Untitled Document
Brown Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Harvard Penn Princeton Yale



 Page 4 of 5 « First<2345
Username Post: If there is no Ivy basketball season next year        (Topic#24307)
penn nation 
Professor
Posts: 21085

Reg: 12-02-04
If there is no Ivy basketball season next year
06-30-20 03:54 PM - Post#309758    
    In response to Streamers

https://www1.nyc.gov/site/doh/covid/covid- 19-data-...

Go to Confirmed Deaths and then click on the button that says Underlying Conditions.

Right now it's unclear what to make of these data since as the chart shows there are many cases where it's uncertain if there were, in fact, underlying conditions.



Edited by penn nation on 06-30-20 03:55 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32683

Reg: 11-21-04
Re: If there is no Ivy basketball season next year
06-30-20 04:04 PM - Post#309759    
    In response to penn nation

I quoted my numbers from that. Look, again, what we believe is irrelevant--young people in good health believe, quite reasonably, that Covid-19 is not a threat to their lives. But it may be a threat to their potential livelihoods. So intentionally trying to be exposed to obtain immunity makes sense. It's a risk-reward calculation. At our ages, we are dealing with a different set of numbers.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32683

Reg: 11-21-04
06-30-20 04:07 PM - Post#309760    
    In response to Streamers

"So, let's concede nobody dies among the players, but what about families, coaches, staff, other students they come in contact with?"

Their thinking would be that once they are testing negative again, how can they give it to anyone? If that were not correct, the entire recommendation that anyone exposed quarantine for 14 days would be incorrect.

 
Streamers 
Professor
Posts: 8141
Streamers
Loc: NW Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
If there is no Ivy basketball season next year
06-30-20 04:55 PM - Post#309765    
    In response to palestra38

what about the time period between infection and detection via the test? (forgive the 'whatabout' please)

 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
Postdoc
Posts: 2685

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
06-30-20 05:04 PM - Post#309768    
    In response to Streamers

Remember, these athletes are presumably in school, taking classes, eating meals, living in dorms, etc. The result could be major epidemic, with students surviving. However, professors, staff and locals are at risk. What about when all these students head home for Thanksgiving, etc.?

Last year universities decided not to become the healthcare provider and sent the kids home in March. They'll do it again in November, seem to actually be planning on it by eliminating on campus classes after that.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32683

Reg: 11-21-04
06-30-20 05:57 PM - Post#309770    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

Hey--I'm with you all on this. I'm just explaining what well could be in the mind of a 20 year old football player with a Power-5 conference team.

 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
Postdoc
Posts: 2685

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
06-30-20 07:06 PM - Post#309775    
    In response to palestra38

Sex?

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32683

Reg: 11-21-04
06-30-20 08:52 PM - Post#309779    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

Sure....and playing football to get an NFL contract. They are not mutually exclusive

 
HARVARDDADGRAD 
Postdoc
Posts: 2685

Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
07-01-20 12:06 AM - Post#309787    
    In response to palestra38

Both are equally dangerous, at least at this moment.

 
Condor 
PhD Student
Posts: 1888

Reg: 11-21-04
07-01-20 10:20 AM - Post#309809    
    In response to HARVARDDADGRAD

Unless I am reading the data incorrectly, the chances of someone dying in the 18-44 age range from COVID-19 if they contract the virus and report such is 0.34%. Of those, 96.4% have an underlying illness which can include lung disease, asthma, heart disease, a weakened immune system, obesity, diabetes, kidney disease, liver disease and cancer. For people 45 and older, 98% or more had an underlying illness. Hence, someone 18-44 had less than a 1 in 1,000,000 chance of dying from this disease if they did not have an underlying illness. Someone older than 44 had less than a 1 in 2,000,000 chance of dying from this disease if they did not have an underlying illness or condition.

For those with underlying conditions, many suffer from poor lifestyle choices not the least of which is eating too much and/or poorly. Some exercise, even if it is just walking, would also help.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32683

Reg: 11-21-04
07-01-20 11:48 AM - Post#309817    
    In response to Condor

For some reason, stating this information has become controversial. For those of us who believe in a fact based dialog, and who agree that the measures to contain the virus are necessary, this explains why young people not only resent these measures, but might want to purposefully infect themselves if they think it would provide immunity.

 
Bryan 
Junior
Posts: 231

Loc: Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
07-01-20 12:32 PM - Post#309822    
    In response to Condor

Condor, I wasn't able to follow your conclusion on the likelihood of dying from Covid-19 for those age 18-44 with no underlying health conditions. If it's 0.34% for the combined age group and 96.4% of the deaths are for those with an underlying health condition, don't you need to know what portion of those age 18-44 have an underlying health condition to determine the chance of death for those without an underlying condition? To take an extreme (and certainly incorrect) example, if 96.4% of the population age 18-44 had an underlying condition then the risk of dying would be the same 0.34% for both those with and without an underlying condition, right? Am I missing something?

 
Streamers 
Professor
Posts: 8141
Streamers
Loc: NW Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
07-01-20 12:47 PM - Post#309825    
    In response to palestra38

As stated earlier - the data seems to backup the claim that the risk to athletes is negligible - any controversy lies with the potential to spread it to other students, family staff, etc.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32683

Reg: 11-21-04
07-01-20 12:52 PM - Post#309826    
    In response to Streamers

Except that it appears that once you have gotten through it and test negative, you no longer can spread it. So if you get it, quarantine for 14 days, and test negative, you're ready to go for football season.

 
mobrien 
Senior
Posts: 389

Loc: New York
Reg: 04-18-17
07-01-20 01:09 PM - Post#309829    
    In response to palestra38

College students don't exist in a bubble. If they start spreading the virus—and dorms and lecture halls are almost perfectly designed to do that—then a lot of older people will be at risk too: professors, janitors, and, eventually, the surrounding towns. Focusing on the mortality rate for 18 to 22 year-olds is not what we should be doing.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32683

Reg: 11-21-04
07-01-20 01:19 PM - Post#309832    
    In response to mobrien

You see, this is the problem with having this discussion. I said specifically that I would not do this--but putting myself in the place of a 20 year old football player, it makes sense. By hiding the facts on just how low the mortality rate is for young healthy people, we do not present an accurate picture of why we are doing what we need to do. But in terms of that hypothetical football player, if 30 players on LSU suddenly test positive, it is reasonable to suggest that they may have done so to avoid it later https://www.si.com/college/2020/06/20/ls u-football...

ANd if they are quarantined once positive, they won't pass it on. It's actually a pretty good plan, as long as no one dies---but in the story, no one has had more than mild symptoms. Is this something I would do? No. But I am not a 20 year old Big Time college football player looking at the possibility of missing a year before I get my shot at the NFL.

 
penn nation 
Professor
Posts: 21085

Reg: 12-02-04
07-01-20 01:40 PM - Post#309834    
    In response to palestra38

I think making it a binary paradigm of dying vs not dying is also misleading.

There are any number of other potential negative consequences, both short term and beyond.

 
Old Bear 
Postdoc
Posts: 3988

Reg: 11-23-04
If there is no Ivy basketball season next year
07-01-20 02:01 PM - Post#309839    
    In response to penn nation

Interesting piece in today's WSJ from Provost and Pres. of Cornell.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32683

Reg: 11-21-04
07-01-20 02:04 PM - Post#309840    
    In response to penn nation

Yes, but not to them.

 
Streamers 
Professor
Posts: 8141
Streamers
Loc: NW Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
07-01-20 02:10 PM - Post#309841    
    In response to palestra38

  • palestra38 Said:
Except that it appears that once you have gotten through it and test negative, you no longer can spread it.


We have been over this before. There is a 'spread window' that begins with infection and ends with detection. You would have to put the entire team in quarantine and only release them once they contract it and get over it. Even then, it is not established that one cannot spread the virus after infection and recovery. It is only hoped that you develop immunity yourself.

In other words, the 'herd' would have to be penned up indefinitely.

 
 Page 4 of 5 « First<2345
Icon Legend Permissions Topic Options
Report Post

Quote Post

Quick Reply

Print Topic

Email Topic

20476 Views




Copyright © 2004-2012 Basketball U. Terms of Use for our Site and Privacy Policy are applicable to you. All rights reserved.
Basketball U. and its subsidiaries are not affiliated in any way with any NCAA athletic conference or member institution.
FusionBB™ Version 2.1 | ©2003-2007 InteractivePHP, Inc.
Execution time: 0.591 seconds.   Total Queries: 16   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT -0500) Eastern. Current time is 02:31 PM
Top