ViAggie wrote: ↑

August 21st, 2020, 9:36 am

hipsterdoofus21 wrote: ↑

August 21st, 2020, 8:58 am

1% of the US has tested positive for Covid.
0.04% have died from it.
What are we DOING!!!!

I'm sure this gets political quick, just like everything else, but here's my take. I wish it hadn't been politicized because as a healthcare worker there's enough to argue about how this has been handled by scientists and doctors worldwide without even bringing politics into it. That's where I try to come from with my arguments.

300K dead Americans by the years end is where are on-track for. That's a lot of dead Americans, regardless of the percentage of the population. It is, but within the healthcare industry alone there's not a lot of confidence in that number. The measures used to count actual covid related deaths are inconsistent and far to often subjective over objective. There has already been a number of situations where hospitals and state health departments were found to be counting deaths as Covid, when in reality it was clearly another cause.

The purpose of the lock downs was to try and reduce the spread and keep the ER's from being over run with Covid Patience. One of the more startling statistics from Covd-19 is that the simple majority of those who contract the virus require some type of hospitalization, now that might just be an ER room visit and short stay, but it could also be a lot worse. The idea was the try and prevent the hospitals from being over run with Covid Patience, and hospital staff contracting the virus themselves, unable to help those they would normally treat and care for. Agreed. This was the purpose and it worked. Even in New York the hospitals weren't overrun. But the plan was never to remain locked down. It was just to flatten the curve. When in human history have we ever quarantined the healthy instead of the sick or high risk?

For those of you who have ever played organized tackle football, like myself (9 years), you know that you end up getting all sorts of bodily fluids on you at least a few times a season, especially if you are wearing anything white. You know you'll end up with someone else's blood, vomit and other fluids too gross to mention, on your uniform at some point during a game, unless you are lucky and ride the pine the whole time. Yes I agree. It's impossible to play football and not spread illnesses of all kinds, and in this case Covid. My argument is not for me or you to determine whether these kids play. My argument is for the players and coaches to decide. If they want to play despite the risks then I don't see the difference between that and the assumed risks already built into playing football. If they don't want to play, then I'm fine with that.

So unless we want to isolate our college athletes like we do our pro's, it's too risky for some. Even the schools giving it a go are finding that out. College students are not going to stay socially distanced during the season, they will eventually go out to public places where they could easily pick up the virus, infect their whole team, professors, girl friends, parents, grand parents, etc., all who could be high risk. Sure the young athletes are in good shape and it may not affect them as much as it would someone in their 60's, but they will surely be interacting, at school, with those who are. You're right, college students are not going to stay socially distanced. That is a fact whether they're playing football or not. But you could argue that the players would have much better surveillance of their health as part of the team.

That's the thought anyway. If we decide as a nation the risk is worth it for our entertainment, than so be it. It is what it is (oh crap, SB here we come?)

hipsterdoofus21 wrote: ↑

August 21st, 2020, 10:56 am

ViAggie wrote: ↑

August 21st, 2020, 9:36 am

hipsterdoofus21 wrote: ↑

August 21st, 2020, 8:58 am

1% of the US has tested positive for Covid.
0.04% have died from it.
What are we DOING!!!!

I'm sure this gets political quick, just like everything else, but here's my take. I wish it hadn't been politicized because as a healthcare worker there's enough to argue about how this has been handled by scientists and doctors worldwide without even bringing politics into it. That's where I try to come from with my arguments.

300K dead Americans by the years end is where are on-track for. That's a lot of dead Americans, regardless of the percentage of the population. It is, but within the healthcare industry alone there's not a lot of confidence in that number. The measures used to count actual covid related deaths are inconsistent and far to often subjective over objective. There has already been a number of situations where hospitals and state health departments were found to be counting deaths as Covid, when in reality it was clearly another cause.

The purpose of the lock downs was to try and reduce the spread and keep the ER's from being over run with Covid Patience. One of the more startling statistics from Covd-19 is that the simple majority of those who contract the virus require some type of hospitalization, now that might just be an ER room visit and short stay, but it could also be a lot worse. The idea was the try and prevent the hospitals from being over run with Covid Patience, and hospital staff contracting the virus themselves, unable to help those they would normally treat and care for. Agreed. This was the purpose and it worked. Even in New York the hospitals weren't overrun. But the plan was never to remain locked down. It was just to flatten the curve. When in human history have we ever quarantined the healthy instead of the sick or high risk?

For those of you who have ever played organized tackle football, like myself (9 years), you know that you end up getting all sorts of bodily fluids on you at least a few times a season, especially if you are wearing anything white. You know you'll end up with someone else's blood, vomit and other fluids too gross to mention, on your uniform at some point during a game, unless you are lucky and ride the pine the whole time. Yes I agree. It's impossible to play football and not spread illnesses of all kinds, and in this case Covid. My argument is not for me or you to determine whether these kids play. My argument is for the players and coaches to decide. If they want to play despite the risks then I don't see the difference between that and the assumed risks already built into playing football. If they don't want to play, then I'm fine with that.

So unless we want to isolate our college athletes like we do our pro's, it's too risky for some. Even the schools giving it a go are finding that out. College students are not going to stay socially distanced during the season, they will eventually go out to public places where they could easily pick up the virus, infect their whole team, professors, girl friends, parents, grand parents, etc., all who could be high risk. Sure the young athletes are in good shape and it may not affect them as much as it would someone in their 60's, but they will surely be interacting, at school, with those who are. You're right, college students are not going to stay socially distanced. That is a fact whether they're playing football or not. But you could argue that the players would have much better surveillance of their health as part of the team.

That's the thought anyway. If we decide as a nation the risk is worth it for our entertainment, than so be it. It is what it is (oh crap, SB here we come?)

NavyBlueAggie wrote: ↑

August 25th, 2020, 1:52 pm

Interesting article Mr. Biggle, even with the tilting in the article. I work at a facility that has granted me insight to a pair of research groups, one funded by a certain school of medicine, and the other group is preparing countermeasures for COVID 19. Amazing what a person can learn from first hand research without a microphone, a reporter or a manager reporting to a handler who is delegating funds for answers.

Agreed there is much emotion about this situation, and if it weren't an election year it's like we would have just had another flu season we've recently survived. I would note that the COVID 19 mortality rates have significantly under-performed the models many times over.