more covid discussion from the basketball thread

You must not have read what I wrote. Had nothing to do with what you said.

Has everything to do with what has changed since the beginning of the pandemic. Everyone was tested before the vaccine and even asymptomatic people were considered positives. We aren’t testing everyone like that anymore. I understand that vaccinated people can get it, but they are only being tested when they have symptoms. This is huge when trying to play games.

Got it. I'm saying there should be no difference in the testing if members of each group are both just as likely to either transmit it or receive it.
 
I'm not specifically referring to Tennessee Basketball. I'm speaking more broadly about the unvaccinated and their perception of whether to get the vaccine or not get the vaccine. Tennessee might not be testing asymptomatic people, but Jeff Goodman today tweeted that he polled 125 programs and 42% of them still are testing all vaccinated individuals. And, that doesn't even mention the fact that different localities have different state and local recommendations that aren't in line with the CDC. I live in Washington D.C. and things here in some circumstances are more severe than CDC recommendations depending on where you work, and this is a highly vaccinated region.

My only point is that unvaccinated people see the uneven application of these restrictions and think to themselves "What's the point?"

That’s on those localities and schools then. But off the state of TN website: “fully vaccinated close contacts are not required to quarantine…as long as they remain asymptomatic since the exposure…” They do suggest getting tested 5-7 days afterward. But that is a drastic departure before the vaccine was available.

At least the majority (58%) of schools are not testing vaccinated players. That helps get more games played.

What’s interesting, is that I’m guessing the areas with the least vaccinated also are the areas that follow the CDC and aren’t more restrictive with guidelines.
 
“With” is the key word. Being hospitalized WITH Covid is not the same as FOR Covid. This is how the numbers have been fudged from the beginning. Someone shot or in a car wreck who happens to have Covid isn’t hospitalized because of Covid but that’s how it gets reported.
you do realize where it says With or For, it means that people unvaccinated are being hospitalized at a much greater rate even if your theory is true it isn’t all directly COVID. With 65-70% vaccinated that leaves 30-35% unvaccinated making up 91% of hospitalizations. 70% vaccinated folks only make up 9% of hospitalizations. It’s pretty damning data against those ranting against the effectiveness of the vaccine. Bottom line is unvaccinated folks are more likely to be hospitalized by a long shot.

But go look at Ballad news release cause they also publish the unvaccinated vs vaccinated rate on people on ventilators which are most definitely going to be mainly COVID.
 
Got it. I'm saying there should be no difference in the testing if members of each group are both just as likely to either transmit it or receive it.

Ok…sorry. There’s an incentive part of this though. But I also believe that vaccinated people don’t transmit it quite as much as the unvaccinated, but different variants do change this.
 
Ok…sorry. There’s an incentive part of this though. But I also believe that vaccinated people don’t transmit it quite as much as the unvaccinated, but different variants do change this.

Yeah, most of those nuances are unclear now. We shall see how they pan out. Unfortunately.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lankykong
Ok…sorry. There’s an incentive part of this though. But I also believe that vaccinated people don’t transmit it quite as much as the unvaccinated, but different variants do change this.
Plus the unvaccinated are the ones who are dying from this pandemic ...I work at a hospital that has had 20 die in last 3 months .. and all were unvaccinated patients ....just a fact ...
 
You can't get Covid and be vaccinated because the vaccines work 70% of the time every time.
 
Nobody is trying to get COVID. I believe that the vaccines only work for about 4-5 months and reinfection occurs more frequently than people realize. They might term “ Full vaccinated people” by having 2 shots plus booster
 
2 days before symptoms is when you have a good chance of spreading to others and first few days of having symptoms. Some people may not show symptoms but can still spread it.
Why are we still testing asymptomatic people? This is silly. Nobody goes to the doctor to get tested unless they have symptoms. Contact tracing and testing asymptomatic people need to stop. If you have a fever then don’t play and don’t make anyone that don’t have symptoms sit because they’ve been in contact with someone who has. It’s common sense
 
Ballad health just reported 91% of COVID hospitalizations were unvaccinated. So they are making that up? And every hospital in America with similar stats is also making it up? That’s one heck of a conspiracy theory right there that hundreds of thousands of healthcare workers and executives are just fudging the numbers and part of some scam. A scam that is putting 29% of hospitals in the red (canceling elective surgeries and tests/scans that are money makers) and having to spend more on staffing. Geez!
I agree, but there are folks that will argue the government is manipulating the data. Read all the reasons antivaxxers won’t take the shot with some believing there’s a tracking device in the vaccine. Social media has empowered crazy in this country
 
I agree, but there are folks that will argue the government is manipulating the data. Read all the reasons antivaxxers won’t take the shot with some believing there’s a tracking device in the vaccine. Social media has empowered crazy in this country
I crack up about the tracking device rumors. Tracking that much data and actually analyzing it isn't cheap. How much money can be made from knowing where Jed from Sheboygan is at all times?
 
I’m not trying to turn this political, but where does it end when it comes to sports/fairness? The kids were told to get vaxxed so they wouldn’t miss games, potentially hurt their teams, yet now that exactly what is happening? The % chance of college athlete being hospitalized/dying if unvaxxed was minuscule as it was, now he’s vaxxed and that % is even lower, doesn’t seem right to have to sit out.

For a vaxxed college athlete what’s % chances of death from COVID vs, seasonal flu/cold? Yet only 1 of those REQUIRES a player to miss time?

They wouldn't have to miss AS MANY games. At no point has it ever been the policy that if they tested positive, they wouldn't have to miss any games.

Last year if you tested positive, I believe it was a minimum 10 day quarantine and any other player/personnel in contact with that person that tested positive would also have to quarantine for a minimum of 14 days. This year, if you are vaccinated and come into contact with someone who tests positive, you don't have to isolate if you test negative 3-5 days after exposure.

And obviously it isn't ONLY about protecting only the college athlete. There are coaches, staff, officials, etc as well that they are trying to protect.
 
Last edited:
I have had a 22 year career in medical devices and there is zero merit to some conspiracy that companies that produce life saving therapies wants to keep people unhealthy to sell more.
have you looked at the price difference between invermectin and the new phizer and moderna pill?
 
Nobody is trying to get COVID. I believe that the vaccines only work for about 4-5 months and reinfection occurs more frequently than people realize. They might term “ Full vaccinated people” by having 2 shots plus booster
Studies show that the MAX time the shot is effective is 200 days.
 
have you looked at the price difference between invermectin and the new phizer and moderna pill?
That has to do with how long the therapy has been out and the cost of development. Look at HIV drugs; they’re probably similarly expensive (or more) and I don’t think those companies are trying to get people to have HIV.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lostsheep
Aren’t people with the flu/strep/etc contagious? Yet they aren’t required to sit out? In college athletes what’s the hospitalization/death rate for seasonal flu vs. COVID? Why does only 1 require missing time?

I don't know that those stats are listed anywhere for college athletes. But considering COVID killed 7-10 times the amount of people in the last year that the average flu year does, I would imagine the hospitalization/death rate would likewise be substantially higher than the flu.

And again, it isn't only the college athlete that is being put a risk. Coaches, staff, officials, etc are also put at risk by allowing a COVID positive player to play.

And why there aren't any requirements in place, if you test positive for strep/flu, doctors always advise that you isolate. The difference is that you typically only get tested for those when you have symptoms.

Also, every business I've ever worked for has always strongly advised against coming into work if you have flu like symptoms, even pre-covid. My current work always sent out flu vaccine reminders and offered the flu vaccine at the on-site medical facility (they still do this even now).
 
Are you familiar with Purdue Pharma?
The opiate industry would be the exception to that, yeah. I would counter that expensive medicine means that the company does not actually want that many people to get it though.

Opiates are actually relatively cheap, and pain is extremely common already, so they didn’t have to convince people to be in pain more; they just had to convince some doctors that all pain should be treated with opiates and that tolerance wasn’t a relevant concept.
 
The opiate industry would be the exception to that, yeah. I would counter that expensive medicine means that the company does not actually want that many people to get it though. Opiates are actually relatively cheap, and pain is extremely common already, so they didn’t have to convince people to be in pain more; they just had to convince some doctors that all pain should be treated with opiates and that tolerance wasn’t a relevant concept.
No, but they made a heck of a lot of money convincing people that more meds=less pain. They didn’t do that because they believed it. They did it because it doubled, tripled, and quadrupled their profit margins with each dosage increase, and in turn, created a trillion dollar drug epidemic crisis.

So, I’m sorry, I’ll not be convinced that medical sales wants to limit the use and availability of their products. At the end of the day, sales is sales. Whether it’s cars or medicine, the goal is still the same. And expensive medicine only means that they’ll figure out a way for insurance to pay for it, which creates another problem.
 
Being not obese, and somewhat in shape seems to be more effective than the vaccine. No one is telling people to get off there a$$es and eat healthier. Ever wonder why that is? Could it be the pharmaceutical industry wants to create customers, and not cures…
No conspiracy if it's true. First wave of covid targeted this exact population but you couldn't call out those obese or target certain demographics. First line to each medication in regards to type 2 diabetes.... this product is to be used in conjunction with diet and exercise.
 
The opiate industry would be the exception to that, yeah. I would counter that expensive medicine means that the company does not actually want that many people to get it though.

Opiates are actually relatively cheap, and pain is extremely common already, so they didn’t have to convince people to be in pain more; they just had to convince some doctors that all pain should be treated with opiates and that tolerance wasn’t a relevant concept.
They convinced doctors that addiction wouldn't be a problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lankykong

VN Store



Back
Top