[old spanish trail]

I would imagine we could move to a “test to stay” model, as my kids’ schools have.  For close contacts, as long as daily rapid tests are negative, they can play.

I think it would be hard to justify sending positive players out there, even if asymptomatic.  It’s not that they would be in danger, but that they run the risk of infecting others, and although most of the other players they are playing with are low risk, not everyone they come in contact with (coaches, support staff, etc.) will be, so it is best to isolate known positives until they are no longer infectious. What that time period ought to be is up to debate, but a relatively short period (7 days, or even 5, down from ten may be ok.

BC

But aren't those others, who are not low-risk, vaccinated? 

It just seems to be simpler to focus on vaccination, masking, isolation, etc., of the smaller high-risk population, as we do with the flu, shingles, hepatitis, etc., rather than trying to get 100% of the larger population to comply 100% of the time. And by "the time", I mean indefinitely.

That may be where we end up, but we are still collecting info as we go, and modifying accordingly. Some will want to move that process along faster (assuming we can), but after what we have been through, I'm for taking the careful route.

[old spanish trail]

I would imagine we could move to a “test to stay” model, as my kids’ schools have.  For close contacts, as long as daily rapid tests are negative, they can play.

I think it would be hard to justify sending positive players out there, even if asymptomatic.  It’s not that they would be in danger, but that they run the risk of infecting others, and although most of the other players they are playing with are low risk, not everyone they come in contact with (coaches, support staff, etc.) will be, so it is best to isolate known positives until they are no longer infectious. What that time period ought to be is up to debate, but a relatively short period (7 days, or even 5, down from ten may be ok.

BC

But aren't those others, who are not low-risk, vaccinated? 

It just seems to be simpler to focus on vaccination, masking, isolation, etc., of the smaller high-risk population, as we do with the flu, shingles, hepatitis, etc., rather than trying to get 100% of the larger population to comply 100% of the time. And by "the time", I mean indefinitely.

That may be where we end up, but we are still collecting info as we go, and modifying accordingly. Some will want to move that process along faster (assuming we can), but after what we have been through, I'm for taking the careful route.