Thoughts on % chance that we can attend 2021 games at TCF, let's see predictions

Donate To GopherHole


PMWinSTP said:
The on-campus student body of 2,000 had 200+ cases in the seven days before Feb 12. That's 200+ of a total 936 cases since the first recorded case in Feb 2020.
Click to expand...

Your point is what? Banning outdoor walks, exercise, interaction is going to reduce transmission? That mandate will almost certainly increase transmission by keeping people confined indoors for a few extra hours per day, bored, more likely to interact out of sight. Similarly, it’s very plausible the Big Ten ban on attendance was actually harmful and led to increased transmission at home watch parties.

There is no evidence of transmission amongst spaced outdoor individuals.
 

MplsGopher said:
Disagree.

It simply isn't going to be possible for this virus to vary itself to the degree where it can completely evade the vaccine and still be virulent. It's one or the other, and the vaccine makers are already working on "tune ups" for the released vaccines that will be fine tuned to the dominant variant.

It would have to be a radically different genetic sequence, to the point where it wouldn't be a coronavirus anymore. It doesn't evolve that fast.
Click to expand...

There are evolutionary pressures and selection to become more transmissible which inherently makes it more deadly in absolute terms. Smallpox is/was very transmissible and quite deadly so your quote isn’t necessarily true. I’d say there is evolutionary room for this thing to spread its wings and evolve in ways we don’t like very much. But, what are the odds, and let’s think positive.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
There are evolutionary pressures and selection to become more transmissible which inherently makes it more deadly in absolute terms. Smallpox is/was very transmissible and quite deadly
Click to expand...
My quote did not say "vary itself to the degree where it can become more transmissible and still be virulent".

The vaccine is key difference, and what my post was about.
 


Pompous Elitist said:
Your point is what? Banning outdoor walks, exercise, interaction is going to reduce transmission? That mandate will almost certainly increase transmission by keeping people confined indoors for a few extra hours per day, bored, more likely to interact out of sight. Similarly, it’s very plausible the Big Ten ban on attendance was actually harmful and led to increased transmission at home watch parties.

There is no evidence of transmission amongst spaced outdoor individuals.
Click to expand...

My point was to simply provide details as to why there was a lockdown/quarantine on the campus. The school lifted the outdoor exercise ban.
 

PMWinSTP said:
My point was to simply provide details as to why there was a lockdown/quarantine on the campus. The school lifted the outdoor exercise ban.
Click to expand...

Did the ban on outdoor activity make sense, in your mind?
 

Pompous Elitist said:
Did the ban on outdoor activity make sense, in your mind?
Click to expand...
When 26% of your total cases for the past year happen in the span of 7 days, you might initially be a little too strict in communicating your point to stay in their rooms.
 

If "Bat Shit Crazy" Joe gets his wish and vaccinates as many people as he wants in the first 100 days, then there is about an 80% chance of the stadium having fans. The question is, how many will be allowed and what will be the guidelines for admittance.

I'm thinking negative test requirements to attend and 50% capacity or less. Mask mandates which are better enforced than at the Super Bowl.
 



Otis said:
If "Bat Shit Crazy" Joe gets his wish and vaccinates as many people as he wants in the first 100 days, then there is about an 80% chance of the stadium having fans. The question is, how many will be allowed and what will be the guidelines for admittance.

I'm thinking negative test requirements to attend and 50% capacity or less. Mask mandates which are better enforced than at the Super Bowl.
Click to expand...

He is already on a pace for 150 million in the 1st 100 days. And the pace is only going up.

It depends on how fast that the 4 (Pfizer, Moderna, J & J, AstraZenica) companies can get the supply out. I'm saying 60% for OSU, and all the way to 100% for Wisconsin.
 

Ski U Mah Gopher said:
He is already on a pace for 150 million in the 1st 100 days. And the pace is only going up.

It depends on how fast that the 4 (Pfizer, Moderna, J & J, AstraZenica) companies can get the supply out. I'm saying 60% for OSU, and all the way to 100% for Wisconsin.
Click to expand...
There are 250M adults in the country, and only 50% or so have initially indicated (via polling) that they want the vaccine. In other words, 125M people (adults). Obviously, the bulk of that is going to be aged 18-64.

As you indicate, by the end of April (100 days from Jan 20), they're on pace for 150M or so.


But didn't Fauci recently say he was hoping to start offering the vaccine to anyone who wanted it, by April? IE, people younger than 65 and/or non front-line type folks?


Something isn't quite adding up here. They either need to start offering the vaccine to anyone, soonish (early March?), or I think they're going to run up against a real demand problem quicker than they realize.


Unless a significant number of that "no thanks" 50% have started to change their minds. That will happen to some portion of them, but how quickly?
 

PMWinSTP said:
When 26% of your total cases for the past year happen in the span of 7 days, you might initially be a little too strict in communicating your point to stay in their rooms.
Click to expand...

You think dishonesty is the best policy here? Do you think most students respected the thought process?

My answer is no to both. Counterproductive, and likely harmful. Thats a crazy policy - glad they got rid of it but too late to salvage credibility.
 

MplsGopher said:
There are 250M adults in the country, and only 50% or so have initially indicated (via polling) that they want the vaccine. In other words, 125M people (adults). Obviously, the bulk of that is going to be aged 18-64.

As you indicate, by the end of April (100 days from Jan 20), they're on pace for 150M or so.


But didn't Fauci recently say he was hoping to start offering the vaccine to anyone who wanted it, by April? IE, people younger than 65 and/or non front-line type folks?


