I disagree. A college athlete with no immunological compromise will not die of COVID. People dying under the age of 25 are patients with underlying disease, transplants or cancer. I would bet every penny I have that if a normal season is held no division 1 football or basketball player would die or even be admitted to an ICU on a ventilator or bipap machine.
Nine More Positive COVID-19 Tests in Iowa Athletic Department
- Thread starter RobHowe
- Start date
- Status
I disagree. A college athlete with no immunological compromise will not die of COVID. People dying under the age of 25 are patients with underlying disease, transplants or cancer. I would bet every penny I have that if a normal season is held no division 1 football or basketball player would die or even be admitted to an ICU on a ventilator or bipap machine.
I have a unique perspective here. I’m an anesthesiologist, I spent the month of April in NYC during the peak of the pandemic working in COVID ICUs and I’ve actually been COVID positive myself and I survived.
These players across the country are all asymptomatic and at worst have had very mild symptoms. I’m 36 healthy and am in good physical shape (run and work out a lot) and I myself had very mild symptoms, basically a cold you wouldn’t think twice about in a normal year.
Our country’s hope here is that asymptomatic or mild symptom spread across much of the population especially among healthy people to build up the herd. Contrary to what the news may say, young healthy people are not getting a seriously ill, unless they have immunocompromise (cancer, lung disease, transplants etc) To me, the fact that this virus is sweeping through healthy young people will be a better thing long term. Division 1 football and basketball players in peak condition are not at risk from this. The caveat would be once a player tests positive he needs to stay away from nursing homes and elderly relatives. However if he’s in fall camp or in season this shouldn’t be a big deal.
Last edited:
A voice of reason like this is just shouted down amid the current hysteria.
You have to realize though, my particular real life perspective doesn’t translate into clicks, television ratings or votes. So it’s of little value to people shaping the narrative.
Meh. I’m sure the folks on the story county board of health are nice and well meaning people, but I’m not sure they have any authority over anything. What do the Marshall county board of health people say? What about Boone county? Maybe ISU can run over and play in lower risk marshalltown.
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
Our local baseball travel club just had a coach for one of the age groups test positive in the last week. He was going to have a medical procedure done for something and they tested him. He had no idea he had it.
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
You would definitely see certain sports cut at schools first, like baseball, hockey, field hockey, etc.. Of course, if a women's sport was cut they'd have to cut a guy's sport as well for Title IX.
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
........and really, how effective is quarantine for 14 days at the beginning of a season or start of practice really going to be? These players will be together for months and the players will be around other individuals, family, acquaintances, etc.. What, if one does get it will they quarantine everybody again and each time someone else gets it?
This whole situation is just a mess and sucks.
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
No way. I disagree. There are healthy football players who unfortunately periodically pass away on a football field. There are tens of thousands of athletes. Remember not just football and basketball. Are you telling me there are no athletes playing with Type I diabetes? There is a very good chance a player could have some unknown condition that may not be good with a COVID-19 infection. It's the numbers.
I agree these cases would be very rare, but I don't think one can say 100% of students would be safe. The question is how much it deviates from up with COVID compared to health situations/deaths non-related to COVID. If very very minimal, than you can argue that you are correct that the risk is minimal.
A player could die with an undiagnosed heart condition such as IHSS, traumatic injury falling off their scooter or from heat stroke, that could happen. A healthy 18 year old athlete randomly getting COVID and ending up dead from a cytokine induced pulmonary edema is just a CNN fantasy.
That being said screenings for heart conditions such as hypertrophic cardiomyopathy have become so simple with echocardiography those deaths are becoming extremely rare, especially at the college level.
Yeah I believe it. It's just out there and thankfully for most folks it isn't that bad to have. It just sucks that they too are passing it on to others that may get really sick from it. But what can you do? Unless you're getting tested or staying away from people there's just not much else to do
NorthKCHawk
Well-Known Member
I am in the camp with JONRN. I have studied the numbers carefully and the number of cases of serious impact or death for healthy kids under 25 is statistically zero.
I think colleges are taking the exact WRONG approach if we are looking at the long term. The colleges should actually be allowing the virus to spread across the campus quickly and early. Protect the coaches, profs, staff and sick with social distancing, but for the regular 20 year olds on campus, they need to get the virus early, and get over it long before they start sending these kids home for Thanksgiving. Let the virus rage in August so that it largely does not exist on campus in November. Trying to slow the progression is a losing battle and will just mean that a lot of kids will take it home with them at the end of the semester.
I think colleges are taking the exact WRONG approach if we are looking at the long term. The colleges should actually be allowing the virus to spread across the campus quickly and early. Protect the coaches, profs, staff and sick with social distancing, but for the regular 20 year olds on campus, they need to get the virus early, and get over it long before they start sending these kids home for Thanksgiving. Let the virus rage in August so that it largely does not exist on campus in November. Trying to slow the progression is a losing battle and will just mean that a lot of kids will take it home with them at the end of the semester.
RobHowe
Administrator
I honestly don't know what is the best approach. I look to scientists and epidemiologists for guidance. They aren't always right, but it's a new virus. I think everybody is learning as we go. I prefer to listen to experts in the field as opposed to people in other professions.
I'm following safety guidelines like wearing a mask and washing hands. I'm often one of the few people wearing a mask. Does the mask help and how much? I don't know. But I know it can't hurt and if I can help protect someone else, it's a pretty small sacrifice.
