All Things COVID-19 College Football Impact

Donate To GopherHole
Crosby said:
I am not sure about whose projections are right and whose are wrong. What we are seeing is indeed aligned with politics more than science though. There is pretty much ZERO incentive for anyone in a position of authority or influence on this thing to call for a "do nothing stance." It is simply not in Fauci's interest to recommend opening up quickly. If he pushes that, and a million people die, it will be viewed as his fault. On the other hand, if he recommends continuing the shutdown for another 18 months, and the death count is minimal, people will say "see it's good thing we kept that shutdown going; it sure saved a lot of lives." It won't matter at all if the death count would have been low anyway. It's the same with virtually every politician. State governors do not want to be viewed as "doing nothing." They have the same risk/reward situation as Fauci. And that is not just for COVID, it's anything. Politicians want to be viewed as "doing something." And by "doing something" this generally means passing new laws. Then the politicians are are lauded as courageous leaders taking a stand. The leaders I admire most are the ones who are willing to go against the mob, at their own peril. The ones who will stand up and say that it's better not to take any action at all in some cases. That takes courage. The general CYA approach doesn't.
Click to expand...
The government exists for the purpose of doing things, for the betterment of our society.

Advocating that nothing should have been done, is nothing more than advocating for anarchy. It truly is the most absurd position imaginable.
 

GoldenRodents said:
South Dakota and Sweden used every precaution used in prior flu pandemics. There should never have been a lockdown. The "Science" used for the lockdown was not scientific at all, it was a high school science project with plug in Chicken Little numbers.
Click to expand...
Please stop putting science in quotes when you refuse to acknowledge facts. I’ve given you an apolitical overview and you continue to ignore.
 

MplsGopher said:
All multi-layered cloth masks have the same quality as surgical masks. Going with them, not you. You have no credibility beyond being a random internet person.
Click to expand...

Not all. Material matters whether NBC told you so or not. The good news is higher quality, electrostatic, and quilted layer masks did perform well in lab conditions. How well cotton-sourced materials perform after 1-2 hours of use, damp or waterlogged is another discussion I don’t think has been looked at yet.

BE6B9F07-3FE3-4B46-BA4A-D6E6BC74E5B3.jpeg
 

Pompous Elitist said:
Not all. Material matters whether NBC told you so or not. The good news is higher quality, electrostatic, and quilted layer masks did perform well in lab conditions. How well cotton-sourced materials perform after 1-2 hours of use, damp or waterlogged is another discussion I don’t think has been looked at yet.

View attachment 8615
Click to expand...
OK. You were correct and I was wrong. Thanks for the screenshot.

Though in a silly sense.

I really doubt that almost anyone who was being serious was making masks out of silk, with a gap, or 80 threads per inch quilt material.


Costco had boxes of disposal surgical masks for purchase recently. That's what I've been wearing since, even though I've been well served by my multi-layer cloth mask prior.
 
Last edited:

RahSkiUMah said:
Please stop putting science in quotes when you refuse to acknowledge facts. I’ve given you an apolitical overview and you continue to ignore.
Click to expand...

Facts include the virus has behaved in ways that epidemiologists are still struggling to understand and model. Early on the variable inputs were educated guesses or extrapolated from China and Northern Italy which are different cohorts of culture, comorbidities, age and so on. Now we have better treatment algorithms, better understanding of case rate by age, transmission characteristics. However, the virus may evolve. We didn’t know if seasonal issues would come into play. People may not follow aseptic technique hygiene guidelines, distancing guidelines, masking guidelines and we get what we’re seeing now. The models should never have been gospel or overly predictive or used for blanket shutdowns outside urban centers.
 


Pompous Elitist said:
Facts include the virus has behaved in ways that epidemiologists are still struggling to understand and model. Early on the variable inputs were educated guesses or extrapolated from China and Northern Italy which are different cohorts of culture, comorbidities, age and so on. Now we have better treatment algorithms, better understanding of case rate by age, transmission characteristics. However, the virus may evolve. We didn’t know if seasonal issues would come into play. People may not follow aseptic technique hygiene guidelines, distancing guidelines, masking guidelines and we get what we’re seeing now. The models should never have been gospel or overly predictive or used for blanket shutdowns outside urban centers.
Click to expand...
Show me a country that only shut down urban centers, but allowed the rest of the country to remain open.

I don't think any did that. 1) it would be politically suicide, as it would be unfair targeting, and 2) there is no proof that it would "work". On 2, I could actually see it causing more harm than good, as some people would've fled the urban areas for the "oasis" outside. People still did that, to some extent, and brought the virus with them.
 

IVIcChaos said:
I thought the article below and the graph shown were very informative.
https://stream.org/why-you-shouldnt-panic-about-spikes-and-surges-in-new-coronavirus-cases/

corona2b-3-700x389.png

Thinking that this will be over with sooner than we think as 80 million people are estimated to be infected with near perfect statistical correlation. I thought it was a good read with lots of backup info and provides hope for gopher football with fans in the stands this fall. Also if 80M cases and 120,000 deaths, it would put the infection mortality rate at 0.15%
Click to expand...
It's a great argument but he leaves a lot out and makes some false statements. You also know it's politically motivated when it's so fixated on deaths (left or right). I wholly agree that case counts are not what we should be fixated on. Neither are death counts. The left and right are too fixated on that, flattening the curve was always about hospital capacity and mitigation not absolute prevention. This is where common sense measures like social distancing, wearing a mask when social distancing is difficult, hand washing, and limits on gathering places come into play. These measures are meant to prevent lockdown, not be part of it. He's either missing the

When he rails against the "media counts" of deaths he leaves out that our excess deaths actually point to an under counting of covid related deaths. Also for having a PhD in statistic he doesn't mention some serious confounders to the numbers. Like the median age of infection in places like Florida and Texas (which will push the death/hospitalization rate down, GOOD!), or the impact of improved treatments protocols are having on hospitalizations and deaths, or the fact that deaths lag cases by at least 1 and maybe up to 4 weeks. I have seen the Penn paper and do hope it to be accurate because that means we're that much closer to herd immunity. ICU and inpatient beds are filling in the places where cases are rising, we have to keep an eye on that for at least a couple weeks before we decide the complete inaction is the best move.
 

MplsGopher said:
Show me a country that only shut down urban centers, but allowed the rest of the country to remain open.

I don't think any did that. 1) it would be politically suicide, as it would be unfair targeting, and 2) there is no proof that it would "work". On 2, I could actually see it causing more harm than good, as some people would've fled the urban areas for the "oasis" outside. People still did that, to some extent, and brought the virus with them.
Click to expand...

Like New Yorkers fleeing the city for FL, CA, and others? That didn’t seem to cause any significant problems. The issues are spacing, density, contact, hygiene, and lack of masking. These problems are much, much worse in urban areas and eg manufacturing facilities, public transit or work buses in the case of migrant workers. They are also an issue at nightclubs, social gatherings, parties...
 

Pompous Elitist said:
Like New Yorkers fleeing the city for FL, CA, and others? That didn’t seem to cause any significant problems. The issues are spacing, density, contact, hygiene, and lack of masking. These problems are much, much worse in urban areas and eg manufacturing facilities, public transit or work buses in the case of migrant workers. They are also an issue at nightclubs, social gatherings, parties...
Click to expand...
No I'm talking about the well known cases in Minnesota of people fleeing to their cabins.

The point is that no country (or state) did that, so we don't have evidence of what would happen. Only speculation.

Your idea is just fine, and probably correct on paper. But your proposed solution, while maybe well intended (though you strike me as someone who detests urban centers, because they're "left"), could easily backfire, as I've hypothesized.
 



