Bad News Thread

N00B said:
In the world of sports...

www.google.com

What to Know About the Yankees’ Coronavirus Outbreak (Published 2021)

Gleyber Torres is the eighth person (and the first player) from the Yankees organization to test positive for the coronavirus this week. All had been vaccinated.
www.google.com www.google.com
Click to expand...
One guy was symptomatic, right? Makes it tricky to draw any type of reasonable conclusion. Oh, and I am not arguing that vaccines aren't working. As @dad4 states, there's a lot of evidence to suggest they are doing exactly what we hoped they would do.
 
Honest question, is there a difference between testing positive for Covid and having Covid? What does testing positive mean when your already vaccinated? I don't know that we have those answers.

Actually we know very little about the virus other than the odds of getting it outdoors are slim to none, it's virtually harmless to children and the aged and certain co-morbidities make you more vulnerable to severe symptoms and/or death. I'm going to guess that we will eventually determine that there is also some genetic factors that make certain, seemingly healthy, people more susceptible to dire consequences.
 
Glitterhater said:
I mean- I almost think we're ready for an Off Topic 3 at this rate! :)
Click to expand...
The funny thing is that Dominic moved this discussion here so he wouldn't have to monitor it closely. With the exception of one misanthropic, multi-aliased troll who occasionally goes off his meds, the discussions here are more civil than on the regular board. That wasn't the case originally.
 
kickingandscreaming said:
I wasn't really thinking about this in terms of shutting down the show. It was more about the significance of a positive test, after vaccination where no symptoms are shown. The point is, we don't know the significance in terms of transmission to others. Can they transmit at all, and more importantly, are those that aren't vaccinated in danger of getting a "bad" case from someone such as Maher.
Click to expand...

The test looks for the virus, not the symptoms. Even before we had the vaccines, it was noted that people could be infected without showing by symptoms.
 
kickingandscreaming said:
The funny thing is that Dominic moved this discussion here so he wouldn't have to monitor it closely. With the exception of one misanthropic, multi-aliased troll who occasionally goes off his meds, the discussions here are more civil than on the regular board. That wasn't the case originally.
Click to expand...
You are a far better person than I if you think it's just 1! :D

I actually enjoy reading the heated debates, as several come correct with knowledge, facts, and well thought out ideas, (on both "sides".) I can't do the conspiracy theorists, however. Or the baseless claims that make you wonder how that person had enough brain cells to tie their shoes that morning.
 
espola said:
The test looks for the virus, not the symptoms. Even before we had the vaccines, it was noted that people could be infected without showing by symptoms.
Click to expand...

Well this raises the possibility that they might not even be infected....there may be 2 types of asymptomatics: 1) with the virus in their nasal cavity but the body's immune system (whether by vaccine or naturally) deals with it at the point of entry so it doesn't enter the rest of the system, and 2) those where the virus has gone beyond the point of entry and is replicating in other cells but remain asymptomatic. We don't know how contagious either is right now. But it may serve to explain the split in the research over how contagious asympatomics really are.
 
Senator Burr asked Fauci, Peter Marks from the FDA, and
@CDCDirector what percentage of their own employees are vaccinated. Fauci probably a bit more than half, around 60%. Marks said about the same. Walensky dodged the question.
 
watfly said:
Honest question, is there a difference between testing positive for Covid and having Covid? What does testing positive mean when your already vaccinated? I don't know that we have those answers.

Actually we know very little about the virus other than the odds of getting it outdoors are slim to none, it's virtually harmless to children and the aged and certain co-morbidities make you more vulnerable to severe symptoms and/or death. I'm going to guess that we will eventually determine that there is also some genetic factors that make certain, seemingly healthy, people more susceptible to dire consequences.
Click to expand...
In regards to policy making, I personally think its important to make decisions based upon what we do know and to be very, very careful about making decisions on what we think may be true but don't have any evidence to support it. Unfortunately, our policy makers are often risk adverse (aka blame avoidance vs. actual leadership) and myopic.
 
kickingandscreaming said:
The funny thing is that Dominic moved this discussion here so he wouldn't have to monitor it closely. With the exception of one misanthropic, multi-aliased troll who occasionally goes off his meds, the discussions here are more civil than on the regular board. That wasn't the case originally.
Click to expand...
So you mean to tell me if you isolate the problematic group and let the masses proceed, things can be better?
 
Grace T. said:
Well this raises the possibility that they might not even be infected....there may be 2 types of asymptomatics: 1) with the virus in their nasal cavity but the body's immune system (whether by vaccine or naturally) deals with it at the point of entry so it doesn't enter the rest of the system, and 2) those where the virus has gone beyond the point of entry and is replicating in other cells but remain asymptomatic. We don't know how contagious either is right now. But it may serve to explain the split in the research over how contagious asympatomics really are.
Click to expand...

If asymptomatic (vaccinated) not pre-symptomatic can spread the virus, we may have just created policy based on CDC guidance on masks for vaccinated individuals and no need to quarantine after exposure of vaccinated persons that will perpetuate the spread and endemic nature of this virus.
 
N00B said:
If asymptomatic (vaccinated) not pre-symptomatic can spread the virus, we may have just created policy based on CDC guidance on masks for vaccinated individuals and no need to quarantine after exposure of vaccinated persons that will perpetuate the spread and endemic nature of this virus.
Click to expand...

It was always going to be endemic (at least for the next 3-5 years). The real question is deaths/severe illness. We're just going to have to get used to it floating around. We can thanks the PRC for that.
 
watfly said:
Honest question, is there a difference between testing positive for Covid and having Covid? What does testing positive mean when your already vaccinated? I don't know that we have those answers.

Actually we know very little about the virus other than the odds of getting it outdoors are slim to none, it's virtually harmless to children and the aged and certain co-morbidities make you more vulnerable to severe symptoms and/or death. I'm going to guess that we will eventually determine that there is also some genetic factors that make certain, seemingly healthy, people more susceptible to dire consequences.
Click to expand...

The vaccine does not cloak you in an invisible protective shield. Virus can still get in, but the immune system of a vaccinated person has been pretuned to have a stronger defense against the virus.
 
Grace T. said:
Well this raises the possibility that they might not even be infected....there may be 2 types of asymptomatics: 1) with the virus in their nasal cavity but the body's immune system (whether by vaccine or naturally) deals with it at the point of entry so it doesn't enter the rest of the system, and 2) those where the virus has gone beyond the point of entry and is replicating in other cells but remain asymptomatic. We don't know how contagious either is right now. But it may serve to explain the split in the research over how contagious asympatomics really are.
Click to expand...

For a novel definition of "infected", perhaps.
 
Jerry West upset with Jeanie Buss' 'offensive' list of important Lakers
West spent entire playing career with Lakers and helped reshape organization from front office

Sports take that pisses me off today. Jeanie is so wrong and I know her dad would have JW in the top 5. Sorry LeBron, no way you get in my top 5, now way :(
 
Grace T. said:
Well this raises the possibility that they might not even be infected....there may be 2 types of asymptomatics: 1) with the virus in their nasal cavity but the body's immune system (whether by vaccine or naturally) deals with it at the point of entry so it doesn't enter the rest of the system, and 2) those where the virus has gone beyond the point of entry and is replicating in other cells but remain asymptomatic. We don't know how contagious either is right now. But it may serve to explain the split in the research over how contagious asympatomics really are.
Click to expand...
That's what I was thinking with my question... 1) is testing positive for Covid and 2) is having Covid and 3) would be being impacted by Covid. I would guess that all 3 have different levels of transmissibility.
 
espola said:
The test looks for the virus, not the symptoms. Even before we had the vaccines, it was noted that people could be infected without showing by symptoms.
Click to expand...
Again, this goes back to my point which I don't suppose I made very well, when does a positive test matter? For cases that have "broken through", how often does anything "happen" (symptoms beyond a common cold or the passing of the virus to someone who eventually develops serious symptoms)? It's incomplete information as you note - some cases are asymptomatic and some lead to death.
 
Glitterhater said:
You are a far better person than I if you think it's just 1! :D

I actually enjoy reading the heated debates, as several come correct with knowledge, facts, and well thought out ideas, (on both "sides".) I can't do the conspiracy theorists, however. Or the baseless claims that make you wonder how that person had enough brain cells to tie their shoes that morning.
Click to expand...
Heated debates are good. What would this board be without @dad4 and @Grace T. engaged in way more of the English language than I ever learned? We need to engage - even with those we strongly disagree with or those who have ideas we think are outrageous. I am speaking of broadly stated aspersions applied to groups of people.
 
kickingandscreaming said:
Heated debates are good. What would this board be without @dad4 and @Grace T. engaged in way more of the English language than I ever learned? We need to engage - even with those we strongly disagree with or those who have ideas we think are outrageous. I am speaking of broadly stated aspersions applied to groups of people.
Click to expand...

Dude, these people are nuts and you know it. I've been dealing with them before I was born. I'm no troll, trust me :)
1621022310545.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top