Laughably, but predictably . . . - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Laughably, but predictably . . . (/thread-22850.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Laughably, but predictably . . . (/thread-22850.html)
Laughably, but predictably . . . - teejers1 - 01-13-2022
the moderators closed the thread on Covid, even though nothing has a greater impact on Stanford sports and fan viewing of same.
I was going to post that I agree with BC's reminder about perspectives on virus and response to same. We all form opinions based on our own circumstances and priorities (while I am higher risk than BC, I also have kids who engage in HS extracurriculars that have been adversely affected . . . which is really unfortunate).
And as my final point on this, I'll share that I bumped into an MD who is rather high up the chain at Kaiser (and who is certainly left-of-center on the political spectrum). He predicted that the US will shortly do away with the mass testing that is going on now, specifically at schools. A lot of what is going on now is medical appearances and "politics," but he thinks those will give way once this surge washes over everywhere in 2-3 weeks. [I'm paraphrasing and using my words except for the quote].
But it does go to the balance of benefit/harm of the steps recently taken, including by Stanford. If it is to "buy time" to allow hospitals not to be flooded . . . okay. [Recall, that was, imo, the best justification for the original lockdown measures way back when]. This assumes the hospital number reportings are legit. I read the article BC linked, which included one or two specifics, and a lot of anecdotes. My whole point has been that each community should make policies that are sensible for that community. And I'm not aware of SC County hospitals in "danger zone," though apparently there are some indications of this, at least for Stanford hospital.
And to specifically bring this back to Stanford sports, is it better for the competitors to all get Omicron at once and be out for 10 days together, or for 2-3 different (presumably) people to be out over the course of a disjointed, multi-month season? [And yes, obviously the best answer is for no one to get Omicron at all, but is that realistic?]. The basketball program may provide insights into this as it looks like a big chunk of players got it in Hawaii (number unknown, though you'd think somewhere around 7-8). On the women's side . . . well, it appears they had 5 under protocols for WSU, so maybe they'll be spared another mass unavailability of players].
RE: Laughably, but predictably . . . - old spanish trail - 01-13-2022
(01-13-2022, 02:09 PM)teejers1 Wrote: the moderators closed the thread on Covid, even though nothing has a greater impact on Stanford sports and fan viewing of same.
I was going to post that I agree with BC's reminder about perspectives on virus and response to same. We all form opinions based on our own circumstances and priorities (while I am higher risk than BC, I also have kids who engage in HS extracurriculars that have been adversely affected . . . which is really unfortunate).
And as my final point on this, I'll share that I bumped into an MD who is rather high up the chain at Kaiser (and who is certainly left-of-center on the political spectrum). He predicted that the US will shortly do away with the mass testing that is going on now, specifically at schools. A lot of what is going on now is medical appearances and "politics," but he thinks those will give way once this surge washes over everywhere in 2-3 weeks. [I'm paraphrasing and using my words except for the quote].
But it does go to the balance of benefit/harm of the steps recently taken, including by Stanford. If it is to "buy time" to allow hospitals not to be flooded . . . okay. [Recall, that was, imo, the best justification for the original lockdown measures way back when]. This assumes the hospital number reportings are legit. I read the article BC linked, which included one or two specifics, and a lot of anecdotes. My whole point has been that each community should make policies that are sensible for that community. And I'm not aware of SC County hospitals in "danger zone," though apparently there are some indications of this, at least for Stanford hospital.
And to specifically bring this back to Stanford sports, is it better for the competitors to all get Omicron at once and be out for 10 days together, or for 2-3 different (presumably) people to be out over the course of a disjointed, multi-month season? [And yes, obviously the best answer is for no one to get Omicron at all, but is that realistic?]. The basketball program may provide insights into this as it looks like a big chunk of players got it in Hawaii (number unknown, though you'd think somewhere around 7-8). On the women's side . . . well, it appears they had 5 under protocols for WSU, so maybe they'll be spared another mass unavailability of players].
Before this is shut again (and, I hope it isn't), you mentioned you hadn't seen any data comparing vaccinated vs unvaccinated in hospital. Contra Costa County has a databoard showing a very significant difference.
RE: Laughably, but predictably . . . - cardcrimson - 01-13-2022
(01-13-2022, 02:48 PM)old spanish trail Wrote:(01-13-2022, 02:09 PM)teejers1 Wrote: the moderators closed the thread on Covid, even though nothing has a greater impact on Stanford sports and fan viewing of same.
I was going to post that I agree with BC's reminder about perspectives on virus and response to same. We all form opinions based on our own circumstances and priorities (while I am higher risk than BC, I also have kids who engage in HS extracurriculars that have been adversely affected . . . which is really unfortunate).
And as my final point on this, I'll share that I bumped into an MD who is rather high up the chain at Kaiser (and who is certainly left-of-center on the political spectrum). He predicted that the US will shortly do away with the mass testing that is going on now, specifically at schools. A lot of what is going on now is medical appearances and "politics," but he thinks those will give way once this surge washes over everywhere in 2-3 weeks. [I'm paraphrasing and using my words except for the quote].
But it does go to the balance of benefit/harm of the steps recently taken, including by Stanford. If it is to "buy time" to allow hospitals not to be flooded . . . okay. [Recall, that was, imo, the best justification for the original lockdown measures way back when]. This assumes the hospital number reportings are legit. I read the article BC linked, which included one or two specifics, and a lot of anecdotes. My whole point has been that each community should make policies that are sensible for that community. And I'm not aware of SC County hospitals in "danger zone," though apparently there are some indications of this, at least for Stanford hospital.
And to specifically bring this back to Stanford sports, is it better for the competitors to all get Omicron at once and be out for 10 days together, or for 2-3 different (presumably) people to be out over the course of a disjointed, multi-month season? [And yes, obviously the best answer is for no one to get Omicron at all, but is that realistic?]. The basketball program may provide insights into this as it looks like a big chunk of players got it in Hawaii (number unknown, though you'd think somewhere around 7-8). On the women's side . . . well, it appears they had 5 under protocols for WSU, so maybe they'll be spared another mass unavailability of players].
Before this is shut again (and, I hope it isn't), you mentioned you hadn't seen any data comparing vaccinated vs unvaccinated in hospital. Contra Costa County has a databoard showing a very significant difference.
Yes it does, and the infection rate for the boosted is currently higher than the rate for the unvaxxed during the summer surge. Also, I think Fauci said recently that everyone is going to get omicron, it's just a matter of time. . . .
RE: Laughably, but predictably . . . - 2006alum - 01-13-2022
Guys, the admin closed the other thread for a reason. I know everyone likes to get the last word, but let's stop. And a friendly reminder that M T created a dedicated all-things-COVID board, so please feel free to carry on the conversation there.
https://thecovidboard.createmybb4.com