Something isn't quite adding up here. They either need to start offering the vaccine to anyone, soonish (early March?), or I think they're going to run up against a real demand problem quicker than they realize.


Unless a significant number of that "no thanks" 50% have started to change their minds. That will happen to some portion of them, but how quickly?
Click to expand...

The demographics of the vaccine hesitant or deniers mostly align with the groups of people that are most likely to already have been infected - millennials and gen zzz, lower income, God is my co-pilot types. There is a group of ultra anxious and neo-liberal anti-vax types that probably won’t take the vaccine and have been hiding out but they aren’t likely to crowd into a football stadium anytime soon. The wild cards seem to be duration and nature of immunity from infection/vaccine, and impact of the South African variant and any others coming down the pike. Too soon to say.
 





Pompous Elitist said:
The wild cards seem to be duration and nature of immunity from infection/vaccine, and impact of the South African variant and any others coming down the pike. Too soon to say.
Click to expand...
As far as if people change their minds on getting the vaccine? Otherwise, I don't understand what this has to do with my post.
 


Pompous Elitist said:
You think dishonesty is the best policy here? Do you think most students respected the thought process?

My answer is no to both. Counterproductive, and likely harmful. Thats a crazy policy - glad they got rid of it but too late to salvage credibility.
Click to expand...
Good grief. Not sure why you are trying to argue with me...
 



Pompous Elitist said:
Well, you started it...

Correct me if I’m wrong but you seemed to support the policy of banning outdoor activities because of a recent outbreak.
Click to expand...
How so? I responded to your post. I merely provided the details for school's reason for the lockdown, which you had not provided.
 

Pompous Elitist said:
The demographics of the vaccine hesitant or deniers mostly align with the groups of people that are most likely to already have been infected - millennials and gen zzz, lower income, God is my co-pilot types. There is a group of ultra anxious and neo-liberal anti-vax types that probably won’t take the vaccine and have been hiding out but they aren’t likely to crowd into a football stadium anytime soon. The wild cards seem to be duration and nature of immunity from infection/vaccine, and impact of the South African variant and any others coming down the pike. Too soon to say.
Click to expand...
You got any proof for that bud? Anecdotally my interactions say the exact opposite, but I don't think anyone has done any official surveys that indicate one way or the other.
 


Pompous Elitist said:
The demographics of the vaccine hesitant or deniers mostly align with the groups of people that are most likely to already have been infected - millennials and gen zzz, lower income, God is my co-pilot types. There is a group of ultra anxious and neo-liberal anti-vax types that probably won’t take the vaccine and have been hiding out but they aren’t likely to crowd into a football stadium anytime soon. The wild cards seem to be duration and nature of immunity from infection/vaccine, and impact of the South African variant and any others coming down the pike. Too soon to say.
Click to expand...
I have found this to be an interesting paper. Its more about parent's views of their children being vaccinated. Your description of the vaccine hesitant appears to be accurate but a bit abbreviated. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7595070/
 

MplsGopher said:
Can you please cite the controlled study that looked at bans on outdoor activities?
Click to expand...

The burden is on you to find instances of proven transmission amongst people out for walks, runs, biking, or otherwise keeping appropriate 3-6 foot distancing outdoors. There aren’t any contact tracing events to show this type of transmission. Sure, it could happen in theory, but it’s far more likely the students will have a higher risk cooped up in their dorms and apartments with roommates, walking down halls, hanging out in common spaces instead of being outdoors. Is this sinking in, at all?
 


PMWinSTP said:
How so? I responded to your post. I merely provided the details for school's reason for the lockdown, which you had not provided.
Click to expand...

You implied it made sense to ban outdoor activities because Berkeley had a small outbreak - am I wrong?
 

Taji34 said:
You got any proof for that bud? Anecdotally my interactions say the exact opposite, but I don't think anyone has done any official surveys that indicate one way or the other.
Click to expand...

Sure, the Kaiser Foundation tracks vaccine hesitancy on a monthly basis. There is no group without some hesitancy but some stand out more than others. Multiple reasons, some crazier than others.

www.kff.org

KFF COVID-19 Vaccine Monitor: January 2021 - Vaccine Hesitancy - 9616-2 | KFF

These additional findings were released January 27, 2021. The KFF COVID-19 Vaccine Monitor is an ongoing research project tracking the public’s attitudes and experiences with COVID-19 vaccinations. Using a combination of surveys and qualitative research, this project tracks the dynamic nature of...
www.kff.org www.kff.org

CF0EFC2D-D95D-4DF8-A7E0-613DFB83B5DF.png
B5738D45-39F6-4E30-8DC8-9D4C026758C2.png
 

Fascinating. Only the first has any real legitimacy - likely no significant incidence of long term effects but it’s true, there is no data. The relative risk for most groups... is a no-brainer. How to best approach these folks with irrational fear? Calmly explain the mechanism, low risks of the vaccine versus risks of COVID-19? Ridicule them endlessly? Cash incentives?

Will these incentives and reasoning work with the outdoor exercise ban folks?

D15B346C-DFD9-431C-8DEE-24ACA58863C7.png

www.kff.org

KFF COVID-19 Vaccine Monitor: January 2021 - Vaccine Hesitancy - 9616-2 | KFF

These additional findings were released January 27, 2021. The KFF COVID-19 Vaccine Monitor is an ongoing research project tracking the public’s attitudes and experiences with COVID-19 vaccinations. Using a combination of surveys and qualitative research, this project tracks the dynamic nature of...
www.kff.org www.kff.org
 


You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom