The Big 10 made a huge mistake, change my mind...

Donate To GopherHole
I'm sorry you can't tell when you have a cold. I can tell when I should go to work and when I shouldn't.
 

kisarazu said:
I'm not going to address the rest of the silly in this post, just the common cold. The only reason we don't have vaccines for strains of the common cold is that there is simply no reason to invest the time and money to combat such a benign and short-lived virus.
Click to expand...
Except, the common cold can kill people.... Common cold can cause pneumonia and kill people, generally the same people who struggle with covid. Not all, but largely most. I mean, if any you want to live scared and sheltered until some magic potion comes along and makes it allgo away, by all means shelter in place. This is your right. But after killing 500,000 in 1918, another scary virus emerged again in 2009 killing hundreds of thousands and continues to do so every year since...every year.

No Lockdowns
No mitigation
No canceled seasons
No distance learning
Hardly any testing

Life went on.....huh. Again, sorry for my logic.
 


hello-world said:
When I'm sick, I don't know if I have allergies, a cold, the flu, bronchitis, or pneumonia. It's awfully hard to say that colds are 'no big deal' when a virus that seems to not effect a good portion of the people that have it is killing hundreds of thousands of people. If I had covid, odds are I wouldn't know that I had covid, I would just feel a little under the weather.

Like most people, I've had a fair number of employers in my life, and at every single one of them, it was frowned on or unacceptable to take unplanned time off. I don't think that's unusual.

I don't get why people are so against face masks. Nobody is advocating wearing them in public forever, and if we're left with a little bit of a culture for wearing masks so you don't get others sick, then that's a good thing.
Click to expand...

If you can’t tell the difference between allergies and pneumonia or bronchitis, you may have bigger issues.
 

WriterGoph said:
Lots of false stuff in your post. I know people who work in hospitals in a few different areas of the country and they definitely were overwhelmed and had many extra COVID units.

But again, we NEVER locked down that stringently. There was never paperwork required to leave your house. There were never scheduled windows for weekly grocery store trips. People could move at will with any excuse. It took months for a lot of the country to start wearing masks. Hell, I was in Missouri last week and literally 99% of people were not wearing masks. Even in restaurants the staff didn't have masks on (which I had not seen in any other state, but I imagine it's like that the more red the state is). On top of that, we had states starting to re-open too early in April (and we've seen how that worked out).

So quit acting like the US took these amazingly extreme measures. At least half the states have been very much behind the curve compared to what measures the countries who were smart put in place.
Click to expand...
Paperwork required to leave your house? Are you for real? Scheduled grocer trips? Good grief you are a real tool.
 


GopherWeatherGuy said:
I never said those states are leading the way. Who do you consider leading the way?

New York and New Jersey have the highest deaths per capita in the world. Herd immunity is the reason the disease has slowed there, not masks. Cases have gone up in Minnesota despite mandatory masks. California has been one of the most heavily locked down and masked states in the country. The spread of the disease has only accelerated there over the last 2 months.

Demographics, obesity, and age are the top reasons behind the hot spots and where the disease spreads. It has nothing to do with masks, social distancing, any governors, or Trump.

The US has the most susceptible population in the world to this disease, and yet it's still not any more deadly than the flu to the majority of the population. There's now nearly 6 months of data to back this up.
Click to expand...
BOOM! GII
 

hello-world said:
They don't wear masks all the time. Sick people wear masks so they don't get their coworkers and friends sick. Honestly, we should probably adopt that habit because their practice is a hell of a lot more sanitary than the way Americans handle it. I can't tell you how many times I've had to go into work / class / whatever with a cold. I would have happily worn a mask if people wouldn't have looked at me like I was an asshole.
Click to expand...
Appears you really care what others think of you. More than anything else.
 

Bernie Bro said:
24 hours later and it’s enlightening to read the replies to this thread. My main takeaway so far is that most people are still way more concerned about the direct threat from the virus (getting sick and dying) than they are about the second order effects from our response to it (economic, etc).

Kind of interesting to me because my understanding (I’m not an expert) is that although we may not be 100% certain about the health risk, it appears to be at least somewhat comparable to the flu (maybe less for healthy college age kids?). What we do know with near certainty is that the fallout from our response in this case is will be enormous (losing billions and destroying a beloved pastime).

I guess time will tell and I may be wrong, but if I were a gambling man (I am), I wouldn’t make the bet that the Big Ten is making.
Click to expand...
Destroying?

