On the Children

[Latrinsorm]

COVID does not tend to kill children as much as it kills adults and older. Per the CDC (https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Death-Counts-by-Sex-Age-and-S/9bhg-hcku) the least vulnerable age group is newborns, which is unusual in that most of the time a newborn is more likely to die than children all the way up to 16. For children age 1-14, it has accounted for only 0.7% of deaths from February to August 8th compared to 9% of total deaths, and while we'll be sending people older than 14 to school overall the curve looks like this:

https://imgur.com/k9mXnCv.png

So clearly children are at much lower risk of COVID deaths than adults are at risk of COVID deaths. But how much lower risk are they compared to other diseases that kill children? For that we turn to CDC WONDER (https://wonder.cdc.gov/ucd-icd10.html) and find that from 1999-2018 cancer is by far and away the most at 13% of all deaths in this age bracket, then infantile cerebral palsy at 2.2%, then predominantly allergic asthma 1.1%, and that's it.

COVID is already the #4 deadliest disease among children.

And, clearly, since a total of 1 American died of COVID in February and we're well above our overall average of 789 daily deaths, it'll probably end up #3.

.

Okay, but we know that the only two outcomes aren't death and everything being perfect. Do we have data on other outcomes? Yes! (https://downloads.aap.org/AAP/PDF/AAP%20and%20CHA%20-%20Children%20and%20COVID-19%20State%20Data%20Report%207.30.20%20FINAL.pdf) 2% of children who contract COVID end up hospitalized. If a child is in a class with 50 students, one of them will be hospitalized.

But once they get out everything's fine, right? Except for 60% (https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/fullarticle/2768916) of COVID survivors developing myocarditis, aka the thing that can cause an apparently healthy young person doing vigorous exercise like Reggie Lewis or Hank Gather to abruptly drop dead, sure! The good news is that myocarditis of this kind does tend to go away on its own after a few months. The bad news is that it develops "independent of preexisting conditions, severity and overall course of the acute illness". Whether the child is hospitalized for weeks or never even knows they had the disease they're are at the exact same risk. You may have heard about how college sports are getting cancelled left and right - turns out they've already identified a dozen (https://twitter.com/pinepaula/status/1293900327608102913?s=21) players with myocarditis from COVID.

.

.

And this is if we changed nothing after August 8th.

And people opened schools in person and will continue to do so.

Seems bad! Seems like a bad plan.

[Sighisoara]

I usually try to avoid shitting on people here, but this is fucking idiotic. Absolutely moronic.

[Tgo01]

COVID is already the #4 deadliest disease among children.

Not even the top 4 cause of death among children, but specifically the top 4 deadliest disease among children?

Nice fear mongering.

[Latrinsorm]

Not even the top 4 cause of death among children, but specifically the top 4 deadliest disease among children?

Nice fear mongering.

For once you did read what I actually said! So proud of you. :D

[Tgo01]

For once you did read what I actually said! So proud of you. :D

To be fair I skimmed your post again but that part jumped out at me like "WHOA!"

[Sighisoara]

2% of children who contract COVID end up hospitalized. If a child is in a class with 50 students, one of them will be hospitalized.

First, you are assuming facts which are simply inaccurate. Second, this is not how statistics work.


But once they get out everything's fine, right? Except for 60% (https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/fullarticle/2768916) of COVID survivors developing myocarditis, aka the thing that can cause an apparently healthy young person doing vigorous exercise like Reggie Lewis or Hank Gather to abruptly drop dead, sure!

You should check your sources more closely. That study is full of problems. Don't take it from me, but from this guy (https://twitter.com/venkmurthy/status/1294406748678365191). He's a cardiologist at the University of Michigan, and he's specifically referencing your cited source. Moreover, myocarditis can be caused by ANY infection, even the common cold. You're being disingenuous. Read the whole thread, it's quite interesting.

Also, on the subject of colleges cancelling fall sports, it has nothing to do with COVID and it has everything to do with athletes seeking to collectively bargain. There's a reason that the BIG and Pac-12 are the only P-5 conferences to cancel.

[Tgo01]

Moreover, myocarditis can be caused by ANY infection, even the common cold.

This is what gets me about all of the fear mongering going on with COVID-19.

"OMG! You can spread the virus even if you aren't showing symptoms!"

Yes, this is true with many viruses, even the seasonal flu.

"OMG! Studies show even if you recover from COVID-19 it could have lingering effects on your health!"

Once again yes, this is true with many viruses, including the seasonal flu. In fact we don't even know what all of the lingering health effects from the flu are because it has never been extensively studied, yet people act like this is something unique with COVID-19.

This isn't to say we shouldn't be as careful as possible, but people need to stop acting like COVID-19 is unique from a virus perspective, because it isn't, it's just new, that is literally it.

When will all of this madness end?

[Latrinsorm]

First, you are assuming facts which are simply inaccurate. Second, this is not how statistics work.



You should check your sources more closely. That study is full of problems. Don't take it from me, but from this guy (https://twitter.com/venkmurthy/status/1294406748678365191). He's a cardiologist at the University of Michigan, and he's specifically referencing your cited source. Moreover, myocarditis can be caused by ANY infection, even the common cold. You're being disingenuous. Read the whole thread, it's quite interesting.

Also, on the subject of colleges cancelling fall sports, it has nothing to do with COVID and it has everything to do with athletes seeking to collectively bargain. There's a reason that the BIG and Pac-12 are the only P-5 conferences to cancel.

The blue text denotes a hyper-link, in this case linking to a joint report from the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Children's Hospital Association. I am not "assuming", I am simply relaying information.

I hope you see the humor in challenging a peer reviewed study with a Twitter thread. Would you feel better if I cited two other MDs (https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/fullarticle/2768915) who themselves cite another peer-reviewed study (https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/fullarticle/2768914) as further buttressing the one I cited? I have read the thread - I don't know what CMF LVEF% is, or what a reasonable band for it is, which as near as I can tell is Professor Francis' one and only problem with the study. I am confident he knows what they are, but I have no confidence he knows it better than Drs. Puntmann, Yancy, Lindner, et al. Why would I?

Let us consider a house. A fire in the house can be caused by bad wiring, lightning strikes, or exploding cellular telephones. It can also be caused by someone dousing the house in gasoline and lighting a match. If prevalence of the latter has dramatically increased recently (e.g. a serial arsonist), does pointing that out imply or insinuate in any way that the former do not or can not occur? Or is it simply saying "hey folks, there's an unusual increase in this one specific type of risk."

As to conferences, there are no athlete unions in any conference and arguably there is no legal basis for them in the first place, but the conferences who have canceled are largely based in states that have taken the coronavirus seriously (i.e. the North and West), and the conferences who haven't are largely based in those that haven't (i.e. the South). It seems like geography is the more parsimonious explanation, don't you think?

[Latrinsorm]

This is what gets me about all of the fear mongering going on with COVID-19.

"OMG! You can spread the virus even if you aren't showing symptoms!"

Yes, this is true with many viruses, even the seasonal flu.

"OMG! Studies show even if you recover from COVID-19 it could have lingering effects on your health!"

Once again yes, this is true with many viruses, including the seasonal flu. In fact we don't even know what all of the lingering health effects from the flu are because it has never been extensively studied, yet people act like this is something unique with COVID-19.

This isn't to say we shouldn't be as careful as possible, but people need to stop acting like COVID-19 is unique from a virus perspective, because it isn't, it's just new, that is literally it.

When will all of this madness end?

And you were doing so well. Alas.

I didn't say "COVID could have lingering effects on your health", I cited a specific lingering effect that coronavirus is PROVEN to have, AND specifically how common it is. I don't know who told you "we" don't know what the lingering health effects from the flu are, but I can assure you they have been studied and they are nowhere near this. If you like I can provide the information for you to skim over / ignore, but why not skip that step this time and just admit I'm right? :D

You would struggle less if you stopped basing your takes on what people are "acting like" and started just listening to what they actually say. We have words and numbers for a reason - they work! If you have to invent an "acting like" straw man to keep from agreeing, why not just agree? Seems like an awful waste of your time and energy to me.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

2% of children who contract COVID end up hospitalized. If a child is in a class with 50 students, one of them will be hospitalized.

I take back when I said chicken little was book smart.

[Tgo01]

I don't know who told you "we" don't know what the lingering health effects from the flu are

Good because I didn't say that. I said "we don't even know what all of the lingering health effects from the flu are."

Even if "we" as in the experts knew all of it (which they don't), "we" as in the general population don't because the lingering effects of the flu isn't something that is hyped up nearly as much as COVID-19 is.

At some point you have to ask yourself why? Why do we shutdown the entire world for months and seriously talk about keeping schools shutdown for months longer when we don't do anything nearly that drastic for the flu which has killed far more people than COVID-19 has.

We don't point to studies about lingering effects from the seasonal flu and say "Whoa now! No more sports for you!" but we do for COVID-19.

We don't keep beaches, restaurants, bars, movie theaters, or anything closed when flu season rolls around, yet in a lot of areas those places are still closed down because of COVID-19.

We don't have a ticker running on cable "news" channels with updates on how many people have died to the flu like a bunch of ghouls.

We don't fear monger the shit out of everyone about the flu mutating like a sonofabitch yet we fear monger the shit out of it whenever COVID-19 changes slightly.

And before you cry "But...but flu has a vaccine!" The flu vaccine is typically only about 30%-50% effective and the flu itself is treated as such a non-issue that many people don't even bother getting the flu vaccine every year, even the people who are most vulnerable.

[Sighisoara]

The blue text denotes a hyper-link, in this case linking to a joint report from the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Children's Hospital Association. I am not "assuming", I am simply relaying information.

I hope you see the humor in challenging a peer reviewed study with a Twitter thread. Would you feel better if I cited two other MDs (https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/fullarticle/2768915) who themselves cite another peer-reviewed study (https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/fullarticle/2768914) as further buttressing the one I cited? I have read the thread - I don't know what CMF LVEF% is, or what a reasonable band for it is, which as near as I can tell is Professor Francis' one and only problem with the study. I am confident he knows what they are, but I have no confidence he knows it better than Drs. Puntmann, Yancy, Lindner, et al. Why would I?

Let us consider a house. A fire in the house can be caused by bad wiring, lightning strikes, or exploding cellular telephones. It can also be caused by someone dousing the house in gasoline and lighting a match. If prevalence of the latter has dramatically increased recently (e.g. a serial arsonist), does pointing that out imply or insinuate in any way that the former do not or can not occur? Or is it simply saying "hey folks, there's an unusual increase in this one specific type of risk."

As to conferences, there are no athlete unions in any conference and arguably there is no legal basis for them in the first place, but the conferences who have canceled are largely based in states that have taken the coronavirus seriously (i.e. the North and West), and the conferences who haven't are largely based in those that haven't (i.e. the South). It seems like geography is the more parsimonious explanation, don't you think?

You are assuming a 100% infection rate in your example. That is virtually impossible. You’re not simply “relaying information,” you’re making shit up.

Had you bothered to read what I cited, you would see that Dr. Murthy lists multiple problems with your study. I provided the Twitter thread because I thought it would provide you with a concise argument as to the fallacy you quoted. It’s an easy read, you should try it.

You can think that the colleges closing is based upon geography all you like, you’re still very, very wrong. A simple rule when dealing with colleges, and more specifically athletic departments, when they say it’s about the kids, what they mean is it’s about the money. Or, you can just continue to make shit up that fits your narrative.

