Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2020 11:08:27 GMT -5
Big east announcement next week. Sounds like its: 1. No non conference for sure (all fall sports) 2. Possibility of no fall sports (practice only) and either moving to spring, or cancelling all together. But, the Big East does not seemingly want to be the trendsetter or to be lagging in making their decisions; probably based on what happened with the BE basketball tourney.
|
|
|
Post by azvolleydad on Jul 10, 2020 11:27:15 GMT -5
Every student, every athlete is at risk, especially while on campus. Athletes even moreso because they aren't able to socially distance at practice for volleyball, football, basketball. What if an athlete, on a bus trip 5 hours to and from their next opponent learns she has tested positive for Covid while on the road? What happens? Are they sent home by car? Uber? Plane? Do they continue to stay with the team and stay in the hotel and ride back on the bus? This is a very, very likely scenario for every team in the conference. Having a season, whether 15 games or 30 is INSANE. No athlete should be put at risk. The school's bottom line should not take priority over placing any player at risk of death or possible serious health problems in their future. If there is a season, we will see athletes die because they were "lucky" enough to play on a college team. I feel very sad for you.
|
|
|
Post by gluckgluck on Jul 10, 2020 11:57:44 GMT -5
Every student, every athlete is at risk, especially while on campus. Athletes even moreso because they aren't able to socially distance at practice for volleyball, football, basketball. What if an athlete, on a bus trip 5 hours to and from their next opponent learns she has tested positive for Covid while on the road? What happens? Are they sent home by car? Uber? Plane? Do they continue to stay with the team and stay in the hotel and ride back on the bus? This is a very, very likely scenario for every team in the conference. Having a season, whether 15 games or 30 is INSANE. No athlete should be put at risk. The school's bottom line should not take priority over placing any player at risk of death or possible serious health problems in their future. If there is a season, we will see athletes die because they were "lucky" enough to play on a college team. I feel very sad for you. Why would you feel sorry for me? Because I'm not terribly optimistic about a pandemic? The cases are rising throughout the country. If my daughter was playing, I would not be wanting her to be put at risk in order to 1) get men's basketball on the court, or 2) to comply with Title IX requirements because the men's sports are the revenue (TV money) that won't be recouped. Of course an oncampus education is what you want for a student/athlete. It's more than just books and ball. Especially at elite schools. But why play a shortened season? Cancel this season. Let the athletes stay on scholarship, get degrees and have another year of eligibility either at current school, or at a new school when they graduate. I see no reason to put these kids at risk. There are so many questions about how the disease affects young people in later life, when most everyone is showing damaged lungs in the aftermath.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2020 11:59:49 GMT -5
when most everyone is showing damaged lungs in the aftermath. Can you cite this research for me please?
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Jul 10, 2020 12:02:20 GMT -5
There are so many questions about how the disease affects young people in later life, when most everyone is showing damaged lungs in the aftermath. This is absolutely, positively false. Stop spreading fake fear. There ARE legitimate reasons to think sports shouldn’t be played this fall and I have no problem with people making that argument. Or simply choosing for themselves that even if sports happen, they will decide not to play. But those discussions and decisions need to be based in truth. Not that garbage.
|
|
|
Post by gluckgluck on Jul 10, 2020 12:07:13 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2020 12:11:40 GMT -5
Sorry, I'm a bit confused (happens often). The title of one of those articles is "The coronavirus is leaving some people with permanent lung damage" and the other references 3 people who've had lung transplants out of the roughly 4 million confirmed cases. Where is the quote about "most everyone" having lung damage after they have recovered?
|
|
|
Post by gluckgluck on Jul 10, 2020 12:14:44 GMT -5
There are so many questions about how the disease affects young people in later life, when most everyone is showing damaged lungs in the aftermath. This is absolutely, positively false. Stop spreading fake fear. There ARE legitimate reasons to think sports shouldn’t be played this fall and I have no problem with people making that argument. Or simply choosing for themselves that even if sports happen, they will decide not to play. But those discussions and decisions need to be based in truth. Not that garbage. OK, Noob, let's say SO MANY are having resulting lung damage. This is not a false statement. And even if you do not like it, it is not fake. here's some food for thought: nypost.com/2020/07/01/doctor-if-college-football-is-played-someone-is-going-to-die/
|
|
|
Post by rbball02 on Jul 10, 2020 12:18:22 GMT -5
This is absolutely, positively false. Stop spreading fake fear. There ARE legitimate reasons to think sports shouldn’t be played this fall and I have no problem with people making that argument. Or simply choosing for themselves that even if sports happen, they will decide not to play. But those discussions and decisions need to be based in truth. Not that garbage. OK, Noob, let's say SO MANY are having resulting lung damage. This is not a false statement. And even if you do not like it, it is not fake. here's some food for thought: nypost.com/2020/07/01/doctor-if-college-football-is-played-someone-is-going-to-die/ Doctor of Computer Science...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2020 12:25:59 GMT -5
This is absolutely, positively false. Stop spreading fake fear. There ARE legitimate reasons to think sports shouldn’t be played this fall and I have no problem with people making that argument. Or simply choosing for themselves that even if sports happen, they will decide not to play. But those discussions and decisions need to be based in truth. Not that garbage. OK, Noob, let's say SO MANY are having resulting lung damage. This is not a false statement. And even if you do not like it, it is not fake. here's some food for thought: nypost.com/2020/07/01/doctor-if-college-football-is-played-someone-is-going-to-die/ Do you have the research to show that playing sports is more dangerous than the parties, bars and other activities in which students would be partaking if they WEREN'T playing sports? I can only speak to the institutions I'm familiar with, but each has a strict protocol in place for students who are rejoining the program, that is designed to limit their exposure to people outside the "bubble" of their sport. In fact, although I already know of players who tested positive when they returned to school, I do not know of a single athlete that caught the virus from someone else inside their bubble. I have yet to see data proving that a return to collegiate athletics is more dangerous than not returning. Given your claims, I'm sure you have such data so I'd humbly ask if you could post it.
|
|
|
Post by gluckgluck on Jul 10, 2020 13:28:04 GMT -5
Do you have the research to show that playing sports is more dangerous than the parties, bars and other activities in which students would be partaking if they WEREN'T playing sports? I can only speak to the institutions I'm familiar with, but each has a strict protocol in place for students who are rejoining the program, that is designed to limit their exposure to people outside the "bubble" of their sport. In fact, although I already know of players who tested positive when they returned to school, I do not know of a single athlete that caught the virus from someone else inside their bubble. I have yet to see data proving that a return to collegiate athletics is more dangerous than not returning. Given your claims, I'm sure you have such data so I'd humbly ask if you could post it. It's difficult to compile data when you are in the middle of the pandemic. But the CDC provides some pretty great numbers for all to look up: Cases countrywide are on the rise. I did not say playing sports is more dangerous. Bubbles are basically nonsense at this point. I'd leave examples in professional sports for you to look at, including the MLS and the NWSL. The Nashville men's team, which was already in the bubble, had to pull out of the tournament because of a covid outbreak among team members. www.latimes.com/sports/soccer/story/2020-07-09/mls-is-back-nashville-expelled-nine-players-test-positive-coronavirusThe Orlando women didn't even make it to the bubble before having to pull out of the tournament. All I'm saying here is that the whole prospect of playing this fall is dicey. It's throwing caution to the wind. Or maybe it's throwing hands up in the air. I'm not sure what research the Big East presidents are using to make decisions. How much risk is it worth to increase/decrease the odds of healthy administration, staff, professors, coaches and students and athletes?
|
|
|
Post by Tara Flex on Jul 10, 2020 13:45:01 GMT -5
Do you have the research to show that playing sports is more dangerous than the parties, bars and other activities in which students would be partaking if they WEREN'T playing sports? I can only speak to the institutions I'm familiar with, but each has a strict protocol in place for students who are rejoining the program, that is designed to limit their exposure to people outside the "bubble" of their sport. In fact, although I already know of players who tested positive when they returned to school, I do not know of a single athlete that caught the virus from someone else inside their bubble. I have yet to see data proving that a return to collegiate athletics is more dangerous than not returning. Given your claims, I'm sure you have such data so I'd humbly ask if you could post it. It's difficult to compile data when you are in the middle of the pandemic. But the CDC provides some pretty great numbers for all to look up: Cases countrywide are on the rise. I did not say playing sports is more dangerous. Bubbles are basically nonsense at this point. I'd leave examples in professional sports for you to look at, including the MLS and the NWSL. The Nashville men's team, which was already in the bubble, had to pull out of the tournament because of a covid outbreak among team members. www.latimes.com/sports/soccer/story/2020-07-09/mls-is-back-nashville-expelled-nine-players-test-positive-coronavirusThe Orlando women didn't even make it to the bubble before having to pull out of the tournament. All I'm saying here is that the whole prospect of playing this fall is dicey. It's throwing caution to the wind. Or maybe it's throwing hands up in the air. I'm not sure what research the Big East presidents are using to make decisions. How much risk is it worth to increase/decrease the odds of healthy administration, staff, professors, coaches and students and athletes? Interested in the definition of "throwing caution to the wind". How many 18-23 year olds have died from Covid since they started tracking on 2/1/20 and where is the data that says athletes are more likely to get the virus playing 2 matches in a visitors gym on a weekend vs going to bars, parties and dorms if they were back on campus?
|
|
|
Post by huskerjen on Jul 10, 2020 13:45:35 GMT -5
This is absolutely, positively false. Stop spreading fake fear. There ARE legitimate reasons to think sports shouldn’t be played this fall and I have no problem with people making that argument. Or simply choosing for themselves that even if sports happen, they will decide not to play. But those discussions and decisions need to be based in truth. Not that garbage. OK, Noob, let's say SO MANY are having resulting lung damage. This is not a false statement. And even if you do not like it, it is not fake. here's some food for thought: nypost.com/2020/07/01/doctor-if-college-football-is-played-someone-is-going-to-die/ This is what you're looking for. There are quite a few papers on it. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7228737/"Pulmonary fibrosis is a recognised sequelae of ARDS...available data indicate that about 40% of patients with COVID-19 develop ARDS, and 20% of ARDS cases are severe."
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 10, 2020 13:50:57 GMT -5
This is what you're looking for. There are quite a few papers on it. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7228737/"Pulmonary fibrosis is a recognised sequelae of ARDS...available data indicate that about 40% of patients with COVID-19 develop ARDS, and 20% of ARDS cases are severe."
Median age of the 201 patients in that study was 51 and ALL had been admitted to hospital because of their symptoms. Do you want to revise the above post? It seems like you're suggesting 40% of ALL patients with COVID-19 develop ARDS.
|
|
|
Post by huskerjen on Jul 10, 2020 14:07:13 GMT -5
This is what you're looking for. There are quite a few papers on it. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7228737/"Pulmonary fibrosis is a recognised sequelae of ARDS...available data indicate that about 40% of patients with COVID-19 develop ARDS, and 20% of ARDS cases are severe."
Median age of the 201 patients in that study was 51 and ALL had been admitted to hospital because of their symptoms. Do you want to revise the above post? It seems like you're suggesting 40% of ALL patients with COVID-19 develop ARDS. I didn't suggest that. That's just the data from the preliminary studies coming out. It makes sense that the data has a higher median age since that's the population most likely to be hospitalized during the pandemic, especially early on before the modified re-opening measures. However, absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. It's a specious corollary to presume since younger cohorts' CFR is lower vis-a-vis older groups that any associated symptoms will also be similarly diminished. Death is one thing, associated illnesses are another. I don't see how anyone can look at this from a risk management perspective and think we have near enough information to get back to business as usual. I understand the economic and social impact of shutting things down and mitigating activities for a prolonged period. It's fine if politicians, business leaders, and other bureaucratic organizations, want to push forward with re-opening everything, but at the very least they all should be honest about their motives. Namely, we don't know enough yet to ensure safety (assuming our citizens, college students, etc. don't want to strictly adhere to wearing masks, physical distancing, etc.), but we're choosing economic and social stability and are accepting that many more will die and many more than that may incur long term health ramifications as a result. Some people are saying that openly, and I can't fault them. My only issue is the people that act like CFR is all that we should care about and those that pretend to know enough about the long lasting effects of this virus to make confident decisions about how we should move forward.
|
|