STrib: Most classes at the University of Minnesota will be taught fully online this fall.

[MplsGopher]

I posted a link to a newsweek article written by an MD, PHD. Where is the misinformation? I don't know that it's a lie as this doctor from Yale who penned the piece seems to strongly support his conclusions based on multiple studies and publications. Did you read it? If so, I'm struggling to realize how you could immediately dismiss what he is saying especially when considering his credentials.

Not worth my time. It was studied, and it failed to prove effective. Many actual studies.

Have your quack docs and conspiracy hypothesis.

Truly hope that if you or your fam gets infected (hope it doesn't happen, in the first place), that you don't give them a substance that has been proven to do nothing for cv19.

 

[Angry]

I posted a link to a newsweek article written by an MD, PHD. Where is the misinformation? I don't know that it's a lie as this doctor from Yale who penned the piece seems to strongly support his conclusions based on multiple studies and publications. Did you read it? If so, I'm struggling to realize how you could immediately dismiss what he is saying especially when considering his credentials.

MLPS G doesn’t know anything. You’re better off just ignoring him/her.

 

[WindyCityGopher]

If you're worrying about your healthy children in this pandemic, you probably have a lot of other things you should be worrying about instead.

It's my job as a parent to protect my kids from harm, not to guide them toward it, so I will not volunteer them to be guinea pigs in the midst of a global pandemic hoping they won't get sick, or worse. That's fucking lunacy. But like I said earlier, if that's your jam with your kids, go for it.

 

[Gopher Teeth]

LOL!!

21k to 9k. Yeah which is worse??

Hmm, I wonder if Florida's deaths might be increasing any time soon???? Nah, probably not.

21k to 9k is a pointless comparison its apples to oranges, you have to compare deaths per million, and they are nearly the same with much worse demographics.

 

[GophersInIowa]

How is it a conspiracy? Support of this treatment is endorsed by many doctors. The new england journal of medicine in may published a review in support of this treatment as well. The results have been overwhelmingly positive.

Not sure I'd overwhelmingly positive. The results have been mixed. Not sure what NEJM article you're talking about but they've come out with several articles saying it hasn't shown to do anything either way.

https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa2012410

https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa2019014?articleTools=true

 

[mplarson7]

This summary is showing most hydroxychloroquine studies to have no benefit or mixed results.

But let's try not to turn this into a rehash of the lengthy thread in the off-topic forum for the mod's sake.

Science | AAAS

www.sciencemag.org

 

[MplsGopher]

21k to 9k is a pointless comparison its apples to oranges, you have to compare deaths per million, and they are nearly the same with much worse demographics.

Yeah it’s not like Florida’s deaths are increasing. It had to be right now or nothing. And cases don’t ever turn into deaths, so let’s ignore those too!

 

[mnsportsgeek]

It's my job as a parent to protect my kids from harm, not to guide them toward it, so I will not volunteer them to be guinea pigs in the midst of a global pandemic hoping they won't get sick, or worse. That's fucking lunacy. But like I said earlier, if that's your jam with your kids, go for it.

I find it funny when parents claim they’re just keeping their kids safe, when just 5 months ago they put their kids in far worse danger than COVID will likely cause them every single day.

 

[WindyCityGopher]

I find it funny when parents claim they’re just keeping their kids safe, when just 5 months ago they put their kids in far worse danger than COVID will likely cause them every single day.

Tell me, counselor, what far worse danger was I putting my kids in front of, and how do you have any freaking clue?

 

[mnsportsgeek]

Tell me, counselor, what far worse danger was I putting my kids in front of, and how do you have any freaking clue?

Have your kids ridden in a car before? Have they gone swimming? Those are just the easy ones.

 

[stocker08]

It's simply wishful thinking. As the start of the school year approaches and the virus is still raging they'll pull back to all virtual with nobody living on campus because they'll have no choice.

You nailed it with all your posts. It's not just the fear of contracting the virus itself....it's the possibility of spreading it to loved ones in more venerable states. And even if college age students are unlikely to die due to the disease....some do end up experiencing pretty rough effects. Not to mention that longer lasting health issues have nor been fully recognized. It's foolish to shrug it off because you don't have all of the information. You wouldn't board an airplane in which the captain was *pretty* sure to be in good working order.

As for the in class/online mix. As much as can be done online is the way to go. The corona hoaxers haven't thought through what a single infected student could do. One positive....and you are now looking at a MINIMUM of an entire class that could also potentially be infected. But since the virus doesn't show effects in everyone....you are now rolling the dice.

Honestly....it's grade schools that I think are even in more danger. Many more students, far more likely to spread the virus (due to age), in schools that are not big enough to effectively distance. One positive could spread like wildfire there. Could effectively shut down entire classrooms....or if it is not immediately identified and contained....entire schools.

 

[stocker08]

Have your kids ridden in a car before? Have they gone swimming? Those are just the easy ones.

Can be controlled. Can be controlled. An infectious disease is really out of anyone's control.

But thanks for the false equivalency.

 

[MplsGopher]

Have your kids ridden in a car before? Have they gone swimming? Those are just the easy ones.

Kids who get infected will not experience a single long term debilitating side effect??

You willing to put your paychecks for the rest of your life on the line for that bet?? I sure as hell wouldn’t. No one knows.

 

[mnsportsgeek]

Kids who get infected will not experience a single long term debilitating side effect??

You willing to put your paychecks for the rest of your life on the line for that bet?? I sure as hell wouldn’t. No one knows.

If I’m gonna put my kid in a moving car everyday, then it’d be pretty hypocritical of me to keep them from seeing other children for their sole protection.

You and I already agreed that the reason to keep your children away from others isn’t for their own safety but for the safety of others.

So I’m not sure why you jumped in to move the goalposts from “your kid has a greater chance of dying or being injured in a car crash” to “Are you willing to bet your life savings that no kid will ever die of COVID or have long term effects?”

No, of course I wouldn’t make that bet. I also wouldn’t bet that my kid won’t ever die in a car crash. But I’m still gonna drive.

 

[mnsportsgeek]

Can be controlled. Can be controlled. An infectious disease is really out of anyone's control.

But thanks for the false equivalency.

Yes, dying in a car crash can be prevented until it happens to your kid. Doesnt change the fact that your kid has a greater chance of dying in a car or swimming pool than from Covid.

 

[stocker08]

Yes, dying in a car crash can be prevented until it happens to your kid. Doesnt change the fact that your kid has a greater chance of dying in a car or swimming pool than from Covid.

I'd argue that parents who are reckless or poor drivers.....one's not paying attention to their children when they are swimming have something to do with those numbers. My guess is that they are the same ones that would have no problem letting their children get infected because the chance of death is low.

On the other hand....I'm guessing that parents who tend to be more cautious with their children....are the same ones that would prefer not to temp fate.

 

[mnsportsgeek]

I'd argue that parents who are reckless or poor drivers.....one's not paying attention to their children when they are swimming have something to do with those numbers. My guess is that they are the same ones that would have no problem letting their children get infected because the chance of death is low.

On the other hand....I'm guessing that parents who tend to be more cautious with their children....are the same ones that would prefer not to temp fate.

Unfortunately it’s many times the reckless driver killing the cautious one.

lots of guessing going on here. Not a lot of math.

 

[stocker08]

Unfortunately it’s many times the reckless driver killing the cautious one.

lots of guessing going on here. Not a lot of math.

Ok....so it can't ALWAYS be controlled. Not sending your child into disease nest can be controlled. But once the virus is contracted....there's basically nothing resembling control.

And again....long term effects are not yet fully understood. Feel free to risk your own children.

 

[howeda7]

If I’m gonna put my kid in a moving car everyday, then it’d be pretty hypocritical of me to keep them from seeing other children for their sole protection.

