Page 1 of 9 123456 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 236

Thread: Covid-19, non-football discussions

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Back in Niagara
    Posts
    4,020

    Default Covid-19, non-football discussions

    Spud's Cyclesguy and all others who want to talk about these topics (sans football) let's do it here.

    Here are several themes we could carry over from the Line of Scrimmage threads:

    I. Hydroxychloroquine - Is it useful in treating Covid? Clinical doctors in South Korea, NY, NJ, MI claim it was effective when combined with Zinc. Why do all the studies that say it is not effective leave out Zinc?

    The study just released in the Lancet was the largest study yet. It looks to be very professional. I saw no obvious flaws with it other than it obscured who funded it and it did not address the most important question - is the combination of HQ & Zinc effective at treating SARS-Cov-2/Covid-19/Wuhan flu? There is no question that Hydroxychloroquine or Chloroquine on their own or with an anti-biotic like Azithromycin or Clarithromycin is not effective and may cause some harm in some patients. WE ALREADY KNOW THAT!

    Now, I think there is a second issue: who is funding all these studies that seem designed to discredit Hydroxychloroquine and why are they they doing it? Follow the money!!

    II. Drinking of Bleach, Lysol etc. - Lots of talk about President Trump having said this. Yet I've never seen anyone actually quote him, produce the transcript or video evidence where he suggested anyone drink. I watched the press conference that started all these memes and I heard him ask a question. After discussion about the ability of simple cleaning products like soap & water, alcohol (>65%), bleach and hydrogen peroxide to effectively kill the virus outside the body, Trump asked if there was any possibility of incorporating that knowledge into research for a treatment for the virus. Maybe a stupid question but no suggestion that anyone drink anything. I say a stupid question because you'd have think that almost every medical researcher out there would have been a couple steps of Trump. Which they were.

    But maybe I missed something. Perhaps Trump did say something after that about people at home drinking cleaning products. Maybe Spud you could Google up the transcript or video evidence of Trump actually saying something like that. But please don't share any links that don't contain Trump's actual words. We all know there are probably 10,000+ links to people talking about Trump saying it. All I want to see is him actually saying it.

    III. Hospitals overrun in NYC? - It seemed obvious to me that hospitals in NYC were close to the brink at the peak. Some probably reached their capacity, others didn't. Very little of the capacity of the temporary hospitals and the USS Comfort hospital ship was used. But in situations like that you have to err on the side of caution and have some excess capacity available. The bigger question here might be why Gov Cuomo forced nursing homes to accept returning Covid-19 patients rather than putting them into some of these temporary hospitals where they could have been properly quarantined and treated. That one decision probably cost hundreds, maybe thousands, of lives.

    IV. The media, Corona virus deniers and Trump bashing Fox - I accept that they are out there but I haven't come across any people or fringe media who believe this is a hoax or part of a conspiracy. I think any sensible person knows this is real. People are dying. At the same time lots of the media are over-hyping it for there own purposes - it's great for ratings. Then there is the whole political side of it. People of all political persuasions are going to try to spin it to hurt their opponents.

    Trump fighting with Fox is not new. Fox News' CEO Roger Ayles was a Never-Trumper. Fox did a hatchet-job on Trump after he was the Republican nominee as nasty as anything CNN/MSNBC etc. have ever done. The Megan Kelly ambush was part of that. Sean Hannity was attacking him. After Trump survived the all-out assault on his campaign in August 2016 [release of the "grab'em by the pussy" video] there was no chance of removing him as GOP nominee. Ayles eventually got on side.

    V. Bernie and the Democratic Party - Bernie has been screwed over twice by the Democratic establishment. I don't know why people would expect anything different. Sanders isn't even a Democrat except when he wants to run a presidential campaign. The Democratic party is too closely tied to Wall St for its funding to make a move to the radical left. The progressive left of the party needs to ask the AOC question: why am I in the same party as Joe Biden? The bigger question may be: Can the party stay together in the longer term? And the next logical question, could a Socialist/Progressive party work in the USA?

    It depends what you mean by work. They could count on hundreds of millions of dollars from George Soros and his organizations, and some of the Silicon Valley billionaires. They have done extremely well raising money from small $ donors. They have been adept at recruiting, organizing and deploying young white radicals in a volunteer movement. They have significant support in the media. The issue might be do they have a large enough voter base. If the Dems remain a left-of-centre party, there is not enough space for a Soc/Prog party. But, if the Dems were to move back to the centre and take back some of the Republican's base in the white working class, the S/Ps might have a chance.


    Feel free to add any of the other non-football topics from L-O-S threads I missed.
    Last edited by peter.gryphon; 2020-05-23 at 09:04.
    An unofficial source for news & opinions about the University of Guelph football program
    http://gryphonfootball.wordpress.com/

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Back in Niagara
    Posts
    4,020

    Default

    I'm replying here rather than continuing to sidetrack a LofS thread with Covid-19 debate.

    Scientific studies of Covid-19 immunity:

    - Singapore - Duke-NUS Medical School - Articles: Scientists uncover SARS-CoV-2-specific T cell immunity in recovered COVID-19 and SARS patients & "Common Cold” Coronaviruses Could Help Produce Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Immune Cells and the study - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2550-z

    - Sweden - Karolinska Institute & Hospital - Immunity to COVID-19 is probably higher than tests have shown

    - England - Oxford Univ - The impact of host resistance on cumulative mortality and the threshold of herd immunity for SARS-CoV-2
    Great news from new Oxford study. #HerdImmunity Threshold (HIT) is 10–20%.

    “HIT may be greatly reduced if a fraction of the population is unable to transmit the virus due to innate resistance or cross-protection from exposure to seasonal coronaviruses.”
    Many more links to come
    Last edited by peter.gryphon; 2020-07-19 at 21:41.
    An unofficial source for news & opinions about the University of Guelph football program
    http://gryphonfootball.wordpress.com/

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,348

    Default

    You expose yourself badly when you call it the "Wuhan Flu". The only people who do that are pushing a political agenda. Anyone with credibility uses the actual common name of Covid-19.

    It wouldn't be very hard to figure that out since nearly every business in existence has some sort of Covid-19 web page or mail out. If everyone else can figure out the name, why are you struggling?

    It is pretty clear from your bullet points that you're only interested in what Donald Trump thinks about the virus, and how it'll impact US politics. It might surprise you, but most of the world doesn't view the world through a lens of whether it helps Trump get re-elected or not.
    Last edited by gilligan; 2020-07-20 at 14:07.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Back in Niagara
    Posts
    4,020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gilligan View Post
    It is pretty clear from your bullet points that you're only interested in what Donald Trump thinks about the virus, and how it'll impact US politics. It might surprise you, but most of the world doesn't view the world through a lens of whether it helps Trump get re-elected or not.
    FYI, I don't think Donald Trump knows sweet fuq all about the virus.

    FWIW, the actual name of the virus is SARS-CoV-2.
    Last edited by peter.gryphon; 2020-07-20 at 21:09.
    An unofficial source for news & opinions about the University of Guelph football program
    http://gryphonfootball.wordpress.com/

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,348

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peter.gryphon View Post
    FYI, I don't think Donald Trump knows sweet fuq all about the virus.

    FWIW, the actual name of the virus is SARS-CoV-2.
    Correct, and the illness it causes has been named Covid-19.

    However, if you know all of that, why why did you call it Wuhan Flu? Not only do you know that is not its name, you also appear to know it isn't a flu virus at all.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Back in Niagara
    Posts
    4,020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gilligan View Post
    Correct, and the illness it causes has been named Covid-19.

    However, if you know all of that, why why did you call it Wuhan Flu? Not only do you know that is not its name, you also appear to know it isn't a flu virus at all.
    I wrote that 2 months ago. I was trying to summarize arguments made by multiple people in order to redirect them from football threads and Wuhan Flu was a term that had been used prior, probably by our friend Hollywood. I'm more than happy to talk about or debate on any of these issues. I just didn't think it should sidetrack football discussions.
    An unofficial source for news & opinions about the University of Guelph football program
    http://gryphonfootball.wordpress.com/

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Back in Niagara
    Posts
    4,020

    Default

    An unofficial source for news & opinions about the University of Guelph football program
    http://gryphonfootball.wordpress.com/

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,348

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peter.gryphon View Post
    True. They are obviously less paralyzed by fear than the rest of Canada.

