This was posted 2 years 9 months 7 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

[WA] Free Pint to People on Day of Vaccination Fr 12PM-6PM @ Windsor Hotel (South Perth)

17714
[WA] Free Pint to People on Day of Vaccination Fr 12PM-6PM @ Windsor Hotel (South Perth)
Go to Deal
save50 on 13/07/2021 - 10:03 windsorhotelsouthperth.com (589 clicks)
Last edited 23/08/2021 - 10:44 by 2 other users

A Perth pub is offering a free pint to people who get vaccinated against COVID-19, but the offer only applies on the day of the shot.

South Perth’s Windsor Hotel has announced they are giving away a free pint of Ogden’s Brewery beer to those who can prove they have had their jab.

The promotion runs between 12pm-6pm daily.

The move comes hot on the heels of a similar one in Melbourne, which was shot down by the Therapeutic Goods Administration.

The Prince Alfred Hotel was offering free pints to those who had received their shot, but the TGA called the pub and warned them about regulations that prevent using ‘alcohol, tobacco or registered medicines’ as incentives to get vaccinated.

But Prime Minister Scott Morrison said the move was a bit ‘heavy-handed’ and said he would ‘get it sorted’.

Now The Windsor is having a go, with the promotion beginning on Saturday.

Perth punters considering a jab now have the choice of two drinks after getting a shot at one of the city’s vaccination hubs: a juice box, or a pint of Ogden’s finest.

Or, they could have both.

via Perthnow

Alcohol Beer COVID-19 Vaccination Instagrampost

Related Stores

The Windsor Hotel, South Perth
The Windsor Hotel, South Perth

closed Comments

                  • [Deactivated] on 13/07/2021 - 12:05
                    +1

                    @hypie: A principle of medicine is encouraging autonomy of care for all patients. I think what you mean is don't speak to patients if I'm not willing to influence their decision making. Please never become a clinical practitioner.

                    • hypie on 13/07/2021 - 12:11
                      +9

                      @[Deactivated]: You clearly don't understand the other principle of medicine.

                      Evidence based medicine.

                      You have consistently provided false and inaccurate information in your posts (mortality rate for influenza posted was incredibly inaccurate).

                      If you don't understand evidence based medicine. Please go back and do some CEP.

                      • [Deactivated] on 13/07/2021 - 12:15
                        +2

                        @hypie: Nobody understands anything except people who agree with your hysteria. Lock your doors and sit back down on your sofa, I'm sure you're missing the latest terrifying Covid graph on ABC News.

              • AlbyDuck on 13/07/2021 - 11:56
                +5

                @hypie: They watch Sky News. What better education could a free-thinking non-lemming wish for?

              • hypie on 13/07/2021 - 12:03

                @hypie: No*

                Typo in my previous comment.

          • [Deactivated] on 13/07/2021 - 11:47
            +2

            @hypie: "Covid denier"? Ahh, yes, the mantra of the lemming. No one is denying Covid exists. It just doesn't warrant your ridiculous hysteria. Again, get the vaccine and good luck to you. Stay home forever, no one really cares if you do. The rest of us want to live our lives free from government interference. Not a lot to ask.

            • TheBean on 13/07/2021 - 11:56
              +14

              @[Deactivated]: Then remove yourself from society?

            • hoxygt on 13/07/2021 - 12:01
              +2

              @[Deactivated]: Are you American? No issue if you are and like I say, totally respect your right to choose.

              Since you're a nurse (assume practicing) you wouldn't have been locked down and would be familiar with infectious control processes. If you think the only government interference is this COVID vaccine you must live on another planet? Do you not pay taxes, follow road rules, visit a doctor, live by our law i.e. live in the modern world?

        • hoxygt on 13/07/2021 - 11:42
          +5

          Two main things;

          1. Because we can control COVID (as Australia has fairly successfully done) by limiting movement until prevention (vaccinations) become available. Influenza has been in the wild for hundreds of years and can be prevented fairly well with vaccines but its a turd that we need to live with the best we can. COVID will also join the viral burden we all must live with i.e. this years Quad flu vac protects against H1N1 (swine flu)

          2. The flu kills 15.2 peeps/ 100,000 thats 0.015% (CDC source below), COVID kills about 2% of those infected or 2,000 peeps/ 100,000 and causes injury and long terms impacts to many more

          Sources: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/flu.htm & https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanres/article/PIIS2213-2600(20)30527-0/fulltext

        • muwu on 13/07/2021 - 11:50
          +4

          The flu kills almost 4% per 100,000, Covid far less

          Have a read up on the statistics for the lethality of influenza vs. COVID. It will change your opinion here.

          The issue here is novelty. We have lived with influenza for millennia - what changes each season and year is the strain, which ensures the influenza virus can still infect to a certain degree to allow it to persist because the herd immunity that communities have developed over previous years is not quite adequate. What you end up with is relatively low numbers of infection rates and mortality with each influenza outbreak. On the other hand, COVID-19 was a zoonosis, never exposed to human communities before it transitioned from bats, so that we have no historical immunity, leading to higher rates of infection and mortality.

          There are two choices - allow outbreaks and natural infections (DEATH), or vaccination.

          It's 2021. I'm taking modern medicine here. It's imperfect and we have imperfect vaccines that cause side-effects, sometimes, and complications, very rarely, but they allow a route for herd immunity which will save millions of lives.

          • robredo on 13/07/2021 - 15:43
            +7

            @muwu: Historically, Influenza kills more people under the age of 60 than sars-cov-2 has over similar time periods/seasons. While SARS-cov-2 kills more above 60, predominantly those with 2 or more comorbidities. That’s a fact.

            You are also not factually correct when you say the virus jumped from animal to human. This has not been proven, it is only a hypothesis, and a weak one at that. The higher probability hypothesis (85% or so) is that it it was developed in the WIV, right next to the seafood market where it allegedly jumped.

            You also state natural infection means death (in capitals) but vaccination (without commentary). You do realise vaccines have also killed many people worldwide already right? Many deaths or adverse reactions have also gone undocumented.

            And on herd immunity, this can be achieved not just by vaccination but natural infection of those under 60, healthy and without comorbidities. Vaccination should be left to the over 60s who are actually at risk, especially if they have one or many comorbidities. Even then, there’s so many cheap and effective off label treatments it’s just one of many tools in the toolbox. Shame governments, pharma companies, and people are so single minded and focussed on vaccination

            • hypie on 13/07/2021 - 16:44
              +1

              @robredo: Nothing you wrote is actually accurate or factual…. Saying something is a fact doesn't make it a fact (for future reference).

              • [Deactivated] on 13/07/2021 - 17:05
                +2

                @hypie: "Saying something is a fact doesn't make it a fact". Lol, is that a fact? Bullying people online with illogical statements won't sway them (for future reference).

              • robredo on 13/07/2021 - 17:18

                @hypie: And saying something isn’t accurate or factual doesn’t prove that it’s not (for future reference).

                • hypie on 13/07/2021 - 18:25

                  @robredo: I can't reference and cite something that isn't true now can I. Feel free to provide evidence to back up your inaccurate "fact".

                  I'll wait.

                  • [Deactivated] on 13/07/2021 - 18:38
                    +3

                    @hypie: "By the way, I worked in retail for 11 years…". Did you now. https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/413236/comments

                    Was that before or after you got your "degree in this field". Little wonder you requested your comment about your "degree" be deleted. You are a fraud.

                    • hypie on 13/07/2021 - 18:59
                      -1

                      @[Deactivated]: While I was at university… so yes before… you do know people can work while they study right. They don't have to live on the doll and government handouts.

                      I requested removal because I don't need to have online arguments with imbeciles using my credentials.

                      • [Deactivated] on 13/07/2021 - 19:02
                        +1

                        @hypie: You never mentioned your credentials, just some nonsense about having a "degree in this field" (a yet unspecified field) that apparently took 11 years to complete while you worked in retail. Tell us more, please.

    • teereb on 13/07/2021 - 11:18
      +5

      You Google your own stupidity instead of perhaps sending hate for peoples health.

      However, as you seem too ignorant to do so, and too lazy so you would rather send false claims here:

      "..over 7.3 million doses of COVID-19 vaccines." "…335 reports of deaths in people who have recently been vaccinated and found that two were definitely linked to vaccination."

      https://www.tga.gov.au/periodic/covid-19-vaccine-weekly-safe…

      Compared to death rate of covid in Australia:

      https://www.google.com/search?q=Australian+covid+deaths&oq=A…

      31,224 cases, with 911 deaths.

      Do some reading and educate yourself please.

    • nzthunderboy on 13/07/2021 - 11:42
      +4

      Post COVID-19 (after recovering) Many have been Diagnosed with hypersensitivity pneumonitis. There is no such cure for it, whatever damaged that has been caused within the lungs, can’t be repaired.. steroids, intermittent oxygen therapy and nebulise.
      Please look at the data and read some facts from scientist from around the world instead of watching a YouTube video made by a chiropractor wearing a white coat in a park.

      • hoxygt on 13/07/2021 - 11:49
        +5

        This is super interesting - the post COVID injury. The death rate is easily quantifiable but the ongoing injury and decline in quality of life caused by COVID can't be underestimated.

      • yanyan1 on 14/07/2021 - 00:56

        Long Covid too. Some people have gone from working to being bedbound because they are so unwell after the infection.

    • Yorkshire-Man on 13/07/2021 - 14:50

      None.

      Close to a thousand people died. Get back on facebook with your tin hat…

  • GG57 on 13/07/2021 - 10:58
    +2

    "…Morrison said the move was a bit ‘heavy-handed’ and said he would ‘get it sorted’…."
    Has he yet? Or another announcement that probably gets a couple of people in a pub onside, but doesn't actually get delivered.

    I don't think that the TGA warning has changed.

    • lgacb08 on 13/07/2021 - 11:25

      Encouraging others to spend their own money is the best he can do so he doesn't have to pay for extra doses of vaccines.

  • buckerooni on 13/07/2021 - 11:00
    +3

    stomping ground brewery tried this early on, but their FB page got smashed with anti-vaxxers and they pulled it. hopefully these guys fair better!

  • mdavant on 13/07/2021 - 11:04
    +5

    Unethical to incentivise any medications.

    What a dumb promotion.

    Will probably get negged, but it should be given to an informed consenting individual.

    If there is a serious side effect the risk benefit/ informed consent process is tainted by an incentive.

    Shocking policy to allow this to happen.

    • trentgibbo on 13/07/2021 - 11:10
      +3

      You are acting like they are incentivising brain surgery. You are 40 times more likely to die driving your car to get the jab than getting the jab. Be realistic.

      • mdavant on 13/07/2021 - 11:51
        +4

        I am very aware of statistics, I am fully immunised and advocate for immunisation.

        I am very aware of how to consent to medical procedures.

        It is ludicrous to incentivise any medical procedure irrespective of the risk as informed consent is tainted. Informed consent is necessary to protect the community

        The prime minister is encouraging a stupid idea.

        • ray6005 on 13/07/2021 - 21:44

          offer free drink but no alcohol, problem solved.

      • robredo on 13/07/2021 - 16:17

        Not sure where you’ve pulled those stats from but the actual covid 19 death risk expressed as equivalent of death risk of travelling by motor vehicle is in the same ball park as driving a car for daily commute. This is without any vaccine, which studies showed only reduced the severity of symptoms (relative risk reduction metrics used).

        Here’s some highlights from the mRNA vaccine trials in case you haven’t seen them:

        For Pfizer, only 9 placebo patients out of 20,000 became what the company defined as “severely” ill, compared to one vaccine recipient. Hospitalisations were rarer still. The trials also had almost exactly the same number of “deaths” in people who received the placebo or vaccine. No one died of covid in the Pfizer trial.

        For Moderna, 1 placebo recipient died of covid, the only patient to die of covid of all 70,000 people in two-trials. Counting every death that occurred for any reason, or “all-cause mortality”, 8 people who received the vaccine died, compared to 11 who received the placebo. Given the size of the trials, the tiny difference offers no evidence to suggest the vaccines either save or cost lives.

        • hypie on 13/07/2021 - 16:49
          +1

          @robredo I keep reading the rubbish you post and your lack of understanding about epidemiology and biostatistics.

          The thing is. I hear these same points being made by uneducated anti-vaxers. It's like you all read the same script and listen to the same 3 youtube videos.

          Do you know how to calculate relative risk reduction?

          Feel free to read a living real world outcome trial on the benefits of vaccination.

          https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00947-8/fulltext

          • robredo on 13/07/2021 - 17:44
            +1

            @hypie: Those who have to put down others to try and prove their point not only don’t deserve to be heard, they don’t deserve any respect whatsoever. For your information, I know very well how to calculate RRR. Do you think that by asking me a question that you think is technical somehow validates your point?

            • hypie on 13/07/2021 - 19:12

              @robredo: You keep using it in a context that attempts to devalue it. I do not think you understand how to calculate RRR or the value of it.

              Actual Risk Reduction and Relative Risk Reduction are not important. Saying "based on RRR metrics" repeatedly is an attempt to devalue something you clearly don't understand.

              • robredo on 13/07/2021 - 19:36
                +1

                @hypie: Never heard of the term “actual risk reduction”. Shows your knowledge on the topic I guess. Term you were looking for is Absolute Risk Reduction, which is in fact a superior metric to be quoting, along with the Relative Risk Reduction value.

                • hypie on 13/07/2021 - 20:16

                  @robredo: Actual risk reduction and Absolute risk reduction are the same things… pedantic, but apologies for the mistake. I'm battling your colleague in another post.

          • robredo on 13/07/2021 - 19:33
            +1

            @hypie: Real world outcome for you too, no evidence to suggest there’s any difference in immunity achieved through natural infection and vaccinations for infections with S-gene target failure and b.1.1.7. https://academic.oup.com/cid/advance-article/doi/10.1093/cid…

            • hypie on 13/07/2021 - 20:29

              @robredo: Fairly interesting article (although the obvious limitations in real world evidence exists) however there are limitations of the trial.

              1) All those in the trial are active healthcare workers therefore are likely to have been exposed quite early on in the pandemic. The also don't represent the standard population.

              2) This is specifically looking at the immunity from the UK variant and the original virus.

              I respect you posting the paper though, it is interesting.

              Natural immunity is usually effective at preventing repeat infections from a range of viruses, however whether or not is will be as effective against double mutant variants is not clear. The impact of using natural immunity globally to create immunity is unthinkable. We currently have over 4 million deaths globally with lockdowns and restrictions in place. Imagine if you let this spread uncontrolled.

        • cannedhams on 14/07/2021 - 00:25
          +1

          This is specious analysis. The Pfizer phase 3 trial took place over three months. There were 162 cases of covid in the control group versus eight in the vaccine group, on which basis the 90% efficacy rate was calculated. The vast majority of the 70,000 trial participants did not contract Covid-19 and therefore the vaccine had no impact one way or the other on their mortality rates - not because the vaccine was useless, but simply because most of the participants did not catch the disease it was intended to prevent.

