Jump to content

OCCH23

Members
  • Posts

    191
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by OCCH23

  1. Assuming the government allows them to . . .
  2. You mean in the WORLD. I'm not sure there's any nation in the world acting as scared as we are. They are going back to life as normal, and even if you want to call it the "new normal" it's still WAY more than some here think is "safe". Personally I'm amazed at how many people think they are going to avoid coming in contact with the virus for the next 3+ months -- that a football game in SEPTEMBER is the one that's going to "do them in". But like you said, it's a personal decision -- I just hope the government treats it as one . . .
  3. You didn't hear? I can get someone sick simply by stepping out of my house. The germs will magically seek out the .2% of the population who could die from it, blasting through doors, walls and masks to find anyone who thinks they are "safe" by staying home . . .
  4. I look forward to them still paying all these people they care so deeply about . . .
  5. You probably meant that sarcastically, but it's WAY too close to the truth than this country deserves . . .
  6. Yeah, like people who don't realize what closing the country is doing to totally healthy people. That it's a known fact that suicides, divorces, bankruptcies, homelessness, poverty, etc. ALL go up during times of financial stress, regardless of health. That older people are the ones who find it the toughest to get their jobs back (so while the majority would have been fine with the virus, the majority will be out of work). That saying "football is a luxury" is a slap in the face of every person who counts on that job to survive (which is why playing in an empty stadium doesn't help either, because concessions, security, etc won't get their jobs back) That regardless of intention, this country was set up so government couldn't just enact its will on the people. That the burden of proof is on them to take away liberties, not on the people to give them up. I know it sounds like I'm picking a fight, but I'm really not. Maybe you agree with everything I've said. But the truth is there is misinformation on BOTH sides (as well as sound defenses), and the only way to break through that is with mature discussion/debate (which unfortunately is lacking in society and on this site).
  7. And hundreds of thousands would still die (like the flu). So when/how does this "end"?
  8. Dude, 1 out of 600 is .17%, so that's not exactly surprising. It's not "fake news", it's two sides of the same coin. Your statistic shows a mortality rate < 0.2%, leading many to think it's not the crisis the media portrays it as. But it's also true that even that % leads to an overwhelming/impossible task for hospitals to deal with. If you're telling me as a medical professional that we're already at "the point of sacrificing care for others", then I'll believe you. But we supposedly spent the past 2 months avoiding that. We can't afford to wait for "everyone to get better" -- no matter when they open things up, people will get sick again. NJ's governor is waiting another month -- what does he expect that to do? It's doubtful we'll have an answer by then, but another month of revenue is down the tubes. I'm obeying all the rules, I just don't agree/understand the logic behind them. So if you have any insight from the medical perspective I'll gladly listen . . .
  9. In the US, about 50,000 die each year, with 1,000,000 seeking hospital care. https://www.thoracic.org/patients/patient-resources/resources/top-pneumonia-facts.pdf So you are right, my numbers are off, I'll go back and edit them. But my point still stands that "answers to the virus" aren't necessarily answers for those who are already susceptible to it . . .
  10. He can't -- they totally shoot down the narrative . . .
  11. Hey I hope you're right. But this virus leads to things like pneumonia, which hundreds of thousands die from every year in this country alone despite our best efforts . . . Edit: 50,000 die, while 1,000,000 seek hospital care https://www.thoracic.org/patients/patient-resources/resources/top-pneumonia-facts.pdf
  12. As opposed to people like you who are totally fine with TENS OF MILLIONS of people potentially losing jobs, homes, businesses, etc. just so you can continue to live in Mr. Roger's neighborhood . . .
  13. But what is the solution? Quarantine for 12 months in the hopes we find a vaccine? We've got 34 million people asking for unemployment from a system that doesn't have the money. And before you say "lives are more important than money", try explaining that to the totally healthy 48 year old father of 3 who suddenly has no job, no house, etc. Or the 65 year old who never got sick, but can't get the job back that he lost (as it's common knowledge that the older you are, the harder it is to find work once you lose it). I realize there's no perfect answer, but I cannot accept that the "best" one is to make hundreds of millions suffer so that hundred of thousands don't die for a few months. But I'm open to hearing alternatives I haven't considered . . .
  14. Honest question that I admit I don't have the answer to -- do you believe herd immunity leads to MORE deaths, or just QUICKER deaths? Is there any reason to believe the person who would die from the virus in May wouldn't die in August? Sure Sweden has more NOW because people got exposed quicker. But most say they don't have to worry about a "second wave" like we will because we have so many unexposed (with weaker immunity, as that's what happens when you're not around people). I'd be interested if you've heard anything regarding this difference, as I've only heard it from one side (pro-herd) . . .
  15. I couldn't agree more. Outside of a vaccine, "stay home, save lives" is really "stay home, postpone deaths". That's why they talk about FLATTENING THE CURVE (spreading deaths out) instead of LOWERING it (lessening deaths). I have the same concern about hospitals, but it comes down to whether we want to rip the band-aid off all at once or slowly pick at it for months -- in the end there's little reason to believe someone who can't handle the virus in May will be able to in August. I truly believe if those who are at higher risk acted like it (took extra precaution) we could open things up and allow herd immunity to do its thing. But I openly admit I'm not a doctor (or a fortune teller) so I'll just make sure to take care of me and my own and do my best to live in whatever reality I find myself . . .
  16. Are you capable of ANY discussion? I would like to watch football in the fall and do not believe statistics defend the position that we shouldn't have it. You respond to my post (not the other way around) and have done NOTHING to support your opinion. I don't need a gif to illustrate how ridiculous your position has been throughout this thread . . .
  17. And had a high mortality rate among young adults, which this current virus does not appear to have. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3734171/ That's why they believe the mortality rate will be considerably less than 1% of the population once all data has been collected.
  18. I have a feeling you don't want a legitimate discussion (considering I never once mentioned "politics" yet somehow you did). but I'll try one more time from the beginning. The original question was "what if Corona hits a team hard". I explained that wasn't likely according to statistics, as 85% of people who get the virus aren't affected, and that the chance of any serious illness/death was VERY low if you remove elderly/unhealthy from the equation (since they don't play football). I later admitted I wasn't considering coaches/refs, but still provided CDC statistics that show people of ANY age/health are considerably more likely to recover than die. Is it possible for a team to get sick at the same time? Yes, and they would have to figure something out for two weeks until they got better (like Tampa with their medical outbreak a few years ago). But to act like we're asking them to put their lives on the line is borderline ignorant/purposely misleading to make this thing seem like a bigger deal than it actually is. And can't help but notice you STILL haven't provided a shred of data (which you supposedly hold in high regard) to support your position . . .
  19. I know it's "only football", so this post is more of a general statement about society as a whole: Is Covid more dangerous for older/unhealthy people? Yes. But according to the CDC website, 80% of deaths are in people 65 or older, and only 4-11% of 65-84 year olds end up dying. (Even for those 85+ the death rate is 10-27%, which means 3 out of every 4 of the VERY elderly are expected to recover). Point is, I believe each person should decide for himself what "risk" he's willing to take. If a 50 yo ref with good health wants to do a game, he should be able to. If a 70 yo coach with diabetes wants to step away for a while, that would probably be a good choice. But this idea that we're asking ANYONE (regardless of age/health) to sign their death warrant by letting life get back to normal just isn't supported by any facts I've seen . . .
  20. If you're going to respond to a post, at least read it first. I said 85% aren't effected -- that doesn't mean the other 15% are hospitalized/in danger of death. It means they'll get sick, just like people do all the time (and just like I said in my original post). I'm one of those examples -- cough/fever for two weeks but then bounced back. If you think data is telling us to keep everyone in quarantine, please provide statistics to defend your opinion (as I have multiple times). Please provide ANYTHING that suggests this is a mortal danger to the overall population and that getting infected is a potential death sentence. It's OK, I'll wait . . .
  21. Um, because they don't play football and that's the purpose of this discussion? And the real question is what's 0.2% of 300 million, because that's what the mortality rate is expected to be once all the data comes in (if you actually care about the data that is). All you need is to look at the scarcity of toilet paper to see how easy it is to lead sheep off a cliff. This is a sickness that attacks a specific segment of the population, and that's where our focus should be. Worrying about elite athletes dying is just catnip for those already convinced we're in the end times . . .
  22. This is actually a more valid point -- there are plenty of coaches who are old/in poor health. Can they coach from the skybox? I honestly don't know, just throwing it out there. I just can't imagine cancelling the season if it didn't revolve around the players, but I guess we'll see how it all plays out . . .
  23. The risk of brain damage is WAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYY higher than the risk of dying from this virus, but somehow we've been convinced it's a death sentence . . .
  24. Just so you know, data has shown it's MUCH more difficult to get the virus outdoors because of the sun, wind, and open space. That doesn't mean players may not give it to players, or fans to fans, but I assure you the two would not be a danger to each other . . .
×
×
  • Create New...