News: MLS Suspends season due to Coronavirus

Yeah after my initial freakout I realized that the curfews probably kept a larger number of people out of bars than the number of people protesting.

 

So should we expect a large outbreak in Liverpool now? Looked like a few thousands celebrated outside Anfield with no masks in sight from what I saw on TV.

 

Did you see the UK beaches this weekend? Worse than any of ours since March

 

Come on.. They get sun so infrequently over there a little thing like a pandemic isn't going to get in their way of a beach trip.

 

My only request to the mods is that the Covid-19 research/analysis conversation be quarantined to just one of these two (this and the MLS is Back Tournament) threads - letting the other be a place where the MLS signal to noise ratio makes it worth following.

I don't want to stop the discussion/debate on the disease or the response to it, I just want to make it so I can catch up on actual MLS news without breaking my scroll wheel.

Thanks.

 

I'd extend that to limiting it to just this thread.

 

Can confirm.

 

I wear glasses. It can be annoying to be asked if my eyes are real. They're hazel. I have no idea what color they often appear to be, but more people who never would have looked that closely at my eyes are doing this now.

I've taken a few peeks over at the board because of the political takes of some posters. That shit can really turn people off from even wanting to be a fan.

 

Deaths have been under 1000 for a full 2 weeks now, but are sure to climb to peak level if not higher soon with all the new cases.

 

We're definitely testing the "young people won't die as much" theory. Of course even if they are a lower percentage of deaths the sheer volume of cases doesn't help.

 

Er, it's not in question that Typhoid Mary could be quarantined or imprisoned when she broke quarantine. The non-ebola nurse had a pretty good defense, that she had been tested and it came up negative. The practical difficulties in distinguishing the healthy from the infectious but asymptomatic don't create new legal authority to quarantine healthy people. SCOTUS dodged the question when declining to take cases from CA and IL about limits of health decrees. But lower courts are all over the place on the matter, some declining to second guess mayors and governors and others wading into the substance.

Three months ago there was a discussion about creating immunity certificates for people who'd recovered from covid so they could be exempted from stay home orders. That idea didn't get much traction, both for civil liberties reasons (they look like internal passports) and medical reasons (it's still not clear how much immunity one gets by having recovered from covid).

 

Reporter at Trump rally has tested positive for COVID-19.

 

I am guessing that deaths won't reach peak level as long as new cases are at the 40,000 or so level. But probably they'll go back over 1000 per day, which is tragic in and of itself, and which represents a pretty terrible job of responding to the crisis.

 

It’s not that it creates “new” legal authority, that legal authority already exists. Many/most states already have the legal authority to protect the health of their citizens and that authority is pretty broad. In this case, because people are infectious when they are pre-symptomatic and pre-clinical, there simply was no way to properly control the spread of the disease without the stay at home orders.

This editorial covers the issue pretty well and walks down a pretty centrist position, but the conclusion is that the stay at home orders would be upheld if properly applied and enforced.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/evange...y-at-home-orders-constitutional/#22300563104e

It’s also largely a state issue and every state’s constitution and laws are different, but, by and large, even then they’d largely be constitutional. Even in Wisconsin the ruling wasn’t that their stay at home order was unconstitutional, it was because it an unelected official implemented it. If the order had been passed by the state legislature, it likely would have been constitutional.

not sure why you brought this up considering you immediately discredited it as a possibility..

 

Considering who is getting infected and that hospitals know how to better treat patients, I would not be shocked if the death rate doesn’t spike too much.. i have no idea how much it will go up, but young people don’t die as much as older people and even older people aren’t dying as much now as 3 months ago.. Of course, another issue we have is that people are still avoiding hospitals, so out excess death number is probably pretty high.

There is also the issue with how states count deaths. Some are pretty generous and count anyone that died that tested positive or are suspected of having covid as a covid deaths, some are only counting people that tested positive, but don’t have underlying conditions, as a covid death, and the rest are somewhere in between.. The problem is, most of the states that are getting hit hard right now fall into the very strict range of counting deaths, while the states that had a lot of deaths early on fall in the loose range of counting deaths.

 

Oregon-Washington Railroad v. Washington (1926).

The Supreme Court recognized that “it is well settled that a state, in the exercise of its police power, may establish quarantines against human beings, or animals, or plants” that may spread disease to the state, even if those quarantines negatively affect interstate commerce.

Note also that such a quarantine would not burden out of state residents if they were already present in the quarantined state and would equally affect in-state residents returning to the state.

 

As of June 17 Texas and Florida weren't including probables.

 

Florida is probably the worst about counting covid deaths. From what I’ve seen, non-resident deaths are sent to their home states to be counted, resident deaths that were infected outside the state are sent to the state where they got infected to be counted, people with underlying conditions are counted as having died from the underlying conditions, people with flu/pneumonia are counted as flu/pneumonia unless confirmed covid, tests aren’t done post-mortem, etc..

 

Huh?

 

https://www.lansingstatejournal.com...s-now-linked-harpers-east-lansing/3270972001/

85 cases traced to one pub. More evidence all this indoor drinking and dining is a horrible idea.

 

I think restaurants that actually follow the rules could be relatively safe, but it's completely impossible for bars to follow social distancing rules.

 

In general, I don't much care how states categorize deaths. By the way, you say "count deaths," but I assume that's not what you mean. One dead person is one dead person. It's the technical cause of death you're referring to. Not to be pedantic, but it's the core issue for me. X number of people die everyday in this country. And when the historical average is being exceeded by a substantial amount, week after week, month after month, something has to be causing it. Debating whether Florida or Ohio or New York or California might be over or under reporting Covid 19 as the cause of death is largely irrelevant, as long as there's only one, obvious reason why many tens of thousands of people have died in this country in excess of the historical average since late March.

 

Yes, but in some cases it really is counting and not reporting cause of death, since Florida appears to be counting some of its COVID-19 deaths as not having died in Florida.