All Things COVID-19 College Football Impact

Donate To GopherHole
Pompous Elitist said:
The letter above is for those posters that don’t like their medical advice coming from Twitter.
Click to expand...
The letter said: "doctors are afraid of MRI". The question is, why? What is the true agenda/motivation behind the fear? Not the fluff in the letter.
 

MplsGopher said:
Yep!

Maximize those profits off the pandemic! Let's try to tank the vaccine, so that we can maximize profits off our sales of rapid-testers!


You can go ahead and say it. We all know.
Click to expand...

😄

In all seriousness, despite restarting their trial a few days ago the Astra Zeneca candidate is probably dead in the water. Money concerns, or scientific validity.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
😄

In all seriousness, despite restarting their trial a few days ago the Astra Zeneca candidate is probably dead in the water. Money concerns, or scientific validity.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes: Sure it is. That would maximize your clients profits, as is your aim. So keep hoping the vaccines tank.
 

We should all be happy football is back.

The players are happy, the coaches are happy, the fans should all be happy. We all support a sport that is far more dangerous than COVID for young healthy people.

If the players/coaches aren't comfortable, they should be allowed to opt out without any repercussion.

It's fall and the Gophers will be playing football, there should be universal excitement.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
😄

In all seriousness, despite restarting their trial a few days ago the Astra Zeneca candidate is probably dead in the water. Money concerns, or scientific validity.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be so sure about this. The setbacks are really common for trials, even for trials of efficacious drugs. I do not know the specifics of the AZ trial, but the people on trials are often not doing incredibly well (it's often out of desperation that people agree to be part of a trial).

I cannot speak to the scientific validity portion (out of my depth), but the money will not be an issue. For companies like AZ, this kind of publicity is worth the price in gold. They also received something like $2billion and PL-immunity. That's a lot of money for a trial.

They are also looking down the barrel at a number of potential anti-trust/price fixing litigations that will be decided by juries - - I think they'd love for a bunch of people to start the case thinking "hey, isn't that the company working on the vaccine?" My point is that even the failed attempts are good marketing.
 


Bob_Loblaw said:
I wouldn't be so sure about this. The setbacks are really common for trials, even for trials of efficacious drugs. I do not know the specifics of the AZ trial, but the people on trials are often not doing incredibly well (it's often out of desperation that people agree to be part of a trial).

I cannot speak to the scientific validity portion (out of my depth), but the money will not be an issue. For companies like AZ, this kind of publicity is worth the price in gold. They also received something like $2billion and PL-immunity. That's a lot of money for a trial.

They are also looking down the barrel at a number of potential anti-trust/price fixing litigations that will be decided by juries - - I think they'd love for a bunch of people to start the case thinking "hey, isn't that the company working on the vaccine?" My point is that even the failed attempts are good marketing.
Click to expand...

Based on public reports ( we don’t know the details) the adverse event was transverse myelitis. Given the small population size of the vaccination arm of the trial, sure it may have been a coincidence, but certainly gives some pause. This is not similar to other drugs in that vaccines are given to people free of the targeted disease. The safety profile must be extremely good.

Given the public hysteria over the cMRI findings the concern over the A Z product will be substantial and acceptance probably lower even if pushed through. That’s before any actual efficacy data.

My comments regarding money were with A Z and other interested parties. Five stages of grief.
 


Pompous Elitist said:
Based on public reports ( we don’t know the details) the adverse event was transverse myelitis. Given the small population size of the vaccination arm of the trial, sure it may have been a coincidence, but certainly gives some pause,

Given the public hysteria over the cMRI findings the concern over the A Z product will be substantial and acceptance probably lower even if pushed through. That’s before any actual efficacy data.

My comments regarding money were with A Z and other interested parties. Five stages of grief.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Jebus you're sad. You'll be looking at every single thing for the rest of your life through this "outrageous" CMR episode.

"You gotta be kidding me! $75 for an oil change?? I bet you think asymptomatic covid19 patients should have cardiac MRI scans, don't you?!?!"
"......uuhhh wut?"
 




MplsGopher said:
:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Jebus you're sad. You'll be looking at every single thing for the rest of your life through this "outrageous" CMR episode.

"You gotta be kidding me! $75 for an oil change?? I bet you think asymptomatic covid19 patients should have cardiac MRI scans, don't you?!?!"
"......uuhhh wut?"
Click to expand...

One of my hobbies is working on my vehicles so that scenario will never happen 😀
 

Pompous Elitist said:
More on the A Z thing

khn.org

NIH 'Very Concerned' About Serious Side Effect in Coronavirus Vaccine Trial - KFF Health News

The AstraZeneca trial is on hold in the U.S. as scientists try to unravel whether a rare neurological condition is linked to the vaccine. But regulators are frustrated by a lack of information from the drugmaker.
khn.org khn.org
Click to expand...
This isn't new, it has been widely reported that the one person came down with this. Out of 30k people, it shouldn't be surprising if something odd happens.

And nothing on your comments about money.
 

So, I have mixed feelings about returning. I am certainly happy that I get to watch college football, but I worry we will find out 5-10 years down the line that this was the wrong decision when the long term effects of COVID have been determined 100%. There are also lots of more important things than football during this global pandemic, and I don't know how to feel about the fact that sports teams are getting access to Rapid Saliva tests because they have the money to pay for it.

I have been thinking a lot about the player safety though, and I don't think the players will be any less-safe playing football. Thinking about the safety measures put into place, daily rapid testing, 21 day mandatory quarantine after a positive test, etc I am fairly certain the players won't catch covid during a game. What this means is that any players who catch covid will have caught it from either attending class, or going out in public and not following social distancing with mask usage. Those are both scenarios that would happen whether or not the B1G season was happening.

In fact, while my position is that in-person classes should not be happening and students should not be on campus, the reality is they are. By having a portion, however small, of the student body and faculty being tested for covid daily it means covid's ability to spread is reduced. So that is one, albeit VERY SMALL, benefit that has come out of this since I don't think they would have started daily rapid testing if the season wasn't happening.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
Letter Warns Against Clinical Role for Cardiac MRI in Asymptomatic COVID Patients



...
Studies123 investigating the prevalence of myocarditis in patients with recent COVID-19 have found features of subclinical myocarditis on cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging in patients without symptoms. Some commentators have raised concern that COVID-19 may lead to frequent, serious long-term cardiac sequelae even among people who have had mild infection and are currently asymptomatic.

We wish to emphasize that the prevalence, clinical significance and long-term implications of CMR surrogates of myocardial injury on morbidity and mortality are unknown. Further, it is unclear if the elevated T1 and T2 flagged in these studies are clinically significant, particularly in isolation, if treatment is needed, and, if so, what the management should be. These important questions should inspire future prospective studies.

Nonetheless, these reports have attracted significant media coverage, at times amplified by speculation on possible clinical implications, thus generating substantial anxiety amongst members of the general public. As a result, we are aware that some individuals are seeking CMR testing despite the absence of cardiac symptoms. We believe that, given the preliminary nature and limitations of the current evidence, testing asymptomatic members of the general public after COVID-19 is not indicated outside of carefully planned and approved research studies with appropriate control groups.

In light of your societies’ standing in the community and advocacy against low-yield testing and low-value medical care through your sponsorship of the Choosing Wisely4, Image Wisely5, and other similar campaigns, we request that you offer clear guidance discouraging CMR screening for COVID-19 related heart abnormalities in asymptomatic members of the general public.

Sincerely,

......

cvctcardiobrief.com

Slot Demo Pragmatic Play | Link Slot Online Terpercaya | Akun Demo Slot Gacor 2024

Cobai langsung link slot online slot demo pragmatic play. Menggunakan akun demo slot dan game slot gacor terlengkap 2024
cvctcardiobrief.com cvctcardiobrief.com
Click to expand...
Thanks for the information. This is what scientific community discussions are all about as they absorb the the information and progress along the learning curve.

It makes total sense that the publicity from the studies could lead to the general public requesting CMR's even if they do not have symptoms (unnecessary, costly testing) . That is a major concern.

The letter did not disagree with the results of the study. It just pointed out that we have much more work to do to learn the significance. Which is obvious.

Thanks for not using a twitter post as you source of information, but a link would have been nice. I did a search and confirmed the letter is correct (never believe unless you can confirm in today's world of alternate truths).
 



Why is it a major concern, to do more MRI scans of humans?

This is extremely rich, scientifically important data, if nothing else. The worst case is .... what? We get more data??
 

MplsGopher said:
Why is it a major concern, to do more MRI scans of humans?

This is extremely rich, scientifically important data, if nothing else. The worst case is .... what? We get more data??
Click to expand...
I think it's more that operating MRIs are expensive and require highly trained individuals. In the US there is not only likely way too few MRIs to support an influx of testing but also a lack of the individuals trained to operate them even if more were produced and distributed to hospitals. Not to mention, just buying 1 or 2 more of these machines is insanely expensive. Basically, "we don't have the infrastructure to support this, and a sudden influx of MRI requests for something that isn't life threatening to most people will make it harder to schedule MRI scans for people who are more likely to be in a life threatening position". Does that make sense? I got a bit wordy.

I also don't know for sure, but if it's similar to CAT scans, technically you increase your risk of things like cancer by some amount each time you get one, so something similar might be weighing in on this as well. A "the chance you have myocarditis and the MRI catches it and saves your life is far smaller than the amount getting the scan increases your chance of cancer" type situation. Though, if it were something like that I would expect them to be much more straight forward about it.
 

The machines are expensive, sure. I doubt they’re hugely expensive to operate. “Skilled individual” who pushes a button.

That of course doesn’t stop the cabal that sets prices in this country for all medical codes, from charging excessively for them.
 

MplsGopher said:
The machines are expensive, sure. I doubt they’re hugely expensive to operate. “Skilled individual” who pushes a button.

That of course doesn’t stop the cabal that sets prices in this country for all medical codes, from charging excessively for them.
Click to expand...
Its not as simple as you are making it out to be. At the moment, I believe machines are supposed to be run by individuals who can read the MRI scan. That's the "skilled individual" part.
 

Not sure if this has been discussed - but, as part of the B1G return to play plan, there was a lot of information about testing. The B1G will monitor the rate of positive tests on each team and in the 'population area' for each team. If the rates reach certain levels, action may be taken.
  • Team positivity rate (number of positive tests divided by total number of tests administered):
    • Green 0-2%
    • Orange 2-5%
    • Red >5%
  • Population positivity rate (number of positive individuals divided by total population at risk):
    • Green 0-3.5%
    • Orange 3.5-7.5%
    • Red >7.5%
Decisions to alter or halt practice and competition will be based on the following scenarios:
  • Green/Green and Green/Orange: Team continues with normal practice and competition.
  • Orange/Orange and Orange/Red: Team must proceed with caution and enhance COVID-19 prevention (alter practice and meeting schedule, consider viability of continuing with scheduled competition).
  • Red/Red: Team must stop regular practice and competition for a minimum of seven days and reassess metrics until improved.
 

alchemy2u said:
Thanks for the information. This is what scientific community discussions are all about as they absorb the the information and progress along the learning curve.

It makes total sense that the publicity from the studies could lead to the general public requesting CMR's even if they do not have symptoms (unnecessary, costly testing) . That is a major concern.

The letter did not disagree with the results of the study. It just pointed out that we have much more work to do to learn the significance. Which is obvious.

Thanks for not using a twitter post as you source of information, but a link would have been nice. I did a search and confirmed the letter is correct (never believe unless you can confirm in today's world of alternate truths).
Click to expand...

The link was at the bottom.

Some of the signees have twitter accounts. Just sayin’.

Good to hear you’re coming around.
 

That’s because PE lazily just pasted the URL as text instead of actually inserting a link. So the new board software converts that to a stupid media box.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
Not sure if this has been discussed - but, as part of the B1G return to play plan, there was a lot of information about testing. The B1G will monitor the rate of positive tests on each team and in the 'population area' for each team. If the rates reach certain levels, action may be taken.
  • Team positivity rate (number of positive tests divided by total number of tests administered):
    • Green 0-2%
    • Orange 2-5%
    • Red >5%
  • Population positivity rate (number of positive individuals divided by total population at risk):
    • Green 0-3.5%
    • Orange 3.5-7.5%
    • Red >7.5%
Decisions to alter or halt practice and competition will be based on the following scenarios:
  • Green/Green and Green/Orange: Team continues with normal practice and competition.
  • Orange/Orange and Orange/Red: Team must proceed with caution and enhance COVID-19 prevention (alter practice and meeting schedule, consider viability of continuing with scheduled competition).
  • Red/Red: Team must stop regular practice and competition for a minimum of seven days and reassess metrics until improved.
Click to expand...

All this talk of red/green teams, oil changes brings up a show near and dear to my heart


 

MplsGopher said:
The machines are expensive, sure. I doubt they’re hugely expensive to operate. “Skilled individual” who pushes a button.

That of course doesn’t stop the cabal that sets prices in this country for all medical codes, from charging excessively for them.
Click to expand...
Yes, MRI technicians take out tens of thousands of dollars in student loans so they can learn how to push a button.
 

GoGophersUMN said:
Yes, MRI technicians take out tens of thousands of dollars in student loans so they can learn how to push a button.
Click to expand...
If someone says you have to have a cert in order to push the button, of course they’re not going to give them away for free.
 






swelna said:
Doesn't take much to google the GFYS is in fact a commonly used abbreviation for the phrase...
Click to expand...
Common isn't a valid excuse for incorrect/imprecise.

Just like the horrible plague of people using "try and". Disgusting
 

MplsGopher said:
Common isn't a valid excuse for incorrect/imprecise.

Just like the horrible plague of people using "try and". Disgusting
Click to expand...
Language evolves. I'm sure there are plenty of things you use when conversing that were considered incorrect/imprecise at one point. Get over yourself.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom