All Things COVID-19 College Football Impact

Donate To GopherHole
For some further consideration here, when clinicians have journal clubs where they sit down and review peer reviewed literature, at the end of reviewing there is a common phrase discussed which is, “How does this literature change my practice?” The anecdotes noted by the PSU researcher are just that, and are not things at current that rise to the level of credible info to dictate a clinicians scope of practice. Whether you agree or disagree, that foundational strategy is for good reason.

What we have to remember is while there are doctors and researchers in the ears of these B1G admin, there are also lawyers. I can see a scenario where lawyers are floating the potential lawsuits that could arise - maybe a future pro gets sick and has some long term problems, and they sue the school against lost earnings because they failed to inform the student of risk adequately. It may be far fetched but I can imagine it.

These decisions aren’t being made solely from a clinical decision making standpoint. Maybe we should be pushing for legal waivers signed by all athletes instead of arguing there is or isn’t any risk to them... we gotta stop pretending it’s just clinical risk that’s dictating these decisions.
 

Sir Yacht reveals his sources as two Big Ten athletic directors and a coach. Sure, why not? 🤷‍♂️ Keep up the good work, Yacht.


 


Pompous Elitist said:
Sir Yacht reveals his sources as two Big Ten athletic directors and a coach. Sure, why not? 🤷‍♂️ Keep up the good work, Yacht.


Click to expand...
How does some random on twitter get into contact with 2 Big Ten ADs and a Coach? If he was a real reporter I could understand, but this seems way to far-fetched.
 

It should be clear by now Yacht is a court jester attention-seeker. It’s been a fun ride.

The amount of drama this has created has been a nice distraction and who knows, maybe the groundswell of hope created will have some positive effect on a movement towards getting a season going this year.

This SI reporter is a little wadded up about it all, but probably wouldn’t hesitate to amplify unverified or unproven allegations as de facto reality...would any “real” journalist these days? 🤔

COLUMN: The Big Ten Misinformation Campaign By 'Content Creators' Needs To End
www.si.com

COLUMN: The Big Ten Misinformation Campaign By 'Content Creators' Needs To End

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 epidemic, people who follow the Big Ten Conference have been misled by inaccurate news breaks. This needs to stop now.
www.si.com www.si.com
 


Pompous Elitist said:
It should be clear by now Yacht is a court jester attention-seeker. It’s been a fun ride.

The amount of drama this has created has been a nice distraction and who knows, maybe the groundswell of hope created will have some positive effect on a movement towards getting a season going this year.

This SI reporter is a little wadded up about it all, but probably wouldn’t hesitate to amplify unverified or unproven allegations as de facto reality...would any “real” journalist these days? 🤔

COLUMN: The Big Ten Misinformation Campaign By 'Content Creators' Needs To End
www.si.com

COLUMN: The Big Ten Misinformation Campaign By 'Content Creators' Needs To End

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 epidemic, people who follow the Big Ten Conference have been misled by inaccurate news breaks. This needs to stop now.
www.si.com www.si.com
Click to expand...
Hmmmmm.... the obvious take from this is, misinformation is only to be allowed from certain outlets and sources. We don't like it when non-approved entities are pushing it
 

Pompous Elitist said:
Good lord, did you even read the editors note on the very first line of the story? The accession standards have reverted to pre- COVID.

You people are the worst.
Click to expand...
I knew it was a older article and tried to find an update, but I didn't notice the editors note. Sorry for the misinformation.

"you people" -- that type of line is more descriptive of you than it is on anyone else.
 
Last edited:

Pompous Elitist said:
In summary, you want to be panicked and you want to panic millions of your fellow Americans over innocuous solitary MRI findings that have no known clinical correlation. The worst.
Click to expand...
Your intolerance and in ability to look at a subject objectively is obvious. I did not say that or imply that I want to panic people. It is a matter of researching the impact of Covid-19. It is in contrast to you blindly believing what you want to believe and expect others to become your gladiators for enjoyment.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
For once, you said something that’s partially true. We don’t know and we won’t know for months, years and maybe decades if the isolated MRI findings (they do NOT necessarily -and most likely don’t - indicate permanent scarring/damage) lead to increased problems. Many/most experts (just go look) are cautioning about alarmism and question the significance of these isolated findings. That’s where the science is today.

Professional athletes are not the only ones that push their hearts hard. Millions of exercisers, amateurs, hikers etc. There has not been an epidemic of increased heart problems at this time.

Think about unintended consequences of spreading unfounded panic and fear. What is it with a significant portion of the population that wants to live in perpetual fear of unlikely events?
Click to expand...
Do not make assumptions like "most likely don't" That is a very broad statement of many/most experts and it is untrue.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/...ur-heart-even-if-you-havent-had-any-symptoms/

You do not know the data about heart problems, many hospitals have seen a decrease in hospital visits for heart issues because patients are staying away from the hospital. Not every victim has to die in order for them to be affected.

Think about unintended consequences of spreading unfounded carelessness and disregard for science. What is it with a significant portion of the population that wants to live so self-centered and with little regard for others?

It is hilarious how you think that people who take precautions are huddled away in their basements afraid of their own shadow. We all take measured risks in everything we do, but wise people try to reduce the risks when possible. No one in their right mind would fly in a plane, drive a car, walk across the street, etc if the you had same chance of spending a significant time in the hospital or developing significant health issues (including death) as you can with Covid-19.
 




Twitter and Youtube have provided a platform for, literally anybody, to become a voice for some group of people who are looking for someone to step up and say the things that they want someone to say, because they want to believe those things are true.

That's how that works.

Take Alex Berenson, for example. Who??? Never heard of him. Oh, but, he's now the "thought leader" of a group of people who want to be told things that they want to believe in.

So now he's rich. Will probably have a book coming out soon, maybe a TV show, and the whole works.
 

Ogee Oglethorpe said:
Totally agree with you on this one, SON. Why does it have to be political
Click to expand...
Has gotten worse over the years. If only our elected officials could do a better job of talking to each other. Attend meetings where they would be educated on a particular subject instead of blowing them off, perhaps we would be more united on communicating in a decent way.
 

MplsGopher said:
Twitter and Youtube have provided a platform for, literally anybody, to become a voice for some group of people who are looking for someone to step up and say the things that they want someone to say, because they want to believe those things are true.

That's how that works.

Take Alex Berenson, for example. Who??? Never heard of him. Oh, but, he's now the "thought leader" of a group of people who want to be told things that they want to believe in.

So now he's rich. Will probably have a book coming out soon, maybe a TV show, and the whole works.
Click to expand...

That guy is a complete moron. So is Yacht Boy.
 



MplsGopher said:
Twitter and Youtube have provided a platform for, literally anybody, to become a voice for some group of people who are looking for someone to step up and say the things that they want someone to say, because they want to believe those things are true.

That's how that works.

Take Alex Berenson, for example. Who??? Never heard of him. Oh, but, he's now the "thought leader" of a group of people who want to be told things that they want to believe in.

So now he's rich. Will probably have a book coming out soon, maybe a TV show, and the whole works.
Click to expand...

Berenson is clearly serving his audience and reflecting his audience, same as MSM factions across the spectrum. I doubt he believes 100% of the crap he tosses out there but he doesn’t want to alienate his viewers, same as MSM factions across the spectrum. He overstates things and misinterprets things...but that’s not unique to him is it. Sad state of affairs. Get angry!
 

alchemy2u said:
Your intolerance and in ability to look at a subject objectively is obvious. I did not say that or imply that I want to panic people. It is a matter of researching the impact of Covid-19. It is in contrast to you blindly believing what you want to believe and expect others to become your gladiators for enjoyment.
Click to expand...

Good lord. Look in the mirror. I’ve clearly stated both sides of this debate all along.
 

alchemy2u said:
Really? your fckg source of the facts is twitter?
Click to expand...

You were 100% on board with an anecdote from a school board zoom meeting as proof of 30-35% incidence of clinical myocarditis. Same with the NYT piece. No paper or other proof required. Just some hearsay. You don’t care about actual facts.

Serious experts do have a presence on Twitter. It’s not just hysterics like yourself.
 

At least with MSM, you have to be somebody already, have accomplished something, have some credibility. You can't literally roll out of bed, and just start spewing stuff that some people want to hear, and become a star instantly.
 

alchemy2u said:
Do not make assumptions like "most likely don't" That is a very broad statement of many/most experts and it is untrue.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/...ur-heart-even-if-you-havent-had-any-symptoms/

You do not know the data about heart problems, many hospitals have seen a decrease in hospital visits for heart issues because patients are staying away from the hospital. Not every victim has to die in order for them to be affected.

Think about unintended consequences of spreading unfounded carelessness and disregard for science. What is it with a significant portion of the population that wants to live so self-centered and with little regard for others?

It is hilarious how you think that people who take precautions are huddled away in their basements afraid of their own shadow. We all take measured risks in everything we do, but wise people try to reduce the risks when possible. No one in their right mind would fly in a plane, drive a car, walk across the street, etc if the you had same chance of spending a significant time in the hospital or developing significant health issues (including death) as you can with Covid-19.
Click to expand...

You can’t even take the time to research a topic like military accessions before furiously posting an article as “proof”. You’re a damn fool. You continue to misstate positions, mock opinions of experts because they’re on twitter, and most damning took anecdotes as fact/truth. I’ve clearly stated there is debate on these issues and a spectrum of opinions. I’ve even posted those debates here!

You’re the last person that should be lecturing anyone on this topic.
 

Guys come on. We all want the truth.

The PSU thing is dead. We know it was Ohio State. We know the paper isn't published yet, it is being peer-reviewed, then it will be publicly available and open to scrutiny from all sources.
 

RahSkiUMah said:
For some further consideration here, when clinicians have journal clubs where they sit down and review peer reviewed literature, at the end of reviewing there is a common phrase discussed which is, “How does this literature change my practice?” The anecdotes noted by the PSU researcher are just that, and are not things at current that rise to the level of credible info to dictate a clinicians scope of practice. Whether you agree or disagree, that foundational strategy is for good reason.

What we have to remember is while there are doctors and researchers in the ears of these B1G admin, there are also lawyers. I can see a scenario where lawyers are floating the potential lawsuits that could arise - maybe a future pro gets sick and has some long term problems, and they sue the school against lost earnings because they failed to inform the student of risk adequately. It may be far fetched but I can imagine it.

These decisions aren’t being made solely from a clinical decision making standpoint. Maybe we should be pushing for legal waivers signed by all athletes instead of arguing there is or isn’t any risk to them... we gotta stop pretending it’s just clinical risk that’s dictating these decisions.
Click to expand...

Right, there are preferred practice guidelines formed over time, evidence-based practice, and old school seasoning of clinical experience. Is there enough evidence here to make sweeping statements that effect public health, personal health decisions, socioeconomic decisions; or enough evidence to affect medico-legal considerations? These are real world problems being debated and worried about. The answers aren’t clear cut other than to responsibly mitigate spread without excessive collateral damage.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
Pompous - with all due respect -

you are not approaching this as some disinterested observer, or from a purely clinical standpoint.

You have a point of view. some might say you have an agenda.

And you promote medical news/findings that tend to support your point of view.

Fine- you have a right to do that.

But don't turn around and pretend like you're some medical ombudsman who is interested only in the facts. Or that you are able to pass final judgement on these issues based on your superior knowledge and wisdom.

if you were that good, you would be in a lab actually studying these issues - not posting about them on an internet message board.

Me, I'm just a tired old dude who comes on here for fun. for me, watching you and Mpls go back and forth is like watching monkeys in the zoo throw feces at each other. And that is all the intellectual level that I attach to it.

you have every right to your point of view. it's the holier-than-thou attitude that bothers me. or at least that is the way I perceive your comments.
Click to expand...

You have a POV as well. Do eg Alchemy’s authoritarian posts bother you, or just mine?

When we have an topic like this, and “truth” is being bandied about based on anecdotes and unpublished studies I think that’s enough to get upset about out. Sorry. I have no regrets about this.
 

