COVID-19 Treatment for Football Players vs. other athletes/students
I posted back at the beginning of the football season regarding testing of football players and how it was affecting the community. As a reminder, I am not a physician but my wife is the Chief of Infectious Diseases at a Group of 5 school so I get some nuggets from her from time to time. Now that the season is coming to a close there is a situation that sort of bookends my post from back in September.
I won't name the school/hospital system that she works for (for privacy reasons) but the game this weekend is canceled due to outbreak on the football team. Next week the team is scheduled to play in the Conference Championship game. Earlier in the week the team physician (an Ortho doc) contacted my wife to ask if protocols could be changed for next week for the purpose of getting asymptomatic positives/contacts out of quarantine much earlier than what has been allowed up to this point in time. He further stated that he was preemptively asking because he knew that the coaches/AD would be concerned that they were being put at a competitive disadvantage if some of the players were not eligible. My wife likes football but she was not about to compromise the plan they have had in place since the start of the season/school year and did not endorse a change. It should be noted that she is not the final authority but her opinion certainly carries weight with the hospital system. Yesterday, she received an email from the team physician that he had sought advice from the Director of the local County Health Dept who was willing to endorse a policy change. Therefore, any asymptomatic players will be able to "test out" of quarantine in order to be able to play in the Conference Championship Game on Saturday.
My questions is this: what are your thoughts on football players being afforded this exception? If you had a child going to a school would you believe that your child (who presumably isn't a football player) had a right to the same treatment/protocol? Thoughts on athletes from other sports? There are obviously political overtones to this entire situation as I'm sure the conference wants to make sure the game gets played for television exposure ($$$). I truly hope this conversation can remain civil. There are a lot of very smart people on this blog who have diverse backgrounds and viewpoints so I am anxious to hear your thoughts and perspectives. If I didn't clarify something in the post and you have a question please do not hesitate to ask.
December 11th, 2020 at 3:04 PM ^
So if I'm understanding this correctly, Player A could test positive on Friday. Be completely asymptomatic on Saturday and play that evening? If that's the case, then that's pretty fucked up.
December 11th, 2020 at 3:21 PM ^
If I had to guess I'll assume that they're going to use the updated CDC guideline that says you can test out at 7 days. However, that guideline was listed as an "option" and was meant to involve areas where it is harmful to the community if asymptomatic people aren't brought off quarantine (Ie, nurses, doctors, other essential employees).
But, please respond to the question at the end: do you have an issue with it being for football players only? Would you support it at Michigan if you had a child going there who wasn't afforded the same opportunity?
December 11th, 2020 at 3:13 PM ^
Kudos to your wife for standing her ground under pressure and shame on that team physician for even considering changing protocol, let alone pressuring your wife in any way to try getting her to sign off on his plan.
If we had even semi-competant B1G leadership I'd be expecting an investigation of that unnamed football factory school.
(edit @3:16: I re-read the OP; I now notice he wrote "group of 5", not "power 5".
But I still won't apologize if my post offended any buckeye fans...)
December 11th, 2020 at 3:42 PM ^
Was Michigan a "football factory" back when the team was consistently decent (1990s)? The reason you accuse teams with more success than yours of being "football factories" is simply because you have nothing else to offer at this point.
December 11th, 2020 at 5:03 PM ^
Was there a worldwide pandemic that I missed in the 90's.
Typical buckeye, completely misses the point of the OP's topic, instead gets "offended" by the term football factory........
December 11th, 2020 at 5:29 PM ^
Not offended at all. The topic was about COVID protocols and - as it turns out - a different school than OSU. Instead of reading the topic carefully, a typical Michigan Man uses it as an opportunity to call OSU a "football factory" which is meant as an insult. I was just asking for more clarification as to what that term means. If it is describing a winning program, I wondered if the same term would have applied to UM back a ways when it used to win consistently. It's been a long time since that was case though, so I guess it doesn't matter. Just another example of Michigan fans left with nothing except the old reliable "yeah, but we do it right!" argument.
P.S. France called UM. They want their white flag back.
December 11th, 2020 at 3:17 PM ^
My understanding was that long, fixed quarantines were only necessary in the absence of testing. Changing the rules for competitive advantage is lame, but in terms of the health risk if you can repeatedly test negative then there's no harm in ending the quarantine.
December 11th, 2020 at 3:20 PM ^
I don't understand how this could be true. You don't immediately test positive for an illness after you are exposed to it, even if you will later. I don't see any way to exclude exposed players testing negative and then becoming contagious mid-game.
Seems very reckless to me. Where are the adults?
December 11th, 2020 at 3:27 PM ^
This entire season has been a rather disgusting confirmation of the lengths of risk and recklessness that some of these programs/conferences will reach in order to keep the revenue flowing. Football is fun, but in the end it's just a damned game. People are falling seriously ill and many are dying and, while the athletes and staff are not likely to succumb, they are still needlessly contributing to the spread by having them congregate.
December 11th, 2020 at 3:37 PM ^
I can’t say I agree. It is about money, of course it is. That’s because that’s peoples’ jobs. The athletic department is a group of people who have jobs, and they want to keep their business open to make that money. The athletes too. Many of them need this to showcase their skills to get to the NFL.
You see it even more so on the small business scale. They can’t afford to shut down, it’s their livelihood. So they stay open as much as possible, even covertly from authorities just to stay alive. This is similar behavior, just on a larger and more public scale.
December 11th, 2020 at 3:30 PM ^
I think the quarantine requirements in question are regarding potential exposures, not previously positive players.
Player A tests positive - Player A is out
Player B was a close contact of Player A - for us normal folks, Player B should be quarantining for 14 days (or 10, or 7 depending on the new CDC rules) to see if they develop symptoms, and to limit the spread of the virus.
What it sounds like the Ortho was asking is "If Player B, a close contact, tests negative, does Player B have to quarantine?"
I think the answer should be "Yes, Player B should quarantine, because someone can be infected and spread the virus before they test positive" which is sounds like was the OP's wife's response.
December 11th, 2020 at 3:32 PM ^
Reading between the lines, I think the G5 team might be Cincinnati. They had to cancel their season finale (in which it was already rescheduled from earlier this season) against Tulsa so they have a AAC championship game against Tulsa.
December 11th, 2020 at 4:03 PM ^
By your exact same logic, Tulsa would qualify. Tulsa had their game against Cinci canceled before their championship game vs. Cinci.
Anyway, it's not that hard to figure out if the OP really did want to stay private. There are 10 total G5 schools going to a championship game. Fewer that had recent game cancelations. Fewer that have their own university health systems. Even fewer with female infectious disease chiefs.
Maybe a mod can scrub the post for the OP.
December 11th, 2020 at 4:01 PM ^
There is a big difference between asymptomatic positives and contacts that are under quarantine. Your statement seems to group them together. The CDC quarantine times are now reduced to 7 days for close contacts with testing and 10 days without testing. Are they trying to reduce the 7 day time? I can't imagine any school trying to get an asymptomatic positive back on the field, that's just messed up.
December 11th, 2020 at 5:34 PM ^
Holy crap. You guys cancelled the game for this? You truly are wusses. You deserve Harbaugh.
Latest Michigan athletics COVID-19 testing data pic.twitter.com/pGfXJPcJtm
— angelique (@chengelis) December 11, 2020
December 11th, 2020 at 5:49 PM ^
Does being obtuse come naturally or do you have to work at it? Positive tests DO NOT INCLUDE contact tracing........please return to the echo chamber at 11W, you will be much happier there with the rest of the tin foil hatters.
December 11th, 2020 at 7:08 PM ^
The team physician said Michigan football was NOT in the Red for Covid with positives and tracing.
Its now being reported that the “40 unavailable players” is from Covid, injuries and players leaving combined.
From a Covid standpoint, they could have played.
December 11th, 2020 at 9:14 PM ^
Gene Smith said that osu was not red/red when they ditched Illinois, Wisconsin wasn't red/red when they bailed on multiple games either, so what's your point?
December 11th, 2020 at 9:29 PM ^
What you're trying to do is commendable, but it's fruitless to talk logic to these idiots. One of them (O'Boogie) is just an obnoxious OSU fan only here to talk shit. He'll soon be in Bolivia. The other (AF1618) looks like a Domer based on his posting history. Best not to feed the trolls.
December 11th, 2020 at 9:41 PM ^
Too true........I wanted points and I was bored.
December 11th, 2020 at 9:47 PM ^
No worries. AF1618 posts some good info every once in a while, but his recent posts have been sketchy.
Cheers! And Go Blue!
December 11th, 2020 at 9:08 PM ^
Your team bailed on the game on purpose and everyone knows it. The France of the Big Ten. Your next HC should have a first name like Francois, Jean-Pierre, or Claude.
December 11th, 2020 at 11:15 PM ^
Why not? Exceptions and changes should be done when it’s warranted- and especially when it serves a greater good. A lot can change in the time between today and when a plan was implemented before the season. To not be willing to change a position and process in the face of new information can be futile.