Jump to content

I want to go to Jets games this year


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, HawkeyeJet said:

Yes, that's it.  If that is true, that is a game changer, to a certain extent. Still not a "game over, we win" moment but big.

I have some other thoughts related to viral load and a few other things, but I don't think this is the platform .

Hopefully the WHO is right this time.

Seems like the original tweet was deleted?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Barry McCockinner said:

Seems like the original tweet was deleted?

Here is another version.  Long story short, the WHO is now saying they think spread from an asymptomatic carrier to another person is very rare.  Whereas before that was a huge concern and cause for a lot of the precautions put in place.  The WHo has been all over the map it seems with some of their insight, so it may be "grain of salt" worthy for now until more studies verify.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, nico002 said:

Natural deaths? What? Other coronaviruses? Like the common cold? You’re clearly uninformed.

When you compare coronavirus to suicides, hunger, etc. you've lost me. As for HIV/AIDS stats in the US are much lower because there are treatments more readily available. In 2017 in the US there were 16,350 deaths from AIDs/HIV. And there are no treatments for coronavirus yet. There are for AIDS. This glass half full coronavirus is no big deal argument just another disease is a stale one. And not true. https://www.niaid.nih.gov/diseases-conditions/coronaviruses

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/6/2020 at 11:10 PM, nico002 said:

If thousands can safely protest people should be able to do the same thing sitting in a stadium. Let people police themselves. On the trajectory we are on I see the NFL resuming with fans in stadiums. 

Yeah, a bunch of morons gathering and risking a second wave.   This crap ain't over with as sad and depressing as it is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, munchmemory said:

What so many folks gloss over is the staggering number of dead people from COVID-19.  As of now, Johns Hopkins reports 404,021 deaths worldwide, 110,734 here in America.   Let that sit.  And who knows how many more cases are not even being reported or correctly classified?  Until we have a cure, therapy or vaccine, putting 80K spectators in a stadium just seems like a recipe for more infection.

And people policing themselves?  Forget it.  Tons of folks at these protests are not even wearing masks.  Others are walking around eating food, hugging, etc.  Especially after few brews, many fans at games will abandon any caution they may have had walking into the stadium.

I know it's a tired argument, but are 250,000-500,000 global deaths from the flu a "staggering" number of dead people?  Because life didn't skip a beat for them.

https://www.medscape.com/answers/219557-3459/what-is-the-global-incidence-of-influenza

Everything is relative.  You can quote 110,000 deaths, I can quote 0.1% mortality rate for non-senior citizens.

Doesn't make one right and one wrong, but IMO people should be allowed to live lives the way they choose, not have that choice made for them . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Rangers9 said:

I don’t buy that argument. If you’re going to do that you can add natural deaths to that too and that’s a lot more. And COVID won’t be irrelevant because other coronaviruses are still around and dangerous. Look this is a new disease and right now they are still trying to understand it and get a treatment. They do know it’s highly contagious and that’s why you don’t want large crowds including demonstrations. 

According to the WHO's recent comments that appears to not be the case after all . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, nico002 said:

it’s higher, about 60k die from the flu on a peak year in the US. Flu deaths include children and young adults in higher numbers though, virtually everyone who has died of covid is over 70 or had a serious pre existing condition. 

once a vacccine is avail for covid it will become an irrelevant disease.

some other stats for perspective 

700k people have died of aids this year 

2.1M deaths caused by smoking this year 

500k suicides this year 

9M die of hunger every year 

700k from aids, and it feels like people act like that isn't even a thing anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Lil O said:

Maxman, do you have season tickets, or do you purchase per season/game?

Yes season tickets. Have had them since 1988.

Actually upgraded to 4 seats this year from two. Don't see that happening though.  :)

I am talking to my rep in the morning I am curious to hear what they are thinking. We are a long way out though for sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Rangers9 said:

That is not what they said. 

If they're saying it's "very rare" that asymptomatic people can pass the virus to others, and also saying up to 80% of the population are asymptomatic, then yes -- this isn't anywhere near as contagious as they feared . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, OCCH23 said:

If they're saying it's "very rare" that asymptomatic people can pass the virus to others, and also saying up to 80% of the population are asymptomatic, then yes -- this isn't anywhere near as contagious as they feared . . .

There is a huge difference between "asymptomatic" and pre-symptomatic and you are confusing the two.  Asymptomatic cases have shown not to transmit while pre-symptomatic cases are the most risky and viral.   The virus is immensely contagious form infected people who are both symptomatic and pre-symptomatic.  Since pre-symptomatic will take usually 3-5 days to show symptoms it can wait up to 2 weeks.  And during that time you are extremely contagious.  

Get your facts right before posting your incorrect.  Please provide the corroboration for your 80% figure.  I doubt that this is anywhere remotely correct.    

