Cam Newtown has Covid-19 [LOCKED]

Submitted by FauxMo on October 3rd, 2020 at 11:19 AM

Just announced on ESPN breaking news. The NFL is clearly not immune... 

 

[Locking this thread because once a couple MGoUsers injected covid disinformation, it quickly devolved into a shitstorm.  

WARNINGS issued to both "Montana41GoBlue" and "FLwolvfan22":  Any further dissemination of covid disinformation by either of you WILL RESULT IN AN IMMEDIATE BANNING.   Don't like it? Plead your cases on the "Mod Sticky" thread.---rob f]

Montana41GoBlue

October 3rd, 2020 at 11:36 AM ^

Understand that NFL positive cases from one particular NJ lab could be false (false positives) 

Im reminded of Alan Iverson "ya talk'n abt practice" rant.... except here should be... "ya talk'n abt cases"... please lets be cognizant of the death rate which continues to decline ...it is the most important data point of course!!

Joined: 09/12/2020

MGoPoints: 3

JonnyHintz

October 3rd, 2020 at 12:24 PM ^

Let’s say roughly half the country gets it. Let’s also say the death rate is .5%, as CDC and other top sources currently have it at about .6%, 6x the average flu season.

Thats 600,000 deaths. At some point, the “death rate,” becomes completely irrelevant as the total number of infections and total deaths rises to numbers such as that. We’re already over 200k right now for example. So when talking about 200k people dying, statistics like “death rate,” become silly and irrelevant data points that lose their usefulness. At some point, the fact that a virus has killed 200k people in 7-8 months is more important to how we handle the virus moving forward than arguing over what the actual death rate is. 

Joined: 01/11/2015

MGoPoints: 48366

WindyCityBlue

October 3rd, 2020 at 12:37 PM ^

I'm not trying to defend the OP on this topic, but he/she is in right direction.  I've had some experience in this space, and the case volume is probably the most inexact number when looking at COVID and that its almost a meaningless stat these days.  There is an extremely large amount of people out there that have/had COVID with little or no symptoms who never get tested.  Those folks never make it into the COVID case volume numbers, but are still just as contagious.

That's why COVID deaths and hospitalizations are far more important stats these days in determining how far the virus has spread and the impact to our society.  Deaths and hospitalizations (while not perfect stats) are far more accurate than COVID case volume stats.

Just my take.  Neg away.

Joined: 07/23/2008

MGoPoints: 40771

Lakeyale13

October 3rd, 2020 at 1:04 PM ^

As long as the data isnt being politicized, death rates can tell us a lot and aren’t completely irrelevant. 
 

Any death is a tragedy, but if the vast majority of deaths from COVID are the elderly with comorbidities that is a far less destructive pandemic / one to fear much less than a pandemic that is killing the majority of it’s victims as perfectly healthy young people.
 

Not saying the elderly don’t matter. Simply making the observation that if the majority of the people dying are the elderly already compromised to some extent, then the death rates have useful / helpful information. 

Joined: 11/16/2014

MGoPoints: 27225

JonnyHintz

October 3rd, 2020 at 1:18 PM ^

But that’s how all viruses tend to work. A virus itself doesn’t kill you. Viruses attack parts of your body and when that part of your body becomes too weak to fight back, it shuts down and you die. That’s why people that are already compromised with other issues are more at risk than the more healthy people. If you’re a heavy smoker and already have lung issues, a respiratory virus is going to have a more significant impact on you. We don’t need death rates to know this.
 

I don’t think bringing something like a death rate is really useful in this case, especially once we consider the fact that 200k have died. You hit a point where a virus is so widespread and so many people have died from it, that the data point becomes irrelevant and nothing more than a data point. I don’t care if the death rate is .5%, .7%, or 1%. 200k have died, and thousands (if not hundreds of thousands) more will die. That’s a pretty damn big number and something that should drive the response. People’s lives aren’t a statistic. 
 

Does it really help us at that point to argue whether the death rate is .5%? .6? .7? What does it accomplish? What does it change? 200k are dead as a result of the virus, so far, and we’re heading into flu season which poses its own similar issues. That’s really the only thing that matters. 

Joined: 01/11/2015

MGoPoints: 48366

Lakeyale13

October 3rd, 2020 at 1:25 PM ^

At some point, for the people making decisions, they have to look at the number and at some point a death rate “number does matter”.  If it is .5% and stays around .5-.7% that is a completely different story than a death rate that is at .5% and rises to 2%. 
 

What I’m not saying is that a death is more important in some cases but not others, I’m trying to convey that if the death rate stays around .5-.7% then it is reasonable to keep the current measures in place.  But if the death rate rises to 2% then additional safety measures should be put in place. 

Joined: 11/16/2014

MGoPoints: 27225

Hotel Putingrad

October 3rd, 2020 at 11:42 AM ^

I don't think anyone's particularly concerned about Cam dying. It's the general disruption to the league's scheduling viability and competitive balance.

And not for nothing, hundreds of people are still dying every day in this country, and that trend will be continuing for quite some time.

So maybe take your dumb cynicism elsewhere.

Joined: 12/10/2014

MGoPoints: 212132

JonnyHintz

October 3rd, 2020 at 12:26 PM ^

You mean “toxic,” as in shitposting on an article with multiple comments, yet you feel the need to say it doesn’t need to be posted? If you don’t think it should be discussed, why are you here discussing it? Why comment on it? Hell, why even click the link to read the damn thing? 
 