You and I already agreed that the reason to keep your children away from others isn’t for their own safety but for the safety of others.

So I’m not sure why you jumped in to move the goalposts from “your kid has a greater chance of dying or being injured in a car crash” to “Are you willing to bet your life savings that no kid will ever die of COVID or have long term effects?”

No, of course I wouldn’t make that bet. I also wouldn’t bet that my kid won’t ever die in a car crash. But I’m still gonna drive.

At this moment this is a false analogy. There will always be risks driving a car. If this virus is here permanently with no vaccine then you would have a point. This isn't about whether to ever send kids to school/campus ever again. It's whether to do it for the next 3-6 months.

 

[LesBolstad]

At this moment this is a false analogy. There will always be risks driving a car. If this virus is here permanently with no vaccine then you would have a point. This isn't about whether to ever send kids to school/campus ever again. It's whether to do it for the next 3-6 months.

It's a great analogy and as everyone here knows, you're a douche. Cars are safer than ever- their "vaccine" includes seat belts, airbags, anti-lock brakes, crush zones. But like virus vaccines, they are never ever 100% effective.

 

[stocker08]

It's a great analogy and as everyone here knows, you're a douche. Cars are safer than ever- their "vaccine" includes seat belts, airbags, anti-lock brakes, crush zones. But like virus vaccines, they are never ever 100% effective.

Fine. If it's such a great analogy, Dr. Douche......let's do some math. About 75 million children (0-18 years of age) in the U.S. Assume each of those kids take one ride in a car each day (that's a very LOW figure). With a covid death rate of approximately 0.01% for children.....lets make an actual comparison.

7,500 kids killed per day in vehicle accidents.....if covid and car rides are comparable? Then you have to consider that it's likely that they'll spread the virus to others as well. Then you have to ignore any lasting effects of the disease.

You must walk around all day wearing a shirt that says "I'm with stupid" and an arrow pointing straight up at your dumb face.

 

[mnsportsgeek]

Fine. If it's such a great analogy, Dr. Douche......let's do some math. About 75 million children (0-18 years of age) in the U.S. Assume each of those kids take one ride in a car each day (that's a very LOW figure). With a covid death rate of approximately 0.01% for children.....lets make an actual comparison.

7,500 kids killed per day in vehicle accidents.....if covid and car rides are comparable? Then you have to consider that it's likely that they'll spread the virus to others as well. Then you have to ignore any lasting effects of the disease.

You must walk around all day wearing a shirt that says "I'm with stupid" and an arrow pointing straight up at your dumb face.

That was a very impressive way of making numbers say what you want them to say. Much better than the guessing you were doing earlier.

 

[stocker08]

That was a very impressive way of making numbers say what you want them to say. Much better than the guessing you were doing earlier.

You made the comparison. But you don't like the math. Wonder why.

Let's do it another way. About 2,000 kids 0-16 die every year in car accidents.

Motor vehicle fatality rate in U.S. by year - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Population of 0-16 year olds is somewhere between 60 and 65 million. At a 0.01% death rate.....you're still looking at 6,000 deaths.

If you know anything about numbers.....one looks quite a bit larger than the other. And as I said.....what about the spread to more venerable adults? What about the evidence that immunity to the disease is thought to be 120-150 days? Half a year and then reinfection? What about the evidence that the virus may give infected persons lasting health effects?


So no....driving in a car is not even close to as dangerous. Keep trying to tell yourself otherwise.

 

[alchemy2u]

You're right, you can't pick. But with a school aged kid having a 0.1% chance of being hospitalized (https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6915e3.htm), there are much more dangerous things that we do nonchalantly in a given day.

So I guess I agree with bga1 that college kids probably aren't trembling in fear, and I think the only worry parents should have about their children is that their kid will give the virus to them or others.

If you're worrying about your healthy children in this pandemic, you probably have a lot of other things you should be worrying about instead.

You should at least use accurate data. The link you have is from March data which is way too early in the case history as seen in this chart:


Here is the current data: