paper neglects to observe that the alternative to the vaccine may well be the disease. One can spend a lot of time planning the precise moment in an athlete's calendar at which it is appropriate for them to be vaccinated, and then have them catch the disease instead. Then the problem is not playing tennis with a sore arm, but potentially dying.

---

 Firstly, the article was originally published in The Lancet, possibly the most learned Medical Journal.

Secondly, professional elite athletes will have very different considerations to you and I. Getting the timing right within a busy schedule is a tricky issue for all tennis players and Jo (and her team) were caught out but she is not unique in that respect and there's much more for athletes to consider than a "sore arm". We should remember that Jo is also managing an injury which imposes it's own constraints, particularly on availability of her time and she is also known to have other medical issues. 

Finally, "Ill make a personal choice on kind of when and how and where and all those things." is pretty much the same as "plan the timing, site, and pre-and post-vaccination training carefully through shared decision making". I have little doubt Jo will be working with her medical adviser(s) on all her health issues.  There is no evidence that Jo is anti-vax, in fact quite the reverse.

Coup Droit wrote:

---

Yes.

Also, the quote says: "Until this time [widespread vaccine rollout],......."

i.e. UNTIL the time of vaccines being widely available, doctors etc can think about what would be the best approach for the players...

Jo would have been entitled to a vaccine as of mid/late May (as she turned 30 in mid/late May and over 30s were allowed then) - so her doctors should have decided before then what their approach was going to be.

Which presumably they did - not to have it yet- and so, yes, she caught the disease which is not that surprising for such an infectious strain- as you say, chris, this is not a tetanus booster - you can't just think when would be the best time without also thinking what are my chances of catching it. (And, yes, you can still catch it after the double vaccine and two weeks, but the chances are so much lower and the chances of being very ill are practically nothing)

Not just aimed at Jo, obviously. But all. 

-- Edited by Coup Droit on Saturday 14th of August 2021 10:09:52 AM

---

 There's inevitably a lot of speculation going on here. We don't how Jo and Dan picked it up but I would guess both were being careful. Dan commented he wouldn't be partying! and Jo was shown a lot wearing a mask, going right back to 2020. If I recall correctly, over 30's became eligible about the same time Jo turned 30? In any case, I think we should just accept they both behaved professionally, under their respective medical advice.

Coup Droit wrote:

---

Chris wasn't criticising The Lancet - he was saying that deciding protocols, before the vaccine is possible, (which is what it says) is not the same as thinking about what might be the best path some time afterwards the vaccine has been available for a while, when you're not just deciding when and where (and if) to get the vaccine, but how likely it is you'll catch the virus instead and what the risks of that might be, as opposed to the inconveniences (and risks) of the vaccine.

---

 The article concludes that clinicians should use the time before vaccines become broadly available to set protocols. Not sure if that answers your question? But I would like to think the athletes' doctors were taking the risk of catching the virus into account. I think the point is that decisions for elite athletes are much more complex than for you and I, if they are to compete on an even playing field and it's not yet an exact science. Put simply, Jo and Dan (and others) were caught out and have paid the price but I don't for one moment, think either have behaved unprofessionally.  

TTMan wrote:

---

christ wrote:

---

TTMan wrote:

---

The following document is the most rigorous "science" I could find regarding the considerations of Covid vaccines for elite athletes and perhaps what Jo and her team are taking into consideration. The final summary paragraph ends:

"Until this time [widespread vaccine rollout], sports clinicians can familiarise themselves with vaccine types, likely type to be used in their setting; efficacy; and side effect profiles; and can set up vaccination protocols for their athletes (plan the timing, site, and pre-and post-vaccination training carefully through shared decision making) so they are best prepared."... which all sounds remarkably like Jo's statement.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7906689/

---

 Two observations:

1) "taking time to set up vaccination protocols" is not immediately synonymous with "personal choice", although if you squint I can see the vague similarity

2) All of that science in the paper neglects to observe that the alternative to the vaccine may well be the disease. One can spend a lot of time planning the precise moment in an athlete's calendar at which it is appropriate for them to be vaccinated, and then have them catch the disease instead. Then the problem is not playing tennis with a sore arm, but potentially dying.

---

 Firstly, the article was originally published in The Lancet, possibly the most learned Medical Journal.

Secondly, professional elite athletes will have very different considerations to you and I. Getting the timing right within a busy schedule is a tricky issue for all tennis players and Jo (and her team) were caught out but she is not unique in that respect and there's much more for athletes to consider than a "sore arm". We should remember that Jo is also managing an injury which imposes it's own constraints, particularly on availability of her time and she is also known to have other medical issues. 

Finally, "Ill make a personal choice on kind of when and how and where and all those things." is pretty much the same as "plan the timing, site, and pre-and post-vaccination training carefully through shared decision making". I have little doubt Jo will be working with her medical adviser(s) on all her health issues.  There is no evidence that Jo is anti-vax, in fact quite the reverse.

---

 I have no argument with anything in the article (... although it is probably out of date now, however learned it is)

... and I stand by everything I said: nothing you have said addresses that.

NB: I deliberately characterised the differences between the extremes (sore arm and dying) for effect, whilst understanding there is a continuum in between. The point still stands.

Just to be clear, my comments are in no way targeting Jo specifically.

My accusations of lack of civic responsibility apply equally to Dan Evans (if he did not get the vaccine) as he also would have been entitled to it as of mid-May. And any other player age 30 or above. And equally to players under 30, from early June. (All based on UK dates of availability). And applies to those who have not caught it, as well as those who have, i.e. Jo and Dan.