Seems kinda like you’re trolling at that point, no? 

Joined: 01/11/2015

MGoPoints: 48366

JoeFink

October 3rd, 2020 at 12:42 PM ^

True, the death rate is declining, BUT, many cases are experiencing negative long-term health problems. As time goes on, more and more of these problems are becoming apparent.  If anything, Covid-19 is a much bigger problem than is being reported, with one or more waves yet to come. 

Joined: 11/11/2015

MGoPoints: 364

Boglehead

October 3rd, 2020 at 11:24 AM ^

This could get ugly quickly for the NFL's chances of finishing the season. 

At least for the Patriots, it wasn't a game they were going to win anyway.

Joined: 08/24/2015

MGoPoints: 690

JonnyHintz

October 3rd, 2020 at 12:40 PM ^

A lot of high schools operate that way (especially in the north) and don’t throw the ball much. Even a QB like Shane Morris who was highly ranked didn’t throw much in high school. Never topped 140 yards per game or 2,000 yards in a season. And, while he didn’t pan out here, we’re talking about a guy who was a five star for a while before mono dropped him in the rankings. You see quite a bit of the veer/option offenses in the high school level. 
 

For a lot of schools the QB is essentially an extra running back with the slight threat of hitting a receiver on a slant or a screen. But very little true passing threat. For other schools, it’s put a big physical guy (like Winovich) back there to either run himself or hand off to a speedy kid.

Joined: 01/11/2015

MGoPoints: 48366

rob f

October 3rd, 2020 at 1:05 PM ^

My oldest nephew was an all-conference QB at Caledonia HS several years ago and I doubt he averaged more than 8-10 passes/game in a multiple-option offense.  He was essentially a running back who threw well enough and often enough that opposing defenses had to stay honest

Joined: 11/11/2010

MGoPoints: 194729

Mitch Cumstein

October 3rd, 2020 at 11:44 AM ^

Presumably, they caught it early before he spread it to teammates. Per the espn article:

"Late last night, we received notice that a Patriots player tested positive for COVID-19. The player immediately entered self-quarantine," the Patriots said in a statement Saturday. "Several additional players, coaches and staff who have been in close contact with the player received point of care tests this morning and all were negative for COVID-19."

So at least it doesn’t look like this will derail the season or even the game (I guess we’ll see in the next few days for sure), but obviously missing the most important player for a big game isn’t ideal.  I would say I kind of assumed this is how the season would go without a bubble concept though. I’m thinking as long as these cases get caught before team spread (potentially unlike what happened with the Titans), the games will keep getting played.

Joined: 10/02/2009

MGoPoints: 14072

MichCali

October 3rd, 2020 at 12:25 PM ^

This means nothing.  You are still very contagious BEFORE you test positive, so it is likely he transmitted it to teammates if he was in contact with them before testing positive.  Since it also sometimes takes a week+ to test positive while the virus is incubating, there could be many of his teammates infected but still testing negative right now.

Joined: 04/28/2016

MGoPoints: -194

Mitch Cumstein

October 3rd, 2020 at 12:33 PM ^

“You are still very contagious BEFORE you test positive”

Is that true? I’ve been wondering that. I thought I recalled Brian quoting a doc saying the opposite in one of his articles on B1G return to play. If you’re correct, that’s a huge flaw in the test everyone everyday C19 mitigation strategy.

Joined: 10/02/2009

MGoPoints: 14072

Sopwith

October 3rd, 2020 at 12:53 PM ^

Oh perfect. I have a premade Heisenberg Box just for this.

And of course this graph from Covid Neck Sharpies Part I which I'm SURE you remember like it was yesterday...

You can move the blue dashed line up or down a smidge, and you would expect the rapid antigen test to be moved up from the PCR line (because it's less sensitive), but the point is there is likely a period of time where you test negative despite being infected and possibly infectious.

Joined: 06/29/2010

MGoPoints: 61105

JonnyHintz

October 3rd, 2020 at 1:05 PM ^

Without knowing the answer to your initial question, theres an inherent flaw with all that we’re doing with CoVid mitigation strategy. Nothing we do is 100% effective. Including masks, including social distancing, including washing our hands and including our testing measures. 
 

The point is to handle these things to the best of our ability that reduces risk in a way that we can move forward with certain aspects of our society that are necessary/safe. The fact of the matter is, this is the best testing strategy we have at this time. It is far from perfect, and isn’t 100% effective but is better than doing nothing. It is the best we have and, for the powers that be, it was enough to move forward with sports. 
 

At the end of the day, the test everyone everyday strategy is more effective than testing once or twice a week before and after games. And both are more effective than moving forward with no testing at all.  And while you may (or may not) be contagious before you test positive, it’s still better to catch it and prevent further exposure after you can test positive. 

Joined: 01/11/2015

MGoPoints: 48366

runandshoot

October 3rd, 2020 at 12:11 PM ^

207k people in the US and nearly 1mm people worldwide would love to chime in about something this "mild," but they can't because they are, you know, dead because of it.

Minimal efforts such as masks and social distancing could get things open faster. It's really that simple.

But let's keep calling it a hoax.

Joined: 09/04/2009

MGoPoints: 6670