RahSkiUMah said:
Framing continual evolution of understanding as a failure of medical science, not as part of the process, is where it starts to tip toe that line.

Lol an ideologue really? Where are you getting that?
Click to expand...

Not re: evolution. Outright fraud or mysteriously sourced numbers as in the studies I listed.
 

MplsGopher said:
At least with MSM, you have to be somebody already, have accomplished something, have some credibility. You can't literally roll out of bed, and just start spewing stuff that some people want to hear, and become a star instantly.
Click to expand...

Well...
 

The title of this thread: PSU football doctor: 30-35 percent of COVID-19-positive Big Ten athletes had myocarditis


I could be totally wrong here, but what I’m hearing from some quarters is it doesn’t matter if that headline is true, or partially true, as long as it serves a purpose. A means to an end.

There is CLEARLY debate over this within professional, expert circles as we’ve seen differing policy informed by expert panels implemented across schools, leagues. I have, apparently erroneously, posted twitter arguments between academic and clinical experts in cardiology in a failed attempt to illustrate the thought process and factors involved and controversy revealing my sinister agenda. We are to wait for published papers, meta-analyses, professional body position papers to arrive before forming opinions. However, zoom call hearsay, unpublished papers, solitary low population n papers or with selection bias, chosen experts in Scientific American articles are to be believed at headline level without context.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
Not re: evolution. Outright fraud or mysteriously sourced numbers as in the studies I listed.
Click to expand...
Do you actually believe that medical science has failed us? Are Ponzi schemes and fraud evidence that capitalism has failed us? Or are they symptomatic of the humans trying to cheat these systems?
 


More tweeting 😆


In an alternate timeline (or dimension) giving an out (and reappraisal).

 

RahSkiUMah said:
Do you actually believe that medical science has failed us? Are Ponzi schemes and fraud evidence that capitalism has failed us? Or are they symptomatic of the humans trying to cheat these systems?
Click to expand...

You‘re misstating/overstating my position. There are some problems that are fundamentally problematic, on a spectrum. Was the Wakefield paper a problem? Are apparently fraudulent databases, eg Surgisphere, problematic, non-reviewed peer reviewed papers of mysterious numerical origin a problem? Assumptions with enormous error ranges setting policy a problem? If you don’t see some real and potential issues it’s not my fault. Public trust is at stake. People like Murthy, Francis, Cole, and others aren’t anti-science. They’re ant- bad science. Is this a religion, like Catholicism?
 

Pompous Elitist said:
More tweeting 😆


In an alternate timeline (or dimension) giving an out (and reappraisal).

Click to expand...

Roberts Rules of Order. The absolute basics for motions and affirmations. How does the
B10 screw this up when billions are at stake? How does Warren survive this (other than the obvious reason)?
 

Pompous Elitist said:
You‘re misstating/overstating my position. There are some problems that are fundamentally problematic, on a spectrum. Was the Wakefield paper a problem? Are apparently fraudulent databases, eg Surgisphere, problematic, non-reviewed peer reviewed papers of mysterious numerical origin a problem? Assumptions with enormous error ranges setting policy a problem? If you don’t see some real and potential issues it’s not my fault. Public trust is at stake. People like Murthy, Francis, Cole, and others aren’t anti-science. They’re ant- bad science. Is this a religion, like Catholicism?
Click to expand...
These are all real issues, I am very well aware of all of them. Do not try to paint my disagreement as ignorance please. I just disagree that these issues are what’s eroding public trust in science. The average person has no clue about these things. If we were to survey the general population, how many would know who Wakefield, Poti, Stapel, Wansink, etc even are? 1% even?

However, politicians and media taking an anecdote like we’ve discussed here and saying “listen to science see a doctor said it!” And then an opposing politician finds their own doctor with an opposing opinion and does basically the same thing... Or rightfully attacking one of these anecdotal opinions, but then characterizing it to be symptomatic that science failing us as a whole, when we’re all in agreement, this isn’t science...these things are eroding public trust in science.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom