23 Clemson football players test positive for COVID19
This season may never get on track
Replies to: 23 Clemson football players test positive for COVID19
The more people get tested...the more cases. The issue are deaths. This drops the fatality rate
(no message)
Anti-body strength training!
(no message)
Wouldn't that be a good thing for getting it out of the way?
(no message)
And I’ll raise you with 30 + LSU players...
(no message)
I’m not sure this is a bad thing. Better now than during the season. Herd immunity?
(no message)
Who really knows. And I don’t mean WHO because they sure as hell don’t ...
(no message)
Who knew you could get COVID19 from taking steroids?
(no message)
Must've tested the whole team this time.
(no message)
This was funny.
(no message)
Heh.
(no message)
I like our chances now.
(no message)
They’re not dead, they just have the virus
(no message)
Only if one of them is Sunshine
(no message)
Symptomatic?
(no message)
THAT is the key question that too few reports are answering
(no message)
Hardly surprising
While they still will have to isolate for a bit, just because they tested positive doesn't mean they have active cases and are "spreaders." There are those in the medical community who feel that the disease is much more wide-spread (up to 25% of the population) since the 80% of those who get it have insignificant to no symptoms and often don't even know they've had it and are never tested.
Roughly 26 million tests (which doesn't translate to anywhere near 26 million people) have been given with roughly a 9% positive rate. We know that there are a huge chunk of folks out there that will test positive but are likely done with their course of the illness.
I'm not going to question the folks that make these decisions, and I'm not trying to make a political statement, but this country will be in worse shape than the days of the Great Depression if we hole up and wait for a vaccine. We need to manage through the situation with appropriate caution. Sports is a good place to test the waters.
Re: Hardly surprising
Some interesting facts, according to a study at Dow University, between two people engaged in conversation at 6 ft. apart.
1. A carrier not wearing a mask has a 70 % probability to infect another healthy person who is not wearing a mask while engaging in conversation.
2. A carrier wearing a mask has a 5% probability to infect a healthy person who is not wearing a mask while engaged in conversation.
3. A carrier wearing a mask has a 1.5% probability to infect a healthy person who is wearing a mask while engaged in conversation.
Would anyone like to take a guess as to what % of those 23 Clemson ballers were conscientious about wearing a mask and social distancing?
Stopping this virus is not difficult, but there are just too many nimrods who believe that freedom and individual rights are more important to protect than the lives of their fellow citizens...until they are on a ventilator in an ICU with a probability of dying at more than 50%. You can't fix stupid and our country seems to create more stupidly arrogant fools than most any country on earth. We also create some pretty courageous and intellectually sound humanitarian thinkers too......unfortunately, some of our country's decision makers are not part of that group. But, for the sake of college football, let's hope those making decisions that may forever affect the lives of these kids and their families are part of the latter group. May they find a way to play the season without the virus running rampant through the ranks.
One of the great and debatable questions of our time which is created by that fact that so many young people are asymptomatic is "does a person carrying the virus have the right to infect another healthy person by not wearing a mask in public?" Common sense and morality seem to dictate an unequivocal "NO", but we seem to cringe at the thought of how a shrewd barrister can spin that into a deadly "absolutely". What is sad is that this question is debatable.
You are on point.
We cannot forget about the major long term economic affects that this shutdown has caused. Although we need to take this seriously, we may have gone too far. We should have focused on testing, containing, and doing our best to protect the most vulnerable. Everyone should wear masks, do their best to properly distance themselves, and those who are most vulnerable need to limit their interactions. We don’t need to go back to the extremes we were practicing in March through May. Let’s get back to as much normalcy as possible. No, I don’t watch the news. I speak directly to the experts to develop my opinion. One of who is an infectious disease professor at multiple universities and a prior president of the Infectious Disease Society of America as well as other similar national and international organizations.
