ISU Athletics Staff Member Tests Positive

[VeloClone]

I am not going to weigh in on whether there should or shouldn't be college football at this point and what it should look like. I think there is still time to make an even more informed decision as we know more and the landscape is clearer.

I would like to address the dismissal of risk. Several people are pointing to the other risks associated with playing that they say are much higher. Or are talking about the risk we all take when we get in an automobile. That is all fine and good but this isn't an either/or situation. This is an added risk on top of the risks an athlete faces on and off the football field. Also, it isn't just about the risk to the athletes or the fans in the stands. We could have practically all low risk people in the stands and on the field but that isn't the whole equation. The idea is to limit the number and spread of cases to protect those who may not be at the games but are high risk. The more people who are out there who are exposed and contract the disease, the greater the chance that the high risk people will interact with a carrier and contract the disease with much graver consequences. This includes the families of the players.

 

[GrappleCy]

You're right that Iowa's test sample is skewed. In general, data from all states in the US should contain a significant time period where tests could only be performed on people who had symptoms. In general, we haven't tested random sweeps of people, at least not in the US. Nearly all the testing data we have is based on people who go to get tested because they suspect they might have the virus. That is the nature of the testing data that we have. So if you say that 80% of people tested positive have no symptoms most people are going to assume that you are referring to the people who have actually been tested, not a hypothetical study group of people tested at random.

Iowa's data says at least 64% have symptoms. The CDC estimates that 65% will have symptoms. That is the data I know of, which strongly contradicts the 80% no symptoms number. If we have data that says today the positive cases are less likely to be symptomatic based on wider testing, then that's great. Or if there has been a study done that attempts to control for the bias in testing data we have. But, so far as I know we don't have that data at least publicly available.

And the point of this related to football - data shows that most people who tested positive do have symptoms. So, we can't just say it's fine for people to play even on a positive test because there's a low chance they'll have symptoms. If someone tests positive, they need to sit out until they're no longer contagious.

The 80% thing comes from people mis-interpreting some data of people coming off of a cruise ship where they tested everyone. It was spreading rapidly on the ship and they tested everyone. 80% of the people that tested positive hadn't shown any symptoms up to that point but they never went back to check and see what percentage of them ended up showing symptoms. But a lot of people have latched on to the 80% number as if it was a wide scientific study or something.

 

[GrappleCy]

https://time.com/5842669/coronavirus-asymptomatic-transmission/

I don't know if I believe the 80% number but it's out there, and not just in Trumpistan.

The headline is misleading. Read the actual text of the article

Out of 217 people on board, 128 tested positive for COVID-19—but only 24 of those people showed symptoms prior to testing. The remaining 104 people—81% of those who tested positive—had not experienced any symptoms, the researchers report.

The takeaway is that a lot of people can be contagious and not know it. But they didn't follow up to see how many of that 80% ended up having symptoms.

 

[WhoISthis]

Where do we stand in getting our team antibodies so they’ll be ready to entertain in the fall?

I see Bama is getting their team exposed before camp. I’d hate to see us at a competitive disadvantage.

 

[VeloClone]

Where do we stand in getting our team antibodies so they’ll be ready to entertain in the fall?

I see Bama is getting their team exposed before camp. I’d hate to see us at a competitive disadvantage.

I know this is in jest, but for anyone considering this, just imagine just one player ending up in the ICU or, worse yet, the morgue - even if due to a pre-existing, undiagnosed condition. The lawsuits could dwarf any profits cleared from a football season, not to mention the PR nightmare for the AD and University. Any protective legislation is not designed to shield against the liability of intentional exposure.

 

[madguy30]

I'm curious if those that are vehemently against football betting played this fall will watch the games or not. Seems like not watching/participating would be the easy answer, but I have my doubts that'll be the actual result.

Not sure if this directed toward me in that group, but for the record I'm not against football being played. I just don't know how logistics would play out and would hope there's things in place like players receiving an extra year if they choose to not play.

I don't plan on attending games but prefer not to as it is...but will watch if they're on. And if they're not being played I'll find other things to do.

 

[WhoISthis]

I know this is in jest, but for anyone considering this, just imagine just one player ending up in the ICU or, worse yet, the morgue - even if due to a pre-existing, undiagnosed condition. The lawsuits could dwarf any profits cleared from a football season, not to mention the PR nightmare for the AD and University. Any protective legislation is not designed to shield against the liability of intentional exposure.

I fear liability will be removed. Which doesn’t promote normalcy.

The court of public opinion may rule in favor, but we’ll see. There are many that still compare it to the flu

 

[Stewo]

Not sure if this directed toward me in that group, but for the record I'm not against football being played. I just don't know how logistics would play out and would hope there's things in place like players receiving an extra year if they choose to not play.

I don't plan on attending games but prefer not to as it is...but will watch if they're on. And if they're not being played I'll find other things to do.

It's directed at those that are severely overreacting.

 

[yowza]

"The chancellor's job had come to be defined as providing parking for the faculty, sex for the students, and athletics for the alumni." ~Clark Kerr

Clark Kerr (May 17, 1911 – December 1, 2003) was an American professor of economics and academic administrator. He was the first chancellor of the University of California, Berkeley, and twelfth president of the University of California.

Where do I apply? This and Bowl Rep have to be pretty good gigs.

 

[brett108]

I know this is in jest, but for anyone considering this, just imagine just one player ending up in the ICU or, worse yet, the morgue - even if due to a pre-existing, undiagnosed condition. The lawsuits could dwarf any profits cleared from a football season, not to mention the PR nightmare for the AD and University. Any protective legislation is not designed to shield against the liability of intentional exposure.

How do you prove intentional exposure? If they test before each contest risk of exposure in a game is minimal. Based on the fact the 4 symptomatic athletes acquired it while away from campus, we shouldn't be preposterous and act like we are asking the athletes to die for our amusement. They seem perfectly capable of picking up the virus outside of a competition.

 

[Gunnerclone]

I'm curious if those that are vehemently against football betting played this fall will watch the games or not. Seems like not watching/participating would be the easy answer, but I have my doubts that'll be the actual result.

I’m not even vehemently against it I just thing it’s stupid how people think there’s no way it could go south quickly. Like “of course they’re playing why wouldn’t they” attitude.

 

[Stewo]

I’m not even vehemently against it I just thing it’s stupid how people think there’s no way it could go south quickly. Like “of course they’re playing why wouldn’t they” attitude.

It's a frightening unknown, no two ways about it. There are ramifications either way, but I think most agree that not having a football season is going to decimate several athletics programs across the country, which of course creates more issue. I'm just glad I'm not making decisions.

 

[tplumm]

This was likely noted among the pages of responses I haven’t had the time to weed through yet, but I believe I heard Murph and Andy or Chris and Ross point out that too many people assume you will get some level of symptoms, recover and return to business as usual.
It was noted that some continue to report issues well after “recovery”. It was noted that even the best conditioned athletes may recover differently and there are still many unknowns as to potential long term impact to those who are on the spectrum where more severe symptoms were experienced. In other words, be careful not to make assumptions that minimize what young athletes could/should expect as this is a novel virus, much of which is not yet known from a longer term perspective.

 

[80sClone]

What a cluster f*** this is going to be for all sports but especially football. Key player goes down with 19 and isolated minimal two weeks. Then tries to come back in key role weakened physically.

 

[Rabbuk]

What a cluster f*** this is going to be for all sports but especially football. Key player goes down with 19 and isolated minimal two weeks. Then tries to come back in key role weakened physically.

Ya I wonder how many marquee players just sit out the season to not have nfl issues.

 

[DeereClone]

What a cluster f*** this is going to be for all sports but especially football. Key player goes down with 19 and isolated minimal two weeks. Then tries to come back in key role weakened physically.

Key player tests positive but has no symptoms - does he have to sit out 2 weeks?

 

[CycloneErik]

At least 5 bama players have it now

And they aren't even into the organized team activities or anything yet.

 

[WhoISthis]

And they aren't even into the organized team activities or anything yet.

It’s Bama, so it could be intentional exposure. Need to cull the two deep now .

 

[80sClone]

Key player tests positive but has no symptoms - does he have to sit out 2 weeks?

Positive test yet workout with team? I don't think so. Is that what you meant?

 

[jsb]

Key player tests positive but has no symptoms - does he have to sit out 2 weeks?

According to Jamie, yes. Because you are still contagious if you have it (even if you don't have symptoms). Not sitting out would be exposing lots more people.

It is shocking how many people don't understand that all scientific evidence shows you can still give the virus to someone if you are positive with no symptoms.