oriental andrew

January 17th, 2023 at 2:00 PM ^

My understanding is that the NCAA has indicated that teams should test for COVID within 72 hours of a game/meet in high contact sports (fball, bball, etc.). Not required for non-contact sports (gymnastics, volleyball, swimming, etc.). I don't know what that means for sports like bball where you have multiple games per week - maybe just a weekly test? REgardless, it does seem they're getting tested regularly still, just not as frequently. 

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 56088

rc90

January 17th, 2023 at 2:18 PM ^

I kinda agree and kinda disagree. I don't trust some college basketball coaches (or, er, hockey coaches) to make good decisions about whether or not to play some kid who is sick. If you're on the hot seat, and you have a couple of kids who are sick, but not severely, then taking the L is pretty tough. But that's really going to suck for people who interact with that coach's team.

Joined: 02/15/2016

MGoPoints: 8513

MgoHillbilly

January 17th, 2023 at 1:31 PM ^

My whole extended family got the "V" and all ended up getting covid anyway. The older males got it worst of all. Severe fever and body aches. Kids were asymptomatic.

My guess would be that the athletes playing college ball in the B1G probably already have the "V" and may or may not feel under the weather getting covid.

 

Joined: 01/04/2017

MGoPoints: 24245

drjaws

January 17th, 2023 at 2:05 PM ^

data (particularly the meta-data analyses) suggest the "V" doesn't prevent covid infection or the symptoms of covid infection. it does appear to slow the spread, help in reducing viral loads faster, and leads to better outcomes in the clinic (i.e., you don't get as sick) but these effects seem to wear off after 3-4 months. basically, getting vaccinated won't stop you from getting covid. but it will prime your immune system so when you DO happen to get covid, the symptoms are less severe and, there's less time you'll be contagious. 

preventing infections isn't how vaccines work anyways. you can still get infected with polio virus, but if you've been vaccinated your immune system takes care of it before you get sick so you never know you came into contact with it. people confuse "infection" with "showing symptoms" 

Joined: 02/26/2014

MGoPoints: 46776

TrueBlue2003

January 17th, 2023 at 2:09 PM ^

Correct, you still get it, but it's more cold-like as if you already had it (cuz you kind of did as far as your immune system knows).  Far less likely to get a severe or fatal case upon your first actual infection.

But at this point, pretty much everyone has had it naturally so probably won't be any difference between inoculated and not inoculated going forward.

Joined: 01/05/2010

MGoPoints: 38075

Bluesince89

January 17th, 2023 at 3:19 PM ^

Yes, no one has ever claimed you won't get COVID with the vaccine, just that it won't be as bad potentially. Just like how you can still get the Flu, RSV, etc., but it's not as bad of an infection. It's just that some vaccines like Polio (as you note) are remarkably effective. The same is true of MMR and TDAP.  

Joined: 09/14/2008

MGoPoints: 14739

klctlc

January 17th, 2023 at 3:57 PM ^

Uh No.

Vaccine definition was changed as COVID-19 virus shots weakened

How, some readers ask, can this column, written by a mere layman, assert that the COVID-19 vaccines aren't very effective?

First, it's because the COVID-19 vaccines are not really vaccines at all as vaccines were defined prior to the current epidemic.

That is, vaccines previously were defined by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention as inoculants that "produce immunity to a specific disease." But last September, as the failure of the COVID-19 vaccines to "produce immunity" was realized, the CDC changed the definition. Now the CDC defines a vaccine as "a preparation that is used to stimulate the body's immune response against diseases."

 

Joined: 09/02/2009

MGoPoints: 2704

4th phase

January 17th, 2023 at 6:01 PM ^

No seems like it was a long overdue distinction that needed to be made since people got all up in arms and scrutinized every little detail. 3% of people with the measles vaccine would still get measles. So basically since the invention of vaccines, the possibility of still being infected has existed. But most people understood what "vaccine" meant in common parlance. Same thing goes for basically every other vaccine, tetanus vaccine's aren't forever, etc. These are properties of vaccines that have always been there, nothing was ever iron-clad despite what some definition said. I see nothing nefarious, or frankly even interesting, about saying "hey these things are just like all the other vaccines that have ever been produced, guess we have to spell it out for you."

Joined: 12/12/2017

MGoPoints: 14012

blue in dc

January 17th, 2023 at 8:46 PM ^

Here is the crux of Powell’s argument 

“The CDC acknowledges that fully vaccinated people can become infected with the COVID-19 virus and, even while without symptoms, can infect other people. Indeed, last week more than 30% of the people in Connecticut hospitals who were being treated for COVID-19 were fully vaccinated, and state government has recorded more than 80,000 cases of fully vaccinated people who still have come down with the virus. 

This doesn't make the COVID-19 vaccines useless. Those 80,000 cases were only 2.3% of all people in the state known to have gotten the virus. 

Rather this makes the COVID-19 vaccines not very effective as vaccines were defined until recently. It makes them therapies that, at least for now, prevent or mitigate symptoms for most infected people”

The problem with this argument is that there are other examples of vaccines that are much less than 100% effective- for instance, the flu vaccine.  

Improving a definition is not so e nefarious conspiracy, it is just improving the definition.

Joined: 01/22/2011

MGoPoints: 20401

The Maize Halo

January 17th, 2023 at 1:26 PM ^

It's more a "sick enough to play" vs "can't play even if you otherwise could because it is specifically covid you are sick with" kind of question. The Flu (hangover) Game is revered, but now that covid specifically is the illness, the question is whether they actually feel too sick to not be able to play basketball or are being forbidden from playing basketball because of the specific sickness they have -- Asking how long we will continue to do stuff specifically because covid is the illness rather than any illness being the illness and sucking it up to play kind of thing.

EDIT: for full disclosure, I hated people that didn't initially take covid seriously, and I also got all the shots and had it at least twice with symptoms -- I just don't think we are in the same space three years into it as we were when it was actually that bad and scary. The number of times most of us have been exposed at this point to weaken viral impact has to be enormous.

Joined: 11/29/2017

MGoPoints: 6988

M-Dog

January 17th, 2023 at 5:13 PM ^

Covid has mutated to the point where it is far less lethal but far more transmissible.  In that sense it is like the flu.  And we've lived with the flu all our lives without completely shutting down society.

Even China realizes this and has stopped trying to prevent every single Covid case.

 

Joined: 07/06/2008

MGoPoints: 257507

TrueBlue2003

January 17th, 2023 at 2:17 PM ^

Cold and flu viruses kill people.  The flu almost certainly more than Covid now. 

I agree that what we learned is that people shouldn't be playing with the flu or any potentially serious illnesses anymore either.

I have noticed a few positive changes: 

1) people got comfortable with testing and home tests are commercially ubiquitous so people are far more likely to test themselves or go to the doc to get tested to see if they have the flu or covid or one of the more dangerous viruses.

2) People are more willing / likely to wear masks when they are sick (with anything), which is good. 

3) People are more likely to be respectful and stay home when they're sick rather than "sucking it up".

Joined: 01/05/2010

MGoPoints: 38075