That’s great. Too little. Too late.
Heads need to roll at the Big Ten. And it needs to include the Big Ten presidents that voted for it. They were wrong. And now we know it.
Again, what is your scientific training or degrees that give you such wisdom in the ways of science?. From the guy posting anecdotes and saying data isn’t needed to draw conclusions. “I just know, man. It’s science. I heard it!”.
Yes, numerous credentialed cardiology experts are clearly nobodies.
Credit where it’s due - you’re persistent. Are you going to follow me around forever and ever?
Wow. And it is not common practice to run full quantitative analysis on samples that are tested in a quality control lab where they are monitoring a manufacturing process. When you are researching the presence of something you want to use the best tools available to do the job, not what a typical doctors uses in a screen exam. A University has those instrument available for use where a "clinic" that needs to be reimbursed by an insurance company will not take 2 hours to run that test. Do not be so naive.It’s not accepted practice to do cardiac MRI on asymptomatic patients that test normal otherwise, for reasons already posted and detailed in the twitter posts of the cardiology experts with a sinister agenda.
Kevin Warren needs to be fired! If he took responsibility he would man up and resign.
B1G gambled that if they cancelled others would follow, they failed, got played, and look embarrassing. Kevin Warren has failed to communicate effectively as to the reason why the season was canceled / postponed while many other states played from high school on up.
warren has embarrassed our conference and has looked dumb. Why is China back to normal day to day things? The ground zero of this plandemic yet we here in America still locked down like clowns. Liberal politics trying to destroy America, and Warren May or may not be doing his part.
start football up, open stadiums and call it a peaceful protest and get games moving.
Somehow I think the thousands of student athletes, training staffs, coaches, and universities that are pouring everything they have into this season probably don't think the same way you do. But for many, this has never been about what's best for the student athletes. Not onceWhy? 2020 college football during Covid is nothing but a smelly clown fart. Half the teams not playing; practices diminished; scheduled games canceled; players opting out; coaches being coy about why certain players are not playing (cough, cough, Covid); empty stadiums or--even worse--partially filled stadiums (cough, cough, Covid). I hope they kill it once and for all.
Somehow I think the thousands of student athletes, training staffs, coaches, and universities that are pouring everything they have into this season probably don't think the same way you do. But for many, this has never been about what's best for the student athletes. Not once
The B1G made a choice. Based on everything we know, that choice was based on the medical advice the B1G received from their medical advisers.
so, if you want to blame anyone, blame the medical advisers.
Again, you have to put yourself in the shoes of the Presidents and Chancellors. The medical advisers were saying "don't play at this time." if the B1G had gone ahead and played, and something had gone wrong, the schools would have opened themselves up to massive lawsuits.
question: So, the B1G voted to play against the advice of its medical advisers?
Jury: we find for the plaintiffs and award punitive damages.
that is the reality the B1G was facing. And they made that decision knowing that it would put schools into financial hardship. because they felt the potential liability was worse than the hardship of foregoing the football revenue. I understand that.
I agree totally. Exploratory study with interesting but weak findings at best. But we're dealing with a novel virus here, so every new data point is a step forward. The job of real scientists is now to point out how future studies could be improved and then go carry out those studies.One can only draw very limited conclusions from the study at hand due to the factors already discussed.
If people could discuss studies like this in proper context that’s one thing, but...
He later added that he was able to make such a definitive pronouncement, because he pulled it straight from his ass. And that his true agenda is to prevent MRI from becoming pervasive in cardiology.NCAA cardiology consultant
Asked specifically what screenings athletes who tested positive for COVID-19 should undergo before returning to the field, Dr. Baggish said that those who experienced no or mild symptoms — which he defined as “the neck and above” — “do not need more pre-participation screenings than they would get in a normal, pre-covid environment.” Athletes who experienced moderate or severe bouts of COVID-19 should go through the battery of heart tests before returning to play, he said.
“The vast majority of athletes that we’re seeing come back now either didn’t know they had disease or were just sick with mild symptoms for just a couple of days, and we’re just not finding pathology that matters in those people,” Dr. Baggish said later. “…Doing more advanced testing without really knowing what you’re going to do with the information because we simply don’t know what normal is, is going to end up causing more harm than good.”
BINGO!So tell me, professor, how easy is it is to round up, on short order, a control group of 26 non-covid athletes for a 2 hour cardiac MRI that requires a contrast injection? From what I can gather you know nothing about science outside of what you can Google or find on Twitter.
Bolded: more false words, have never been spoken.The flip responses by some to the crushing of daily motivations, goals, dreams of these players, coaches, staff members is pretty unsettling. Not to mention the tip of the iceberg collateral damage to the Olympic sports, those players and staff members, community businesses and those livelihoods and dreams. The paternalistic attitude of: we know what’s best for you -particularly when evidence has changed, things were overstated but are too proud to admit - are bothersome.
When in doubt, do less, not more. I realize this is tough in our ridiculous litigation climate, a monster we cannot put back in the bottle it seems...
You wish awfully hard that people will get sick and die. Pretty sad.Here's the study the PSU Doctor was referencing when he initially said the number was 30+% and later said he was mistaken. It was 15%
Cue the post disagreeing with the methodology saying the study is worthless. Accompanied by the posts saying that this is why the PAC12 and BigTen were so cautious.
PhD = allowed to have an opinion on scientific research.
Else, piss off.
Again, what is your scientific training or degrees that give you such wisdom in the ways of science?
I am not following you around, just pointed out how the claims you make are ridiculous . Just because you keep screaming it out and use Twitter to justify your rambling doesn't make it correct.
Wow. And it is not common practice to run full quantitative analysis on samples that are tested in a quality control lab where they are monitoring a manufacturing process. When you are researching the presence of something you want to use the best tools available to do the job, not what a typical doctors uses in a screen exam. A University has those instrument available for use where a "clinic" that needs to be reimbursed by an insurance company will not take 2 hours to run that test. Do not be so naive.
ALSO. Twitter is not a source of the truth. Not a single post has ever gone through multiple rounds of being reviewed, critiqued, and edited by a team of well know experts in that field. It is a place where ANYONE can post what ever they want and ANTONE can respond. Even a very young doctor that has been practicing just a few years and is bragging about just getting their first article published (you know, the one that is you main twitter source). Twitter is more akin to a group of drunken guys chatting in a bar than any sort of source of real scientific reasoning.
I agree totally. Exploratory study with interesting but weak findings at best. But we're dealing with a novel virus here, so every new data point is a step forward. The job of real scientists is now to point out how future studies could be improved and then go carry out those studies.
It's not surprising in this day and age, but I guess I find the level of discourse in many of the tweets you're sharing to be distasteful. I'm not saying you're distasteful for sharing them...just that I wish professional academics and physicians could rise above our current political climate and simply refute study conclusions, share studies with contrary findings, and suggest next steps without demonizing other researchers or straight up acting like children. For example, the study linked in the tweets in post 42 and 63 is actually very interesting. Why couldn't those Twitter users just post it as food for thought without the condescending tone?
Having trouble supporting your POV again? Do you have any competent refutations for the limitations of this and similar studies? The critics are experts from Mayo, Michigan, Oxford, Pitt, and others.
Furthermore, would competent, compassionate physicians without an agenda (of some sort) intentionally cause panic or at the very least undue psychological stress amongst millions of afflicted COV survivors? The critics would probably say for most of those folks: “this is what we know, this is what we don’t know. At this time we don’t know exactly what this means. Studies are ongoing...here are symptoms to watch for, our plan for you going forward is XYZ.”