We Don't Know The Opt Out Rules

Ring 6 said:

In a conversation about the risks of if you catch a virus mortality rate is a very important statistic.
You making up the fact that stating mortality rate means you are saying it’s all that matter is a you problem. You are arguing with yourself.

Click to expand...

Word salad - Wikipedia

Simpelton said:

We don't need stats to prove there's a risk. You need stats to even begin to try to prove a negative, that there's no significant risk to athletes. not every opposite is symmetrical.

Click to expand...

I never said there wasn’t a risk. You really need to start looking at what people write and not adding things between the lines that you can create an argument about.


The poster asked the person he responded to for statistics (that don’t exist) to attempt to belittle his point. I simply asked if he had the statistics he was claiming were vital and contrary to the posters opinion.

Simpelton said:

Word salad - Wikipedia

Click to expand...

Now you are just being annoying on purpose evidently to mask the flaws in your argument.

The poster quoted mortality rates.
The poster did not make any comment calling them the only factors or draw any conclusion.

If you don’t want to have a respectful friend up discussion and post bullshlt like you just did then find someone else to talk to.

I have no interest in watching you argue with yourself by making up the other person opinion and arguing he says what he didn’t.

Clonamery said:

I know of two competitive long distance runners (1 Ironman) who will no longer compete. There is also the baseball player, Eduardo Rodriguez. Let’s call him day to day with myocarditis.

My point is that it’s not simply, have the virus get better because you’re a world class athlete or die if you’re elderly or have an underlying issue like some seem to imply. The individual risk for permanent damage to lungs, etc. is real for anyone, athlete or not.

Click to expand...

Probably would have been better to say that than make a snarky comment.
But post how you want.

Ross12 said:

Calm down and respect your fellow board members. No reason to speak to others like this.

Click to expand...

Eh, it's not disrespectful to inform someone that they're making a fool of themselves. It could easily be said to be kinder than letting them continue to keep digging.

Ring 6 said:

Now you are just being annoying on purpose evidently to mask the flaws in your argument.

Click to expand...

Name one. Note: you haven't done that yet.

The poster quoted mortality rates.
The poster did not make any comment calling them the only factors or draw any conclusion.

Click to expand...

Disingenuous. you don't make that point in the way @Triumph made it if you aren't trying to draw a conclusion that SARS and COVID-19 are comparable threats. They are not. SARS is nothing near as deadly as COVID, even if it is more of a killer per capita. Both lethality AND infectivity are critical, but when assessing the threat level of a pandemic, infectivity is the more telling of the two.

Any discussion of a pandemic has to begin with the number of people that are at risk of infection. Any discussion if a solution to the pandemic has to begin with combating the threat of infection. Focusing on lethality/complications/treating the symptom is akin to locking the barn once the horse has already escaped.

And in neither case are we anywhere near a point where we can reopen for business without risking hundreds of thousands of additional lives.

You'd have to talk very, very fast to convince anyone who knows what they're talking about that the risk we're taking by trying to reopen for business at this point is acceptable.

I have no interest in watching you argue with yourself by making up the other person opinion and arguing he says what he didn’t.

Click to expand...

I'd be up for having a discussion, any time you'd like to start.

Hyped said:

- Not arguing that hospitals aren't incentivized.
- Anecdotal evidence is nice, but meaningless.
- Not arguing the number of positives. Arguing that "deaths are understated".
- Yup, more tests = more positives. No argument there.
- Don't care about recounting previously infected folks. I am saying that even if we are miscounting, the number of deaths is statically likely understated/undercounted.

-Here are some links (including the CDC's official one):

Official U.S. coronavirus death toll is 'a substantial undercount' of actual tally, Yale study finds
The Uncounted Dead
COVID-19-associated Deaths Significantly Undercounted
Excess Deaths Associated with COVID-19

Last, but not least....this is a NFL player "opt out" thread...not a COVID-19 one. So, I am stepping out here....I'll just click on "useful" in response to your inevitable response to my response to your response to my original post, LOL.

Click to expand...

"Associated deaths"
"Excess deaths"
..

The subjectivity of those terms contributes to the disagreements.

Ring 6 said:

Probably would have been better to say that than make a snarky comment.
But post how you want.

Click to expand...

Thank you for giving me permission, Andy.

Simpelton said:

Name one. Note: you haven't done that yet.



Disingenuous. you don't make that point in the way @Triumph made it if you aren't trying to draw a conclusion that SARS and COVID-19 are comparable threats. They are not. SARS is nothing near as deadly as COVID, even if it is more of a killer per capita. Both lethality AND infectivity are critical, but when assessing the threat level of a pandemic, infectivity is the more telling of the two.

Any discussion of a pandemic has to begin with the number of people that are at risk of infection. Any discussion if a solution to the pandemic has to begin with combating the threat of infection. Focusing on lethality/complications/treating the symptom is akin to locking the barn once the horse has already escaped.

And in neither case are we anywhere near a point where we can reopen for business without risking hundreds of thousands of additional lives.

You'd have to talk very, very fast to convince anyone who knows what they're talking about that the risk we're taking by trying to reopen for business at this point is acceptable.



I'd be up for having a discussion, any time you'd like to start.

Click to expand...

Again you are making up a point of view, attributing to someone else and then arguing about it.
Time to move on.

Clonamery said:

I know of two competitive long distance runners (1 Ironman) who will no longer compete. There is also the baseball player, Eduardo Rodriguez. Let’s call him day to day with myocarditis.

My point is that it’s not simply, have the virus get better because you’re a world class athlete or die if you’re elderly or have an underlying issue like some seem to imply. The individual risk for permanent damage to lungs, etc. is real for anyone, athlete or not.

Click to expand...

Pretty much scraping the bottom of the barrel to try and find anyone aren't we.

So what is the thread topic again?

Patsgofor4 said:

Congratulations, in a single post you have demonstrated and you have no idea what the f*ck you're talking about. Stay in your lane and stop getting your talking points from Breitbart News message boards. The contention that death rate is the only important statistic, when it comes to an epidemic or pandemic, is used as internet red meat for the simple minded and the misinformed.

Here's How COVID-19 Compares to Past Outbreaks


SARS is another type of coronavirus that came out of China and spread quickly through respiratory droplets. Though the SARS death rate was higher than COVID-19, COVID-19 has already claimed more lives.

According to Johnson, contact tracingTrusted Source — or monitoring people in close contact with those who contracted it — was really effective with SARS, largely because symptoms were severe and therefore easier to identify and contain.

In addition, Schleiss said the SARS virus didn’t have the “fitness to persist in the human population,” which eventually led to its demise.

Schleiss added this doesn’t seem to be the case with COVID-19, which seems to be able to spread and thrive in the human body.

Overall, though SARS’ death rate was higher, COVID-19 has led to “more fatalities, more economic repercussions, more social repercussions than we [had] with SARS,” Johnson said.

This article was from March 12 and COVID-
19 had already caused more than six times the number of global deaths as SARS 2002-3.

Let me guess, you are among the millions of morons who don't plan to get the vaccine, once it is, hopefully, available in 2021?

Click to expand...

Hello Ignoramus

I dont read Breitbart or Drudge or watch Fox news.

From your own link -

Overall, though SARS’ death rate was higher, COVID-19 has led to “more fatalities, more economic repercussions, more social repercussions than we [had] with SARS,” Johnson said.

Click to expand...

As I stated, Covid is less deadly than SARS. Currently the covid death rate is 3.4% including 2 states ( NY and NJ) governed by morons that account for 33% of all US deaths. United States Coronavirus: 4,399,779 Cases and 150,084 Deaths - Worldometer

Then we get to the ginned up numbers in states like Florida where they count a motorcycle accident in the covid death numbers.

Dont think or wonder anything hockey helmet.

Triumph said:

Hello Ignoramus

I dont read Breitbart or Drudge or watch Fox news.

From your own link -

As I stated, Covid is less deadly than SARS. Currently the covid death rate is 3.4% including 2 states ( NY and NJ) governed by morons that account for 33% of all US deaths. United States Coronavirus: 4,399,779 Cases and 150,084 Deaths - Worldometer

Then we get to the ginned up numbers in states like Florida where they count a motorcycle accident in the covid death numbers.

Dont think or wonder anything hockey helmet.

Click to expand...

Let's understand what you mean by less deadly.

DISEASE 1
There are 10,000 cases and 1,000 die. 1,000 deaths or 10% of total cases.

DISEASE 2
30 million cases and 300,000 die. 300,000 deaths or 1% of the total.

Which do YOU think is a greater travesty to a country? Which is MORE deadly? the disease that kills 1,000 or the one that kills 300,000?

mgteich said:

Let's understand what you mean by less deadly.

DISEASE 1
There are 10,000 cases and 1,000 die. 1,000 deaths or 10% of total cases.

DISEASE 2
30 million cases and 300,000 die. 300,000 deaths or 1% of the total.

Which do YOU think is a greater travesty to a country? Which is MORE deadly? the disease that kills 1,000 or the one that kills 300,000?

Click to expand...

Exactly. @Triumph's premise is fatally flawed. He's drawing the wrong conclusions because he's misinterpreting the facts.

This thread got derailed big time. I'm at fault for contributing as it's hard not to get your own politics into it.

Simpelton said:

Name one. Note: you haven't done that yet.



Disingenuous. you don't make that point in the way @Triumph made it if you aren't trying to draw a conclusion that SARS and COVID-19 are comparable threats. They are not.

Click to expand...

Bingo. You don't have to be Carnac the Magnificent to figure out the point of his original post. Triumph has now confirmed his viewpoint with a subsequent post, although Ring 6 still won't back down.

Triumph said:

Hello Ignoramus

I dont read Breitbart or Drudge or watch Fox news.
As I stated, Covid is less deadly than SARS.
Then we get to the ginned up numbers in states like Florida where they count a motorcycle accident in the covid death numbers.

Dont think or wonder anything hockey helmet.

Click to expand...

Doubling down on stupid....interesting strategy. One of us is educated about epidemiology, infectious diseases in general, COVID-19 in particular and has actually treated patients with the disease. The other person is you.

Think the thread purpose has run its course, has been totally derailed by now. Locking.