The Ivy League Cancels Spring 2021 Sports

[BT3100]

Hundreds of thousands dead in this country. Thousands dying every day in this country. Yeah, let's keep playing games

Life's hard. It's harder when people lie, cover up and conspire to hide a disease instead of informing the world about It's ability to kill. I wish more nations were honest, I think you do too. But they're not. So we can only do what we can do, I choose to live my life. You can choose to live yours too at home in safety. Its a persons own choice about their body.

 

[CrazyNani]

Figured you'd be, since you can't make a case as to why a state shutdown for over a year has more deaths than a state "wide open" for a year.
Come back when you want to discuss facts.
Were always here!
Just bring facts..

California has almost twice the population as Florida. Now, go bully someone else, please.

 

[BT3100]

California has almost twice the population as Florida. Now, go bully someone else, please.

Look at deaths per million. That is independent of total population.
You're not bullying me. I want to bully no one. Just discussing facts. No drama, no name calling, just facts. Tell me how Florida and their maskless ways have similar or less deaths per million than shut down California?
I need to be enlighten.

 

[Shiloh]

Tell me how Florida and their maskless ways have similar or less deaths per million than shut down California?
I need to be enlighten.

Compared to Florida, California has more:

Population density.
Multi-generational households (due to high housing costs)
Immigrants and low-wage workers, ie ‘essential workers’ who won’t or can’t take sick days.
Significant economic reliance on unskilled labor ie farm workers.
Cooler weather which drives people indoors.
Higher level of inter-state migration.
Large population centers that are conservative and don’t believe in social mitigation measures such as mask-wearing, social distancing (Central Valley, Inland Empire/San Bernardino County, Orange County)
Poverty and income inequality

 

[BT3100]

Don't cherry pick stats..it is unbecoming. What do N. Dakota and S. Dakota have in common? How about Hawaii and Vermont? Or look at other countries which were more restrictive and compare them to the US?

The fact that FL and CA are so similar only means that there are lot more factors involved in morbidity/infection rates than just how restrictive a State/Country was. For all we know without restrictions, CA could have been 5 times worse statistically than what they are now if they had the same lack of restrictions as FL/N. Dakota/S. Dakota.

Also for what is worth, I do I think CA went a bit overboard with regards to not allowing youth outdoor sports to be played.

Just drawing a contrast. Clear one at that, most clear. No one knew enough about this virus to make the drastic moves certain states did. It was done with no data, made with little or no concern for the impact and proved to be disastrous.

 

[BT3100]

Compared to Florida, California has more:

Population density.
Multi-generational households (due to high housing costs)
Immigrants and low-wage workers, ie ‘essential workers’ who won’t or can’t take sick days.
Significant economic reliance on unskilled labor ie farm workers.
Cooler weather which drives people indoors.
Higher level of inter-state migration.
Large population centers that are conservative and don’t believe in social mitigation measures such as mask-wearing, social distancing (Central Valley, Inland Empire/San Bernardino County, Orange County)
Poverty and income inequality

And Florida has a significantly more elderly population, more transient population mainly coming from states who were most hardly hit (NJ/NY) and was last to establish mask mandates. Never closed schools, or adapted draconian measures to control the population.
Florida is a borderline textbook example of a contrast to the lockdown states. One of the main reasons the MSM doesn't speak about Florida covid cases.

 

[BT3100]

Fatcs are Covid is an awful virus that has a disastrous impact on a specific portion of the population. Certain states understood that and acted, while others exposed the elderly to the virus and it killed so many. If we really want to follow the science then we need to protect those most vulnerable and don't send sick people back into nursing homes. Mask up and be responsible. However telling college aged kids that they can't play ball is another knee jerk reaction, poorly thought out and lacking of common sense and scientific data. Its a lazy response done to virtue signal caring when other leagues are taking smart and effective measure to mitigate the spread.
I'm done.

 

[BT3100]

The contrast is flawed as there are other states which prove the opposite of what you are trying to get at.

When you have a lack of data about something in Engineering design you put a factor of safety on your design and the result is that you typically spend more on the product than you would probably need to 99.99% of the time..Of course that is a much easier moral question since the only thing you are considering is cost of product and not the cost associated with the impact of restrictions on human lives. Was there a better way of balancing things for many states? Probably..Unfortunately with the way the world is, this won't be the last pandemic in our lifetimes so lets hope the public health people have learned from this.

I'll get back to tomorrow when I'm awake enough to give ya a response worthy of your post (I mean that sincerely) worked 20 hours straight today . I do think California went way to far in destroying lives to save lives. Maybe Florida didn't go far enough but more to come on the conversation. I'm reading what your saying and considering it. I don't know all the answers and am learning as this evolves

 

[BT3100]

All I was saying was that states like CA just put a huge factor of safety on their "design" where the only thing they were considering was controlling the spread of the virus and death. Restrictions work at controlling the disease..I don't think you can argue that. Again that doesn't mean that more restrictions = less death rate when the sample sizes are different demographically. They took the position that the impact on humans due to the restrictions was a valid tradeoff for controlling the spread. There is probably a happy medium somewhere which I am sure some "elites" are studying at the moment so that next time this happens we can go about this in a bit of a different way perhaps.

They did but when they saw it was destroying lives in other ways they refused to bend, buckle or give in, even when the data supported doing so. They chose to dig in harder and made things worse.

 

[BT3100]

So you had access to all the data, including what lifting the restrictions would do in their state to the death rate? You ease up on the restrictions and the lives of younger people (and perhaps the economy but I am not sure about that...) most certainly improve but the lives of the most vulnerable gets worse. Maybe that is a risk worth taking, maybe not. They obviously decided it wasn't.

People on this board who have DD's that love to play softball are biased, and rightfully so. They love their kids and hate to see them suffer. However people making decisions have to take everything into account. The point here is stop acting like these decisions were akin to choosing to supersize your order at McDonalds (is that still a thing..I haven't gone to McDonald's in 20 years).

They didn't have data either but chose to lock down without any evidence that it was the right thing to do.
Florida chose not to with similar outcomes from a health standpoint. Elected leaders in California made a bad call. It happens but the real crime is continuing this charade like they were right all along.