[BostonCard]

And the testing regime, isolation on a wide open campus, and playing protocols is much safer than sending kids/coaches back to wherever - and their testing and playing protocols simply do not equate to "doing whatever I want."  

I've previously expressed my scorn at the notion that "we're all in this together."  The EDD numbers front page story in the Merc (those numbers Mick reports here regularly) renders that notion quaint, but not real.

Maybe the testing regime would have been better used in long-term care facilities' staff?  There's another thread in here that describes how the staff were getting COVID-19 and transmitting it to the most vulnerable.

And maybe part of being all in this together is asking that if bars and restaurants have to close all in person dining, maybe we can give up football for a few weeks.

BC

---

I still am not aware of any study that shows college or pro football has contributed to either the spread, or more importantly, hospitalizations.  And the value is in entertainment.  Which is important to ease mental fatigue. That’s the reason to play.

We are way beyond the point where we can say "we haven't seen proof of x, so it should be allowed".  We are down to trying to hit the pandemic with a sledgehammer so that our hospitals are not overwhelmed and we don't have a runaway pandemic mere months before widespread vaccine availability.  The next step, if the current "stay at home" order doesn't work, is for a spring-style lockdown.

Also, I've shown data that says the single best way to bring down R is to reduce travel between regions.

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail...re-working

We found two ways that lockdowns suppress R. First, reducing trips to work helps, as do fewer outings to restaurants, bars and shops, though the effect of those leisure settings may vary a lot. (Usage of parks or public transport had no impact, perhaps because visitors are outside or wearing masks.) Second, lockdowns deter people from travelling to other local authorities. This is probably the most important factor in decreasing R overall.

You know what involves people traveling to other local authorities?  Intercollegiate athletics.  The reason is probably not the game itself, but the fact that every person the team comes in contact with when it is in Southern California, is a person that they would not have come into contact with had they stayed home.  Mathematically, each of these interactions is a (small) chance of COVID-19 transmission, so the more interactions, the higher the transmission rate.  This is just basic epidemiology and completely independent of the activity.

Plus we are back to special pleading for activities that we deem important.  Sorry, but intercollegiate athletics are not essential.

BC

[BostonCard]

And the testing regime, isolation on a wide open campus, and playing protocols is much safer than sending kids/coaches back to wherever - and their testing and playing protocols simply do not equate to "doing whatever I want."  

I've previously expressed my scorn at the notion that "we're all in this together."  The EDD numbers front page story in the Merc (those numbers Mick reports here regularly) renders that notion quaint, but not real.

Maybe the testing regime would have been better used in long-term care facilities' staff?  There's another thread in here that describes how the staff were getting COVID-19 and transmitting it to the most vulnerable.

And maybe part of being all in this together is asking that if bars and restaurants have to close all in person dining, maybe we can give up football for a few weeks.

BC

---

I still am not aware of any study that shows college or pro football has contributed to either the spread, or more importantly, hospitalizations.  And the value is in entertainment.  Which is important to ease mental fatigue. That’s the reason to play.

We are way beyond the point where we can say "we haven't seen proof of x, so it should be allowed".  We are down to trying to hit the pandemic with a sledgehammer so that our hospitals are not overwhelmed and we don't have a runaway pandemic mere months before widespread vaccine availability.  The next step, if the current "stay at home" order doesn't work, is for a spring-style lockdown.

Also, I've shown data that says the single best way to bring down R is to reduce travel between regions.

https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail...re-working

We found two ways that lockdowns suppress R. First, reducing trips to work helps, as do fewer outings to restaurants, bars and shops, though the effect of those leisure settings may vary a lot. (Usage of parks or public transport had no impact, perhaps because visitors are outside or wearing masks.) Second, lockdowns deter people from travelling to other local authorities. This is probably the most important factor in decreasing R overall.

You know what involves people traveling to other local authorities?  Intercollegiate athletics.  The reason is probably not the game itself, but the fact that every person the team comes in contact with when it is in Southern California, is a person that they would not have come into contact with had they stayed home.  Mathematically, each of these interactions is a (small) chance of COVID-19 transmission, so the more interactions, the higher the transmission rate.  This is just basic epidemiology and completely independent of the activity.

Plus we are back to special pleading for activities that we deem important.  Sorry, but intercollegiate athletics are not essential.

BC