Do everyone a favor and stick to Jets talk.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Dcat said:

There is a huge difference between "asymptomatic" and pre-symptomatic and you are confusing the two.  Asymptomatic cases have shown not to transmit while pre-symptomatic cases are the most risky and viral.   The virus is immensely contagious form infected people who are both symptomatic and pre-symptomatic.  Since pre-symptomatic will take usually 3-5 days to show symptoms it can wait up to 2 weeks.  And during that time you are extremely contagious.  

Get your facts right before posting your incorrect.  Please provide the corroboration for your 80% figure.  I doubt that this is anywhere remotely correct.    

Do everyone a favor and stick to Jets talk.

Maybe you should take your own advice?

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/50-percent-of-people-with-covid19-not-aware-have-virus

It quotes a study where 80% of patients with the virus were asymptomatic, along with other studies with a lower number.  Hence my statement "up to 80%".  

The point is, MANY people are asymptomatic -- are you going to argue that?

Experts once thought those people could still transmit the disease -- are you going to argue that?

Experts are now saying those people have a "very rare" chance of transmitting it -- are you going to argue that?

So if experts once thought a large portion of the population could transmit the virus, but now believe they likely won't, doesn't that mean it's not as contagious as they once thought?  Perhaps you need a link for the definition of the word?

https://www.google.com/search?q=defition+of+contagious&rlz=1C1GCEA_enUS793US793&oq=defition+of+contagious&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l7.4524j1j4&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, OCCH23 said:

If they're saying it's "very rare" that asymptomatic people can pass the virus to others, and also saying up to 80% of the population are asymptomatic, then yes -- this isn't anywhere near as contagious as they feared . . .

That statement by the WHO was brief and confusing. I hope it's true but it's not a 100% foolproof statement. Doctors I respect on TV like Sanjay Gupta (who is non partisan just a health guy) said WHO has to further clarify this statement because even he doesn't understand it.  Laurie Garrett a health reporter who won a Pulitzer on MSNBC said something similar. You can't just jump onto one statement because you like the content. Many people on your side of the fence have attacked the WHO. So why all of a sudden are you listening to them.  IMO they are worth listening to. Again they are learning about this disease because it's a novel virus which means new. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Rangers9 said:

That statement by the WHO was brief and confusing. I hope it's true but it's not a 100% foolproof statement. Doctors I respect on TV like Sanjay Gupta (who is non partisan just a health guy) said WHO has to further clarify this statement because even he doesn't understand it.  Laurie Garrett a health reporter who won a Pulitzer on MSNBC said something similar. You can't just jump onto one statement because you like the content. Many people on your side of the fence have attacked the WHO. So why all of a sudden are you listening to them.  IMO they are worth listening to. Again they are learning about this disease because it's a novel virus which means new. 

Pot calling kettle black?

All along we're told "listen to the experts", but once they say something you don't like it's "let's take this slow"?

Would you agree the further we get in this experience, the more trustworthy the data should be (since there's more to go by)?  So shouldn't findings in June be more relevant than findings in March?

Regardless, I wasn't promoting any "side" -- that's your bias lying to you.  I simply made a comment about their latest findings, and will change my view if//when they change theirs . . .

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, OCCH23 said:

Pot calling kettle black?

All along we're told "listen to the experts", but once they say something you don't like it's "let's take this slow"?

Would you agree the further we get in this experience, the more trustworthy the data should be (since there's more to go by)?  So shouldn't findings in June be more relevant than findings in March?

Regardless, I wasn't promoting any "side" -- that's your bias lying to you.  I simply made a comment about their latest findings, and will change my view if//when they change theirs . . .

 

It's one comment one statement that legit analysts say deserves more scrutiny. It's not clear what they meant by it. The experts don't even know what it means and if it's accurate. Let's just put that footnote on it. I don't really know what your views on WHO are so I shouldn't say that. But WHO has been ripped and defunded by our gov and many believe they have no credibility. I'm not one of them I think they are crucial esp in third world countries but that's my opinion. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, playtowinthegame said:

3 months of social distancing undone in a matter of two weeks. Brace yourselves, that second wave could be like a Tsunami due to all the protesting. Hope I'm wrong. 

Be nice if the cops wore masks too. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Maxman said:

Yes season tickets. Have had them since 1988.

Actually upgraded to 4 seats this year from two. Don't see that happening though.  :)

I am talking to my rep in the morning I am curious to hear what they are thinking. We are a long way out though for sure.

Well I definitely hope things work out for us, especially since you added the extra seats… True fan! I’ll give my rep a call as well. I just have a couple of seats but I really really love going to games. I’ve had season tickets for 12 years now. Fingers crossed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, nico002 said:

it’s higher, about 60k die from the flu on a peak year in the US. 

some other stats for perspective 

700k people have died of aids this year 

 

just want to point out you're comparing global AIDS stats to US Flu stats. 

there were 16k AIDS related deaths in the USA in 2017 the last time that number was available 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Maxman said:

Yes season tickets. Have had them since 1988.

Actually upgraded to 4 seats this year from two. Don't see that happening though.  :)

I am talking to my rep in the morning I am curious to hear what they are thinking. We are a long way out though for sure.

Please share with us what they are thinking.  I have a feeling they will use the “we are still evaluating” line.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/8/2020 at 3:25 PM, HawkeyeJet said:

There is some news today about asymptomatic transmission of the disease, from the WHO.  If the news hold to be true, I have a pretty good feeling you will able to get your wish.  Dang near everyone might.

Looks like this bubblehead overstated her claim.

WHO walks back claim about ‘very rare’ asymptomatic coronavirus transmission

The World Health Organization on Tuesday walked back comments from a top official who said it was “very rare” for someone to contract the coronavirus from an asymptomatic carrier.

“Some estimates of around 40 percent of transmission may be due to asymptomatic [cases], but those are from models. So I didn’t include that in my answer yesterday but wanted to make sure that I made that clear,” Maria Van Kerkhove, a WHO epidemiologist and technical lead on the pandemic, said during a news conference Tuesday.

Her comments a day earlier — when she told reporters, “From the data we have, it still seems to be rare that an asymptomatic person actually transmits onward to a secondary individual” — gave ammunition to critics of lockdowns and social distancing.

But after other experts questioned her statement, Van Kerkhove and WHO officials were singing a different tune Tuesday.

Calling the controversy “a misunderstanding,” Van Kerkhove said that during the news conference Monday, she was trying to respond to a journalist’s question when she said asymptomatic transmission was “very rare.”

Enlarge Im

“I wasn’t stating a policy of WHO or anything like that,” she said. “We do know that some people who are asymptomatic, or some people who do not have symptoms, can transmit the virus on.”

It was not the “intent of WHO to say there is a new or different policy,” said Mike Ryan, head of emergency programs for the WHO.

“There is still too much unknown about this virus and still too much unknown about its transmission dynamics.”

Ryan also said, however, that people appear to be at their most contagious when symptoms are at their worst.

“Now as we look at COVID-19, we have an infectious pathogen that is present in the upper airway for which the viral loads are peaking at the time you are just beginning to get sick,” he said.

The different definitions of what it means to be asymptomatic complicate matters, the Washington Post noted.

Some infected people never show symptoms, and experts would consider those to be actual asymptomatic cases.

image.gif.d7a813b0f8b251d0ebaa5cffab02de06.gif

But others only show symptoms later on and could be spreading the virus before those symptoms manifest — and they would be considered “presymptomatic” cases, the paper reported.

“It’s a mess. I don’t know why they would say asymptomatic transmission is very rare when the truth is we simply don’t know how frequent it is,” Eric Topol, a professor of molecular medicine at Scripps Research, told the paper.

“And it doesn’t change the facts we do know, which is that this virus is very transmissible and is very hard to combat.”

Keith Neal, a professor of the epidemiology of infectious diseases at Britain’s University of Nottingham, told Canada’s Global News that the question of how large a role asymptomatic transmission plays in new infections was unclear.

But what is known is that people with symptoms are responsible for most of the spread of the disease.

“This reinforces the importance of any person who has any of the symptoms of COVID-19 arranges a test … as soon as possible and isolating until they get their test result,” he said.

In the US, there have been more than 2 million cases of coronavirus and more than 113,000 deaths to date.

https://nypost.com/2020/06/09/who-walks-back-claim-about-asymptomatic-coronavirus-transmission/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, munchmemory said:

Looks like this bubblehead overstated her claim.

WHO walks back claim about ‘very rare’ asymptomatic coronavirus transmission

The World Health Organization on Tuesday walked back comments from a top official who said it was “very rare” for someone to contract the coronavirus from an asymptomatic carrier.

“Some estimates of around 40 percent of transmission may be due to asymptomatic [cases], but those are from models. So I didn’t include that in my answer yesterday but wanted to make sure that I made that clear,” Maria Van Kerkhove, a WHO epidemiologist and technical lead on the pandemic, said during a news conference Tuesday.

Her comments a day earlier — when she told reporters, “From the data we have, it still seems to be rare that an asymptomatic person actually transmits onward to a secondary individual” — gave ammunition to critics of lockdowns and social distancing.

But after other experts questioned her statement, Van Kerkhove and WHO officials were singing a different tune Tuesday.

Calling the controversy “a misunderstanding,” Van Kerkhove said that during the news conference Monday, she was trying to respond to a journalist’s question when she said asymptomatic transmission was “very rare.”

Enlarge Im

“I wasn’t stating a policy of WHO or anything like that,” she said. “We do know that some people who are asymptomatic, or some people who do not have symptoms, can transmit the virus on.”

It was not the “intent of WHO to say there is a new or different policy,” said Mike Ryan, head of emergency programs for the WHO.

“There is still too much unknown about this virus and still too much unknown about its transmission dynamics.”

Ryan also said, however, that people appear to be at their most contagious when symptoms are at their worst.

“Now as we look at COVID-19, we have an infectious pathogen that is present in the upper airway for which the viral loads are peaking at the time you are just beginning to get sick,” he said.

The different definitions of what it means to be asymptomatic complicate matters, the Washington Post noted.

Some infected people never show symptoms, and experts would consider those to be actual asymptomatic cases.

image.gif.d7a813b0f8b251d0ebaa5cffab02de06.gif

But others only show symptoms later on and could be spreading the virus before those symptoms manifest — and they would be considered “presymptomatic” cases, the paper reported.

“It’s a mess. I don’t know why they would say asymptomatic transmission is very rare when the truth is we simply don’t know how frequent it is,” Eric Topol, a professor of molecular medicine at Scripps Research, told the paper.

“And it doesn’t change the facts we do know, which is that this virus is very transmissible and is very hard to combat.”

Keith Neal, a professor of the epidemiology of infectious diseases at Britain’s University of Nottingham, told Canada’s Global News that the question of how large a role asymptomatic transmission plays in new infections was unclear.

But what is known is that people with symptoms are responsible for most of the spread of the disease.

“This reinforces the importance of any person who has any of the symptoms of COVID-19 arranges a test … as soon as possible and isolating until they get their test result,” he said.

In the US, there have been more than 2 million cases of coronavirus and more than 113,000 deaths to date.

https://nypost.com/2020/06/09/who-walks-back-claim-about-asymptomatic-coronavirus-transmission/

Yep,not surprising.  That's why I said in a later post it might be "grain of salt worthy".  Hard to trust what the WHO is saying, which is scary in it's own right.

Semi-Related note:. Dr Van Kerkhove....not bad at all

  • Sympathy 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, HawkeyeJet said:

Yep,not surprising.  That's why I said in a later post it might be "grain of salt worthy".  Hard to trust what the WHO is saying, which is scary in it's own right.

Semi-Related note:. Dr Van Kerkhove....not bad at all

Yeah, this entire process is maddening.   I can't wait until we can put this terrible disease behind us.

As for Dr. Van Kerkhove:  Yeah, except in certain profile shots, she's cute.  Let's start a "Ladies of the Pandemic Thread".  lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remain confident that the virus is petering out and there will be a full slate of NFL games. As to whether there will be fans in the stands, it all depends on what the NFL powers that be decide. Good to see the number of cases reported on the CDC site has declined the last 2 days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Jet Fan RI said:

I remain confident that the virus is petering out and there will be a full slate of NFL games. As to whether there will be fans in the stands, it all depends on what the NFL powers that be decide. Good to see the number of cases reported on the CDC site has declined the last 2 days.

(Reuters) - Arizona again told hospitals to activate the coronavirus emergency plans after cases spiked following reopening, turning it into a U.S. virus hotspot along with neighboring Southwest states.

 

The state’s stay-at-home order ended on May 15, and its cases have increased 115 percent since then, leading a former state health chief to warn Arizona may need new social distancing measures or field hospitals. 

State health director Cara Christ on Saturday told hospitals to “fully activate” emergency plans - a message she last sent on March 25 - after Arizona’s largest medical network Banner Health warned it was reaching its capacity in intensive care unit beds. 

“Since May 15, ventilated COVID-19 patients have quadrupled,” Banner Health tweeted on Monday, adding it had hit capacity for some patients needing cardiac and respiratory care.

The alert came after Arizona, New Mexico and Utah each posted rises of 40% or higher in new cases for the week ended June 7 compared with the prior seven days, joining hotpots in the South like Florida and Arkansas, according to a Reuters analysis. 

University of Washington researchers estimated on Monday 145,728 people could die of COVID-19 in the United States by August, raising their forecast by over 5,000 fatalities in a matter of days. 

In Arizona, a “cavalier” exit from the state’s successful stay-at-home program caused the sudden case surge, said former state health chief Will Humble. 

Humble said Governor Doug Ducey let Arizonans voluntarily follow Centers for Disease Control guidance but must now impose measures like mandatory face mask use inside public spaces. A failure to do so will leave Ducey with two drastic choices, he added.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-arizona/arizona-calls-for-emergency-plan-as-covid-19-spikes-after-reopening-idUSKBN23H03K

 
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...