    Re. the CJFL - the Football Canada Return to Play document reads like some bureaucratic, cover-your-ass creation you expect from government. I re-read it recently, when Football Ontario was stalling on the announcement of their re-opening guidelines. It was really disheartening and pretty obvious that they were ready to throw in the towel on the 2020 season.

    For fuq's sake, minor football is played outdoors where almost no transmission occurs = LOW RISK. The participants are in age groups that have almost NO RISK even if they were to become infected. And the experts tell us, up to puberty there is a very LOW RISK of a young person transmitting virus to anyone else. Even if an asymptomatic 12-yr-old could spread the virus to another player, acc to the experts, they would have to be "in close proximity to each other for an extended period of time", 15-20 minutes minimum. That just doesn't happen out on a football field.

    Add it all up, LOW RISK + NO RISK + LOW RISK + NO RISK = Quebec is the only jurisdiction in Canada that really understands risk management.

    Sure, there are some potentially problematic issues at the OPFL, CJFL, university levels because of indoor facilities (locker rooms, dining halls, meeting rooms, weight rooms, etc.) and transportation but youth tackle and flag football can be played without any of those things.
    The nonsense that kids are not able to be affected or spread the virus is so untrue and harmful that Facebook and Twitter have started taking down Trump campaign posts about it (and Facebook *never* takes down anything of Trump's, until now). However, I'm not too worried about many football board members taking scientific advice from you, given that you were also the one floating the idea Montreal would be the safest place to play because they're near herd immunity (even though only around 3% of the population of Montreal has been infected). It is pretty clear that you do not get your information from credible sources.

    You also seem to be implying that CJFL chickened out and just wanted to cancel all along, but that makes zero sense given that they waited months longer than anyone else to cancel (even though their season starts sooner). They clearly wanted to play this year, especially given the unique opportunity available to them with USports not playing. The problem is, the return to sport guidelines of most provinces they play in just don't allow for it. The guidelines in the provinces I've looked at are fairly similar to the return to sport plan in Australia (which is one of the best developed and researched plans in the world). If a sport chooses to go against their provincial health guidelines and plays anyhow, they'll have hard time getting insurance or sanctioning, and their board members risk getting sued into the ground if it goes south. For a board member cancelling isn't about cowardice at all, it is about stepping back and looking at the big picture and fulfilling their duties to the organization using some common sense.

    The one thing you're right about is that there is some room for youth football to operate. Teams can be smaller, training and facility needs are different, and many locations can get in games without requiring inter-region travel. There is also the possibility of adapting to play 6 man or 9 man football to further lower the team/gathering sizes, while also increasing the number of teams in the local area. Saskatchewan has always had success developing kids with that format, so it isn't surprising that many other minor football organizations are looking at the idea as a way to play safely during a pandemic. Some clubs with a lot of players are even mulling over the idea of doing leagues just within themselves, just to get the kids playing.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    10 minutes by car from PEPS Stadium
    Posts
    4,987

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gilligan View Post
    The nonsense that kids are not able to be affected or spread the virus is so untrue and harmful that Facebook and Twitter have started taking down Trump campaign posts about it (and Facebook *never* takes down anything of Trump's, until now). However, I'm not too worried about many football board members taking scientific advice from you, given that you were also the one floating the idea Montreal would be the safest place to play because they're near herd immunity (even though only around 3% of the population of Montreal has been infected). It is pretty clear that you do not get your information from credible sources.
    It's not nonsense at all. Look at the numbers coldly and tell me without laughing that kids and teens are affected by the coronavirus: In Québec, kids and teens (up to 20 years old) only represent 0.7% of hospitalizations, 0.0 % of intensive care cases and 0.0% of the deaths. There's been no deaths at all in these age categories out of the 5687 recorded so far in Québec. I don't know what your "credible sources" are but mine are the National Public Health Institute of Québec and the Québec Ministry of Health.
    Rouge et Or all the way!