[Latrinsorm]

Good because I didn't say that. I said "we don't even know what all of the lingering health effects from the flu are."

Even if "we" as in the experts knew all of it (which they don't), "we" as in the general population don't because the lingering effects of the flu isn't something that is hyped up nearly as much as COVID-19 is.

At some point you have to ask yourself why? Why do we shutdown the entire world for months and seriously talk about keeping schools shutdown for months longer when we don't do anything nearly that drastic for the flu which has killed far more people than COVID-19 has.

We don't point to studies about lingering effects from the seasonal flu and say "Whoa now! No more sports for you!" but we do for COVID-19.

We don't keep beaches, restaurants, bars, movie theaters, or anything closed when flu season rolls around, yet in a lot of areas those places are still closed down because of COVID-19.

We don't have a ticker running on cable "news" channels with updates on how many people have died to the flu like a bunch of ghouls.

We don't fear monger the shit out of everyone about the flu mutating like a sonofabitch yet we fear monger the shit out of it whenever COVID-19 changes slightly.

And before you cry "But...but flu has a vaccine!" The flu vaccine is typically only about 30%-50% effective and the flu itself is treated as such a non-issue that many people don't even bother getting the flu vaccine every year, even the people who are most vulnerable.

Cost benefit analysis requires looking at both cost and benefit.
In one scenario, you spend $50 and get 1 candy bar.
In the second scenario, you spend $50 and get 100 candy bars.
It is internally consistent for you to make the second purchase and not the first, because while the cost is the same the benefit is 100x higher.

Now, we know COVID-19 is around ten times deadlier than the flu, and we know at the start of the pandemic absolutely no one had any immunity to the it (natural or vaccine), so treating COVID-19 like the flu would have resulted in around 3,300,000 deaths.

We also know how effective lockdown was at preventing the flu:

https://imgur.com/HTQNuhk.png

Over the past three flu seasons we've averaged 17,000 flu cases since April. This year we've had 600. This reduction if deployed over a full flu season would result in saving about 35,000 lives of the 37,000 lost to the flu in each of the last three years per the CDC (https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/index.html).

Technically the benefit we're seeing from lockdown vs. COVID compared to lockdown vs. flu is only 94x and not 100x, but you get the idea, right? Gotta look at cost AND benefit.

[Latrinsorm]

You are assuming a 100% infection rate in your example. That is virtually impossible. You’re not simply “relaying information,” you’re making shit up.

Had you bothered to read what I cited, you would see that Dr. Murthy lists multiple problems with your study. I provided the Twitter thread because I thought it would provide you with a concise argument as to the fallacy you quoted. It’s an easy read, you should try it.

You can think that the colleges closing is based upon geography all you like, you’re still very, very wrong. A simple rule when dealing with colleges, and more specifically athletic departments, when they say it’s about the kids, what they mean is it’s about the money. Or, you can just continue to make shit up that fits your narrative.

I'm not sure which part of my post you're referring to, but I don't believe I am. For example the COVID deaths I cited are not projections, they're those that have already been confirmed by the CDC.

I thought that by "a cardiologist" you were referring to Professor Francis as opposed to Dr. Murthy, since the former lists cardiology and a scholastic credential in his Twitter handle and the latter doesn't. Honest mistake, although to be honest having looked at both I find Professor Francis' argument far more compelling, and honestly I'm not sure what you see from Dr. Murthy that fundamentally changes what I said earlier, if I'm being honest. Example: "Also, about 1/6 of the normal controls have LGE or scar in their heart muscle. I suppose this is possible, but seems like quite a lot for normal people to me." Given that the study has undergone peer review and been corroborated by another one that also has, isn't it reasonable to conclude that what the doctor supposes is possible was in fact the case?

Of course it's about the money - and where would those schools face lawsuits, in this case for wrongful death? Where for the most part do they draw their talent and funding? Southern schools were the last to integrate their sports teams too, why would we be surprised they also follow their geographical cues when it comes to coronavirus?

[Gelston]

Detective Latrine is in the case!

[Parkbandit]

Detective Latrine is in the case!

https://previews.123rf.com/images/kongvector/kongvector1712/kongvector171201901/91674019-detective-toilet-character-cartoon-style.jpg

[Latrinsorm]

I saw today that it's not just the power 5 but also the group of 5 conferences that follow the geographic split I posited, and I thought I'd make some graphs to make it more rigorous!

The four cancel conferences are easy because they each have a west and northern midwest that don't overlap, so there's only states in 1 conference (light blue) or 2 conferences (blue):

https://imgur.com/hQlwcZC.png

The six keep conferences are messier because fully five of them are represented in Texas (dark red), so it goes down from there with four (red) three (orange) two (yellow) and one (pink):

https://imgur.com/Y3SjKhl.png

(Also worth noting, of course, is that the AAC's UConn has already canceled football of its own accord, and the ACC's Boston College is currently the only New England school still scheduled to play.)

The southernmost "cancel" state east of the Mississippi is Illinois, each and every one of the orange or higher "keep" states was in the Confederacy.

.

.

Also brought to my attention was a peer reviewed study (https://www.jpeds.com/article/S0022-3476(20)31023-4/fulltext) on the larger question of children and COVID, and the conclusions are not great for opening schools. We've all seen the Amazon commercials with the forehead temperature scanners, but "Symptom monitoring is an ineffective strategy for identifying infected children." and more specifically, "Only 51% of children with acute SARS-CoV-2 infection presented with fever; symptoms of SARS-CoV-2 infection, if present, were non-specific."

And it gets worse! The reason kids don't suffer as much from infection is demonstrably not because they have a lower viral load: "Viral load in children in the asymptomatic/early infection phase was significantly higher than in hospitalized adults with severe disease." How significantly? Adults with enough of the virus to be hospitalized for weeks topped out at 6 log10 RNA copies/ml from swab tests, infected kids with no symptoms averaged 6.2 in the same measure.

And, of course, we know kids aren't going to be any more obedient of the scientifically required measures to prevent person to person spread. We know this because we have observed human children at any point in our lives, obviously, but if we needed any reminders the reports from North Paulding High to the University of North Carolina to Martin County surely drove it home.

There's just no way to open schools safely with our current level of infection. Germany is seeing under 1% infection in schools not because they use some kind of magic garden for kids or "gartenkinder" but because they are experiencing new cases per capita at less than a tenth of ours, and this despite them increasing their testing by 50% since August (as ours has decreased over the same span).

[Roblar]

UConn is independent.

For your records..

[Tgo01]

There's just no way to open schools safely with our current level of infection.

Children don't deserve a proper education! Sit them in front of a computer and make them watch YouTube videos all day!!!

How about we just shut schools down for the year, stop paying teachers, and give that money to parents so they can choose how to best educate their kids? They can home school, or send them to private schools, or setup neighborhood classrooms. Sounds great!

Oh...oh wait no. Of course teachers still want to get paid. Gotta give the teachers union everything they want even at the detriment of our children.

[Latrinsorm]

UConn is independent.

For your records..

ah thanks! i was going off the AAC map but on closer inspection it hasn't been updated since 2017

[Latrinsorm]

Children don't deserve a proper education! Sit them in front of a computer and make them watch YouTube videos all day!!!

How about we just shut schools down for the year, stop paying teachers, and give that money to parents so they can choose how to best educate their kids? They can home school, or send them to private schools, or setup neighborhood classrooms. Sounds great!

Oh...oh wait no. Of course teachers still want to get paid. Gotta give the teachers union everything they want even at the detriment of our children.

Children, and their families, deserve to live.

This right is both self-evident and unalienable.

Teachers are not the enemy.
Unions are not the enemy.
No one and nothing is the enemy but the virus.

And we can beat it.
And we know this because many other developed urbanized service-based-economy nations have.
And we know how to do it, what to do, when to do it.
And we know we can get from where we are to where Germany and New Zealand and South Korea are, and it only takes one step:

Try.

Try, even if doing so offends our macroeconomic principles (and it will).
Try, even if we hear smug chuckles about how it can't possibly work (and we will).
Try, even if we're exhausted (and we will be).

When we take it seriously, we will win.
We will win back our schools.
We will win back our sports.
We will win back our theaters.
We will win back our airlines.
We will win back our peace of mind.
We will win back our friends.
We will win back our families.
When, and only when, we take it seriously.

This is America.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I did not realize

we lost our schools
we lost our sports
we lost our theaters
we lost our airlines
we lost our peace of mind
we lost our friends
we lost our families

I love the drama though, you should write some ads. Maybe a man in a vest and top hat could tell us how much we lost and that this is America!

[Neveragain]

Children, and their families, deserve to live.

Except the people at the grocery store, gas station, factory floor, police, fire fighters............basically anyone that works a blue collar job.

They all deserve to die.

covid-19 the white collar flu.

[Latrinsorm]

Except the people at the grocery store, gas station, factory floor, police, fire fighters............basically anyone that works a blue collar job.

They all deserve to die.

covid-19 the white collar flu.

Since only about 25% of the population are blue collar workers, the other 75% of us can drive the virus down to manageable levels (even zero) without impinging on their work or safety at all, which is exactly what happened in Germany, New Zealand, South Korea, etc. etc.

But we need ALL of the 75%, ALL of the white collar workers, ALL of the retirees, and (returning to the central point of this thread) ALL of the schoolchildren.

And we need that buy-in not just for a day, not just for a week, not just for a month... because of how badly we've mishandled this crisis until now we need a solid year of uniform participation, from top to bottom.

We've tried the version where a few states at a time take it serious for a few weeks at a time (with a significant minority in those states still not caring).
It just plain doesn't work.
There's a better way.
All we have to give up are our illusions.
And we will, sooner or later.
Right now Republicans are arguing in Congress that we need $1,000,000,000,000 of stimulus.
The same Republicans who unanimously agreed to $2,200,000,000,000 of the same in March.
Republicans!!!

But sooner would be better.

[Latrinsorm]

I did not realize

we lost our schools
we lost our sports
we lost our theaters
we lost our airlines
we lost our peace of mind
we lost our friends
we lost our families

I love the drama though, you should write some ads. Maybe a man in a vest and top hat could tell us how much we lost and that this is America!

It's clearly pleasant to live in a bubble like yours, but from out here in the real world the cost looks awfully high.

[Neveragain]

Since only about 25% of the population are blue collar workers, the other 75% of us can drive the virus down to manageable levels (even zero) without impinging on their work or safety at all, which is exactly what happened in Germany, New Zealand, South Korea, etc. etc.

But we need ALL of the 75%, ALL of the white collar workers, ALL of the retirees, and (returning to the central point of this thread) ALL of the schoolchildren.

And we need that buy-in not just for a day, not just for a week, not just for a month... because of how badly we've mishandled this crisis until now we need a solid year of uniform participation, from top to bottom.

We've tried the version where a few states at a time take it serious for a few weeks at a time (with a significant minority in those states still not caring).
It just plain doesn't work.
There's a better way.
All we have to give up are our illusions.
And we will, sooner or later.
Right now Republicans are arguing in Congress that we need $1,000,000,000,000 of stimulus.
The same Republicans who unanimously agreed to $2,200,000,000,000 of the same in March.
Republicans!!!

But sooner would be better.

25% percent of the team making the sacrifice does not sound like "we're in this together".