Pathetic take, absurdly wrong.
 

Block M said:
The US has destroyed so many small businesses because there have been too many fu**ing infections and too many fu**ing people refused to take precautions. It really is that simple.

Postscript: but I do wish the Big 10 had just kicked the can down the road another 2-3 weeks. They probably could have made it work.
Click to expand...
Also the part that S2 glossed over (because he's an admitted anarcho-capitalist .... yes, seriously ... those exist, welcome to the internet), is that Sweden has a much higher level of social and economic support from their national government. So that probably provides a good deal of help to struggling small(er) businesses. Imagine that.
 



Pompous Elitist said:
We know how they voted. Pretending they didn’t vote (unofficially, off the record/show of hands) is insulting.

Warren has had a horrendous coming out party. The BTN interview was catastrophic. Even with that, he may still come out smelling like roses in the end if the the rest of the P5 stumbles.

Gary Tinsley’s death was a tragedy. I’m not sure whether a suspected cause of his myocarditis ever came out but the most common reason is viral. Get your flu shots, guys. None of us knows how many days we have left. Life is precious. Carpe diem.

Players are less likely to die or have complications of myocarditis with the cardiac screenings they’ll receive on campus. Off campus...on your own.
Click to expand...
Bolded is absurdly false, since they'd be more likely to get myocarditis from covid19 by being on campus and participating in football practices, than quarantining at home.

If they choose not to quarantine at home, that is entirely their own (poor) decision and has nothing to do with schools or football. Red herring
 

You know this thread has turned to complete s__t when you have OTB swamp creatures like Ogee, S2, BarnBurner, et al crawling out of their OTB sewer.

Bleh.
 

Block M said:
The US has destroyed so many small businesses because there have been too many fu**ing infections and too many fu**ing people refused to take precautions. It really is that simple.

Postscript: but I do wish the Big 10 had just kicked the can down the road another 2-3 weeks. They probably could have made it work.
Click to expand...
No, you are excusing the ineffective lockdowns. Most people took huge precautions.
 




If we had followed 100 years of pandemic response science, we would be like Sweden now. But instead we pursued draconian lockdowns, killing the economy, damaging children, destroying half the restaurants in the country, enriching Amazon, Target and Home Depot.

We treated this like it was the Black Death, polio, or the Spanish Flu.

1597846396591.png
 


We wouldn't be like Sweden right now.

And being like Sweden isn't anything in particular that's good. They had excess deaths compared to what they could've had.
 

MplsGopher said:
Bolded is absurdly false, since they'd be more likely to get myocarditis from covid19 by being on campus and participating in football practices, than quarantining at home.

If they choose not to quarantine at home, that is entirely their own (poor) decision and has nothing to do with schools or football. Red herring
Click to expand...

A concise summary of the presidents’ rationale when they unofficially voted.
 


With a few yet to decide I guess, the last count I saw was somewhere around 30+ states to start playing HS football in the next several weeks.

But I guess they all want to kill the kids?

Still yet to hear much of a viable argument why college football players are at much greater risk on campus and in the athletic facilities, tested regularly, in a structured environment and with access to first-rate medical resources than they would be at their homes, many of which are in areas that were hit harder than most by the virus, and many of which live in multi-generational households with people who are much more susceptible to the virus?

Are there really parents here who would much prefer their 20-year old student athlete were staying at home with them than in the athletic facilities with an army of people looking out for their well-being?
 

Ogee Oglethorpe said:
With a few yet to decide I guess, the last count I saw was somewhere around 30+ states to start playing HS football in the next several weeks.

But I guess they all want to kill the kids?

Still yet to hear much of a viable argument why college football players are at much greater risk on campus and in the athletic facilities, tested regularly, in a structured environment and with access to first-rate medical resources than they would be at their homes, many of which are in areas that were hit harder than most by the virus, and many of which live in multi-generational households with people who are much more susceptible to the virus?

Are there really parents here who would much prefer their 20-year old student athlete were staying at home with them than in the athletic facilities with an army of people looking out for their well-being?
Click to expand...


Probably not.

Probably.
 

GoldenRodents said:
If we had followed 100 years of pandemic response science, we would be like Sweden now. But instead we pursued draconian lockdowns, killing the economy, damaging children, destroying half the restaurants in the country, enriching Amazon, Target and Home Depot.

We treated this like it was the Black Death, polio, or the Spanish Flu.

View attachment 9141
Click to expand...
Killing, damaging, destroying. Sigh. Sweden has the highest per capita death rate from Covid in Scandinavia as I recall. They finally realized the error of their approach (herd immunity not feasible).
 

Block M said:
Killing, damaging, destroying. Sigh. Sweden has the highest per capita death rate from Covid in Scandinavia as I recall. They finally realized the error of their approach (herd immunity not feasible).
Click to expand...

They did? Then why didn't they change their approach? And why are their cases declining and deaths down to only around a handful per day?

Sweden's median age of death is 86. The median age of COVID death across the US and Europe is near, or higher than the average life expectancy.
 

By the time they realized it, they probably knew that there was nothing they could do. You can’t undo sending a roller coaster train down the first hill.

They’ll have achieved maximal deaths, for no tangible gains.
 

The thread is - or was - about whether the B1G "made a mistake."

Ultimately, what it comes down to is that the B1G Presidents made a choice, based on whatever information they had at the time.

Other people could potentially make a different choice based on the same information, or make a different choice based on different information.

but - questions to ponder -

did the B1G presidents make the decision because they wanted to damage their own institutions?

did they want to deny athletes a chance to compete?

is this part of a plot to influence the election?

Are they a bunch of evil, heartless people - or just stupid?

Or are the B1G Presidents a group of well-meaning people who were trying to do the right thing - as they saw it?

it's one thing to disagree with a choice. it's a different matter to disagree or question the motives behind that choice.
 

BarnBurner said:
Paperwork required to leave your house? Are you for real? Scheduled grocer trips? Good grief you are a real tool.
Click to expand...

This is super rich coming from the guy who follows an 80-year-old poster around the board incessantly calling him a "fraud" 1,000 times.
 

short ornery norwegian said:
The thread is - or was - about whether the B1G "made a mistake."

Ultimately, what it comes down to is that the B1G Presidents made a choice, based on whatever information they had at the time.

Other people could potentially make a different choice based on the same information, or make a different choice based on different information.

but - questions to ponder -

1) did the B1G presidents make the decision because they wanted to damage their own institutions?

2) did they want to deny athletes a chance to compete?

3) is this part of a plot to influence the election?

4) Are they a bunch of evil, heartless people - or just stupid?

5) Or are the B1G Presidents a group of well-meaning people who were trying to do the right thing - as they saw it?

it's one thing to disagree with a choice. it's a different matter to disagree or question the motives behind that choice.
Click to expand...
1) No
2) No
3) No
4) No on first two, maybe on last one
5) yes
 

Based on the studies available, roughly 50% of people in the US already had T-cells that had been primed through exposure to other coronaviruses to combat COVID, so they’ll never get COVID. Add that to most of the country already having close to or in excess of 20% of the population with antibodies and we really are pretty close to herd immunity it appears... This also seems to correlate pretty closely with the statistics from every state that I’ve looked at.
 

Attachments

  • 363491B3-1F0C-4976-BFA2-CB32B8E04324.png
    363491B3-1F0C-4976-BFA2-CB32B8E04324.png
    612 KB · Views: 9

Funny that people (who I assume) lean right are pointing to Sweden as the beacon of how to respond to this pandemic. Maybe if the US was as "socialist" as Sweden and a strong universal healthcare system and a strong economic safety neck we could have followed their pandemic strategy.

Not saying I agree with how the US is handling it, but it is fascinating how people can ignore their hypocrisy if it stands in the way of their argument
 

gopheraschells said:
Funny that people (who I assume) lean right are pointing to Sweden as the beacon of how to respond to this pandemic. Maybe if the US was as "socialist" as Sweden and a strong universal healthcare system and a strong economic safety neck we could have followed their pandemic strategy.

Not saying I agree with how the US is handling it, but it is fascinating how people can ignore their hypocrisy if it stands in the way of their argument
Click to expand...

Hypocrisy can be found in just about any direction you look these days...
 

Block M said:
Killing, damaging, destroying. Sigh. Sweden has the highest per capita death rate from Covid in Scandinavia as I recall. They finally realized the error of their approach (herd immunity not feasible).
Click to expand...

Pull your head out of the sand dude, Sweden followed 100 years of pandemic management. They effectively have achieved herd immunity (more than half of the healthy population is already immune, rest have manageable symptoms). We should play the B1G ten schedule over there.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom