These claims by d Atlas are a carbon copy of the claims Sweden’ s heath chiefs claimed and now admit were dead wrong. https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/07/swe...ientist-admits-lessons-have-been-learned.html And here is the article and interview in which dr. Giesecke in Sweden. made the claims from April 17 . He trained their chief health officials. https://unherd.com/thepost/coming-up-epidemiologist-prof-johan-giesecke-shares-lessons-from-sweden/ And a review of the (non)success of the Swedish strategy in the Lancet. It starts out with a reference to dr Giesecke https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31673-1/fulltext As to your dr Rushworth, I find it hilarious that he is citing an unpublished paper in his analysis. One of dr Giesecke’s points was that the British were using the results of an unpublished study for their strategy. The longer it goes on, the less we know, except the USA toll is 161,000 dead so far. We will be at a quarter million by Christmas. at lest no Swedish leader told his citizens to drink disinfectants.
I would rather this particular discussion thread not be so much about the science and certainly not all the politics but I happen to open the NYT this morning after I read these posts. You can't compare covid-19 to the common seasonal flu only when you want to. Kids get sick all the time from the flu and of course they spread it. Some younger kids show viral symptoms from day 1 and have a runny nose for the first 2-3 weeks of school every year. Then half the class is sick then 1/3 of the school. This happens at k-12 schools every year! Boxes of tissues are the first thing a teacher buys for their classrooms. I went to my college health center with cold/flu symptoms almost exactly on Sept 15th for all 4 years I was in college. The big question yet resolved is how much and at what point in a covid infection do asymptomatic persons spread the virus? You'd have to know who has it, but without symptoms, in order to study them. Only mass population testing or very controlled studies (where you infect the subjects) would tell us that. Very many folks who get covid19 can't identify the source and many of them do get very sick. AGAIN - it's the risk of spreading the virus to at-risk people that is more dangerous than kids under 25 having it. We all get that, BUT there is a risk to opening schools and we don't really know the magnitude of that risk. It looks like we're going to find out soon. The link to the research referenced is below: "Recent research suggests that children can carry at least as much of the virus in their noses and throats as adults do, even if they have only mild or moderate symptoms. That has prompted fears that students who become ill at school may spread the virus to their older relatives." Children May Carry Coronavirus at High Levels, Study Finds https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/30/health/coronavirus-children.html About the Big10 - A Big10 President was quoted in an open letter to students today after Delaying In-Person classes for 2 weeks: “I know many of our students want to know if they should come to campus or not. Unfortunately, that is a question I cannot answer”. REALLY?? WTF are we doing.
As I stated from my earlier article everyone is entitled to their own opinion on the matter. Let's not be too quick to forget that both the Lancet and the New England Journal of Medicine were embarrassingly forced to retract the studies they published on hydroxychloriquine. https://www.statnews.com/2020/06/07...ment-terminated-as-details-in-scandal-emerge/ https://www.mdedge.com/cardiology/a...m-retract-studies-hydroxychloroquine-covid-19 https://www.conservativereview.com/...ws-little-evidence-virus-transmitted-schools/ For those watching the news on potential vaccines. This just out: https://af.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idAFKCN25713Q Let us see what the rest of the Power 5 decide to do.
Seems there is a lot of skepticism about this vaccine. But I’m definitely hoping this is legitimate. May give us all hope.
Many with sinecure are more comfortable with a super cautious approach and those that have to work outside the home view the resumption of most things (in whatever adapted forms are possible) as the logical choice going forward. If a person can stay home, pay their bills, and feed their family they generally are ok with more lockdowns. A lot of people (millions in the U.S. alone) don't have that luxury. This isn't the plague we were warned it could be. (I was initially very fearful of this possibility and bought masks and gloves early with massive deaths in Italy and Wuhan along with images of people stuck in their homes with corpses.) It also isn't a bad flu. Treating it like the plague is wrong. Treating it like the flu is wrong too. So there has to be a balance. People are trying to adapt in order to move forward. That is what we are doing. Is it flawed? Absolutely. Rarely is a perfect solution available that solves everything (eg. vaccines kill people https://www.hrsa.gov/vaccine-compensation/index.html National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program)
The Summit League press release SIOUX FALLS, S.D. -- The Summit League President's Council voted unanimously this afternoon to postpone the regular season and championships for the fall sports of men's and women's cross country, men's and women's soccer and volleyball to the spring of 2021. The health, safety and welfare of the league's student-athletes, coaches and staffs were at the forefront of this decision.
Through the eyes of an actuary, epidemiologist or anthropologist, this disease's effect on the total population is just plainly not that bad (Ioannidis 2020). But the effects related to our mitigation practices are horrendous. Indeed this disease is a real problem for our old and infirm and efforts should be directed at protecting the vulnerable. 40% or so of all COVID deaths occurring in LTC (long term care- nursing home) residents. https://abcnews.go.com/US/coronavir...ral-deaths-persist-americas/story?id=72271389 Important to the current discussion is the question What is the real significance of the disease and the mitigation effects to those < 65? And further, what are these effects on children and adolescents. Regarding the disease's affects: Here's an amazing paper Published first on July 1, by Stanford's department of epidemiology and population health and COVID's effects are even less impactful now as our treatments continue to improve. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7327471/ (I am going to cite a few paragraphs from it in the conclusion) But what of the effects of our "mitigation" of this virus on those who are "less vulnerable" Papers are now appearing in the literature about the adverse affects that the politically driven fear mongering are having on our health and well being. For example: Do you really think that stoke rates are down? These ischemic events are very time dependent illnesses, if you miss the window for treatment, the outcomes become much more severe https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7221408/ Do you really think the incidence of Child abuse is down when children are in more prolonged contact with potential stressed out, increasingly depressed and drug affected caregivers and schools are no longer there to blow the whistle? https://www.washingtonpost.com/education/2020/04/30/child-abuse-reports-coronavirus/ and to give you of the NYT ilk validation: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/09/nyregion/coronavirus-nyc-child-abuse.html Not inconsequentially, what about the kids who rely on 2 school supplied meals per day to grow and develop normally? Kids who rely on the school for basic healthcare? And what of the lost educational opportunities? Anyone with children understands that what is being substituted for regular class work is either of limited or no value. These consequences are for sure ephemeral, but any rational person shudders at the possibilities. What are the effects of losing the health benefits and socialization that youth sports bring to kids? The most impactful thing we could do for the health of our kids is to get them out of their houses and back to school. The politically driven fear mongering is having sweeping affects on mental health: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2008017 and drug abuse: https://news.un.org/en/story/2020/06/1066992- contributing to the above. The economic impact will have sweeping effects on everyone, but especially on programs and services for people who are economically vulnerable: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7162753/ Case fatality rates are falling significantly:Treatments are significantly improving the outcomes of this disease, we have either washed through and/or are protecting the most vulnerable better and the disease as, is the case with most viruses, may be becoming less virulent. https://abcnews.go.com/US/coronavir...ral-deaths-persist-americas/story?id=72271389 https://nextpittsburgh.com/latest-n...reads-easier-but-is-less-virulent-and-deadly/ We are now well aware that the infection rate is much higher than the case rates- the denominator used in the case fatality statistic: https://theconversation.com/how-dea...ind-but-researchers-are-getting-closer-141426 https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2020/06/200622141143.htm https://www.paloaltoonline.com/news...ents-have-likely-been-infected-by-coronavirus This means that it is less, and is becoming even less so, deadly as initially believed. Recall, so long ago, that we initially shut down the country to "flatten the curve" and assure that our healthcare facilities and workers were not over burdened. Not only did that did not happen in even in the worst of the US https://www.npr.org/2020/05/07/8517...n-most-without-treating-any-covid-19-patients but instead we have financially devastated our hospitals and healthcare workers, further putting the population at risk for adverse effects of a weakened healthcare delivery system; https://www.aha.org/guidesreports/2...ms-face-unprecedented-financial-pressures-due All this while the insurance companies are raking in the cash as we fear healthcare and suffer to their greater profit https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/05/health/covid-insurance-profits.html Amidst their bounty, medicare cuts many of the frontline specialists payments for 202, 8-11% https://s3.amazonaws.com/public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2020-17127.pdf Indeed, I am of the mindset that the consequences of the disease on a subset of the population is severe, those with risk factors must take personal responsibility for their well being, while we must protect the vulnerable within nursing homes. However, as a population, and especially as it related to our children and adolescents, the disease effects are much less significant than are the consequences of our mitigation practices. Again... https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7327471/ Worth directly mentioning from the above article: "Conclusions People <65 years old have very small risks of COVID-19 death even in pandemic epicenters and deaths for people <65 years without underlying predisposing conditions are remarkably uncommon. Strategies focusing specifically on protecting high-risk elderly individuals should be considered in managing the pandemic." And to put the risk in perspective: "People who are 40–65 years old may have about double the risk of the overall <65 age stratum, while those 40 years old or younger have almost no risk at all of dying. The COVID-19 mortality rate in people <65 years old during the period of fatalities from the epidemic was equivalent to the mortality rate from driving between 4 and 82 miles per day for 13 countries and 5 states, and was higher (equivalent to the mortality rate from driving 106–483 miles per day) for 8 other states and the UK. " But then How do you measure: Increased incidence of severe mental health disease Increased child abuse Increased substance abuse Increased domestic abuse A generation with an educational deficit Weakened and less accessible healthcare overall population economic impacts? Alas its easy to measure a case fatality rate, overall positive test results, and report on individual anomalous cases affecting healthy individuals... and its big news! Further, this media induced panic is all lawyer fodder and there must be limitations to tort claims in these cases. After all how can one possibly truly prove where and from whom the virus was actually transmitted! I think I am making a t-shirt: #Itsnotebola and another #letthemplay
Folks this is a college women’s soccer forum. In case you didn’t know that. No offense but none of that research or the scientific links or arguments mean jack sh** to where we are right now. My daughter is across the street from a Big10 campus in a private apartment. And the president of that campus just delayed the start of classes because he can’t say it’s safe to be there. And this is a major state “flagship” campus with a medical system like many P5s. So if you want to post information that is relevant to the real world right now, or the next 2 weeks, for college women’s soccer players I’m all eyes. Thanks.
This is starting to mirror my FB feed. All we are missing is a video of a Nigerian doctor screaming on the SCOTUS steps about a "cure".
Eddie K you started posting the scientific links soooo, "No offense but none of that research or the scientific links or arguments mean jack sh** to where we are right now" And if you really think the real science should not play a role in the decisions on whether they play or not you are ... ummmm....yeah. That it doesn't is a testament to power if the lawyers, because there is no real medical reason that they shouldn't play.
The B1G justcancelled fall sports Hopes to move to Spring. So the 50% threshold is 12 teams closer. https://www.espn.com/college-footba...lls-plug-fall-football-season?linkId=96801302 the Same article say the PAC-12 is leaning heavily to Spring football, if possible.
The BIG statement https://bigten.org/news/2020/8/11/general-big-ten-statement-on-2020-21-fall-season.aspx "The fall sports included in this announcement are men’s and women’s cross country, field hockey, football, men’s and women’s soccer, and women’s volleyball. The Big Ten Conference will continue to evaluate a number of options regarding these sports, including the possibility of competition in the spring. Decisions regarding winter and spring sports will also continue to be evaluated. "
What makes you think that if there is no season that the players/ athletes won't get the corona virus? legit question that short sighted people don't think about. They have an ideology and are attached to it. right now most atheltes at the least at the P5 schools are being tested weekly, fed, under tighter controls than the normal student. These atheltes also have the added motivation that if they do put themselves in mass gatherings that it might jeopardize their ability to play the sport and their teammates ability to play. take all that away and these athletes will act like normal students and be at more risk. In addition, they are going to still train and play (weather formally or informally). people shouting for cancellations either don't think their position fully or have an ulterior motive
Maybe this is part of the decision. What compelling reason is there to devotion of rescources to student athletes at the expense of the rest of the student population? ( I mean other than tv revenue) test everybody, ensure the others are fed, use the same tight controls, then ask that question. Otherwise you are creating a two tier priority. His seems to be part of the decision. It doesn’t seem to be primarily concern for quarterbacks, tight ends, and cornerbacks.
This seems to be a rapidly evolving and confusing reporting cycle. The announcement I’m looking at says all fall sports are cancelled with a hope of moving them to Spring. https://www.espn.com/college-footba...urces-big-ten-pulls-plug-fall-football-season
1- these programs are providing opportunities for their players to live out their dreams of playing college soccer. the programs are providing an environment that is safer for these athletes than if they just sent them home. 2- from an outsider - "its just a game" perspective - I get it.....just cancel it and move on. The issue is these athletes (and females in this particular case) have worked their whole life to play college soccer and ripping it from them when they don't think you have to is going to mess many of them up long term. 3. much like having a national mandate for fighting the corona-virus is a stupid contention, so is having a ncaa mandate on programs playing or not. If some programs think that cancelling is in the lest interest of their athletes - fine; if other programs think that playing can be done safely and will be beneficial to their athletes - fine. We shouldn't have a national mandate for dealing with the CV; we should have a local response. When the federal government (felt the pressure from the left) to enact a 15 days to flatten the curve, it actually caused a worse problem. people in states that had very little CV at the time were being shutdown; they were looking around and not buying in. It is classic behavior psychology tthat you need people to buy into the change of behavior and closing everything down in states like florida when there were just a few cases - made people not want to change behavior. so when cases started to rise in different parts of the country, government had already blown their opportunity.
The NCAA didn't mandate programs playing or not. They left it to the individual conferences to decide.
Pac-12 postpones fall sports, eyes return next year https://www.espn.com/college-footba.../sources-pac-12-calls-fall-sports-eyes-spring Impacted Pac-12 student athletes will continue to have their scholarships guaranteed. The conference is also encouraging the NCAA to grant students who opt out of playing this academic year an additional year of eligibility.
[ I won’t respond to everything, but the idea this I about some kid’s soccer dreams Is a bit far fetched, don’t you think? Maybe a refocussing to academic success is in order. As to you last point, the idea that local responses to pandemics is an answer in an age where the virus went around the World in a few weeks with modern transportation isn’t very convincing. The only example I can think of is Uruguay, and they did it by excluding everyone else. Are you for that? China is the only example I can think of whe the virus is allegedly controlled, and they were WAY National in their approach. I’m not sure fines and jail for not wearing masks could work here either. (but maybe leadership by example would) I’m in complete agreement that the opportunity to control the virus was lost. Tha happened when our deciders told us it would blow over in the warm April weather, told governors to fend for themselves, and told us drinking disinfectants ought be tried.
With the Big 10 and Pac 12 decisions, here is the status regarding whether there will be NCAA championships this Fall: Total Division I Teams 341 Not Eligible for NCAA Tournament 6 Total Teams Eligible for Tournament 335 50% of Eligible Teams 168 Teams Not Playing in Fall 157 Additional Not Playing to Equal 50% 11 So if 11 more teams decide not to play this Fall, the number will reach the 50% mark. Given that the Big West, Mountain West, and Pac 12 already have decided not to play this Fall, and that the Big Sky already has decided not to play football this Fall, I expect we will see the Big Sky and West Coast decide not to play (I believe the West Coast has been waiting to see if there will be a Fall NCAA championship) and also imagine WAC will decide not to play. The Big Sky and West Coast would put the numbers well beyond 50%. Thus it looks like no NCAA women’s soccer championship this Fall. Maybe in the Spring.
Means nothing without context. 2.8 million people die every year(7671 per day) without a pandemic and most from comorbidities. The delta is what matters. If 163,000 young Americans died from SARS-CoV-2 things would be very different. 225 (15-24 year olds) have died from Covid according to the most recent CDC data. 326 have died from Pneumonia. Is anyone calling for things to be shut down for young people due to Pneumonia? Why not? More died from Pneumonia according to the CDC (326 vs 225)
If there is no NCAA championship this Fall, it still leaves the option for some teams to play in the Fall as the NCAA has left that decision up to the schools and conferences.
ACC and SEC issue statements after PAC-12 and Big 10 bow out. It looks like they are in a holding pattern at present time. https://www.wralsportsfan.com/acc-s...pac-12-big-ten-postpone-fall-sports/19230812/