Likely as good an approach as can be offered MrP.....
sadly, it is beyond the scope of understanding of today's politicians of either party. This approach would in all probability serve to eventually eradicate the virus and , at the same time, allow for economic recovery. But again, sadly there are simply too many nimrods who would rather do whatever the heck they want than what is best for the nation or mankind,....until they are lying in a bed on a ventilator fighting to live.
Likely as good an approach as can be offered MrP.....
sadly, it is beyond the scope of understanding of today's politicians of either party. This approach would in all probability serve to eventually eradicate the virus and , at the same time, allow for economic recovery. But again, sadly there are simply too many nimrods who would rather do whatever the heck they want than what is best for the nation or mankind,....until they are lying in a bed on a ventilator fighting to live.
Well, that’s one theory.
(no message)
You're at the top of the bell curve.
(no message)
The only thing on question is how much..,,
Will the conferences refund the networks for a non season. The biggest advertisers have already let it be known they're cancelling contracts. Why would the networks spend money to broadcast games in which they won't receive ad revenue? I'm guessing the conferences are holding out as long as possible before they refund season ticket holders..,
Yep and unfortunately it will hop around America. I don’t see a solution until a vaccine.
(no message)
There may never be a vaccine. Even with one, it will only be so affective
Are you suggesting the demographic that’s the healthiest and has a death rate lower than the flu be locked inside forever?
Time to learn to live with it and stop freaking out every time someone test positive.
The death rate for Influenza is just over 1%. The death rate for COVID-19 is near 5%
(no message)
It's not near 5%. It's about a half a percent.
(no message)
5% is incorrect and I was speaking specifically to the players
Which 18-22 have very low death rates. And college athletes probably will show to have lower death rates than their non athlete peers.
That really isn't an accurate # with which to make judgements
First of all, the death rate for those who we know have it is 5%. Since 80% of the people who get it have little to no symptoms, there are a whole bunch of people who have had it and don't know they had it. Extrapolate that number and the death rate is easily likely less than 1%. On top of that, the death rate is bound to have been worse in the beginning of the pandemic when we didn't know how to treat it. Now that we have more experience and better therapies, the current death rate is likely a lot less than the initial 5% stat.
That isn't to minimize the pandemic or the seriousness of Covid. It is worse than "the flu" and we don't know what we don't know about it. But that 5% number really doesn't mean squat in relation to what the long term death rate will be once we have a better grip on things.
it's effective
(no message)
Absolutely not. People will die. It’s unfortunate but it’s the history of mankind.
(no message)
See ya' old people! It was inevitable.
Even though it wasn't. God Bless the 5 year old girl from Detroit.
23 is a huge number given they probably have less than 100 players including walkons
Then those 23 go on to infect a significant portion of the rest of the team and all of them go on to infect other people at the school, and then it spreads out to the community at large. If it's only Clemson, and only now, well before the season where they can isolate and be ready before the season. If not, then a school would be foolish to play games with such a high rate of infections and another school would be foolish to play them. A lot of the southern states didn't get hit as hard initially and reopened more quickly and are now seeing rising rates. Florida could be the next New York and football, but it's nature isn't a social distancing kind of sport. Yes, these are young, well conditioned athletes, and most should not have any long term effects. But all it takes is one death for the lawsuits to start. Not to mention while the athletes might do okay, their families and other people they might give it to might not do so well.
Not saying there won't or shouldn't be a football season, but if these numbers are not an outlier and continue as the season approaches, there won't be a season.
Huh? They tested positive. They'll be isolated
They'll also contact trace and find others. This is how this works and why in controlled environments you can put out fired easily.
It's 23 because they have been on their own pretending there isn't a virus because quite honestly, they probably aren't getting symptoms.
The most important question to be answered is...
what is number of acceptable deaths and their probability among football players at which a go ahead can be given for a season to continue? The choice between lives and financial return? The tragedy here is that those making this decision will likely all vary in that answer and adamantly declare that only their answer is correct. How likely are Father Jenkins and Jerry Jones to agree? And so on and so on..........