It actually sounds more like "This is war, now you poor people go die for my freedoms!". I remember when this was a liberal point of protest.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ec0XKhAHR5I

[FlayedAngel]

I love the drama though, you should write some ads. Maybe a man in a vest and top hat could tell us how much we lost and that this is America!

https://youtu.be/X56GPTpgm04

[Gelston]

My step children start school on Monday. I've gone up there and seen how it is going to be set up. I feel fine about it. They are distanced, they enter and exit the school in waves, masks are required, there are hand washing stations all over the place, and they don't change classes, the teachers do. Lunch is eaten in the classroom.

[Latrinsorm]

25% percent of the team making the sacrifice does not sound like "we're in this together".

It actually sounds more like "This is war, now you poor people go die for my freedoms!". I remember when this was a liberal point of protest.



Again, the properly executed scenario involves nobody dying, poor or otherwise.

Let me say it a third time: there don't have to be ANY deaths at this point of the pandemic.

We are suffering one thousand deaths a day.
We have been since July.
Yesterday we suffered 1369, the third most since May, so it looks like we're going to keep it up.
We have three individual states that had more deaths today than all of Germany has had in the all of August.
The English language does not have words for how colossal our failure has been.

This is not a political question. It is not an economic question. It is not a class question. It is (for once!) not even a racial question.
It is a question of the American people - how many times do we have to fail in exactly the same way before we all embrace the strategy that has been proven many times over around the world?

Because it's going to take all of us.
We're all in one lifeboat.
As long as anyone's drilling holes under their seat, we all sink.

[Latrinsorm]

My step children start school on Monday. I've gone up there and seen how it is going to be set up. I feel fine about it. They are distanced, they enter and exit the school in waves, masks are required, there are hand washing stations all over the place, and they don't change classes, the teachers do. Lunch is eaten in the classroom.

I really hope I'm wrong. Hey, there's a first time for everything! But we've been told to distance and mask everywhere, and we can all see how diligent adults have been about that and the terrible cost that resulted. Has there ever been an exercise in hygiene that children have been MORE diligent than adults about? Anywhere? Ever? Like I said there's a first time for everything, but if we burn our collective hand on a hot stove twice, why do we need to try the 3rd? the 20th? 100th?

There is an alternative, and has been for months: drive the spread of the virus down near to zero, and we can open up all kinds of things without immediately spiking cases back up again. Heck, some folks knew this from the start! (https://medium.com/@tomaspueyo/coronavirus-the-hammer-and-the-dance-be9337092b56) The NBA Finals happen in June. This year they're happening in October, and nobody cares. Why can't we push back in-person school openings a couple months to get our house even a little in order first? What's the almighty rush?

[Latrinsorm]

A test case, from Alabama: 1,052 (https://www.axios.com/university-alabama-coronavirus-covid-cases-e647a5f0-6aa1-4474-ae4a-7bfb3cec774c.html) cases have been confirmed at the University of Alabama system from August 19th to August 29th, crucially all contracted after students returned to campus. That's a big number, but in what context? Well, the state as a whole saw a total of 7,081 cases. With 80,000 students and staff in said system in a state populated by 5,000,000, this means people at the University of Alabama are ten times more likely than Alabamans in general to contract coronavirus.

And these are college students! Not the model of diligent self preservation by any means, but compared to high school students? middle school students? elementary school students?

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Come on, bust out some pics of you in a top hat and tell us more about the end of the world.

PS I made meatloaf today. On the meatloaf should be your next retarded thread.

[Latrinsorm]

Come on, bust out some pics of you in a top hat and tell us more about the end of the world.

PS I made meatloaf today. On the meatloaf should be your next retarded thread.

I get why people latched onto my thoughts on cannabis and universal surveillance, they are objectively peculiar. This fixation of yours on an imaginary top hat remains a mystery, though.

[Latrinsorm]

A test case, from Alabama: 1,052 (https://www.axios.com/university-alabama-coronavirus-covid-cases-e647a5f0-6aa1-4474-ae4a-7bfb3cec774c.html) cases have been confirmed at the University of Alabama system from August 19th to August 29th, crucially all contracted after students returned to campus. That's a big number, but in what context? Well, the state as a whole saw a total of 7,081 cases. With 80,000 students and staff in said system in a state populated by 5,000,000, this means people at the University of Alabama are ten times more likely than Alabamans in general to contract coronavirus.

And these are college students! Not the model of diligent self preservation by any means, but compared to high school students? middle school students? elementary school students?

Another from Iowa: 500 (https://www.press-citizen.com/story/news/education/university-of-iowa/2020/08/29/iowa-university-coronavirus-protests-covid-19-cases-students-faculty/5662569002/) cases last week at the University of Iowa, the state as a whole had 6,554. With 35,000 people at the university and 3.2m in the great state of Iowa, that means Hawkeyes are a little over seven times more likely than Iowans in general to contract coronavirus.

It's not working.

[Neveragain]

Another from Iowa: 500 (https://www.press-citizen.com/story/news/education/university-of-iowa/2020/08/29/iowa-university-coronavirus-protests-covid-19-cases-students-faculty/5662569002/) cases last week at the University of Iowa, the state as a whole had 6,554. With 35,000 people at the university and 3.2m in the great state of Iowa, that means Hawkeyes are a little over seven times more likely than Iowans in general to contract coronavirus.

It's not working.

It means that the students are returning back to campus and being tested.

Not sure what point you're trying to make but it's a stupid one.

[Wrathbringer]

Another from Iowa: 500 (https://www.press-citizen.com/story/news/education/university-of-iowa/2020/08/29/iowa-university-coronavirus-protests-covid-19-cases-students-faculty/5662569002/) cases last week at the University of Iowa, the state as a whole had 6,554. With 35,000 people at the university and 3.2m in the great state of Iowa, that means Hawkeyes are a little over seven times more likely than Iowans in general to contract coronavirus.

It's not working.

That's good news. The younger population are the ones who can achieve herd immunity for everyone else and be mostly asymptomatic. Gotta let them live life as normal, though. This would minimize the time the vulnerable need to take precautions and eliminate the need for a vaccine.

[Gelston]

A week into school, mine are doing fine. No massive disease outbreaks reported yet.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

A day later, my leftover meatloaf is fucking excellent. Probably best I've ever made.

[Tgo01]

Another from Iowa: 500 (https://www.press-citizen.com/story/news/education/university-of-iowa/2020/08/29/iowa-university-coronavirus-protests-covid-19-cases-students-faculty/5662569002/) cases last week at the University of Iowa, the state as a whole had 6,554. With 35,000 people at the university and 3.2m in the great state of Iowa, that means Hawkeyes are a little over seven times more likely than Iowans in general to contract coronavirus.

It's not working.

Isn't this just all kinds of ironic. We cancel school, sporting events, concerts, close down bowling alleys, amusement parks, malls, "non-essential" stores, you know places young people typically hang out at, then when they start going back to school we clutch our pearls that some of them start getting sick when they were never given the chance to build up an immunity to this virus to begin with.

Anyone else remember when the goal was just to flatten the curve so our hospitals wouldn't be overwhelmed? When did we let the powers that be change that to "No more infected people ever!!1111"

It's almost like everyone forgot how viruses work.

[Latrinsorm]

It means that the students are returning back to campus and being tested.

Not sure what point you're trying to make but it's a stupid one.

hello! please review my first post re: Alabama, which explicitly stated that the cases were explicitly contracted "after students returned to campus"

explicitly

i have only one more hyper-text marked-up language "tag" to bring to bear

choose wisely

[Latrinsorm]

That's good news. The younger population are the ones who can achieve herd immunity for everyone else and be mostly asymptomatic. Gotta let them live life as normal, though. This would minimize the time the vulnerable need to take precautions and eliminate the need for a vaccine.

oh honey, did you not hear? we incontrovertibly proved months ago that immunity only lasts a few months, i.e. herd immunity is unachievable through natural exposure, i.e. pursuing it without a vaccine will only result in millions of American deaths
your people are quite quick to tell you about whether the united states dollar is worth 101% or 99% of what it was
don't you find it peculiar that they wouldn't inform you of a 100% to 0% outcome?
wouldn't you rather listen to a trust-worthy straight-arrow god-fearin' american like me?

have i ever steered you wrong, parkbandit?

hang on...

[Latrinsorm]

A week into school, mine are doing fine. No massive disease outbreaks reported yet.

glad to hear it!

but surely you can agree that not all outbreaks are reported
we have established that many, many, many, many times over

so how many tests have your children undertaken?
not temperature tests, not coughing tests, not under-the-weather tests, but actual bona-fide coronavirus tests
and if any, any at all, how many results of those tests have you received so far?

and if none... do you actually know they are doing fine?

.

recently someone on these forums inexplicably called me an angel.

i am not an angel.

i am actually a very violent person.

perhaps wolfenstein and all the other DooM clones are to blame, who can say, but my parents will literally die if i go to prison
and i will go to prison if i murder the people who are cheerfully volunteering your children, gelston, to die
i don't expect you to value my parents' lives above your children's, i'm just explaining why i haven't done anything to save them

and i don't expect you to forgive me

i don't even forgive me

[Tgo01]

oh honey, did you not hear? we incontrovertibly proved months ago that immunity only lasts a few months, i.e. herd immunity is unachievable through natural exposure, i.e. pursuing it without a vaccine will only result in millions of American deaths

Are you sure this was "proven" and you didn't just read more into what you were reading?

[Latrinsorm]

Isn't this just all kinds of ironic. We cancel school, sporting events, concerts, close down bowling alleys, amusement parks, malls, "non-essential" stores, you know places young people typically hang out at, then when they start going back to school we clutch our pearls that some of them start getting sick when they were never given the chance to build up an immunity to this virus to begin with.

Anyone else remember when the goal was just to flatten the curve so our hospitals wouldn't be overwhelmed? When did we let the powers that be change that to "No more infected people ever!!1111"

It's almost like everyone forgot how viruses work.

the goal was never "just to flatten the curve", you ignorant slut

the goal was this:

https://imgur.com/FCFkRpn.png

note how the curve is not merely flattened but driven so far down that the "second wave" is barely perceptible! instead we did this:

https://imgur.com/bIdkLkO.png

and 100,000 americans (so far!) have died from our swaggering rugged individualistic pathetic boorish stupidity
and we're trying our unbelievably incompetent and demonstrably failed approach AGAIN
and after being told repeatedly it wouldn't work, and after seeing incontrovertibly that it HASN'T worked, your puppeteers giggle and reach into you to say "AcTuaLLy" and you dance right along

how many more times, TGO01?

how many more times do we, if you'll pardon my french, have to screw it up?
is there any number whatsoever that will give you pause?
200,000 deaths?
300,000 deaths?
will you ever consider you've been led by the nose down the primrose path?

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

glad to hear it!

but surely you can agree that not all outbreaks are reported
we have established that many, many, many, many times over

so how many tests have your children undertaken?
not temperature tests, not coughing tests, not under-the-weather tests, but actual bona-fide coronavirus tests
and if any, any at all, how many results of those tests have you received so far?

and if none... do you actually know they are doing fine?

.

recently someone on these forums inexplicably called me an angel.

i am not an angel.

i am actually a very violent person.

perhaps wolfenstein and all the other DooM clones are to blame, who can say, but my parents will literally die if i go to prison
and i will go to prison if i murder the people who are cheerfully volunteering your children, gelston, to die
i don't expect you to value my parents' lives above your children's, i'm just explaining why i haven't done anything to save them

and i don't expect you to forgive me

i don't even forgive me

Seriously people, a welfare check is basically required at this point. He's lost his mind.

[Tgo01]

the goal was never "just to flatten the curve"

That's like exactly what the goal was. I vividly remember hearing that phrase for weeks until it morphed into "Stay home! Save lives!"

We always knew people were going to get infected and die, the main worry was hospitals would become so overrun that people who might have lived if given proper treatment would instead die in the hospital parking lot due to the hospital not being able to care for everyone.

That nightmare scenario never happened. Not even close.

[Gelston]

so how many tests have your children undertaken?
not temperature tests, not coughing tests, not under-the-weather tests, but actual bona-fide coronavirus tests
and if any, any at all, how many results of those tests have you received so far?


They freak out from shots because they are young, why the fuck would I take them to get tested with no symptoms? My wife and I also have no symptoms. Neither do their teachers. There would be a symptom somewhere. It could happen, but I doubt it. The eldest's largest class is 8 kids, the smallest has 2. The other two stay in one class and they have about 15 total. I'm pleased with the precautions taken.

[Tgo01]

The eldest's largest class is 8 kids, the smallest has 2. The other two stay in one class and they have about 15 total. I'm pleased with the precautions taken.

Is this a really small school or is this because of COVID?

[Gelston]

Is this a really small school or is this because of COVID?

COVID. They split his classes into hybird, so he is virtual on M/W/F and goes to school on T/Th. Everyone is virtual on F. A lot of parents decided to go full virtual though, so that is less that go to classes too. The one that has two students is some dumbass class called Study skills.

[Latrinsorm]

That's like exactly what the goal was. I vividly remember hearing that phrase for weeks until it morphed into "Stay home! Save lives!"

We always knew people were going to get infected and die, the main worry was hospitals would become so overrun that people who might have lived if given proper treatment would instead die in the hospital parking lot due to the hospital not being able to care for everyone.

That nightmare scenario never happened. Not even close.

I can't speak to what "like exactly" the goal was, whatever that means, but here's a timestamped from March 20th (https://www.plaintalk.net/local_news/opinion/article_08ab1f8c-6a54-11ea-acad-e7bd9f69ce1d.html) depiction of what the goal exactly exactly was:

https://bloximages.chicago2.vip.townnews.com/plaintalk.net/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/5/a3/5a358b76-6a54-11ea-9105-9b249034e7f1/5e742d92b1875.image.jpg

Note how the curve does not get flat and stay flat, but gets flat and then goes down.

Americans who might have lived have died.
Tens of thousands of them.
History will remember our failure, for a hundred years and more.
History will not remember for a moment what you personally did.
So what does being on the side that smugly chortles about like exactly owning the libs gain you?

Why not be on the side that exactly exactly saves lives?

[Latrinsorm]

They freak out from shots because they are young, why the fuck would I take them to get tested with no symptoms? My wife and I also have no symptoms. Neither do their teachers. There would be a symptom somewhere. It could happen, but I doubt it. The eldest's largest class is 8 kids, the smallest has 2. The other two stay in one class and they have about 15 total. I'm pleased with the precautions taken.

Because symptoms do not present in all contagious cases, let alone all cases that develop into those that have symptoms.
Because hundreds of American children have died from COVID-19, and hundreds more will.
Because thousands more have been orphaned from COVID-19, and thousands more will.

.

As it happens when I was young (I am told) I brought a sock puppet to inoculations, because in fact they are very unpleasant.
As it happens I also witnessed family friends who buried their father at the ages of 14, 11, and 8.

I can tell you with absolute certainty which path I'm glad I ended up on.

[Tgo01]

I can't speak to what "like exactly" the goal was, whatever that means, but here's a timestamped from March 20th (https://www.plaintalk.net/local_news/opinion/article_08ab1f8c-6a54-11ea-acad-e7bd9f69ce1d.html) depiction of what the goal exactly exactly was:


The idea, according to NPR, is to increase social distancing in order to slow the spread of the virus, so that you don't get a huge spike in the number of people getting sick all at once. If that were to happen, there wouldn't be enough hospital beds or mechanical ventilators for everyone who needs them, and the U.S. hospital system would be overwhelmed. That's already happening in Italy.


We always knew people were going to get infected and die, the main worry was hospitals would become so overrun that people who might have lived if given proper treatment would instead die in the hospital parking lot due to the hospital not being able to care for everyone.

So I was exactly right. Why didn't you just say that instead of doing this weird dance you always do to make it look like I'm wrong when in fact you are saying I'm right?

You're weird.

[Gelston]

Because symptoms do not present in all contagious cases, let alone all cases that develop into those that have symptoms.
Because hundreds of American children have died from COVID-19, and hundreds more will.
Because thousands more have been orphaned from COVID-19, and thousands more will.

.

As it happens when I was young (I am told) I brought a sock puppet to inoculations, because in fact they are very unpleasant.
As it happens I also witnessed family friends who buried their father at the ages of 14, 11, and 8.

I can tell you with absolute certainty which path I'm glad I ended up on.

Oh my god, shut the fuck up.

[Neveragain]

hello! please review my first post re: Alabama, which explicitly stated that the cases were explicitly contracted "after students returned to campus"

explicitly

i have only one more hyper-text marked-up language "tag" to bring to bear

choose wisely

You weren't talking about Alabama. The kids just started here.

P.S. Hawkeyes are people from Iowa.......you're basically saying "Iowan's are 7x more likely than Iowan's in general to contract corona virus."

It's like a double negative but dumber.

I don't blame these kids at all for telling rich liberals to take a fucking hike. You're proving to be a bunch of self centered cowards......erm I guess rich white liberals have always been that way, my bad.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

As it happens I also witnessed family friends who buried their father at the ages of 14, 11, and 8.

Why did they bury their father 3 times, every 3 years? Was he a zombie, in your fantasy world?

Come on, post the top hat and vest picture for us. I promise I'll actually read your posts for a full week if you do.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Is lowercase Latrin the personality that makes threats, and regular case Latrin the one who uses graphs and tries to convince people the world is ending? Which Latrin just learned to buy cold cuts?

[Latrinsorm]

So I was exactly right. Why didn't you just say that instead of doing this weird dance you always do to make it look like I'm wrong when in fact you are saying I'm right?

You're weird.

It is only weird to point out how you are intentionally misinterpreting a given source if my goal is to convince you of the truth, since you have made it clear many times that you refuse to be so convinced. But that is not my goal; my goal is simply the truth, because enough people are legitimately interested in it.

An ancillary benefit is that when your puppeteers no longer employ a given fiction, you will get less whiplash from suddenly embracing the opposite point at their behest, since I've already patiently explained the whats and hows of said fictions.

[Latrinsorm]

You weren't talking about Alabama. The kids just started here.

P.S. Hawkeyes are people from Iowa.......you're basically saying "Iowan's are 7x more likely than Iowan's in general to contract corona virus."

It's like a double negative but dumber.

I don't blame these kids at all for telling rich liberals to take a fucking hike. You're proving to be a bunch of self centered cowards......erm I guess rich white liberals have always been that way, my bad.

Students returned to in-person classes at the University of Alabama on August 19th. Don't believe me! Look for yourself:

https://uasystem.edu/covid-19-dashboard/

Note, if you will, the bolded "Entry testing is not included in this calculation."

I did the necessary arithmetic in the post I pointed you towards, but I will include it as a hyper-link here for your ease:

http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?125751-On-the-Children&p=2169735#post2169735

Please let me know if you have any other confusion.

[Latrinsorm]

Why did they bury their father 3 times, every 3 years? Was he a zombie, in your fantasy world?

Come on, post the top hat and vest picture for us. I promise I'll actually read your posts for a full week if you do.

This father had three children. The giveaway is the plural form "friends".

[Neveragain]

Students returned to in-person classes at the University of Alabama on August 19th. Don't believe me! Look for yourself:

https://uasystem.edu/covid-19-dashboard/

Note, if you will, the bolded "Entry testing is not included in this calculation."

I did the necessary arithmetic in the post I pointed you towards, but I will include it as a hyper-link here for your ease:

http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?125751-On-the-Children&p=2169735#post2169735

Please let me know if you have any other confusion.

You're having a really hard time distinguishing between Iowa and Alabama. I didn't reply to your fucking Alabama post.

99% chance that latrin doesn't have kids.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

This father had three children. The giveaway is the plural form "friends".

Oh, so you were using one anecdotal death as a reference for what scientific finding again?

[Latrinsorm]

You're having a really hard time distinguishing between Iowa and Alabama. I didn't reply to your fucking Alabama post.

99% chance that latrin doesn't have kids.

Which is why I requested you "review my first post re: Alabama", to demonstrate how your concern had been met.

explicitly

[Latrinsorm]

Oh, so you were using one anecdotal death as a reference for what scientific finding again?

Gelston asked why he would take his asymptomatic children to get tested, given that his children (like most) do not have a great time at the doctor's office.

I pointed out some children I knew who, like most, had a much worse time at their parent's funeral. I didn't think this would be a point of contention but here we are.

[Neveragain]

Which is why I requested you "review my first post re: Alabama", to demonstrate how your concern had been met.

explicitly

I refused your request, I don't care about Alabama. The two states are not even closely relatable.

[Neveragain]

Gelston asked why he would take his asymptomatic children to get tested, given that his children (like most) do not have a great time at the doctor's office.

I pointed out some children I knew who, like most, had a much worse time at their parent's funeral. I didn't think this would be a point of contention but here we are.

If you have not taken note, people tend to get pissed at people that tell them what to do with their children when you yourself don't have children.

That's something you might want to keep in mind.

[Wrathbringer]

Because symptoms do not present in all contagious cases, let alone all cases that develop into those that have symptoms.
Because hundreds of American children have died from COVID-19, and hundreds more will.
Because thousands more have been orphaned from COVID-19, and thousands more will.

.

As it happens when I was young (I am told) I brought a sock puppet to inoculations, because in fact they are very unpleasant.
As it happens I also witnessed family friends who buried their father at the ages of 14, 11, and 8.

I can tell you with absolute certainty which path I'm glad I ended up on.

Damn, man. You're petrified. I kindly suggest turning off CNN and taking some time away from your toxic triggered doom purveyor friends on social media. You're welcome.

[Latrinsorm]

If you have not taken note, people tend to get pissed at people that tell them what to do with their children when you yourself don't have children.

That's something you might want to keep in mind.

I didn't tell anyone what to do. Just facts:
-how deadly coronavirus is for children (which turns out to be the #3 deadliest disease American children will face this year)
-how many children who survive coronavirus develop an extremely dangerous condition for months after (myocarditis),
-and that this condition develops regardless of the severity of the initial infection.
-even the most frequent symptom (fever) has only a 50/50 shot of occurring in infected children, which makes symptom based screening wildly insufficient because
-those asymptomatic children have a viral load much higher than hospitalized adults, and so are wildly infectious

From all this I concluded that there was no way to open schools safely, and we now have two cases proving that exactly correct.

None of this is "tell[ing] them what to do", merely telling them what is going to happen if we keep going down this path.

[Latrinsorm]

I refused your request, I don't care about Alabama. The two states are not even closely relatable.

Which is why students experiencing a massive increase in infection rates after returning to campus in both university systems is so compelling. If we were looking at Alabama and Auburn, O.K. maybe that's just a problem with the Yellowhammer State. But Alabama and Iowa have different state governments, different demographics, different regions of the country, different climates - and yet they're having the exact same problem, so what's the same about them?

They're schools.

[Latrinsorm]

Damn, man. You're petrified. I kindly suggest turning off CNN and taking some time away from your toxic triggered doom purveyor friends on social media. You're welcome.

If you would like to dispute any of the facts I have brought to your attention, I welcome that! If you're too afraid, I understand that: it has always looked pretty comfortable when people live in a bubble.

[Uranti]

https://www.inflatablebouncyhouses.com/photo/pl23121155-4m_dome_clear_inflatable_camping_bubble_tent_with_ capsule_tunnel.jpg

Looks pretty comfortable, not gonna lie.

[Mathari]

I didn't read this whole thread and I don't post here often anymore. That said, there are some fairly egregious errors in the OP that need to be called out, if they haven't been already.

Here's the first one:


2% of children who contract COVID end up hospitalized. If a child is in a class with 50 students, one of them will be hospitalized.

This claim is unsupported by the data cited in its defense, and it even runs directly counter to what we know generally about the spread/effects of COVID so far. Let's see why.

Latrin seems to think he's provided data that support this claim. But he hasn't. The data he provides (here (https://downloads.aap.org/AAP/PDF/AAP%20and%20CHA%20-%20Children%20and%20COVID-19%20State%20Data%20Report%207.30.20%20FINAL.pdf)) indicate that around 2% of children who were tested for COVID and came out positive were reported as hospitalized. But given what we know generally about the extent of asymptomatic spread and extremely mild cases -- cases where tests are often not even performed at all, and which are therefore not accounted for in this data -- we know virtually beyond a shadow of a doubt that there are likely many cases of children who were infected with COVID but never even tested (let alone hospitalized). These children are simply unaccounted for in the data Latrin cites (and there is a strong possibility, given what we currently know about the extent of asymptomatic/extremely mild spread, that they constitute a large number of cases). So, the actual percentage of children who contract COVID but end up hospitalized is extremely likely to be far lower than the number Latrin has quoted. (Incidentally, this is precisely why reputable organizations report both a Case Fatality Rate, or CFR, for COVID, as well as an Infection Fatality Rate, or IFR, and set the IFR significantly lower than the CFR -- they know that there are many such cases that are not accounted for and thus that the "real" numbers are likely to be significantly lower.) Latrin should have noticed this, because the very document he cited outright notes that the data is limited in that the "number of children infected but not tested and confirmed" is "unknown." He simply ignores this.

Something that's a bit less important, but also worth noting: some states include people as old as 20-24 in the "children" category, and the majority include 19 year olds, so the data is also likely to be slightly inflated (beyond what we normally think of as "children") in that regard, as well.

So, the conclusion Latrin makes is unsupported by the data he provides, and is very likely to be false (far too large as a percentage of actual -- not just tested -- cases).

Okay... The next mistake is probably even more egregious.


60% of COVID survivors developing [sic] myocarditis

Once again, this claim obviously goes beyond what the cited data show, and its connection with children specifically is even more extraordinarily remote. Let's see why.

Latrin provides a study of only 100 people (here (https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamacardiology/fullarticle/2768916)), gathered from hospital data -- i.e., data regarding people whom the hospital knows had COVID, i.e., who received a positive COVID test at the hospital -- and a third of whom were severe enough cases to require actual hospitalization. He apparently wants us to generalize from this study to the claim that 60% of all COVID survivors, including children, develop myocarditis (see his quote at the end of this paragraph, for example). But that generalization is a gross abuse of statistics. It ignores (1) cases of COVID that were survived but did not involve interaction with the hospital (i.e., all untested asymptomatic cases, all mild cases that may have been treated entirely at home with no hospital interaction or confirmation, etc.), (2) the fact a sample size of 100 is pretty small, (3) the fact that a third of the 100 patients required hospitalization (so a third of the cases were severe), and so on. But furthermore, to quote this in connection with children as though it just generalizes forthrightly to their case is even more irresponsible. The mean age of the 100 people in this study was 49! And the study itself outright says, "The findings are not validated for the use in pediatric patients 18 years and younger" -- i.e., they are not validated for children! So, Latrin wants us to make the leap from a study of 100 adults, a third of whom had severe COVID, and all of whom were tested, where the study itself claims it is not validated for children, to the conclusion that 60% of all COVID survivors develop myocarditis, and that this is data relevant to claims about COVID's affect on children. Immediately after citing the study, he explicitly concludes: "Whether the child is hospitalized for weeks or never even knows they had the disease they're are at the exact same risk."

This inference is frankly baffling. Suffice it to say, it is wholly unsupported by the data provided.

[Latrinsorm]

I didn't read this whole thread and I don't post here often anymore. That said, there are some fairly egregious errors in the OP that need to be called out, if they haven't been already.

Here's the first one:

Okay... The next mistake is probably even more egregious.



I was going off "^ Hospitalization rate = number of child hospitalizations / number of child cases", but I see on review that they are in fact using confirmed cases. My mistake!

I don't think it's reasonable to infer what you believe I was implying from the second one, but I suppose I can explicitly clarify that there: I didn't say or imply 60% of child-aged COVID survivors developed myocarditis, I said "COVID survivors" and I meant "COVID survivors". I do think the inference that myocarditis develops independent of everything in children is reasonable from the demonstrated fact that it develops independent of everything in adults, and that this inference was buttressed by so many young people having been proven to have COVID-generated myocarditis even at the time of my post - it's not like people routinely get cardiac MRIs, and as mentioned in my OP the condition does tend to solve itself eventually, so it's unlikely we'll ever know how many people did or didn't develop it in the general population.

[Mathari]

I don't think it's reasonable to infer what you believe I was implying from the second one, but I suppose I can explicitly clarify that there: I didn't say or imply 60% of child-aged COVID survivors developed myocarditis, I said "COVID survivors" and I meant "COVID survivors".
I think this is what I also said, but let me know if there is a point at which I was unclear. I tried to represent your claim as being a claim concerning 60% of all COVID survivors, including children, by which I meant 60% of all COVID survivors (where the "all" of course includes child COVID survivors). The point of adding the "including children" clause is to note that this thread is about children, and that you at least intended the data to have some relevance to child cases.

But let me say something more about this specific part:


I didn't say or imply 60% of child-aged COVID survivors developed myocarditis
You did say that 60% of COVID survivors develop myocarditis. And you did then say, right after that, that children are "at the exact same risk," right? What is one to conclude? (After reading it a few times, I suppose that you might have meant that their risk of dying from myocarditis, in the cases where they have myocarditis, is the same whether they know about their myocarditis or not -- but then that's somewhat of a red herring.)

In any case, you now say:


I do think the inference that myocarditis develops independent of everything in children is reasonable from the demonstrated fact that it develops independent of everything in adults
But once again, it needs to be pointed out that the study completely ignores untested asymptomatic/mild cases (it does include a few asymptomatic people who got tested, but notes that its findings generally "do not represent patients . . . who are completely asymptomatic with COVID-19"). The current data suggests that a large number of cases fall in that category, and also that children tend to be asymptomatic/mild even more often than adults. What's more, 100 cases is a somewhat small sample size, and a number of these people were ventilated, had pre-existing conditions such as asthma, hypertension, and coronary artery disease. So, I don't think that we can conclude with any degree of reasonability from this study -- again, of 100 adults who were tested (and 33% of whom had severe cases, etc.) -- that anywhere near 60% of COVID survivors generally develop myocarditis, or that 60% of children COVID survivors develop myocarditis, or anything roughly along those lines. Perhaps you are not now concluding that much, but it is worth noting this either way. We can conclude with some reasonability that the probability of developing myocarditis is increased to some degree by COVID infection (even among children), but I would be cautious about going further than that on the basis of this data. (We also know that myocarditis can be associated with pandemic influenza, so this much is corroborated by other data.)

As a matter of tone, the OP is also fairly alarmist. Given only the actual data presented there, though, it would be reasonable to conclude that significantly fewer than 2% of child COVID cases are hospitalizations, and that fewer than half (or so) of those result in myocarditis, and that a much smaller number of those will have any very significant/lasting myocardial inflammation (it appears -- though I admittedly skimmed a bit here -- that only three people in the study cited had "severe abnormalities"). When you multiply probabilities, the resultant probability becomes vanishingly small. Yet the OP talks about young people dropping dead (and it also has that pesky "exact same risk" comment I noted above). So, this is all worth pointing out.

[Gelston]

You're wasting your time. He is exhaustively retarded.

[Neveragain]

I think this is what I also said, but let me know if there is a point at which I was unclear. I tried to represent your claim as being a claim concerning 60% of all COVID survivors, including children, by which I meant 60% of all COVID survivors (where the "all" of course includes child COVID survivors). The point of adding the "including children" clause is to note that this thread is about children, and that you at least intended the data to have some relevance to child cases.

But let me say something more about this specific part:


You did say that 60% of COVID survivors develop myocarditis. And you did then say, right after that, that children are "at the exact same risk," right? What is one to conclude?

In any case, you now say:


But once again, it needs to be pointed out that the study completely ignores untested asymptomatic/mild cases (it does include a few asymptomatic people who got tested, but notes that its findings generally "do not represent patients . . . who are completely asymptomatic with COVID-19"). The current data suggests that a large number of cases fall in that category, and also that children tend to be asymptomatic/mild even more often than adults. What's more, 100 cases is a somewhat small sample size, and a number of these people were ventilated, had pre-existing conditions such as asthma, hypertension, and coronary artery disease. So, I don't think that we can conclude with any degree of reasonability from this study -- again, of 100 adults who were tested (and 33% of whom had severe cases, etc.) -- that anywhere near 60% of COVID survivors generally develop myocarditis, or that 60% of children COVID survivors develop myocarditis, or anything roughly along those lines. Perhaps you are not now concluding that much, but it is worth noting this either way. We can conclude with some reasonability that the probability of developing myocarditis is increased to some degree by COVID infection (even among children), but I would be cautious about going further than that on the basis of this data. (We also know that myocarditis can be associated with pandemic influenza, so this much is corroborated by other data.)

As a matter of tone, the OP is also fairly alarmist. Given only the actual data presented there, though, it would be reasonable to conclude that significantly fewer than 2% of child COVID cases are hospitalizations, and that fewer than half (or so) of those result in myocarditis, and that a much smaller number of those will have any very significant/lasting myocardial inflammation (it appears -- though I admittedly skimmed a bit here -- that only three people in the study cited had "severe abnormalities"). When you multiply probabilities, the resultant probability becomes vanishingly small. Yet the OP talks about young people dropping dead (and it also has that pesky "exact same risk" comment I noted above). So, this is all worth pointing out.

You have to understand, Latrin is OK with sending people off to die in illegal wars but is terribly frightened if they use cannabis to treat PTSD.

[Latrinsorm]

I think this is what I also said, but let me know if there is a point at which I was unclear. I tried to represent your claim as being a claim concerning 60% of all COVID survivors, including children, by which I meant 60% of all COVID survivors (where the "all" of course includes child COVID survivors). The point of adding the "including children" clause is to note that this thread is about children, and that you at least intended the data to have some relevance to child cases.

But let me say something more about this specific part:


You did say that 60% of COVID survivors develop myocarditis. And you did then say, right after that, that children are "at the exact same risk," right? What is one to conclude? (After reading it a few times, I suppose that you might have meant that their risk of dying from myocarditis, in the cases where they have myocarditis, is the same whether they know about their myocarditis or not -- but then that's somewhat of a red herring.)

In any case, you now say:


But once again, it needs to be pointed out that the study completely ignores untested asymptomatic/mild cases (it does include a few asymptomatic people who got tested, but notes that its findings generally "do not represent patients . . . who are completely asymptomatic with COVID-19"). The current data suggests that a large number of cases fall in that category, and also that children tend to be asymptomatic/mild even more often than adults. What's more, 100 cases is a somewhat small sample size, and a number of these people were ventilated, had pre-existing conditions such as asthma, hypertension, and coronary artery disease. So, I don't think that we can conclude with any degree of reasonability from this study -- again, of 100 adults who were tested (and 33% of whom had severe cases, etc.) -- that anywhere near 60% of COVID survivors generally develop myocarditis, or that 60% of children COVID survivors develop myocarditis, or anything roughly along those lines. Perhaps you are not now concluding that much, but it is worth noting this either way. We can conclude with some reasonability that the probability of developing myocarditis is increased to some degree by COVID infection (even among children), but I would be cautious about going further than that on the basis of this data. (We also know that myocarditis can be associated with pandemic influenza, so this much is corroborated by other data.)

As a matter of tone, the OP is also fairly alarmist. Given only the actual data presented there, though, it would be reasonable to conclude that significantly fewer than 2% of child COVID cases are hospitalizations, and that fewer than half (or so) of those result in myocarditis, and that a much smaller number of those will have any very significant/lasting myocardial inflammation (it appears -- though I admittedly skimmed a bit here -- that only three people in the study cited had "severe abnormalities"). When you multiply probabilities, the resultant probability becomes vanishingly small. Yet the OP talks about young people dropping dead (and it also has that pesky "exact same risk" comment I noted above). So, this is all worth pointing out.

I believe the interpretation you're suggesting is that I was saying 60% of white COVID survivors develop it, 60% of octogenarians do, 60% of marathon runners do, 60% of cystic fibrosis sufferers do, etc. I don't think that's a reasonable interpretation, and it is not what I intended. I do think the 60% overall number is instructive even though we don't yet know exactly how that breaks down, because if it was .006% everyone would (justifiably!) be saying 'well who cares, the number is tiny'.

I think if you review more closely, the "exact same risk" clause is completely associated with the "Whether the child is hospitalized for weeks or never even knows they had the disease" clause. To this point, we know the risk level is apparently a literal plateau when 18% of the sample is asymptomatic, so I do not think it's reasonably likely asymptomatic risk all on its own is less than half.

Now, 100 is absolutely a smallish sample size, so if you've got a 200, great! A 1000? Even better! Big fan of big samples. As my dear friend and bosom chum Neveragain can attest, in cannabis discussions I've often pointed out that 1000 > 100, but it's also true that 100 > 0.

.

Since you bring it up, I do think alarm is a good word, from the Latin for "to arms!"
This is not the time to let coronavirus take a few swings at children and see what happens.
We already know what happens.
They get sick.
They transmit that sickness.
They die more than they do from almost any other disease.
And even if they live they are likely to develop life-threatening secondary complications.

The enemy is at the gate.

When the Redcoats massacred .0002% of the population, we didn't wait and see if they'd murder more. We bore our kept arms.
When the Brits burned down Washington DC, we didn't call for calm because they hadn't burned down Philadelphia yet. We fought.
So when the King of England of coronaviruses came over and started pushing us around, why are we pussyfooting around?

This time our muskets are masks. (This is a good trade btw, they're WAY easier to clean.)
This time we've GOT to hang separately to hang together.
This time giving us liberty IS giving us death.

But one thing is the same - no one and nothing on this earth can stand against our States United.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

The enemy is at the gate.

You should write some Patrick Swayze movies. This is fucking 80's movies gold.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Seriously though, does anyone read chicken little's posts anymore? Or do we all just troll him?

[Tgo01]

I didn't read this whole thread and I don't post here often anymore. That said, there are some fairly egregious errors in the OP that need to be called out, if they haven't been already.

I read all of your replies to Latrin and you seem to be making a lot of sense. Latrin is notorious for either misunderstanding the things he cites or just completely makes shit up and links to a study that is related to the shit he makes up and pretends said study backs up the shit he made up.

He is literally the reason I insist upon seeing people's sources and reading them for myself when I see people making claims on the internet. A few years ago he made some claim and linked to a poll to back up the claim he said. Me, being the youthful naive person I was back then, trusted what Latrin said simply because he provided a source, even though I didn't read the source. I still didn't agree with his overall point and I got into an argument based on his post with another person that lasted for several posts. I went searching for sources to back up my claim and strangely enough the source I found was the EXACT SAME SOURCE Latrin had cited, except I linked to it because it proved Latrin's argument wrong. So he either completely misunderstood the link he provided, or he made an argument and Googled a link that vaguely referenced his point and posted it as "proof."

And it doesn't really do any good to argue with him about his sources because as you experienced already he'll just claim he never said that (even though you quoted him saying that), and he'll deflect to something else.

Although you're wasting your time trying to convince Latrin he is wrong, I myself do appreciate your posts because I like to learn more about this virus and having Latrin spreading false information and engaging in so much fear mongering isn't really helping anyone. You probably missed his other posts on this subject but he totally thinks we should shut down the entire country for another 4+ months and is relying on his false information to push for the shutdown.

[Tgo01]

Seriously though, does anyone read chicken little's posts anymore? Or do we all just troll him?

Sometimes it's like a train wreck for me. Like "Just how batshit crazy is Latrin going to be in this post?"

You just have to keep in mind that when you read his posts it's more for the entertainment value than anything else. Like watching a birthday clown spray water in his face.

[Latrinsorm]

You should write some Patrick Swayze movies. This is fucking 80's movies gold.

actually enemy at the gates was a 2001 film

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

But do you like shiitake mushrooms in meatloaf? Why or why not? Ps, if you don’t like them you are a nazi and will die of Covid.

Swayze 4 evar!

[Wrathbringer]

Oh my god, shut the fuck up.

This is correct.

[caelric]

Seriously though, does anyone read chicken little's posts anymore? Or do we all just troll him?

On occasion, I click on 'New Posts' and inevitably, something by latrin will pop up. It's usually comedy gold.

[Latrinsorm]

Another data point on the myocarditis issue: 30% to 35% (https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2020-09-03/one-third-of-coronavirus-positive-big-ten-athletes-diagnosed-with-myocarditis) of COVID+ athletes in the THE Big Ten Conference of College Football in America also tested positive for myocarditis "whether they were symptomatic or not" per Penn State's Wayne Sebastianelli, and if you can't trust someone from Penn State about a matter involving college football, whom can you trust?

On the one hand, this number is lower than 60%, which is good! It's not clear what their error bars are or for that matter what their myocarditis testing accuracy was, so I wouldn't immediately dismiss the 60% number, but it beats all h*ck out of having the same uncertainties for a number higher than 60%.

On the other hand, they confirmed the complete independence from symptoms, which is catastrophically bad. In announcing that they were resuming foosball in late October, the conference said that any student-athlete testing positive for COVID has to sit out at least 21 days, and can only return when those 21 days are up if an actual cardiologist clears them via "labs and biomarkers, ECG, Echocardiogram and a Cardiac MRI". (I'm pretty sure ECG stands for echocardiogram but disirregardless.)

The reason this is so bad is that whether it's 30% or 60%, and even though it goes away on its own relatively quickly, tens of thousands of children have myocarditis right now because of coronavirus, and very few if any high schools can fund universal access to cardiologists, cardiac MRIs, etc., let alone middle schools, elementary schools, pre schools.

[Gelston]

Still no COVID-19 outbreak at any of my kid's schools. City's numbers are actually trending down.

It is almost like shut the fuck up Latrin is the cure.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

Teatrero

[Keller]

How many schools does your kid go to?

[Gelston]

How many schools does your kid go to?

Kids. Two.

[Taernath]

-5 points for not using correct plural possessive.

[Sighisoara]

if you can't trust someone from Penn State about a matter involving college football, whom can you trust?

I can't tell if this is completely tone deaf or an attempt at humor. I'm hoping for the latter, because it's fucking hilarious, but I'd put money on the former.

[Gelston]

-5 points for not using correct plural possessive.

I got +100 points for not giving a fuck in a Latrin topic.

[Sighisoara]

but the conferences who have canceled are largely based in states that have taken the coronavirus seriously (i.e. the North and West), and the conferences who haven't are largely based in those that haven't (i.e. the South). It seems like geography is the more parsimonious explanation, don't you think?

Do this (https://www.oregonlive.com/collegefootball/2020/09/larry-scott-pac-12-going-to-push-the-envelope-to-play-football-this-fall-earliest-timeline-to-return-end-of-october-early-november.html) and this (https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/29897305/sources-big-ten-announce-october-return)mean that the Northern and Western states are no longer taking the virus seriously, or does it mean that the Southern states had the correct approach? Or, perhaps money actually is the motivating factor here.

[Latrinsorm]

Do this (https://www.oregonlive.com/collegefootball/2020/09/larry-scott-pac-12-going-to-push-the-envelope-to-play-football-this-fall-earliest-timeline-to-return-end-of-october-early-november.html) and this (https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/29897305/sources-big-ten-announce-october-return)mean that the Northern and Western states are no longer taking the virus seriously, or does it mean that the Southern states had the correct approach? Or, perhaps money actually is the motivating factor here.

If the current environment were identical to that in early August that would be a reasonable conclusion, but there have been two significant changes:

-the myocarditis factor I previously reported has been unequivocally proven, and colleges in The Big Ten have secured sufficient funding and resources to catch it
-instead of being at 1000 new daily deaths and rising, we are at 800 new daily deaths and declining (or possibly stable, the Labor Day bump is a little tricky to model). California and Washington in particular are doing much better than early August

"Taking the virus seriously" doesn't mean "never do anything", it means respond to what the virus is actually doing. The virus is doing less now, we know more about its long term effects now, it is therefore consistent to consider reopening now having considered closing then.

.

One part of the environment that has not changed at all is collective bargaining with student-player-athletes: there was never any, and there is still none. It is therefore not consistent for that to be the explanation, since a change has occurred while the proposed variable was held constant.

[Latrinsorm]

Still no COVID-19 outbreak at any of my kid's schools. City's numbers are actually trending down.

It is almost like shut the fuck up Latrin is the cure.

Glad to hear it!

A middle school in my home town just closed (https://www.ctpost.com/local/article/Trumbull-school-closes-for-2-weeks-as-70-people-15572956.php?src=ctphpcp), and CT is #45 in new cases per capita right now while being #4 in best testing.

I sincerely hope your schools are testing as well as this one did. Not closing is like not getting surgery - great if there's nothing wrong, but really really not great if there is.

[Tgo01]

Not closing is like not getting surgery - great if there's nothing wrong, but really really not great if there is.

Are we still just assuming that the endless shutdowns actually do anything? The only way these shutdowns would do anything is if the students and staff all stay home and isolate themselves for 10-14 days, but we all know that won't happen so what is really being accomplished? We are just moving which place is likely to be infected next; instead of the local high school it will be the bowling alley since all of the kids will hang out there during school hours.

And even if by some miracle all students and staff did isolate themselves for 10 days, will this do much good in the long run? Since no one is building up an immunity then everyone might get infected the next time there is an outbreak at the school.

It seems somewhere along the way we drifted away from "It's in the science!" and moved more towards "Well...it SOUNDS good in theory...so let's do that!"

[Sighisoara]

-the myocarditis factor I previously reported has been unequivocally proven, and colleges in The Big Ten have secured sufficient funding and resources to catch it

This is demonstrably false. They've always had the funding and resources for this.


"Taking the virus seriously" doesn't mean "never do anything", it means respond to what the virus is actually doing. The virus is doing less now, we know more about its long term effects now, it is therefore consistent to consider reopening now having considered closing then.

You mean like those conferences in the Southern states did?


One part of the environment that has not changed at all is collective bargaining with student-player-athletes: there was never any, and there is still none. It is therefore not consistent for that to be the explanation, since a change has occurred while the proposed variable was held constant.

You're right, this (https://www.theplayerstribune.com/en-us/articles/pac-12-players-covid-19-statement-football-season)and this (https://www.theplayerstribune.com/en-us/articles/big-ten-covid-19-football-season)are not attempts to collectively bargain. Specifically the part where the PAC 12 players demand 50% of revenues be split with the athletes or else they will not continue participation in sports. I don't know how closely you follow college sports, but there is one thing that all power five universities, conferences and the NCAA have in common: they zealously guard their revenues under the name of amateurism. It's always about the money.

[Latrinsorm]

Are we still just assuming that the endless shutdowns actually do anything? The only way these shutdowns would do anything is if the students and staff all stay home and isolate themselves for 10-14 days, but we all know that won't happen so what is really being accomplished? We are just moving which place is likely to be infected next; instead of the local high school it will be the bowling alley since all of the kids will hang out there during school hours.

And even if by some miracle all students and staff did isolate themselves for 10 days, will this do much good in the long run? Since no one is building up an immunity then everyone might get infected the next time there is an outbreak at the school.

It seems somewhere along the way we drifted away from "It's in the science!" and moved more towards "Well...it SOUNDS good in theory...so let's do that!"

There is another possibility; you fundamentally misunderstand what is in the science. To wit:

-shutdowns actually do something, we see this literally every time they are enacted and every time they are lifted, in every country in the entire world. If you flip a coin 100 times and it comes up heads 100 times, it could still be just coincidence, but it probably isn't.

-it is a fact that some people break lockdown, but in-person schooling means everybody breaks lockdown. Even if we don't start doing a better job policing the former, we're miles ahead of the game just by policing the latter.

-it is not possible to "build up an immunity" to the virus that lasts long enough to achieve herd immunity through natural infection. Pursuing it will achieve nothing and kill millions.

The only scientific approaches that don't involve that death toll are to vaccinate or to shutdown long enough and well enough to drive local transmission to zero. The United States has three times proven itself incapable of doing the latter, so our only plausible solution is this sporadic reactive lockdown approach until we get enough of the vaccine. The human and economic costs of this are devastating, but demonstrably not bad enough for enough people to take the problem seriously, and demonstrably so much better than laissez faire that enough people will support it.

None of this is theoretical.

[Tgo01]

-shutdowns actually do something, we see this literally every time they are enacted and every time they are lifted, in every country in the entire world. If you flip a coin 100 times and it comes up heads 100 times, it could still be just coincidence, but it probably isn't.

Literally every time? LITERALLY every time? By "literally" surely you mean "every time that it suits my argument" because many states didn't see a huge spike in numbers after lifting lockdowns.

Not to mention many states continued to see painful number of cases and deaths for weeks after they enacted their shutdowns, take NY for example, also MI who had by far the most stringent lockdowns in the US, possibly of any country outside of Wuhan, China.

[caelric]

Literally every time? LITERALLY every time? By "literally" surely you mean "every time that it suits my argument" because many states didn't see a huge spike in numbers after lifting lockdowns.

Not to mention many states continued to see painful number of cases and deaths for weeks after they enacted their shutdowns, take NY for example, also MI who had by far the most stringent lockdowns in the US, possibly of any country outside of Wuhan, China.

You know better than to use actual facts when arguing with latrine. He'll just ignore you.

[Latrinsorm]

This is demonstrably false. They've always had the funding and resources for this.



You mean like those conferences in the Southern states did?



You're right, this (https://www.theplayerstribune.com/en-us/articles/pac-12-players-covid-19-statement-football-season)and this (https://www.theplayerstribune.com/en-us/articles/big-ten-covid-19-football-season)are not attempts to collectively bargain. Specifically the part where the PAC 12 players demand 50% of revenues be split with the athletes or else they will not continue participation in sports. I don't know how closely you follow college sports, but there is one thing that all power five universities, conferences and the NCAA have in common: they zealously guard their revenues under the name of amateurism. It's always about the money.

Demonstrable, you say? Okay, demonstrate that all Big Ten schools have always had their own cardiologists on call, have always gotten every player a cardiac MRI before they're cleared to play.

This is the same misunderstanding you had before in reverse: before you concluded from no change in variable and some change in outcome that the variable was an active ingredient, now you're concluding from change in variable and no change in outcome that the variable is an active ingredient. Both have to change. The SEC hasn't changed anything in response to a different national and vastly different Florida viral environment, so it is unfounded to conclude that they take the environment into account.

If I had said a President had not been assassinated since Kennedy, would you think the attempted assassination of Reagan was a relevant rejoinder? College athletes have been attempting to collectively bargain for decades. You cited the PAC-12 announcement, show the class where it says they're giving players 50% of revenue. If you can't, you have already demonstrated that these attempts are not relevant to conference decision making.

[Tgo01]

You know better than to use actual facts when arguing with latrine. He'll just ignore you.

I just can't wait to see him try to explain how NY and Michigan were success stories.

Michigan:

March 23rd: State effectively shutdown, 318 new cases that day.

April 23rd: 1437 new cases that day.

May 23rd: 490 new cases that day.

June 23rd: 358 new cases that day.

Latrin: See? Shutdowns work literally every time!

[Latrinsorm]

Literally every time? LITERALLY every time? By "literally" surely you mean "every time that it suits my argument" because many states didn't see a huge spike in numbers after lifting lockdowns.

Not to mention many states continued to see painful number of cases and deaths for weeks after they enacted their shutdowns, take NY for example, also MI who had by far the most stringent lockdowns in the US, possibly of any country outside of Wuhan, China.

You're going to sprain yourself moving the goalposts that quickly: you asked if shutdowns "do anything", I said they "do something", now suddenly you want to see "a huge spike". I have no idea what you mean by "huge spike" so I have no idea how many polities do or don't fit that criteria. I know for a fact every single one fits the criteria of "doing something".

As has also been explained to you many times, cases and especially deaths are lagging indicators. Cases require two to three weeks after lockdown to reach their peak and deaths one to three weeks after that. Example: Michigan locks down the week of 03/09, cases peak the week of 03/30, deaths peak the week of 04/20. Example: New York City locks down the week of 03/16, cases peak the weak of 03/30, deaths peak the week of 04/06. You can repeat this exercise anywhere you like and the same thing happens. Since there is analogous peak for an increase it is more ambiguous to define when they start, but as we saw in Texas Florida and Arizona it is inevitable, where "it" is "later cases and even later deaths quantitatively increasing beyond noise" and not "whatever qualitative benchmark Tgo01 is imagining today".

[Sighisoara]

Demonstrable, you say? Okay, demonstrate that all Big Ten schools have always had their own cardiologists on call, have always gotten every player a cardiac MRI before they're cleared to play.

This is the same misunderstanding you had before in reverse: before you concluded from no change in variable and some change in outcome that the variable was an active ingredient, now you're concluding from change in variable and no change in outcome that the variable is an active ingredient. Both have to change. The SEC hasn't changed anything in response to a different national and vastly different Florida viral environment, so it is unfounded to conclude that they take the environment into account.

If I had said a President had not been assassinated since Kennedy, would you think the attempted assassination of Reagan was a relevant rejoinder? College athletes have been attempting to collectively bargain for decades. You cited the PAC-12 announcement, show the class where it says they're giving players 50% of revenue. If you can't, you have already demonstrated that these attempts are not relevant to conference decision making.

I don't have to demonstrate that each school had its own cardiologist on call, etc, to show you're full of shit. The conference paid out approximately $ 55 million to each member in June (https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2020/07/10/power-five-conference-revenue-fiscal-year-2019/5414405002/). That's more than sufficient for whatever funding or resources would be needed by September. That's not including any additional revenues received through other means.

The SEC, per your example, did, in fact, change it's original plan for its football season, and virtually every other fall sport, too. It postponed the season by three weeks and isn't scheduled to begin for another nine days in order to gauge where things stand towards the end of this month. Is this no longer what you propose should be the appropriate course? These are the same Southern states you denigrated originally.

With respect to your assertions regarding the attempted collective bargaining, you're assuming things again. You're assuming that conference decision making occurs in a vacuum occupied only by considerations of the virus. This is simply wrong. Whether athletes have been attempting to collectively bargain for decades or not is irrelevant (I'm not aware of any such instances prior to 2015, but I haven't looked very deeply into the matter, either). They specifically were attempting to do so in these specific conferences this Summer. To think that it had absolutely nothing to do with the decision making is asinine. Moreover, if they weren't scared of any such attempts, they wouldn't be running to Congress right now seeking anti-trust exemptions.

[Latrinsorm]

I don't have to demonstrate that each school had its own cardiologist on call, etc, to show you're full of shit. The conference paid out approximately $ 55 million to each member in June (https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2020/07/10/power-five-conference-revenue-fiscal-year-2019/5414405002/). That's more than sufficient for whatever funding or resources would be needed by September. That's not including any additional revenues received through other means.

The SEC, per your example, did, in fact, change it's original plan for its football season, and virtually every other fall sport, too. It postponed the season by three weeks and isn't scheduled to begin for another nine days in order to gauge where things stand towards the end of this month. Is this no longer what you propose should be the appropriate course? These are the same Southern states you denigrated originally.

With respect to your assertions regarding the attempted collective bargaining, you're assuming things again. You're assuming that conference decision making occurs in a vacuum occupied only by considerations of the virus. This is simply wrong. Whether athletes have been attempting to collectively bargain for decades or not is irrelevant (I'm not aware of any such instances prior to 2015, but I haven't looked very deeply into the matter, either). They specifically were attempting to do so in these specific conferences this Summer. To think that it had absolutely nothing to do with the decision making is asinine. Moreover, if they weren't scared of any such attempts, they wouldn't be running to Congress right now seeking anti-trust exemptions.

You don't have to do anything, this is still a free country. With that said I hope you can see how when you go out of your way to claim something is demonstrable and immediately refuse to demonstrate it, I'm gonna be a little skeptical of the claim. Having the money to do something and actually doing it are entirely different things - it doesn't matter how much money I have or how often I attempt to hire an electrician, until I actually do it I'm gonna have faulty wiring and be at elevated risk for fire.

As for your other points, I didn't "denigrate" anybody, nor did I make those assumptions. You're the one who brought up that only some conferences had cancelled (which is true!), all I did was point out that collective bargaining is not a meaningful term where unions don't exist. I further pointed out that geography does exist and coheres well to the behavior patterns of both conferences and their nearby governmental behavior. I don't know why you have this hangup on athletes unionizing but I gotta say it is seriously interfering with your thought processes here.

[Sighisoara]

You don't have to do anything, this is still a free country. With that said I hope you can see how when you go out of your way to claim something is demonstrable and immediately refuse to demonstrate it, I'm gonna be a little skeptical of the claim. Having the money to do something and actually doing it are entirely different things - it doesn't matter how much money I have or how often I attempt to hire an electrician, until I actually do it I'm gonna have faulty wiring and be at elevated risk for fire.

I did demonstrate it. You're original assertion in post 94 was "colleges in The Big Ten have secured sufficient funding and resources to catch it." You then changed what you wanted me to demonstrate to a variety of other things. My response as to what was demonstrably false was that they already had the funding and resources to do exactly what you attributed they suddenly were able to do. If you want to move goalposts now, that's your choice, but I've demonstrated that your original assertion was wrong.


As for your other points, I didn't "denigrate" anybody, nor did I make those assumptions. You're the one who brought up that only some conferences had cancelled (which is true!), all I did was point out that collective bargaining is not a meaningful term where unions don't exist. I further pointed out that geography does exist and coheres well to the behavior patterns of both conferences and their nearby governmental behavior. I don't know why you have this hangup on athletes unionizing but I gotta say it is seriously interfering with your thought processes here.

Dude, that's some cool revisionist history there. Your original post referenced college sports getting cancelled "left and right" on account of the virus. I was merely providing you a counterpoint to show that the reason these sports were getting cancelled has to do with something else, namely a potential hit to their business model. History suggests that conferences are much more concerned about that than anything else. Your response to that arguing geography has now been torn asunder. You're missing the forest for the trees on this.

[Latrinsorm]

I did demonstrate it. You're original assertion in post 94 was "colleges in The Big Ten have secured sufficient funding and resources to catch it." You then changed what you wanted me to demonstrate to a variety of other things. My response as to what was demonstrably false was that they already had the funding and resources to do exactly what you attributed they suddenly were able to do. If you want to move goalposts now, that's your choice, but I've demonstrated that your original assertion was wrong.



Dude, that's some cool revisionist history there. Your original post referenced college sports getting cancelled "left and right" on account of the virus. I was merely providing you a counterpoint to show that the reason these sports were getting cancelled has to do with something else, namely a potential hit to their business model. History suggests that conferences are much more concerned about that than anything else. Your response to that arguing geography has now been torn asunder. You're missing the forest for the trees on this.

That I listed "resources" in addition to "funding" makes it inarguable that the resources I was referring to were non-monetary, and since I spelled out such resources in post 85 (namely, "if an actual cardiologist clears them via "labs and biomarkers, ECG, Echocardiogram and a Cardiac MRI"") it is incorrect to accuse me of moving goalposts.

If you'll recall, I said "Of course it's about the money - and where would those schools face lawsuits, in this case for wrongful death? Where for the most part do they draw their talent and funding? Southern schools were the last to integrate their sports teams too, why would we be surprised they also follow their geographical cues when it comes to coronavirus?" The dispute has never been over college sports being a business, the dispute has been over your peculiar obsession with nonexistent athletic unions. And, as I've already pointed out, nothing about the geographic hypothesis has been "torn asunder" since less risk of infection + broader health apparatus = less risk of death = less risk of lawsuits. Everything I've said still hangs together just fine. You pointed out how some athletes demanded 50% revenue, didn't get a nickel, are playing anyway, and somehow that proves collective bargaining is relevant? Yikes!

.

And as long as we're strolling down memory lane, I wonder: does the fact that my source was completely correct about myocarditis and your source was not give you any pause? Do you think they just got lucky? I'm interested to hear how you've rectified that internally.

[Sighisoara]

I somehow missed your response the other day.


That I listed "resources" in addition to "funding" makes it inarguable that the resources I was referring to were non-monetary, and since I spelled out such resources in post 85 (namely, "if an actual cardiologist clears them via "labs and biomarkers, ECG, Echocardiogram and a Cardiac MRI"") it is incorrect to accuse me of moving goalposts.

Yes, you're moving goalposts. Do you not think money allows institutions to do every single one of those things? Call me crazy, but I don't think it would cost in excess of $ 50 million.



You pointed out how some athletes demanded 50% revenue, didn't get a nickel, are playing anyway, and somehow that proves collective bargaining is relevant? Yikes!

Um, they're not playing anyway. I take it you didn't pay much attention to what I cited.



And as long as we're strolling down memory lane, I wonder: does the fact that my source was completely correct about myocarditis and your source was not give you any pause? Do you think they just got lucky? I'm interested to hear how you've rectified that internally.

Completely correct? As in off by 30 percent? If you'll recall, the counterpoint I cited didn't say that the study was completely incorrect, it complained about the methodology and the conclusion of the 60% number. Is that lucky?

[Methais]

I can't take Latrin seriously until he stops poopying his pants.

[Suppa Hobbit Mage]

I deleted my posts because it's been a terrible year.

Think of the children.

[Tgo01]

I almost forgot all about this. Wasn't in school learning supposed to lead to a huge spike in the number of cases and murder everyone?

Aren't the daily infection rates actually down from before schools reopened? Aren't the number of daily deaths down too?

What happened to the fear mongering?

Flu season is starting up soon! I can't wait until each and every single flu death is attributed to COVID! Let's goose those daily number of deaths up to 3,000+!

[Latrinsorm]

I almost forgot all about this. Wasn't in school learning supposed to lead to a huge spike in the number of cases and murder everyone?

Aren't the daily infection rates actually down from before schools reopened? Aren't the number of daily deaths down too?

What happened to the fear mongering?

Flu season is starting up soon! I can't wait until each and every single flu death is attributed to COVID! Let's goose those daily number of deaths up to 3,000+!

The week starting 09/07 saw the lowest number of confirmed cases since 06/15, albeit one 65% higher than the previous local minimum in the week starting 06/01.
The week starting 09/14 saw a higher number.
The week starting 09/21 saw an even higher number.

Deaths have not increased by the same proportion yet, because as has been explained to you many times deaths lag even further behind cases which are themselves a lagging indicator.

As was also explained to you previously all indications are that we are going to see an extraordinarily light flu season: over the past three years US clinical laboratories reported about 1000 flu cases a year to the CDC in September, through the first three weeks this year we have 41. The 3,000 or so flu deaths we'll still see are less than 1% of the 400,000 coronavirus deaths we're going to see.

https://i.makeagif.com/media/3-30-2017/qqE38l.gif

[Tgo01]

The week starting 09/07 saw the lowest number of confirmed cases since 06/15, albeit one 65% higher than the previous local minimum in the week starting 06/01.
The week starting 09/14 saw a higher number.
The week starting 09/21 saw an even higher number.

Now I know what everyone is thinking: Why oh WHY did Latrin decide to start this comparison on 9/07 when most schools started opening up to 2-4 weeks prior to that?

The reason is simple: that week has the fewest number of confirmed cases since 6/15, just like he said.

8/31: 295k cases
9/07: 250k cases
9/14: 290k cases
9/21: 290k cases

So weird. Almost as if 9/07 is an outlier and Latrin is using this outlier to further his fear mongering.

You know, let's go ahead and use Latrin's bad faith data point anyways. So a 16% increase in cases is what we're worried about here? We were seriously considering (and in many cases went through with it) denying kids a good education because of a 16% increase in cases?

Flu season is coming up soon! People die during flu season! Let's shut down the schools and jobs and lock people in their homes for the next 3 months! You know, because suddenly we care so much about saving lives from viruses!

[caelric]

We were seriously considering (and in many cases went through with it) denying kids a good education because of a 16% increase in cases?



Also considering a significant increase in violent child abuse (parents are home with kids much more and this has led to increased tensions), seriously cut the income of many households in which both parents normally worked (further increasing tensions), caused some families to lose their houses due to decreased income, destroyed the economy, put many businesses out of business, permanently, and countless other problems.

But, hey, sure, if we save one life by more quarantines, it's worth it, amirite? (even though there are lives lost BECAUSE of the quarantine)

[Tgo01]

Also considering a significant increase in violent child abuse (parents are home with kids much more and this has led to increased tensions), seriously cut the income of many households in which both parents normally worked (further increasing tensions), caused some families to lose their houses due to decreased income, destroyed the economy, put many businesses out of business, permanently, and countless other problems.

But, hey, sure, if we save one life by more quarantines, it's worth it, amirite? (even though there are lives lost BECAUSE of the quarantine)

I'd take these fear mongers more seriously if it weren't so obvious what they are doing.

Flu season comes and goes every year, no one gives a shit.

AIDs swept through the nation, no one gave a shit.

Swine flu swept across the entire globe, no one gave a shit.

China flu hit our shores during a presidential election year, "OMG! We need to stay home to save lives! If you don't stay home and don't wear a mask you are literally a murderer!!!! Oh wait, if you're Antifa or BLM you go ahead and protest and riot all you want! But we see you, right wingers. MURDERERS!"

[Risen]

We will know in 44 days if we are going to have more daily infections than our peak to date. And we can then reasonably predict whether or not we will see more daily deaths in 65 days. I am betting we will not be pleased with the results, no matter who we are.


Also considering a significant increase in violent child abuse (parents are home with kids much more and this has led to increased tensions), seriously cut the income of many households in which both parents normally worked (further increasing tensions), caused some families to lose their houses due to decreased income, destroyed the economy, put many businesses out of business, permanently, and countless other problems.

Also this is correct. Sad, but correct.

[caelric]

Oh wait, if you're Antifa or BLM you go ahead and protest and riot all you want! But we see you, right wingers. MURDERERS!"

No, all the tear gas used at the riots, umm, I mean 'peaceful protests' killed any and all COVID germs.

[Latrinsorm]

Now I know what everyone is thinking: Why oh WHY did Latrin decide to start this comparison on 9/07 when most schools started opening up to 2-4 weeks prior to that?

because cases are a lagging indicator, and because "most" schools were not open in the time frame you describe (i.e. California, Miami, Chicago, NYC, Texas)

[Latrinsorm]

Also considering a significant increase in violent child abuse (parents are home with kids much more and this has led to increased tensions), seriously cut the income of many households in which both parents normally worked (further increasing tensions), caused some families to lose their houses due to decreased income, destroyed the economy, put many businesses out of business, permanently, and countless other problems.

But, hey, sure, if we save one life by more quarantines, it's worth it, amirite? (even though there are lives lost BECAUSE of the quarantine)

Even with how inept our approach as a society and a government has been to lockdowns (an ineptitude not universally shared by other people) it has been without a shadow of a doubt a net gain: without them we would have had more deaths from COVID than every other cause of death combined.

[Tgo01]

because cases are a lagging indicator

So what you're saying is the number of cases actually went down after schools reopened then went back to where they were before?

Not sure you thought this one through.

[Latrinsorm]

I'd take these fear mongers more seriously if it weren't so obvious what they are doing.

Flu season comes and goes every year, no one gives a shit.

AIDs swept through the nation, no one gave a shit.

Swine flu swept across the entire globe, no one gave a shit.

China flu hit our shores during a presidential election year, "OMG! We need to stay home to save lives! If you don't stay home and don't wear a mask you are literally a murderer!!!! Oh wait, if you're Antifa or BLM you go ahead and protest and riot all you want! But we see you, right wingers. MURDERERS!"

Coronavirus killed more Americans in the last week than swine flu did in a year.

If you didn't get such an erection of your human penis from racism, you might stop to wonder why you're being told to repeat the lie that we did nothing for swine flu when it barely has 1% of the death toll.

But if you weren't so easily manipulated, you wouldn't be on the side you're on in the first place.

These are the breaks.

[Latrinsorm]

So what you're saying is the number of cases actually went down after schools reopened then went back to where they were before?

Not sure you thought this one through.

The number of cases that had been declining continued to decline until the effects of reopening became measurable, were measured, and were reported. Since all these things take time, cases are a lagging indicator, and since it takes even longer for cases to become fatal, deaths lag even further.

This has happened every single time we've opened or closed across the entire globe, and has been explained to you almost as many times.

If you jump out of an airplane reach terminal velocity and turn on a jet pack, you don't start going up, you stop going down as quickly.