Pompous Elitist said:
Facts include the virus has behaved in ways that epidemiologists are still struggling to understand and model. Early on the variable inputs were educated guesses or extrapolated from China and Northern Italy which are different cohorts of culture, comorbidities, age and so on. Now we have better treatment algorithms, better understanding of case rate by age, transmission characteristics. However, the virus may evolve. We didn’t know if seasonal issues would come into play. People may not follow aseptic technique hygiene guidelines, distancing guidelines, masking guidelines and we get what we’re seeing now. The models should never have been gospel or overly predictive or used for blanket shutdowns outside urban centers.
Click to expand...
These are all great facts, don't forget to add model was built on influenza characteristics not COVID. The modelers knew their model would be flawed, but it's still a pretty decent piece of science and they really weren't far off with their lower bound estimates.

I'm well aware of the assumptions the models were built on. I've never advocated for blanket lockdown and never will in the U.S. as it is not feasible or ideal based on our varying demographics. The original modeling paper discussed at length the potential "trigger" points to more drastic measures, that trigger was certainly hit in NYC and few others, but lockdown definitely only delayed things out in other places (because we did not adopt test, trace, quarantine). Unfortunately we had no clue at the time because of low testing capacity what it was like in every region and that's what triggered the lockdowns.

I want to continue working and I want Gopher football, sustainable spread is the path. Unchecked spread will lead to more lockdowns no doubt about it.
 

MplsGopher said:
No I'm talking about the well known cases in Minnesota of people fleeing to their cabins.

The point is that no country (or state) did that, so we don't have evidence of what would happen. Only speculation.

Your idea is just fine, and probably correct on paper. But your proposed solution, while maybe well intended (though you strike me as someone who detests urban centers, because they're "left"), could easily backfire, as I've hypothesized.
Click to expand...

There were major COVID epidemics in Detroit Lakes, Brainerd, etc? Consider me educated.

Broad-based shutdowns were also experimental as Dr Ferguson pointed out in his seminal work in mid March. He plainly stated in the final paragraphs of his Empire London paper he could not predict the economic or other unintended consequences we‘re seeing.

I’ve lived, worked in, and visited a variety of cities and environments. Yes, I prefer Moab or Park City to the south side of Chicago. I won’t apologize.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
There were major COVID epidemics in Detroit Lakes, Brainerd, etc? Consider me educated.

Broad-based shutdowns were also experimental as Dr Ferguson pointed out in his seminal work in mid March. He plainly stated in the final paragraphs of his Empire London paper he could not predict the economic or other unintended consequences we‘re seeing.

I’ve lived, worked in, and visited a variety of cities and environments. Yes, I prefer Moab or Park City to the south side of Chicago. I won’t apologize.
Click to expand...
We’ll never know since no country or state only shut down urban centers.

Something had to be done. Anarchy would not be tolerated. That means broad based shutdowns. We’ve learned a lot. Next time, maybe something different will happen. Can’t honestly state much more than that.

Noted that you prefer white, wealthy, exclusive to black, poor, urban.
 

MplsGopher said:
We’ll never know since no country or state only shut down urban centers.

Something had to be done. Anarchy would not be tolerated. That means broad based shutdowns. We’ve learned a lot. Next time, maybe something different will happen. Can’t honestly state much more than that.

Noted that you prefer white, wealthy, exclusive to black, poor, urban.
Click to expand...

I’m pretty sure some cities instituted shutdowns in 1918 to good effect. Of course, they didn’t even know what a virus was back then other than a non-bacterial particle or miasma.

Oftentimes less is more. This should be on a plaque in every household, clinic, school, hospital, boardroom, manager office. Stop, think, use evidence, avoid fear-based decisions.

More to do with crime, poverty, lack of peace of mind and recreational activities. I wouldn’t be comfortable in small town Oklahoma either for some different reasons. I suspect many people that live in urban centers would rather not live in urban centers.
 



GoldenRodents said:
South Dakota and Sweden used every precaution used in prior flu pandemics. There should never have been a lockdown. The "Science" used for the lockdown was not scientific at all, it was a high school science project with plug in Chicken Little numbers.
Click to expand...
What might work in South Dakota and Sweden probably won't work in places like NYC and Chicago.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
Not all. Material matters whether NBC told you so or not. The good news is higher quality, electrostatic, and quilted layer masks did perform well in lab conditions. How well cotton-sourced materials perform after 1-2 hours of use, damp or waterlogged is another discussion I don’t think has been looked at yet.

View attachment 8615
Click to expand...
You seem to have a good grasp on the mask topic. For work we have cloth masks with our company logo on them. But they seem to be high quality, two layers. We also have carbon filters that we put in them and change frequently. Are you familiar with these filters?

 


MplsGopher said:
The government exists for the purpose of doing things, for the betterment of our society.

Advocating that nothing should have been done, is nothing more than advocating for anarchy. It truly is the most absurd position imaginable.
Click to expand...

You could not be more wrong.
 

GophersInIowa said:
You seem to have a good grasp on the mask topic. For work we have cloth masks with our company logo on them. But they seem to be high quality, two layers. We also have carbon filters that we put in them and change frequently. Are you familiar with these filters?

Click to expand...

I‘m sure Jeff Bezos only provides the highest quality products 😂.

Sorry, no I’m not really familiar. The carbon is nice in that it will aid in reducing the stench of your unwashed coworker or the delightful wafting odor of the grilled onion sandwich they had for lunch, or bind other toxic fumes. Without a known quantity, certified particulate NIOSH filter (or a homemade one made of lab-vetted materials) I’d still maintain a minimum 3 feet of distancing even if both parties are wearing Bezos masks. 🤷‍♂️. I wonder if Amazon sells these to the public? If so there might be option to query the materials in a Q and A format somewhere..
 

RahSkiUMah said:
It's a great argument but he leaves a lot out and makes some false statements. You also know it's politically motivated when it's so fixated on deaths (left or right). I wholly agree that case counts are not what we should be fixated on. Neither are death counts. The left and right are too fixated on that, flattening the curve was always about hospital capacity and mitigation not absolute prevention. This is where common sense measures like social distancing, wearing a mask when social distancing is difficult, hand washing, and limits on gathering places come into play. These measures are meant to prevent lockdown, not be part of it. He's either missing the

When he rails against the "media counts" of deaths he leaves out that our excess deaths actually point to an under counting of covid related deaths. Also for having a PhD in statistic he doesn't mention some serious confounders to the numbers. Like the median age of infection in places like Florida and Texas (which will push the death/hospitalization rate down, GOOD!), or the impact of improved treatments protocols are having on hospitalizations and deaths, or the fact that deaths lag cases by at least 1 and maybe up to 4 weeks. I have seen the Penn paper and do hope it to be accurate because that means we're that much closer to herd immunity. ICU and inpatient beds are filling in the places where cases are rising, we have to keep an eye on that for at least a couple weeks before we decide the complete inaction is the best move.
Click to expand...
So nice to have a respectful response. I really appreciate it. I think you make some great points in the above and I appreciate them.

I think his (the articles) arguments are more sound than what we are seeing and I think it is more likely that we are further along than people think. As far as getting an idea of the true severity of the virus I think deaths are what we should be looking at. It can tell us where we are along the road of infection.

Even in lockdown people still go to the store and interact with others I have a hard time believe that a disease this contagious would not spread under our lockdown conditions. Even in lockdown I think I remember that people movement was still 60% of what it was before lockdown.

Also our tests are still pretty inaccurate ~80% I believe. And we started testing so late that the tests can’t tell us where we are on the curve or if we are rising or falling since we keep changing how much we rest . I think that the deaths are the most accurate information we have to go on. Is it perfect? no. but we’ll never have perfect information. As you said I hope we are further along as this article asserts.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
I‘m sure Jeff Bezos only provides the highest quality products 😂.

