Once again, i've ignored nothing. You saying that is the case doesn't make so and the chances being "extremely small" are getting bigger every passing day post innoculation and with every new set of data that comes in.
anyway, i'm not going debate the merits of pro or not. I will say, testing negative he should be subjected to the same rules as everyone else because he is neither sick, nor with a viral load that is evident upon testing.
He is no more dangerous than any other person on that field with a negative test.
There are people for whom any amount of risk mitigation regarding COVID is unacceptable. They don't think critically about it, they just blast any call for tests, vaccines, quarantines, etc. because the cost of such measures could never be low enough for them to be ok with the mitigation.
Then there are people who whom no amount of mitigation is unacceptable because they are religiously dedicated to the cult of safeism. They don't think critically about it, they just argue that all it, the mask mandates, the vaccine mandates, the enforced quarantines, the enforced lockdowns, etc. are all reasonable because it agrees with their religious infatuation with the virus.
That's how you wind up with people who think it's reasonable to tell a healthy young person he can't work when he's not sick and can prove it-- no critical thinking, just a slobbering attachment to a cause that can't be questioned.
So it seems that Captain is in the latter camp. We already knew Poker was. Shoot, he put me on ignore just because I had the temerity to have a different opinion on COVID stuff than he does. That's some puritanical devotion right there.