          Mortality rates in Australia from the disease are low - around half a percent. If only 162 people contract Covid then statistically it is quite plausible that no one in the sample would die from Covid during the three months of the trial. Unless you are seriously suggesting however that the mortality rate from Covid is zero, its pretty silly to assert that vaccines neither save nor cost lives.

          • robredo on 14/07/2021 - 20:55

            @cannedhams: Put another way, let me explain the part about efficacy for the mRNA vaccines. Pfizer & Moderna ran their clinical trials in a way that ensured they would not have to answer the question of whether their vaccines actually save lives, when they asked for permission to sell their vaccines.

            Pfizer and Moderna ultimately reported 366 covid infections in their big trials (counting from 1-2weeks after the second shot, when the vaccines become fully effective). 19 of the infections occurred in people who received the vaccines. The other 347 occurred in people who got the placebo shots.

            19 vs. 347. Those were the numbers the companies highlighted in November 2020 that excited the world. But what no one seemed to understand, then or now, was that those were not hospitalised patients much less people who needed intensive care or died. They were all mild or moderate cases- meaning a positive covid test along with symptoms such as cough or low grade fever.

          • robredo on 14/07/2021 - 20:59

            @cannedhams: So why did so few people die in the trials if covid has killed over 500,000 people in the US for instance? I.e. 1 out of every 600 people. Because both companies tested their vaccines mostly on healthy individuals and those under 65. They included only a few elderly people with serious medical conditions, who are the people far more likely to die from covid than anyone else. Only 1,700 of the 40,000 participants in the Pfizer trial were over 75. And only half of those received the vaccine. Worse, Pfizer enrolled only 5 people over the age of 85 in its trial- even though people that age make up one quarter to one half of all coronavirus deaths in most countries. For Moderna, the figures are similar.

            • cannedhams on 15/07/2021 - 09:45

              @robredo: I don't disagree with any of that. Most of the people who die from Covid are over eighty years of age. However, there are still enough of those people that any pandemic runs the risk of overwhelming the hospital system. The options then are either a) making a societal decision that people over eighty should simply be allowed to die if they contract the disease or b) mass vaccination. For reasons which are perfectly sound, most governments have taken the second option.

              • robredo on 15/07/2021 - 13:52

                @cannedhams: Or, it’s 3) Life as usual for anyone without underlying health conditions known to exacerbate sars-cov-2 and having a focus also on looking at effective treatments (which in fact do exist but are being suppressed I.e. Ivermectin which has something like 24 RCTs showing it’s effectiveness to date), not just vaccination. In Hospitals and high risk settings put in place draconian infection control measures, contact tracing of workers in and out of facilities, protect those elderly people in the aged care homes (who btw make up over 60% of Australia’s 912 deaths recorded against Covid).

        • trentgibbo on 19/07/2021 - 09:56
          -1

          Insert random statistic I googled on the internet because I know better than the government

    • Charity on 13/07/2021 - 11:18

      Sheep are sheep. The govo understands this very well. Which is why the NRL players, from the hotspots, are free to travel. And their families too! Keep them red eyed and distracted - then anything is possible

    • GG57 on 13/07/2021 - 11:23
      +4

      I'm not aware of any 'policy' that you refer to? In fact, no-one of authority is actively doing that, and no-one is mandating that vaccinations should be given to all.
      I agree, it is unethical to incentivise medications, vaccinations, etc. That is what the TGA stated. It is Morrison who mentioned that he would take care of it (which is just a stupid statement).

    • Ordinance on 13/07/2021 - 11:32
      +1

      Unethical to encourage people to get vaccinated

      Do you work for the Federal Government’s PR department?

    • hoxygt on 13/07/2021 - 11:51
      +1

      Yeah but can't I get a beer to compensate me for my time :)

      • mdavant on 13/07/2021 - 11:52
        +1

        Not ethically you can't.

        • hoxygt on 13/07/2021 - 11:55

          I think I'll live with it just fine :) but I do appreciate your point :)

          • mdavant on 13/07/2021 - 12:38
            +1

            @hoxygt: Haha. Enjoy.

            Plus it is a pint. You can't knock back a free pint.

    • Vomo on 13/07/2021 - 18:11

      True.

  • Dex38313 on 13/07/2021 - 11:04
    -4

    How much is a life a pint lol
    A lady just died from the jab
    Where was her Beer

  • trentgibbo on 13/07/2021 - 11:07
    +2

    Got 5 jabs and ended up drunk as a skunk

    • radiocleve on 13/07/2021 - 11:24
      +3

      "COVID vaccine got this person dead drunk" Daily Mail probably

  • nomadspartan on 13/07/2021 - 11:11
    +2

    I'm no doctor but is it a good idea to drink alcohol while taking medication? Surely you'd wait a day before you have a drink.

    • muwu on 13/07/2021 - 12:06
      +1

      I am a doctor.

      Don't mix alcohol with sedatives (e.g. benzodiazepines).

      Go ahead and mix alcohol with a vaccine, if that means this country does better than 9% vaccination rates and is currently looking at locking down the lives if >5-6mil people in it's largest city/region for, prospectively, 2-3 months.

  • ichatting on 13/07/2021 - 11:14
    -3

    wow, let me think about it - NO THANKS

  • spuderump on 13/07/2021 - 11:15
    +7

    I laugh at all the freaks who refuse to get the jab, like it's completely your choice, but don't complain when all the vaxxed can freely travel and go about their normal lives again.

    • Charity on 13/07/2021 - 11:20
      -7

      You mean "new normal"

      You will own nothing and be happy.

    • Bluey91 on 13/07/2021 - 11:30
      +8

      And we will laugh when the long term effects come back from the test dummies. Testing on the public is illegal but you call the helpline and they say document everything and let us know. Hmm weird isn't it.

      • muwu on 13/07/2021 - 12:10
        +1

        Testing happened in clinical trials.

        Vaccines in Australia are TGA approved. The effects and risks are known, and every authority - legislative, scientific, and clinical - is saying get personally protected against COVID for the sake of yourself, your family, your community, and your country.

        The infinitesimal risk of TTS doesn't need to scare you. You can do it!

        • Bluey91 on 13/07/2021 - 14:36
          +1

          Call the helpline and tell me i am wrong. They say it is safe for brest feeding mothers but they are encouraging all breastfeeding mothers who are vaccinated to deliver them information. You sure it is 100% safe and fully tested?? Keep believing what the media post and you will live a long life… said nobody ever.

          • muwu on 13/07/2021 - 16:08
            +3

            @Bluey91:

            They say it is safe for brest feeding mothers but they are encouraging all breastfeeding mothers who are vaccinated to deliver them information

            It's a nationally implemented vaccination program to combat a pandemic… health authorities need data to help manage a program to help 25mil people, which includes the low rates of side-effects and complications, amongst many other things.

            You sure it is 100% safe and fully tested?

            No, I know it's not 100% safe. No medicine is. There's a 0.5 in 1 million risk of TTS and death.

            Yes, I am sure it's 100% tested. It's passed 3rd stage clinical trials and been approved by the TGA, as well as every other pharmaceutical authority in developed countries.

            Keep believing what the media post and you will live a long life… said nobody ever.

            I read multiple sources and critically analyse my own conclusions.

            I thinks it's statistically unlikely that my choice to be fully vaccinated against COVID will have any effect on my life expectancy. I'm focusing on a balanced diet and regular exercise to do that. But my choice has meant a higher vaccination rate for Australia, which brings us all closer to protecting the vulnerable (elderly, those with chronic disease), stopping lockdowns, opening borders and freeing travel, and bettering national and household economies.

            I implore you to do the same, please?

            • Bluey91 on 13/07/2021 - 16:38
              +1

              @muwu: Unfortunately there is 0% chance i will be recieving this vaccination unless i am forced for my employment. You just don't see that you are currently being tested on… illegally, but i guess you have no rights in a state of emergency.

              • Cyb3rGlitch on 13/07/2021 - 21:37

                @Bluey91: You would prefer a random virus mutation test itself on you instead? Those are the options - modern medicine or exposure to whatever flavour of the virus exists. No chance you'll avoid the virus long term.

                • Bluey91 on 16/07/2021 - 12:04
                  -1

                  @Cyb3rGlitch: Honestly i would prefer neither the virus or the vaccine but as long as i have some rights left as a human to choose i will chose the only option out of thise 2 in my power to not be illegally tested on. As i keep saying call the helpline and see how little information they have. The media is lying to you and i feel sorry for you for believing what you read on facebook.

          • hypie on 14/07/2021 - 08:46
            -1

            @Bluey91: Yes, a trial was already underway on 10,000 pregnant women who were vaccinated early in their pregnancy.

            It is now approved for use by the RACOG for use in pregnancy/breastfeeding feeding.

            See the trial for more information.

        • Alx75 on 14/07/2021 - 16:47
          +2

          @miracle

          No. Covid vaccines are only "provisionally approved".

          "Provisional approval of this vaccine is valid for two years and means it can now be legally supplied in Australia. The approval is subject to certain strict conditions, such as the requirement for AstraZeneca to continue providing information to the TGA on longer term efficacy and safety from ongoing clinical trials and post-market assessment. COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca has been shown to prevent COVID-19 however it is not yet known whether it prevents transmission or asymptomatic disease."

          Post-market assessment… Let that sink in…

          It means they are getting the data as they go. They don't have the complete data about long term efficacy, and they definitely don't have the complete data on long term safety or long term side effects. You are the guinea pig. As Greg Hunt said "The world is engaged in the largest clinical trial, the largest global vaccination trial ever".

          Thanks, I'll wait and grab that beer in a few years. Neg all you want, the information is from TGA website and your health minister.

    • Dentshop on 13/07/2021 - 11:34
      +3

      I can travel freely and go about my normal life now. The virus doesn't stop me - the government does. You sound like a boot- licker.

      • muwu on 13/07/2021 - 12:16
        +4

        The virus doesn't stop me - the government does I do

        FTFY

        Governments don't lockdown and restrict our liberties on their own whim. In fact they're reluctant and slow to do so because of both economic and libertarian reasons, as Berejiklian has been a more recent example of.

        Lockdowns happen because of COVID outbreaks and it's high risk of morbidity and mortality if left unchecked. That risk of morbidity and mortality is so high because only 9% of the Australian population has immunity to COVID (mostly from vaccines).

        Get the vaccine. Stop lockdowns.

        • Dentshop on 13/07/2021 - 13:42
          +2

          The government does lock down on a whim - they did so in South Australia last year. The vaccines too, do not provide immunity. You can still catch Covid even though you have had the jabs. That's not immunity. There is no clear evidence that the jab reduces the effects of the symptoms either.

          • muwu on 13/07/2021 - 13:54
            +4

            @Dentshop:

            The government does lock down on a whim - they did so in South Australia last year

            A small outbreak occurred in the northern suburbs of Adelaide in Nov 2020. A short lockdown lasting 4 days was concluded early after contact tracing was able to catch up with known exposure sites after the index case was shown to have lied about his movements between multiple places of employment.

            The vaccines too, do not provide immunity. You can still catch Covid even though you have had the jabs. That's not immunity.

            Stay away from thinking in absolutes - start understanding the world in relatives. Immunity is the production of antibodies targeting a pathogen that will limit the infective potential of an infection. COVID vaccines will never eliminate the infection, but rather greatly reduce the chance of contraction, the severity of disease, the likelihood of morbidity, the likelihood of death, and the rate of infecting others you contact.

            There is no clear evidence that the jab reduces the effects of the symptoms either.

            Yes, there is.

          • TheBean on 13/07/2021 - 14:12

            @Dentshop: Vaccines don't give you immunity, that's not how it works…

  • ColdFusion on 13/07/2021 - 11:15
    +2

    It's no Jabs for Joints but it will do.

  • is it though on 13/07/2021 - 11:16
    +6

    Promoting the jab, whilst also promoting socializing and drinking from re-used glasses in a pandemic… hmmm.

    • Mr Haj on 13/07/2021 - 13:02
      +2

      So you're in favour of single use items for peace of mind? Imagine the waste in your fantasy world. It's bad enough as it is.

      • is it though on 13/07/2021 - 13:05
        +3

        No, just in favour of people actually trying to help the pandemic effort rather than make a business move disguised to help it.

        • hypie on 13/07/2021 - 13:37
          +2

          I don't think there is much evidence that sugests covid has been transmitted through infecred glasses that have been washed appropriately…

          In addition this bar is in Perth, we currently have 0 community cases of the virus.

  • Clear on 13/07/2021 - 11:19
    +2

    Where can I get back paid in beer for having the shot back in March?

  • Jules_d1 on 13/07/2021 - 11:21
    +5

    Pretty sure using free alcohol as a promotion is illegal.

    A bar in Port Melbourne did the same and it got shut down pretty fast.

    • GG57 on 13/07/2021 - 11:26

      Isn't that exactly what OP was referring to?

      • Jules_d1 on 13/07/2021 - 11:28

        Yea. Im just saying ive seen instances of it being shut down very quickly.

        Lots of issues associated with this.

        Scott Morrison should spend more time sorting out the vaccination process/availability rather than free beers.

        • GG57 on 13/07/2021 - 11:32

          Morrison isn't offering the free beers; he made a stupid statement that he didn't think this type of 'promotion' was a problem.

          Yes, he should sort out the vaccination programme. But he hasn't.

          • Jules_d1 on 13/07/2021 - 11:41

            @GG57: Please re-read my posts and OP's post. I never said he was offering beers.

            "But Prime Minister Scott Morrison said the move was a bit ‘heavy-handed’ and said he would ‘get it sorted’."

            He should spend less time "getting it sorted" and circumnavigating the law, and focus on the vaccine rollout.

            • GG57 on 13/07/2021 - 14:35

              @Jules_d1: "Scott Morrison should spend more time sorting out the vaccination process/availability rather than free beers."

    • diddy50 on 13/07/2021 - 11:33
      +1

      Correct, you cannot incentivise vaccines.

      TGA will stomp on this. Sadly

    • Wally on 13/07/2021 - 11:35

      TGA doesn't want Big Pharma taking doctors out for long boozy lunches to incentivize signup for their products

  • ChurchMouth on 13/07/2021 - 11:40
    +2

    I dont think it is a good idea health wise

  • Charity on 13/07/2021 - 11:47
    -1

    Idiocracy

  • boretentsu on 13/07/2021 - 11:50
    +2

    It's important to stay hydrated after your vaccination

  • Bargaihunting on 13/07/2021 - 11:50

    And if your against the covid vaccine being mandatory dint forget to sign the petition https://www.aph.gov.au/e-petitions/petition/EN2753?fbclid=Iw…

    • hoxygt on 13/07/2021 - 11:54
      +3

      Is it necessary though, there never has been any intention to make it mandatory for this or basically any medicine ever….unless you want to go down the fluoride garden path?

    • ozbargainer88 on 13/07/2021 - 13:23
      +1

      You're*

      The COVID vaccine is not mandatory. Useless petition.

    • DogGunn on 14/07/2021 - 03:59

      lol the whole premise of that petition is wrong. Will be ignored completely.

  • stingykent on 13/07/2021 - 11:52
    -5

    wow, offering alcohol as an incentive for the jab? nothing sus here, move on 🐑🐑🐑

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join