Sorry, no I’m not really familiar. The carbon is nice in that it will aid in reducing the stench of your unwashed coworker or the delightful wafting odor of the grilled onion sandwich they had for lunch, or bind other toxic fumes. Without a known quantity, certified particulate NIOSH filter (or a homemade one made of lab-vetted materials) I’d still maintain a minimum 3 feet of distancing even if both parties are wearing Bezos masks. 🤷‍♂️. I wonder if Amazon sells these to the public? If so there might be option to query the materials in a Q and A format somewhere..
Click to expand...
There are all kinds of options to buy them on Amazon. Honestly the best thing about them is it prevents the mask from being sucked into my mouth when I inhale. So just that alone makes it worth while.

For some reason the link I provided doesn't work anymore. But if you search for them at Amazon there are a bunch of options.
 


GophersInIowa said:
There are all kinds of options to buy them on Amazon. Honestly the best thing about them is it prevents the mask from being sucked into my mouth when I inhale. So just that alone makes it worth while.

For some reason the link I provided doesn't work anymore. But if you search for them at Amazon there are a bunch of options.
Click to expand...

I’m going to check them out! Would be nice to have the next time I’m in NYC...
 




IVIcChaos said:
So nice to have a respectful response. I really appreciate it. I think you make some great points in the above and I appreciate them.

I think his (the articles) arguments are more sound than what we are seeing and I think it is more likely that we are further along than people think. As far as getting an idea of the true severity of the virus I think deaths are what we should be looking at. It can tell us where we are along the road of infection.

Even in lockdown people still go to the store and interact with others I have a hard time believe that a disease this contagious would not spread under our lockdown conditions. Even in lockdown I think I remember that people movement was still 60% of what it was before lockdown.

Also our tests are still pretty inaccurate ~80% I believe. And we started testing so late that the tests can’t tell us where we are on the curve or if we are rising or falling since we keep changing how much we rest . I think that the deaths are the most accurate information we have to go on. Is it perfect? no. but we’ll never have perfect information. As you said I hope we are further along as this article asserts.
Click to expand...
Thanks IV, I try to keep it civil. I totally agree if you follow the mainstream media it’s either one end or the other. I hope he’s right but we’ve got to be cautious for a few weeks to be sure. Texas has gone from 8.4% of inpatient beds as COVID to 12%+ in just the last week.

If we’re doing it right, serious cases happen less and less because the vulnerable population is sheltering. In regards to the most accurate info, I’ll dig up a link later (remind me) but a lot of internal medicine and ICU docs say that following hospital admissions/bed capacity gives you the best and most unbiased view of what things look like locally. In places like Texas it’s concerning but not yet out of control.
 

GoldenRodents said:
Nobody is wearing a surgical mask, the cloth masks and bandanas do nothing, except provide some virtue signalling benefit for the people rendered ignorant by preening politicians and manipulative news media. Besides, the healthy should be trying to get infected. Most will have no or mild symptoms.
Click to expand...
I wear a surgical mask when I wear a mask. Easy to find. Menards sells them.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
Like New Yorkers fleeing the city for FL, CA, and others? That didn’t seem to cause any significant problems. The issues are spacing, density, contact, hygiene, and lack of masking. These problems are much, much worse in urban areas and eg manufacturing facilities, public transit or work buses in the case of migrant workers. They are also an issue at nightclubs, social gatherings, parties...
Click to expand...

IMHO Bars should be included. It would be interesting to see if bars are adding to the spread. If so, rural/ small town Minnesota needs to be cautious.
 


STPGopher said:
IMHO Bars should be included. It would be interesting to see if bars are adding to the spread. If so, rural/ small town Minnesota needs to be cautious.
Click to expand...

Small towns are clearly not immune. A bar in Mpls has the same spacing concerns as a bar in Fulda. Nobody is really safe, some are just safer than than others. We know what causes transmission, for the most part. But here we are, still banging out heads against the wall. We clearly can’t force anyone to do the right thing, eh STP? Escalation between short tempered and ill tempered people leads to problems, I’ve seen.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom