mannc

There are lots of things we don’t know, but it’s insane to close schools and ban organized sports out of fear of something for which there is very little hard evidence. The media has disgracefully exaggerated and misrepresented the scope of the threat to healthy young people. A recent poll showed that the average American believes that 9 percent of the population has died from COVID 19–that would be 30 million people. Here’s a stat I’ve never seen published in the MSM: in the entire state of California, not one person under 18-years old has died from CV19. Not one, out of a sample size of 9 million kids. I’m sorry, I do not believe that a disease that is incapable of causing even one death in a population of 9 million is somehow leaving young people with mysterious long term health damage...

UK has more CV19 deaths per capita than the USA. How is that doing a better job? The fact that they have it “under control” now is probably because they are approaching some form of herd immunity, similar to what seems to be happening in NYC. At any rate, the US is much bigger and diverse (in every way) than the UK and it’s difficult to generalize about the current course of the disease in the country as a whole.

You don’t need a PhD or an MD to understand the demographics and risk factors of this disease. Much about the disease is not known, but we do know that young adults and school kids are at far less risk from CV 19 than from other diseases and perils that we readily allow them to be exposed to. The media has done its best to misrepresent this, in part by focusing disproportionate attention on extreme outlier cases and in part by just never mentioning it, and focusing on “cases” ...

Oh FFS. The Eduardo Rodriguez thing has been WAY overblown. The so called “complications” are very mild and he’s expected to play again this year. And it’s ONE player.

Really? In what sense?

Based on the known demographics of the disease, I’m going to say zero.

There is a ton of stuff out there on herd immunity at 20% or lower. This article cites one such study and explains why it may be lower than previously thought .https://www.northsidesun.com/herd-immunity#sthash.WsvtUqBU.dpbs

The governor’s discussion of herd immunity is way off. Many experts believe effective herd immunity with this virus is 20% or below, not 40 or 80%. And you are vastly overstating the extent to which lockdowns are a proven scientific technique for controlling viruses. They had never been done before on anything close to this scale, and for good reason. Prior to CV 19, the CDC had recommended against such measures as a method of combatting viruses like this one.

That’s highly debatable and not scientifically proven. Many states and countries that imposed fewer restrictions have “performed” as well or better than counties or states that locked down harder. And at any rate, it’s not an argument between zero restrictions and full lockdown. Certain restrictions made sense for some period of time, and few if any countries imposed none. I haven’t read every post in this thread and I don’t intend to, so enlighten me, if you will...

Nothing I said is statistically wrong, and you certainly don't point to anything I said that might be. The nonsense you posted, on the other hand... 1 in 5 "people" require hospitalization? What utter nonsense. In my state, with 4.2 million people, a grand total of 1500 people have been hospitalized since the beginning of the "pandemic". That works out to .035 percent of the population, or about one in every 3000 people. If you were only talking about the percentage of people who tested positive, which of course is only a small percentage of people who have actually contracted the virus, then it's 1500 out of 18,000, which works out to just over 8 percent, not 20 percent. And of course, there is zero evidence at this point of long-term effects from the virus, much less people being "permanently damaged." Any such talk is nothing more than panic-mongering speculation. Lastly, you have no idea whether I or anyone else in my family has been "impacted by it." In fact, I have two members of my immediate family who have been severely impacted by the insane and scientifically unsupported forced school closures, business closures and travel restrictions. Do they count too? Are we even going to consider them? I'm guessing there are many more people like me than there are people who have close friends or family members who have died from CV19.

LOL. What on earth do you think that proves?

Life is uncertain; we voluntarily encounter all sorts of risks every day. With regard to COVID 19, our society's ability to rationally assess and respond to risk has gone right out the window, largely because of dishonest and incompetent media coverage of the virus. And BTW, i've never heard of these "asymptomatic athletes that haven't fully regained their ability." Who are you talking about?

The California numbers regarding kids under 18 was cited in response to an anecdote about an infant falling ill. Those numbers certainly suggest that there is no reason for kids not to be in school and playing HS sports. But in fact, the number of deaths for people under 40 dying from CV19 in California and elsewhere, while not zero, is vanishingly small--a fact the media never talks about. It's true that dying isn't the only problem associated with CV19. But the number of hospitalizations for people under 40 is small as well, and the evidence of long term effects from the disease are of course anecdotal at this point, as is your story about the rowing team, all of whom apparently recovered. (It doesn't say how many of the "infected" rowers actually got sick, but it's worth noting that none required hospitalization. Articles about the horrors of CV19 rarely mention that most of the "infected" never even showed symptoms.) It is also worth noting that certain heart conditions (such as a temporarily enlarged heart) are common after patients recover from any respiratory illness, such as the flu. it's hardly surprising that this is being observed in some recovered CV19 patients.

Sorry, anecdotal evidence like this proves nothing. In the entire state of California, not one person under 18-years old has died of CV19. That a sample size of 9 million kids. You can confirm this by going to the state’s Coronavirus dashboard. The demographics of this disease have been wildly misrepresented in the media. It poses very little risk to healthy people under 60 years old, and even less than that to NFL football players in their 20s. Players who are opting out are either seriously misinformed, are making a business decision, or have some significant pre-existing medical condition that makes them more vulnerable.

I like the one over the tunnel at the Patriots Game: Cheaters Exit Here

Fish is a really good player. Kyle has his work cut out for him. As good as guys like Kyle and Romo are, it is like night and day between them and even the lowest journeymen on the PGA tour. You can tell the difference watching one swing, or even one chip or putt.

So it’s confirmed that they cheated—again. Incredible.

Thank you. These athletes (and their coaches) are at far greater risk of dying in an auto accident on their way to practice.

The players who test positive will no doubt quarantine for a week or two to avoid infecting others, just like someone with the flu would be expected to stay home. BFD. Furthermore, the evidence that non-symptomatic people (esp. young people) are major spreaders of the disease is weak at best. Finally, the vast majority of college coaches and trainers are also in age categories where the virus poses less risk than things like accidental drowning or being struck by lightning. What was your point? No football this year? GTFOOH!

McCoy had one really good year for the Bills. And he was an easily replaced RB. Hughes has been our best pass rusher for seven years in a row, FFS. He probably will be again in 2020.

And yet no reports that even one of them is seriously ill, and none likely to be, given their ages. Why is this even a story? We have lost our damn minds.

Hughes trade and it's not close. Hughes is still an elite (or near elite) player at a very high value position. McCoy was overpaid and overrated at the lowest value position on the field. He really only had two good seasons here. Hughes on the other hand is still playing at a high level seven years after trade.

Hmmm

I’m not trying to be a wiseguy, but how do we know Pegula’s oil and gas business is debt-free? Is it publicly traded?

I think you are wrong. The pistol offense they ran at Oregon was a terrible match for his skill-set, especially after they refused to let him run, his senior year. I think he’s going to be a really good pro.