    "A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall" - Vince Lombardi

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Kincardine
    Posts
    4,289

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sylven View Post
    It's not nonsense at all. Look at the numbers coldly and tell me without laughing that kids and teens are affected by the coronavirus: In Québec, kids and teens (up to 20 years old) only represent 0.7% of hospitalizations, 0.0 % of intensive care cases and 0.0% of the deaths. There's been no deaths at all in these age categories out of the 5687 recorded so far in Québec. I don't know what your "credible sources" are but mine are the National Public Health Institute of Québec and the Québec Ministry of Health.
    Oh and how are these aged 5-16 kids/teens going to get to and from practices, games etc?


    That's right....parents, family, etc....all of which are in a higher age demographic that's more susceptible to greater risk.
    2019: 10 weeks, 17 games, 6,587kms.
    2018: 11 weeks, 17 games, 7,952kms. (preseason incl.)
    2017: 12 weeks, 21 games, 9,675kms. (preseason incl.)
    2016: 14 weeks, 18 games, 9,791kms. (preseason incl.)
    2015: 11 weeks, 16 games, 6,247kms.
    .......
    2009: 12 weeks, 19 games, 11,063kms.
    2008: 12 weeks, 19 games, 6,191kms.
    2007: 11 weeks, 18 games and 7,531kms.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    10 minutes by car from PEPS Stadium
    Posts
    4,987

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chappy View Post
    Oh and how are these aged 5-16 kids/teens going to get to and from practices, games etc?

    That's right....parents, family, etc....all of which are in a higher age demographic that's more susceptible to greater risk.
    The same way they go their baseball and soccer practices and games right now! And there's no problem with that now, so why would it be a problem with football this Fall?

    A bit but not by much. Again look at the stats coldly and leave your fear behind. If you're under 60 without health problems, the risks that you run are extremely low. An Italian study found that "73.9% of all infected individuals aged less than 60 years did not develop symptoms". Almost three quarters not intensive care, not hospitalization, not even a bad flu, just no symptoms at all!!!

    Again, according to stats from the Québec governement, people under 60 only represent 19.1% of hospitalizations and 2.3% of deaths. In Québec, 89.3% of the patients hospitalized had a preexisting chronic disease (what is called a co-morbidity). The data is not available for deaths but I would presume it's logically higher and probably very close to 100%.

    But to start with, you need to catch it, which is becoming something of a little statistical feat in a lot of regions across the country as the number of remaining actives cases steadily go down. For example, there's 71 left in Québec City (population of 750,000), the majority in long-term care centres and nursing homes. If you don't work or visit one of these, it's the utmost bad luck to catch it on the street.
    Rouge et Or all the way!

    "A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall" - Vince Lombardi

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Québec city
    Posts
    1,006

    Default

    Read this paper, try to understand it and stop making a fool of yourself with your stupid stats.
    Start looking at the entire forest instead of staring at the tree in front of you.
    You are blinded by your limited comprehension of the stats that you are applying without any rationale just to support your narrow vision.

    https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2769235

    And, let me remind you, that this world-wide pandemic started with ONE case!!!!! ONE!!!! We must have been pretty unlucky indeed to develop a pandemic.
    Contagions go beyond stats!
    It is not because cases are going down that suddenly all will be good. They are closing countries that were doing great, if not better than us just weeks ago!

    You are like a man falling down from the sky with no chute saying so far so good...

    Smart up man!
    Last edited by Wildtype; 2020-08-08 at 12:28. Reason: typos
    Laval is a palindrome!!! How can we lose???