(Here's where someone cites a study that masks don't help. Then I can cite a study that does. And around we go.).
I'm following safety guidelines like wearing a mask and washing hands. I'm often one of the few people wearing a mask. Does the mask help and how much? I don't know. But I know it can't hurt and if I can help protect someone else, it's a pretty small sacrifice.
(Here's where someone cites a study that masks don't help. Then I can cite a study that does. And around we go.).
There are no
There are no definite answers, however it’s almost certain that containing the virus is impossible. The only way to truly slow it down is mass exposure as what happened in NY in April, mass exposure will be much more effective quickly than a vaccine which is very difficult to develop. Even flu shot research and development which has been around for 20+ years has really never been reliable.
The caveat would be positive tested football players would have to stay away from grandparents and nursing homes, which shouldn’t be difficult
There are no definite answers, however it’s almost certain that containing the virus is impossible. The only way to truly slow it down is mass exposure as what happened in NY in April, mass exposure will be much more effective quickly than a vaccine which is very difficult to develop. Even flu shot research and development which has been around for 20+ years has really never been reliable.
The caveat would be positive tested football players would have to stay away from grandparents and nursing homes, which shouldn’t be difficult
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
Agree. There is no way to wrangle a moving train, IMO.
MelroseHawkins
Well-Known Member
I've thought about this and have had a similar belief on occasion. I don't see a real issue with letting the 20 yr olds get it to build antibodies. That would be great, but, the issue is trying to contain that to a campus and not letting the 20 yr olds infect those outside of the campus such as elderly parents, relatives, those with co-morbid conditions that were at Walmart the same time the 20 yr old was.
The concern is overrunning the hospitals if that were to happen. I completely agree with the logic, but the collateral damage has to be put into perspective. Again, I'm more on your side of thinking that this has to pass through for herd immunity.
okeefe4prez
Well-Known Member
Of course not. Thanks for sharing it. We completely quit watching American mass media crap and got rid of our cable. My wife is utterly disgusted by it. We watch the news on NHK out of Japan everyday. It's the remnants of what the US forced on them after WWII when their media was a fervent propaganda machine. No advertising, no direct government funding. They just send guys around to everyone's house every year to collect $40 to fund it. It reports news. That's it. No circle jerk talking heads saying "Orange Man so bad, did you see what he said on Twitter yesterday????"
Your story is 100% in line with what the Japanese version of NHK reports. They won't test people unless they are majorly at risk or are very sick. The government there basically just tells everyone to presume they have it and that everyone who they come into contact with has it and to exercise caution, but they've barely tested because they realize it is a futile exercise and that the old people (who are a huge percentage of the population) have just got to exercise massive caution. They don't have many people with a BMI over 30 and they don't have nursing homes. They have under 1000 deaths in an extremely densely packed country. I'm not saying people shouldn't exercise caution, but we have been dealt a response that is basically akin to if this thing was damned near as bad as Ebola and as contagious as the common cold, which is a huge mistake.
HuckFinn
Well-Known Member
Thank you for your service in NYC. That took a lot of guts, especially at that point in the pandemic. Enjoyed your post. I am glad you included your background.
Iowa data (IDPH site) as of 6/23/2020:
Total deaths in 0 - 60 years age range: 88
Number of those that had no preexisting condition: 8 (all in the 40 to 60 age range)
All deaths in the 18 - 40 range (which was 15 deaths) had a preexisting condition. So evidence for 4 or 5 months shows your risk of death is tiny in this range and even nil so far if you don't have a preexisting condition. But Fear.
To date, 26,346 positive cases overall, with 83% of those in the 0 to 60 age range. That translates to 21,867 cases in that range. The death rate therefore would be 88 / 21,867 = roughly 0.4% for known cases in this range. Much lower for the younger in the range as 12,119 positive cases in the 18 - 40 year old range and 15 deaths (all with preexisting conditions) for a death rate of 0.12% for known cases in that age range. There have been 0 deaths in the under 18 year old range. For the 41 - 60 age range the death rate is 73 deaths / 8,694 cases = 0.84%. So if you are younger than 40 this thing is about as deadly as a regular flu virus, less so if younger than 18.
These are what is known based on past experience during a time when the medical community was learning how to treat and you can verify on IDPH website. I know fear gets more eyeballs though.
Total deaths in 0 - 60 years age range: 88
Number of those that had no preexisting condition: 8 (all in the 40 to 60 age range)
All deaths in the 18 - 40 range (which was 15 deaths) had a preexisting condition. So evidence for 4 or 5 months shows your risk of death is tiny in this range and even nil so far if you don't have a preexisting condition. But Fear.
To date, 26,346 positive cases overall, with 83% of those in the 0 to 60 age range. That translates to 21,867 cases in that range. The death rate therefore would be 88 / 21,867 = roughly 0.4% for known cases in this range. Much lower for the younger in the range as 12,119 positive cases in the 18 - 40 year old range and 15 deaths (all with preexisting conditions) for a death rate of 0.12% for known cases in that age range. There have been 0 deaths in the under 18 year old range. For the 41 - 60 age range the death rate is 73 deaths / 8,694 cases = 0.84%. So if you are younger than 40 this thing is about as deadly as a regular flu virus, less so if younger than 18.
These are what is known based on past experience during a time when the medical community was learning how to treat and you can verify on IDPH website. I know fear gets more eyeballs though.
- Status
