Cal vs USC football game CANCELLED after Cal covid outbreak

I am pro-vaccination but what the heck did the team do, have a makeout session amongst themselves? It's amazing that a "99% vaccinated team" can have so many positive cases.

Knowing their luck, this will be ground zero for a new, highly contagious variant dubbed the Cal virus.

but what if someone got covid?

they might get a sniffle.

cancel earth!!!! we're all gonna die!!!! OMG!!!

Genyus IQ wrote:

It's amazing that a "99% vaccinated team" can have so many positive cases.

Basically anytime someone throws out a stat in conversation and uses one of "90%", "nine times out of ten", or "99%"...I assume those are inaccurate, unsourced stats meant to give us an emotional response of certainty. My BSing boss taught me that one.

rojo wrote:

yes yes yes yes wrote:

I just about give up.,

How about, owners and moderators, just stay neutral on divisive issues?

How about creating the appearance of an open forum where ideas can be discussed and presented, and the people who run the show are behind the scenes (repeat: behind the scenes) to step in if necessary?

They should not be the provocateurs.

If they cannot fathom that they might be provoking divisiveness, all the more reason to just be quiet and moderate,

It is an open forum. It's just an open forum where I'm allowed to h ave my opinion and weldon his own different opinion.

I have no issue with diverse viewpoints, no matter how fringe, but the moderation policy is inconsistent with anything more than superficial talking points and shouting across the divide.

As I've posted on multiple moderation threads over the past year is that the defacto moderation policy is to allow multiple threads per day. This is inconsistent with the moderation for other hot button topics and it's not clear why Covid threads are treated differently than other such topics.

More importantly allowing multiple threads dilutes any attempt at rational fact-based discussion and that lack of focus provides a fertile environment for agents of disinformation.

This is where I think you and I disagree. I think that most of the unvaccinated at this point have been infected (other than in some rural areas or places where people work primarily outdoors or where environmental conditions are never all that favorable for transmission) and now we are primarily witnessing infection among the vaccinated. If you take a look at the data from the UK, the transmission rate was higher in the vaccinated than in the unvaccinated in the most recent surveillance data (especially in those 30 and above, where the vaccination rate is almost 90%, the rate of infection is near double that of the unvaccinated).

We have now entered a stage of the pandemic where infection (other than kids, which are, statistically speaking, of little concern, other than their ability to infect others) is now primarily among the vaccinated (as they are the least likely to have had a natural infection and the efficiency of the vaccines has dropped precipitously). Prior infection provides a much higher efficiency of immunity than the vaccines [reinfections account for 1.5% of infections in the UK as compared to breakthrough infections which account for almost 60% of infections (and close to 90% of infections among those 30 and older)]

And please stop acting like there is no risk to vaccination, as there is a risk, and the risk is elevated in the previously infected and among young males. The rise in excess deaths among males under 25 (small though it was) corresponds to when vaccines were rolled out for young males in the UK:

Here is what I would propose. If they are going to have vaccine mandates, they need to have exemptions for the previously infected (they already have superior immunity), they should not include anyone under 25, and they should mandate booster shots among the previously vaccinated (they would actually reduce infections more by mandating boosters among the vaccinated than mandating vaccinations among the unvaccinated). If you want to make the exemptions contingent to an N-type antibody test or a prior positive PCR test, that is fine (they are not that expensive). Natural immunity is far superior to vaccinated immunity. And by the way, if you think that vaccination gives you a significant reduction in hospitalization and death if you do ultimately experience a breakthrough infection, you might want to take a closer look at data. Unfortunately the CDC is running a political campaign rather than objectively releasing science based facts.

Monkeys Skyping wrote:

rojo wrote:

It is an open forum. It's just an open forum where I'm allowed to h ave my opinion and weldon his own different opinion.

I have no issue with diverse viewpoints, no matter how fringe, but the moderation policy is inconsistent with anything more than superficial talking points and shouting across the divide.

As I've posted on multiple moderation threads over the past year is that the defacto moderation policy is to allow multiple threads per day. This is inconsistent with the moderation for other hot button topics and it's not clear why Covid threads are treated differently than other such topics.

More importantly allowing multiple threads dilutes any attempt at rational fact-based discussion and that lack of focus provides a fertile environment for agents of disinformation.

How many threads did we have on the NYC marathon. Should it have just been one post?

10000 foot view is this is a site about running. Potentially how many things can you talk about with running? Eventually you run out of topics.

As long as a thread is created with a "coronavirus" tag it's fair game.

1) COVID is more of a risk than vaccination, even for young males. Hilarious that you're now using graph–squinting to fearmonger because you have no data to support your anti-vaxx viewpoints.

2) There's no need to be fair about this. If we want the best population immunity at the lowest cost we should require previously infected to get at least 1 shot of an mRNA vaccine. "Hybrid" immunity is much better than either its component parts.

The world is not fair – probably time accept this and stop whining.

Inb4 joedirt falls victim to base–rate issues or Simpson's paradox while desperately trying to fearmonger vaccines

To question the mainstream COVID-19 narrative on vaccine effectiveness is to follow simple logic. Do people not know how to do 3rd Grade-level Math?

The following numbers cannot all be true (or are stastically improbable to a high degree):

* There was a consensus that COVID-19 has an age-graded severity such that ~80% of deaths have been in people age 65+

* Vaccination rate for age 65+ the past few months has been ~85%

* COVID-19 deaths the past few months reached ~2k/day

* COVID-19 deaths the previous waves (pre-vaccine) reached around the same of ~2k/day if you average all the waves

* The vaccines supposedly reduce one's change of dying from COVID-19 by 90%+, the exception of <10% being the "breakthrough cases"

Someone help me understand why one is not like the other? We should be allowed to have free and fair discussions about how numbers add up.

By my calculation, if the COVID-19 vaccines were as effective as claimed, we should've never reached even ~200 deaths/day the past few months.

I don’t quite get the controversy here? Yes it stinks they had a mostly benign COVID spread, but the game isn’t even cancelled it’s postponed. Are we really saying they should all play while COVID-positive? What about the non-negligible chance an infected player has respiratory or heart issues?

If there’s a controversy it should be that testing/diagnosis for groups like football team should be consistent and well thought-out. Think testing 10 guys a day from different parts of the roster to stem outbreaks.

This thread, like thousands of others that have preceded over the past two years, exemplifies clearly the grossly poor understanding of the sciences by even well-educated people among the general US population. Most people have learned just enough to do their jobs and retain little else except what roughly applies to their pastimes.

You’re really this dumb? Delta is far more infectious, and thus more people are getting COVID than in past waves. The death statistic is hugely over-represented by the unvaccinated. Yes 65+ is still more common, but if 5x more people get infected the outliers in the age groups below begin to emerge. There are also plenty of people with comorbidities and while vaccination among elderly people is higher, the unvaxxed who were lucky to dodge it in previous waves face longer odds in this wave.

jamin, fair question, and I await hearing from some of the Brainiacs, but a couple of things to consider is that the delta variant is more contagious, and quite simply, more people are are getting infected now just because the virus has had longer to spread and people are congregating more frequently and isolating less.,

jamin wrote:

To question the mainstream COVID-19 narrative on vaccine effectiveness is to follow simple logic. Do people not know how to do 3rd Grade-level Math?

The following numbers cannot all be true (or are stastically improbable to a high degree):

* There was a consensus that COVID-19 has an age-graded severity such that ~80% of deaths have been in people age 65+

* Vaccination rate for age 65+ the past few months has been ~85%

* COVID-19 deaths the past few months reached ~2k/day

* COVID-19 deaths the previous waves (pre-vaccine) reached around the same of ~2k/day if you average all the waves

* The vaccines supposedly reduce one's change of dying from COVID-19 by 90%+, the exception of <10% being the "breakthrough cases"

Someone help me understand why one is not like the other? We should be allowed to have free and fair discussions about how numbers add up.

1) The Delta wave is significantly more contagious so more people are being exposed.

2) The relative portion of 65+ deaths has decreased a lot following widespread vaccination.

seattle prattle wrote:

jamin, fair question, and I await hearing from some of the Brainiacs, but a couple of things to consider is that the delta variant is more contagious, and quite simply, more people are are getting infected now just because the virus has had longer to spread and people are congregating more frequently and isolating less.,

We know Delta is far more contagious?

How do we "know" this?

The test does not even identify the strain of Covid.

You want to keep foisting vaccines on us that clearly do not work?

Create different strains that the vaxx does not stop.

One question. If the jab does not stop these new strains, how does giving more jabs help?

It's all BS. Self serving BS excuses. People aren't masking. Not social distancing. New strains. Please

jamin wrote:

To question the mainstream COVID-19 narrative on vaccine effectiveness is to follow simple logic. Do people not know how to do 3rd Grade-level Math?

Anytime someone on here talks like the only thing keeping people from the truth is a failure to grasp basic math and logic, I know I'm about to read a post where they make 1000000 unstated assumptions and also do a little bit of math. "Facts and logic and assumptions and a very particular worldview" is more like it.

I know you are doing anything but arguing in good-faith. Look at state-level data between the South and the Northeast since July. Look at outcomes of unvaccinated vs. vaccinated. Cases are the least important stat, and yes its the one where the difference between vax and unvaxxed has narrowed somewhat. Doesn't mean they don't work by any stretch of the imagination.

Might I direct many posters here:

https://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=10805774

After 204 pages you should have a good understand of the current COVID situtation.