    "Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something."
    - Plato

    "Victory belongs to the most persevering."
    - Napoleon Bonaparte

    "If winning isn't everything, why do they keep score?"
    - Vince Lombardi

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,348

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sylven View Post
    It's not nonsense at all. Look at the numbers coldly and tell me without laughing that kids and teens are affected by the coronavirus: In Québec, kids and teens (up to 20 years old) only represent 0.7% of hospitalizations, 0.0 % of intensive care cases and 0.0% of the deaths. There's been no deaths at all in these age categories out of the 5687 recorded so far in Québec. I don't know what your "credible sources" are but mine are the National Public Health Institute of Québec and the Québec Ministry of Health.
    In Israel, reopening the schools was by far the largest vector of new infections in their second wave.

    Just because most kids can fight the virus off without needing to go to the hospital doesn't mean we should start infecting them with it. We don't yet know if there is long term organ damage or developmental problems in kids who recover. More importantly, we know that even if it doesn't harm the kids, they can be drivers of new waves of infection in the larger population, and that any new waves of infection will lead to more hospitalisations and deaths for the rest of us.

    Also, even though Quebec has no deaths in that age category, other places have. The virus can and does kill children, just at a much lesser rate than adults. It spreads readily in children. Peter (and Trump) keep claiming that children are completely immune and can't spread the virus. The claim is blatantly false. There are differences in how the virus impacts them, and likely even differences in how it spreads between them, but we know they are not immune.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Back in Niagara
    Posts
    4,020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gilligan View Post
    In Israel, reopening the schools was by far the largest vector of new infections in their second wave.
    If that is true, then it makes Israel a entirely unique situation. There are dozens of other countries that successfully re-opened schools. The most relevant example for Canadian provinces has to be the successful school re-opening in Quebec. So too, for football. If someone were on the executive of a provincial governing body and personally inclined not to approve play in 2020 because they accepted the prevailing media narrative, they really ought to examine the restarting of sports in Quebec. Football Quebec's actual experience with youth football in 2020 should outweigh the speculation, hypotheticals and narrative when making decisions.


    Quote Originally Posted by gilligan View Post
    Just because most kids can fight the virus off without needing to go to the hospital doesn't mean we should start infecting them with it. We don't yet know if there is long term organ damage or developmental problems in kids who recover. More importantly, we know that even if it doesn't harm the kids, they can be drivers of new waves of infection in the larger population, and that any new waves of infection will lead to more hospitalisations and deaths for the rest of us.

    Also, even though Quebec has no deaths in that age category, other places have. The virus can and does kill children, just at a much lesser rate than adults. It spreads readily in children. Peter (and Trump) keep claiming that children are completely immune and can't spread the virus. The claim is blatantly false. There are differences in how the virus impacts them, and likely even differences in how it spreads between them, but we know they are not immune.
    The odds of a child dying from Covid-19 are one in a million according to Dr Robert Redfield, head of the CDC.

    We know that pediatricians overwhelmingly recommend that children return to school full-time because the harm of keeping them out of school is much greater than the risks of Covid-19, and has more long term impacts than those associated with Covid-19.

    Scientists and doctors have said repeatedly that children are NOT drivers of this pandemic.

    Gilligan, can you answer a simple question: if a person received significant exposure to the virus but did not become infected, are they immune to it?

    What do I mean by "significant exposure"? Think of a married couple living and sleeping together where one partner is infected. Or, children living in a home with an asymptomatic parent during lockdown.
    Last edited by peter.gryphon; 2020-08-09 at 03:01. Reason: grammar
    An unofficial source for news & opinions about the University of Guelph football program
    http://gryphonfootball.wordpress.com/

