Bigger Impact on college Football, COVID or Racism?

Cyclonepride

Thought Police
Staff member
Apr 11, 2006
96,759
57,905
113
53
A pineapple under the sea
www.oldschoolradical.com
Take it with a grain of salt, as the WHO has been all over the place, but very positive for college sports and life in general if true:

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/06/08/asy...-arent-spreading-new-infections-who-says.html

"Coronavirus patients without symptoms aren’t driving the spread of the virus, World Health Organization officials said Monday, casting doubt on concerns by some researchers that the disease could be difficult to contain due to asymptomatic infections."

"“From the data we have, it still seems to be rare that an asymptomatic person actually transmits onward to a secondary individual,” Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, head of WHO’s emerging diseases and zoonosis unit, said at a news briefing from the United Nations agency’s Geneva headquarters. “It’s very rare.”"
 
  • Like
Reactions: dualthreat

aeroclone

Well-Known Member
Oct 30, 2006
9,799
5,814
113
Easy. Racism.

I'm curious how people in this camp think this would play out. There are far more players out there wanting to play football than there are scholarships. If some players refuse to play, there will be others ready to step in. It may lower the level of play, but if that is your primary concern you are watching the NFL anyway. It just seems unlikely to me that so many people refuse to play that schools couldn't field teams.
 

GrappleCy

Well-Known Member
Aug 7, 2018
566
912
63
and are flat relative to April for ICU occupancy

9a-TMC-covid-19-icu-occupancy-trend-6-8-2020.png

'Flat with april' is a hell of a way to say 'rising and back at the first peak'
 

Cyclonepride

Thought Police
Staff member
Apr 11, 2006
96,759
57,905
113
53
A pineapple under the sea
www.oldschoolradical.com

This is how your first link starts.

"The limited evidence on long-term effects of Covid-19
The new coronavirus and the disease it causes are still just months old, meaning researchers have not been able to study the disease's long-term effects on people."

The rest appear to be anecdotal evidence and theories. Obviously I'm not saying we should abandon all caution, but it will be a learn as you go process, and we haven't learned much yet.
 

cycloneG

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2007
15,108
15,129
113
Off the grid
This is how your first link starts.

"The limited evidence on long-term effects of Covid-19
The new coronavirus and the disease it causes are still just months old, meaning researchers have not been able to study the disease's long-term effects on people."

The rest appear to be anecdotal evidence and theories. Obviously I'm not saying we should abandon all caution, but it will be a learn as you go process, and we haven't learned much yet.

I disagree. Long-term effects should be a concern.
 
Last edited:

cycloneG

Well-Known Member
Mar 7, 2007
15,108
15,129
113
Off the grid
Long term effects are a concern, but they are not established yet, except in theory and anecdotal evidence. That was my point.

The evidence is more than anecdotal.

"One study published in March found that out of 416 hospitalized Covid-19 patients, 19% showed signs of heart damage."

"Another study from Wuhan published in January found 12% of Covid-19 patients showed signs of cardiovascular damage."

"Now, physicians warn that Covid-19 survivors may experience long-lasting cardiac damage and cardiovascular problems, which could increase their risk for heart attack and stroke. Doctors also warn Covid-19 could worsen existing heart problems."

"According to Parshley, some CT scans show Covid-19 patients have light gray patches on their lungs called "ground-glass opacities," which don't always heal. One Chinese study found the patches in 77% of patients, Parshley reports."

" research shows that about one third of survivors of similar coronaviruses such as SARS and MERS had long-term lung damage."