Coronavirus, Spring Practice and School Closings

[SW_Mustang]

Is that Rome like in the Pope?

Yes.

They operate a campus in Italy that serves as a central hub for their study abroad program. There's not a ton of information about the facility itself - so I'm not sure if they actually own it or not. It looks like a big apartment building with a church stapled to the side of it. At one point they operated a program in Peru too.

Mary couldn't accommodate the students in Bismarck so they were given the option to study at their Tempe, Arizona campus which is on the campus of Arizona State.

[DapperDan]

These are the only schools that are not suspending classes to some degree as of me writing this, although I would definitely expect to see this change.

University of Mary: Open in Bismarck, although they are allowing students to make other arrangements. Closed in Rome.

Northern State University: Open

Wayne State: Open

Is that Rome like in the Pope?

[SW_Mustang]

[QUOTE=DapperDan;n511360]

I wanted to in-bed some interactive CDC graphs as well but could not figure out how to get it done. Shows the same thing. Maybe not zero deaths under 30 but so infinitesimal to be irrelevant. The odds of a student getting killed by a car while crossing the street for pizza is likely far greater than dyeing of the virus. I originally wrote a lot more but decided to delete as this is a board for sports. Just suffice it to say that, in my opinion, those in positions of power are being a lot more concerned about the risk posed for young and healthy athletes than is necessary. I will add though that the comment about suicides arising from lack of haircuts is a bit off the mark.

If you post links, I'll look at them.

My point is there's more to just "danger" than just death. Evidence is starting to come out that long-term effects of the disease will exist, but I'm not a healthcare professional so I'm not going to attempt to make sense of them. I've got a history with asthma, so I'd rather not take the risk. I'm doing all I can, but it'd be a bummer if some random individual got me sick because of their right to go to the store or something weird like that.

[SW_Mustang]

[QUOTE=NSU4LIFE;n511340]

WTH are you talking about? The point was being made about the low effect of those not elelderly or with conditions...

I was only trying to add a direct perspective from a healthcare professional of direct experiences that branch out over more than one state. Someone in direct contact with others in the same position as well as doctors. When they shut the door to visitors lover two months ago greater than 95% of residents pushed back on it.

We got to go to church last weekend and the vast majority were elderly. I deliver all over the place and you know who I see out eating or running to the parts store not wearing anything...the elderly.

It is certainly important to protect them, but atleast for this region, they are out making their own decisions. If they feel the need or anyone does, they wear a mask.

Also, under current policy you wouldn't be out of a pay check for two weeks, if positive and staying home you are covered by one of the different unemployment options.

I accidentally quoted your post. I've since fixed it. The dramatic "WTH" is really appreciated though - as if I haven't rolled my eyes enough already today.

In regards to the bolded, I already addressed it in a previous post - but I can't afford to take time off from work and it's not related to my personal finances. Also, those unemployment plans are ending soon - end of July I believe, unless they are renewed. EDIT: That's just me personally though, and nowhere did I imply that applies to anyone else but me.

[DapperDan]

[QUOTE=SW_Mustang;n511333]

The original claim said "zero danger," not "zero deaths." Furthermore your information is only from Minnesota, I'd like to see a nationwide or worldwide survey. Then maybe I'll concede to you on that point.

Danger means more than just death. Long term health effects, perhaps? I personally can't afford to take two weeks off of work for more reasons than just financial, so I'd rather not get sick. ~42% of United States adults are obese. Probably slightly less for those in their 20's, admittedly but an adult getting coronavirus is also quite likely to be obese. It's not just some "underlying condition" that a handful of people have, it's something a significant portion of the population have. I am overweight, unfortunately - I'm not excluded from my claim, and yes it is my own fault.

Lastly, most people whining about the COVID shutdowns didn't care about the bolded beforehand - and they won't after. Standing on the graves of suicide victims to get a haircut is pretty low, but I wouldn't expect anything less from about half of the country.

I wanted to in-bed some interactive CDC graphs as well but could not figure out how to get it done. Shows the same thing. Maybe not zero deaths under 30 but so infinitesimal to be irrelevant. The odds of a student getting killed by a car while crossing the street for pizza is likely far greater than dyeing of the virus. I originally wrote a lot more but decided to delete as this is a board for sports. Just suffice it to say that, in my opinion, those in positions of power are being a lot more concerned about the risk posed for young and healthy athletes than is necessary. I will add though that the comment about suicides arising from lack of haircuts is a bit off the mark.

[NSU4LIFE]

[QUOTE=SW_Mustang;n511335]

On the flipside, nursing homes who do experience significant losses could shut down. Around here, they employ a significant portion of the population because our population is so old. Hypothetically, if they were to shutdown, it would devastate the local economy. A few hundred people would be without work and would most likely have to move, and those that need the service wouldn't be able to get it.

But that side of things is conveniently forgotten about - because being able to eat a cheeseburger in a McDonald's matters more than people's lives I guess.

WTH are you talking about? The point was being made about the low effect of those not elelderly or with conditions...

I was only trying to add a direct perspective from a healthcare professional of direct experiences that branch out over more than one state. Someone in direct contact with others in the same position as well as doctors. When they shut the door to visitors lover two months ago greater than 95% of residents pushed back on it.

We got to go to church last weekend and the vast majority were elderly. I deliver all over the place and you know who I see out eating or running to the parts store not wearing anything...the elderly.

It is certainly important to protect them, but atleast for this region, they are out making their own decisions. If they feel the need or anyone does, they wear a mask.

Also, under current policy you wouldn't be out of a pay check for two weeks, if positive and staying home you are covered by one of the different unemployment options.

[SW_Mustang]

On the flipside, nursing homes who do experience significant losses could shut down. Around here, they employ a significant portion of the population because our population is so old. Hypothetically, if they were to shutdown, it would devastate the local economy. A few hundred people would be without work and would most likely have to move, and those that need the service wouldn't be able to get it.

But that side of things is conveniently forgotten about - because being able to eat a cheeseburger in a McDonald's matters more than people's lives I guess.

[SW_Mustang]

[QUOTE=DapperDan;n511253]

Not one death under 30 and virtually 100% had serious health issues. College age people are as close to zero risk as conceivable. Most of the deaths are in nursing homes and the rest have diabetes, cancer, heart disease, obesity or the like. This was obvious from the beginning yet with deaths a tenth of the models half the public is converted to frightened sheep, the economy is ruined, deficit bloated, businesses destroyed, unemployment pushed beyond depression levels, citizens bankrupted, patients with serious issues not visiting doctors, domestic abuse on the rise, alcoholics drinking, suicides up and yada yada. On top of that, while it was obvious the elderly were highly vulnerable, some of our bright leaders required nursing homes accept Covid positive patients. How again was the way this was dealt with not one of the biggest clusters of all time?

The original claim said "zero danger," not "zero deaths." Furthermore your information is only from Minnesota, I'd like to see a nationwide or worldwide survey. Then maybe I'll concede to you on that point.

Danger means more than just death. Long term health effects, perhaps? I personally can't afford to take two weeks off of work for more reasons than just financial, so I'd rather not get sick. ~42% of United States adults are obese. Probably slightly less for those in their 20's, admittedly but an adult getting coronavirus is also quite likely to be obese. It's not just some "underlying condition" that a handful of people have, it's something a significant portion of the population have. I am overweight, unfortunately - I'm not excluded from my claim, and yes it is my own fault.

Lastly, most people whining about the COVID shutdowns didn't care about the bolded beforehand - and they won't after. Standing on the graves of suicide victims to get a haircut is pretty low, but I wouldn't expect anything less from about half of the country.

[NSU4LIFE]

[QUOTE=DapperDan;n511253]

Not one death under 30 and virtually 100% had serious health issues. College age people are as close to zero risk as conceivable. Most of the deaths are in nursing homes and the rest have diabetes, cancer, heart disease, obesity or the like. This was obvious from the beginning yet with deaths a tenth of the models half the public is converted to frightened sheep, the economy is ruined, deficit bloated, businesses destroyed, unemployment pushed beyond depression levels, citizens bankrupted, patients with serious issues not visiting doctors, domestic abuse on the rise, alcoholics drinking, suicides up and yada yada. On top of that, while it was obvious the elderly were highly vulnerable, some of our bright leaders required nursing homes accept Covid positive patients. How again was the way this was dealt with not one of the biggest clusters of all time?

For what it is worth...my wife oversees Healthcare for an assisted living/memory care that has over 100 residents. Zero deaths due to covid however the isolation has 100% led to other issues causing death. Of course, at an assisted living that size, death is always going to be an ongoing thing unfortunately. In our county we have had four deaths, atleast three were on hospice. We have had no nee cases on over four weeks.

In a nearby by city they tested at a nursing home in which, if you test positive they keep testing daily to monitor. They had five positives the first day and the 2nd day all were negative. To which they were told, we do end up with a lot of false positives.

I'm not saying these things to change anyones minds or to take some sort of stand. Just wanted to share some true, factual events as those certainly are more valuable than just sharing my opinion.

Obviously, this is a small sample size so I don't mean to say this is the case everywhere.

Without question we will know more in about a week after all of these protests and large gatherings. If there isn't some insanely drastic spike I think we all have all the info we need. (Thats my opinion portion of this post, haha)

[DapperDan]

[QUOTE=SW_Mustang;n511052]

Interesting. The claim stated there was zero danger, yet the article doesn't say that anywhere.

We can agree there is very little danger, but zero danger is a bit of a reach.

Not one death under 30 and virtually 100% had serious health issues. College age people are as close to zero risk as conceivable. Most of the deaths are in nursing homes and the rest have diabetes, cancer, heart disease, obesity or the like. This was obvious from the beginning yet with deaths a tenth of the models half the public is converted to frightened sheep, the economy is ruined, deficit bloated, businesses destroyed, unemployment pushed beyond depression levels, citizens bankrupted, patients with serious issues not visiting doctors, domestic abuse on the rise, alcoholics drinking, suicides up and yada yada. On top of that, while it was obvious the elderly were highly vulnerable, some of our bright leaders required nursing homes accept Covid positive patients. How again was the way this was dealt with not one of the biggest clusters of all time?

[SW_Mustang]

[QUOTE=DapperDan;n511009]

Any evidence to back the claim?

[/https://www.twincities.com/2020/05/3...nic-illnesses/

Interesting. The claim stated there was zero danger, yet the article doesn't say that anywhere.

We can agree there is very little danger, but zero danger is a bit of a reach.

[DapperDan]

[QUOTE=SW_Mustang;n510646]

Any evidence to back the claim?

[/https://www.twincities.com/2020/05/3...nic-illnesses/

[SW_Mustang]

Seems most schools are going to open and do no roommates. Not really clear how that makes the least bit of difference. The guys are still gonna hang out together. And lest we forget this age bracket faces zero danger. Why is school/football even in question. Crazy. But hey if measures like this save the football season then great.

Any evidence to back the claim?

[BSUDad]

Seems most schools are going to open and do no roommates. Not really clear how that makes the least bit of difference. The guys are still gonna hang out together. And lest we forget this age bracket faces zero danger. Why is school/football even in question. Crazy. But hey if measures like this save the football season then great.

[NSU4LIFE]

(Duplicate)