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Back in Niagara
    Posts
    4,020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gilligan View Post
    You also seem to be implying that CJFL chickened out and just wanted to cancel all along, but that makes zero sense given that they waited months longer than anyone else to cancel (even though their season starts sooner). They clearly wanted to play this year, especially given the unique opportunity available to them with USports not playing. The problem is, the return to sport guidelines of most provinces they play in just don't allow for it. The guidelines in the provinces I've looked at are fairly similar to the return to sport plan in Australia (which is one of the best developed and researched plans in the world). If a sport chooses to go against their provincial health guidelines and plays anyhow, they'll have hard time getting insurance or sanctioning, and their board members risk getting sued into the ground if it goes south. For a board member cancelling isn't about cowardice at all, it is about stepping back and looking at the big picture and fulfilling their duties to the organization using some common sense.
    I believe the CJFL really did want to play, just as most football organizations in Ontario want to play. But unlike Quebec these leagues don't have the support behind them they need to be able to go ahead. Flag football and skills camps may be all we see in 2020. One of the local flag football leagues pushed back their start date by two weeks because Football Ontario was slow to act after the province moved to Stage 3.
    An unofficial source for news & opinions about the University of Guelph football program
    http://gryphonfootball.wordpress.com/

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    10 minutes by car from PEPS Stadium
    Posts
    4,987

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gilligan View Post
    It is really strange that Quebec is way ahead of everywhere else in Football Canada's return to play steps, despite leading the nation in infections. If I recall correctly, most provinces started their return to play at an early stage, whereas Quebec skipped to a late stage right off the bat. It is also strange that every peer league has cancelled already, whereas RSEQ has not.

    It seems risk management in Quebec is done entirely different than everywhere else. Perhaps that difference in philosophy is why the province was hit hardest by Covid to begin with.
    Again, the message is really hard to go through with you, don't mix the whole province with Montréal. The situation is totally under control in most regions of the province, including National Capital (Québec City) and Estrie (Sherbrooke) where three teams out of six are located. Football Québec prepared a solid protocol (did you bother to read it at least?) for the return to competition and the governmental authorities approved it. I don't think they're a bunch of idiots as you seem to depict them.

    By everywhere else, you must mean only Canada because in the States, where the situation is much much much worse than here, NCAA is planning to go ahead with a relatively normal season. Another bunch of total idiots I guess...

    Also, everywhere else in Canada, conferences took really premature decisions more than three months before the beginning of the season! Had they done the right thing to wait for development and make a decision these days, it's very likely they would have taken a different path. Of course, the situation has changed drastically, for the best, since May. That's why all the provincial governments have greatly eased the lockdown measures in place since then.
    Last edited by Sylven; 2020-08-07 at 05:58. Reason: typo
    Rouge et Or all the way!

    "A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall" - Vince Lombardi

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,348

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sylven View Post
    Again, the message is really hard to go through with you, don't mix the whole province with Montréal. The situation is totally under control in most regions of the province, including National Capital (Québec City) and Estrie (Sherbrooke) where three teams out of six are located. Football Québec prepared a solid protocol (did you bother to read it at least?) for the return to competition and the governmental authorities approved it. I don't think they're a bunch of idiots as you seem to depict them.

    By everywhere else, you must mean only Canada because in the States, where the situation is much much much worse than here, NCAA is planning to go ahead with a relatively normal season. Another bunch of total idiots I guess...

    Also, everywhere else in Canada, conferences took really premature decisions more than three months before the beginning of the season! Had they done the right thing to wait for development and make a decision these days, it's very likely they would have taken a different path. Of course, the situation has changed drastically, for the best, since May. That's why all the provincial governments have greatly eased the lockdown measures in place since then.
    You're still not getting that Quebec outside of Montreal is not much different than the rest of Canada outside of Montreal. Yet the rest of Canada has return to sport guidelines in place that are far more restrictive than Quebec. The danger is no different, yet the response very much is.

    You're also ignoring the fact that 50% of RSEQ teams are in Montreal! So if we're talking about whether RSEQ football should play, wouldn't Montreal factor into the discussion? And if we're talking about the provinces return to sport guidelines, wouldn't that include Montreal as well?
    Last edited by gilligan; 2020-08-07 at 14:01. Reason: typo

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    10 minutes by car from PEPS Stadium
    Posts
    4,987

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gilligan View Post
    You're still not getting that Quebec outside of Montreal is not much different than the rest of Canada outside of Montreal. Yet the rest of Canada has return to sport guidelines in place that are far more restrictive than Quebec. The danger is no different, yet the response very much is.
    Well, if that's the case, the other provinces are sacrificing the phyisical and mental health of their youth for a geriatric disease that doesn't concern them. Also, they don't follow the recommendations of pediatricians associations around the world that say kids should resume school and sports. May I remind you that you have more chances of dying hit by lightning than of coronavirus if you're under 30.

