Turn it around, what would you do if you were in TW's position? You do know he, and you, can be a carrier without having symptoms, right? Would you want to risk passing this junk to your spouse/kid/family/friends? For that matter, what would you want TW to do if he was your child knowing of course that he's an adult and can make his own decisions but still, as a parent, what would be your wish? There's no easy answer to this predicament.
Terry Wilson tweet...questions?
- Thread starter brian.mikeson
- Start date
Food for thought.....Car wrecks are not contagious, do not transmit in stadium bathrooms and kill less people in a year than Covid does in a month.
Were he my son, I would advise he play and “bubble” himself off during the season from the daughter. Sounds cruel, but that child’s future is also effected by his abilities to display his talents, and perhaps get a pro K.
UK is undoubtedly showing all reasonable cautions, and playing football might be no more dangerous than going to Walmart (from a Covid perspective).
Coronabros gonna Coronabro. You guys care more about politics than football, no doubt it’s the reason you get giddy when you hear about programs or players opting out.
Looks like he's in. Couldn't have blamed him either way.
https://kentuckysportsradio.com/foo...-fans-hes-all-in-on-upcoming-football-season/
https://kentuckysportsradio.com/foo...-fans-hes-all-in-on-upcoming-football-season/
They do: notice how they all have a political figure’s name as a moniker for participation on a sports forum!
She’s a Covid denier . . . didn’t require masks or testing until too late.
Now Ghomert, my hero is sick!
Glad to hear it. I’m sure it’ll be terribly hard being away from his newborn - if it comes to that, but men have been doing that for ages to go off to war or even a big career opportunity, which the later kind of is for Terry.
We’ve all had to adjust some. Have been away from two family members for weeks for suspected and actual infections.
I’ve said a prayer.
I want Congressmen with sillier last names than mine, and he’s one of the few.
A perfectly logical, and well-thought-out conclusion based on the data, what the experts say, and common sense. Thank you...and in the words of Peyton Manning, I concur.
I would love to be a carrier and give it to my dead aunts 2 sons and her husband.. And they become a death statistic.. Would save me from doing what I wanna do and not go to jail..
His daughter and many others have been giving him hell for ignoring Covid precautions. They've really been piling on.....It's a Ghomert Pile.
kyhanky, that is definitely NOT true. I can definitely understand Terry having second thoughts about playing football because of the COVID-19, and a child on the way. A child's life is much more important then the game of football. I quit watching the NFL when Kapernick took a knee, and I haven't missed it a bit. I don't intend to watch the NBA, since I think ALL lives matter, just not black lives matter.
OLD STOLL FIELD GUY!
Ah... "reputable" - because that's a guarantee. Because JH is beyond reproach and would never take money to favor a side or an industry.
In the late 80s JH did a study on Parkinson's in patients diagnosed with the "disease" and found a significant link between positive diagnosis and prior antacid use. Within a couple years, however, anyone looking for the results of that study couldn't find them nor the articles in periodicals that referred to it. The magazines had been pulled from the shelves of universities and reprints by publishers were not granted.
Turns out that JH received over 4 million from the manufacturers of tums and rolaids and the study just went away. Johns Hopkins is not and has not been immune to corruption or selling out. They are as reputable as Epstein once was, Clinton, Birx, and many others ... until they weren't.
Show me cause and effect. Show me detailed, true to science, data. I want to know what caused, not what someone tested positive for or was presumed to have when they passed due to something else. You can't because it's been purposefully hidden from everyone. The sooner you accept that, the sooner someone can have a real conversation with you about it.
In the late 80s JH did a study on Parkinson's in patients diagnosed with the "disease" and found a significant link between positive diagnosis and prior antacid use. Within a couple years, however, anyone looking for the results of that study couldn't find them nor the articles in periodicals that referred to it. The magazines had been pulled from the shelves of universities and reprints by publishers were not granted.
Turns out that JH received over 4 million from the manufacturers of tums and rolaids and the study just went away. Johns Hopkins is not and has not been immune to corruption or selling out. They are as reputable as Epstein once was, Clinton, Birx, and many others ... until they weren't.
Show me cause and effect. Show me detailed, true to science, data. I want to know what caused, not what someone tested positive for or was presumed to have when they passed due to something else. You can't because it's been purposefully hidden from everyone. The sooner you accept that, the sooner someone can have a real conversation with you about it.
Watch out, saying you think all lives matter lost the King's PA guy his job. Said the statement was insensitive to the black plight or some bs. How twisted is that thought process.
since you asked, I would play and would probably isolate with my team for the course of the season and hope to create some draft stock for myself and my family. My son went to an event last night of kids his age. He texted and said few were wearing masks. Most 20 somethings know they and those younger than they are not at great risk with this disease. I know a few 20 somethings who have tested positive and the experience was like a mild cold for them.
If there are no numbers or analysis that can be trusted, then we have only relativism . . . .
Show me the numbers or analysis that proves a substantially lower death rate from a reputable source.
On our massive Covid thread, from late May until July, posters persistently pointed to the sharply falling numbers especially of deaths from JHU. Now with the reported increases the numbers are worthless . . . .?
Last edited:
When you use hyperbole such as football fans not wanting a season, the only reason you'd say that nonsense is political. So yes, you didn't bring up the name, but your whole post was about liberals vs conservatives, unless you think Trump supporters are hoping for no football?
And maybe, just maybe, some of us (me) actually care about UK's football players and think their safety is more important than watching a leisure sport. While others just want them to sign and dance for them.
I would as well. I would live rather than curb everything, because eventually I will have to deal with the virus anyway. Knowingly or unknowingly. This whole thing just underscores how unhealthy we have become and how much we need to change.
Looking at what was and has been allowed to stay open and mostly unaffected by all of this should tell us how unhealthy this system has become, just as what has been emphasized daily. Liquor and tobacco stores- open. Fast food- open. WalMart- open. Schools- closed. Daycare- closed. Encouraged- seeking medical opinions and tests, waiting for a vaccine, and relative solitude. Discouraged or ignored- eating healthy, getting exercise, being outdoors, healthy interaction, vitamins and supplements.
The players at major universities will likely be getting the best care on all fronts. No question though that the overall risks are greater. Hope it helps athletes that are without it gain a better perspective on what's important.
I think the relevant death numbers for the discussion regarding what I perceive Terry's post to have been (I did not see it) are the numbers associated with COVID deaths of people below the age of 30. If the college setting contemplates distancing and other protections for employees and contractors of the college over the age of 35-40 and players/students are protective of their interactions with the more susceptible members of their community, this virus should have little impact.
]
Congrats on the realization that we "only have relativism." That part of my work here is done.
See if you can follow to the next logical step.
-No one has enough specific data about the deaths to say anything meaningful-
This is purposeful. It was started with the change to flu reporting protocols where they began to list as flu deaths those that didn't die OF THE FLU, but were merely diagnosed with or supposed to have had it. They could have died tomorrow of cancer, heart failure, or natural causes (old age), but if they died today with a runny nose or other flu symptoms, they could be counted as a flu death. If they had the flu virus in their system, they could be counted as a flu death.
Weird thing is which older folks DON'T have the flu virus in their system, since most of them, especially in long term care facilities, get it injected once each year?
Why did they change how flu deaths were counted?
The naive might say "to protect people" since they'd try to be healthier. The wise would understand it was done to sell more flu vaccine. (Why do you think Eastmann/Kodak just got into the vaccine buisness?)
So this is put in a sports-related understanding-
If you wanted to make QBs look better, you'd credit them with all of the passing yards with which they were involved. In truth, the real work is done by the OL and those receiving the ball. If the QB had neither, they'd have no stats but what they earned on the ground on their own.
As it is now- We don't have enough detailed stats to tell the whole story of whether or not a QB is more effective than another from just a single game or season comparison, unless we also add in wins and losses of the team, total yards (rushing yards, too), and watch the performances.
What the new protocols have done, relatively speaking, is credit the QB with the rushing yards gained by the rest of the team AND the defense's ability to limit the opponent's offense. They do this by inserting "flu related" into the equation (the rushing yards where the QB took the snap or called the play), AND flu "suspected" where someone was clearly dying of something else and only symptoms were present but flu was not detected (where the defense gave the QB more snaps by taking the ball away quicker, though the QB had no direct involvement. IOW someone or something else did all the work and the QB just capitalized on it).
I hope the illustration helps people understand what they've done to manipulate the data to sell shots that they've never proven are effective. All they have is correlation, as they've never done any studies as to safety nor effectiveness.
Congrats on the realization that we "only have relativism." That part of my work here is done.
See if you can follow to the next logical step.
-No one has enough specific data about the deaths to say anything meaningful-
This is purposeful. It was started with the change to flu reporting protocols where they began to list as flu deaths those that didn't die OF THE FLU, but were merely diagnosed with or supposed to have had it. They could have died tomorrow of cancer, heart failure, or natural causes (old age), but if they died today with a runny nose or other flu symptoms, they could be counted as a flu death. If they had the flu virus in their system, they could be counted as a flu death.
Weird thing is which older folks DON'T have the flu virus in their system, since most of them, especially in long term care facilities, get it injected once each year?
Why did they change how flu deaths were counted?
The naive might say "to protect people" since they'd try to be healthier. The wise would understand it was done to sell more flu vaccine. (Why do you think Eastmann/Kodak just got into the vaccine buisness?)
So this is put in a sports-related understanding-
If you wanted to make QBs look better, you'd credit them with all of the passing yards with which they were involved. In truth, the real work is done by the OL and those receiving the ball. If the QB had neither, they'd have no stats but what they earned on the ground on their own.
As it is now- We don't have enough detailed stats to tell the whole story of whether or not a QB is more effective than another from just a single game or season comparison, unless we also add in wins and losses of the team, total yards (rushing yards, too), and watch the performances.
What the new protocols have done, relatively speaking, is credit the QB with the rushing yards gained by the rest of the team AND the defense's ability to limit the opponent's offense. They do this by inserting "flu related" into the equation (the rushing yards where the QB took the snap or called the play), AND flu "suspected" where someone was clearly dying of something else and only symptoms were present but flu was not detected (where the defense gave the QB more snaps by taking the ball away quicker, though the QB had no direct involvement. IOW someone or something else did all the work and the QB just capitalized on it).
I hope the illustration helps people understand what they've done to manipulate the data to sell shots that they've never proven are effective. All they have is correlation, as they've never done any studies as to safety nor effectiveness.
I haven't been one of them, so this isn't really applicable to me, is it? You'd have to speak to them about that.
The question I have is- Are "the deaths" something that belong to JH, or are the deaths merely facts that JH and others are reporting or not reporting?
Surely you don't believe that deaths reported by JH are more trustworthy facts just because they came from them and not somewhere else? That would be opinion/bias..
Does it matter who reports them if the underlying statistical methods/protocols are flawed? Isn't that not seeing the forest for the trees?
Then ultimately, comparing annual deaths from all causes, to deaths that actually occur in 2020 will give some objective solidity. Hopefully, with massive shutdowns, some categories will decline for 2020, such as auto accident deaths.
.
UKFBF, your right, it's twisted! I don't like the three women who started BLM. All three are Marxists, and being a veteran, you know how that sets with me.
OLD STOLL FIELD GUY!
Similar threads