    Just watch the massive school dropout that will happen this Fall. Some cégeps are already ringing the bell in Québec but what solutions are they proposing? More money for technological resources to accompany students for online classes... They don't seem to understand that no matter the resources, online classes just don't interest some late teens and young adults. They need human contacts at this age. For a lot of them, studying in their basements will only get them depressed if not downright suicidal. It's a tragedy what we're imposing to these kids for no scientific reason.

    Instead, our governments should spend their money and efforts on measures really protecting the vulnerable persons, i.e. people over 70. That's what the stats are clearly showing for those who bother to read them and can understand them. We've clearly seen the benefits when the Québec governement tried to clean up the terrible mess in long-term care centres, with the new cases, hospitalizations and death dropping substantially. That's where the focus should be not on elementary and high schools. As Pink Floyd used to sing, leave them kids alone.
    Rouge et Or all the way!

    "A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall" - Vince Lombardi

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    584

    Default

    I read this and listen to this and its almost like STFU. WE have just started opening up, schools are not in session, and a very small portion of the population in Canada disagrees with the restrictions we are all living under. Ontario just this past week allowed stage 3 in the larger centre's. Some facts most of you seem to ignore when you want to open up a game so you can sit back and have a beer and watch
    1) some of us are compromised, even if you are not
    2) restrictions have just been lifted, but the borders are still closed and like usual we have a sleeping storm south of us that is clamoring to come up here.
    3) its not about the kids getting sick. Its about protecting the vulnerable, and the chain of people whom can come in contact with them
    4) its been very clearly stated that nobody yet really knows about the rate of transmission from children - there has not been enough data to formulate an educated decision
    5) There is enough concern about kids going back to school. Games are way below that priority
    6) For GAWDS sake - even hockey is not starting up. and you want to start up what is fast becoming a fringe sport.
    7) Baseball - not being in a bubble (which like NCAA is about money) is pretty F 'ed up right now. the
    8) Covid mutates. It has been well documented that the strain in Wuhan was different than the strain that migrated to NY from Europe. With that as a basis, its entirely possible that the strain in the USA, or Brazil or India could also be a different mutation

    We miss one season. None of us like that but if we miss one season and as a society/nation/world through that learn how to deal with things like this going forwards, its well worth it. We are still wearing masks, and maintaining 6 feet, and small circles for the most part. I understand the frustration, but trying to argue how it shouldn't matter is very Amercian!

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    10 minutes by car from PEPS Stadium
    Posts
    4,987

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Football 101 View Post
    6) For GAWDS sake - even hockey is not starting up. and you want to start up what is fast becoming a fringe sport.
    I don't know about Ontario but in Québec, hockey has started up several weeks ago...

    Only practices to begin and now they're playing 4 on 4 in Spring leagues mutated to Summer leagues. Nothing to report so far and it's an indoor sport with the increased risks that come with it. Regular hockey with normal games (5 on 5) is planned to go ahead in September as usual, with hockey conditioning camps just a couple of weeks away.

    No more tournaments and very likley less interregional travel but that's about it. For now, up to 250 people are allowed in the stands. I'm sure the Quebec Junior Major Hockey League is working hard to have that number increased when their season starts in October.
    Rouge et Or all the way!

    "A school without football is in danger of deteriorating into a medieval study hall" - Vince Lombardi

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    London
    Posts
    381

    Default

    It's amazing the amount of Doctors, Scientists and Health Professionals posting on here.... .

    Thank Science we people don't come here to be convinced that we need to return to University ball....

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,348

    Default

    One main difference between Israel and other nations that successfully reopened schools is that Israel did not limit classroom sizes. There is also a difference in how much each nation opened up everything else outside of the schools. I'm also pretty sure Israel was not the only place where classrooms reopened and then had to close them again. It isn't like there is 1 failure and 100 successes or something.

    Thus far, most Canadian school reopening plans does nothing to limit classroom sizes. We're going in with the same plan and hoping for a different result. For that to work, we'd need to nearly eliminate the spread of the virus outside the schools, so that the chances of it getting in and spreading become very low. If community spread starts to flare up again and we have schools open with full classrooms, the spread in schools will become a problem real fast.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,348

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sylven View Post
    Well, if that's the case, the other provinces are sacrificing the phyisical and mental health of their youth for a geriatric disease that doesn't concern them. Also, they don't follow the recommendations of pediatricians associations around the world that say kids should resume school and sports. May I remind you that you have more chances of dying hit by lightning than of coronavirus if you're under 30.

    Just watch the massive school dropout that will happen this Fall. Some cégeps are already ringing the bell in Québec but what solutions are they proposing? More money for technological resources to accompany students for online classes... They don't seem to understand that no matter the resources, online classes just don't interest some late teens and young adults. They need human contacts at this age. For a lot of them, studying in their basements will only get them depressed if not downright suicidal. It's a tragedy what we're imposing to these kids for no scientific reason.

    Instead, our governments should spend their money and efforts on measures really protecting the vulnerable persons, i.e. people over 70. That's what the stats are clearly showing for those who bother to read them and can understand them. We've clearly seen the benefits when the Québec governement tried to clean up the terrible mess in long-term care centres, with the new cases, hospitalizations and death dropping substantially. That's where the focus should be not on elementary and high schools. As Pink Floyd used to sing, leave them kids alone.
    Your characterization of the virus as a geriatric disease is not shared by the medical community.

    In any case, I don't think a reasonable response to this virus is to let everyone else spread it freely, and then try to lock away the most vulnerable people from any human contact. For the most part, our society is far too integrated for such an approach to work. If the virus starts burning through the under 30 population, then it'll also lead to more vulnerable people being exposed as well. Most kids may not die, but some of their parents will, as would many of their grandparents.

    Sure, socialization is important, but during a pandemic it must be done more carefully.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    2,348

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by peter.gryphon View Post
    Gilligan, can you answer a simple question: if a person received significant exposure to the virus but did not become infected, are they immune to it?
    Children are becoming infected and are spreading the disease. There is some debate as to how much, with some studies saying it is at about the same rate as adults, but others suggesting it is a lower rate.

    It is a bit hard to tell because the symptoms are often quite mild in children, so they're generally under-counted. The big difference is kids rarely end up in the ICU or die from it. That doesn't mean they're immune.

    If you misrepresent what "immunity" in the way you're trying to, then we're almost all immune to every disease. Most people are never hospitalized or killed when they're infected with any disease. Surviving the illness isn't "immunity".

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Back in Niagara
    Posts
    4,020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gilligan View Post
    Children are becoming infected and are spreading the disease. There is some debate as to how much, with some studies saying it is at about the same rate as adults, but others suggesting it is a lower rate.

    It is a bit hard to tell because the symptoms are often quite mild in children, so they're generally under-counted. The big difference is kids rarely end up in the ICU or die from it. That doesn't mean they're immune.

    If you misrepresent what "immunity" in the way you're trying to, then we're almost all immune to every disease. Most people are never hospitalized or killed when they're infected with any disease. Surviving the illness isn't "immunity".
    First, IMHO immunity is best understood as a continuum, not as a yes-no binary.

    Second, with respect to the examples I was talking about, a person with mild symptoms or who was asymptomatic is still going to test positive for Covid19.

    I'm asking you if you believe that a spouse or a child who was "locked up" with an infected person for an extended period of time and still tested negative for Covid19 is immune to the virus. This is a yes/no binary choice.

    If a person's immune system can fight off the virus to the extent that they never show a symptom, are they immune or not immune? Or, can you acknowledge that some people may have full immunity and others partial immunity? I.e. - immunity is a continuum and not a binary.
    An unofficial source for news & opinions about the University of Guelph football program
    http://gryphonfootball.wordpress.com/

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •