Would You Go to a Football Game Today

Death rates drop as Dr's get smarter about treating the virus and people get smarter about social distancing.

People who catch it next year will be much, much better off than people who catch it this year from a treatment standpoint. However, if the hospital system is overwhelmed because the people of the state of Mississippi decide to gather in 60,000-person football stadiums during the middle of a global pandemic, all bets are off. Y'all please stay the hell out of my mom's grocery store after y'all go to game. Thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Political Hack

Death rates drop as Dr's get smarter about treating the virus and people get smarter about social distancing.

People who catch it next year will be much, much better off than people who catch it this year from a treatment standpoint. However, if the hospital system is overwhelmed because the people of the state of Mississippi decide to gather in 60,000-person football stadiums during the middle of a global pandemic, all bets are off. Y'all please stay the hell out of my mom's grocery store after y'all go to game. Thanks.

---

I get it. But this post highlights the two views perfectly. Your view as stated, and others' view of, I'm under 50 so if I get it there is a .002 chance I die and I'm good with that, but why in the world would your over 60 mother (I'm assuming age) be in a grocery store where she could get it from me and die?

Probably not but I'm an old guy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by confucius say

I get it. But this post highlights the two views perfectly. Your view as stated, and others' view of, I'm under 50 so if I get it there is a .002 chance I die and I'm good with that, but why in the world would your over 60 mother (I'm assuming age) be in a grocery store where she could get it from me and die?

---

She isn't. But her instacart delivery person that I sent there is. He's going to touch everything you've touched and bring it to her. She's going to wipe it off and hope for the best. However, if COVID was not EVERYWHERE in the store, it makes it easier to avoid for her even though she hasn't left her home.

Without testing and tracing, we DO NOT have the date to effectively open and shut the economy across regions throughout the pandemic. We have to know the prevalence of the disease BEFORE opening up public access to economic drivers like major sporting events, concerts, festivals, flea markets, etc. . . Once we have testing and tracing available, you can realistically open select areas for regular activity with relatively low risk. The latency is only 2-5 days for symptomatic people, but knowing the prevalence of the virus in your area and how it's spreading before those 2-5 days make it obvious is pretty damn important for controlling the ICU bed space and avoiding another major healthcare crisis (PPE shortage, test shortage, swab shortage, vile shortage, etc...).

It's a balance, but you NEED data to manage the balance. The data we need comes from widespread testing to get statistically significant indicators of the saturation rate in your area. Until we have testing and tracing data, it is virtually
impossible to manage this well. It's akin to walking into a pitch black bathroom, pissing, and hoping it hits the toilet. It makes zero sense from a pandemic management standpoint and will do further harm to the economy by hurting business owners even worse (bleed them to death slowly as 20% of their restaurants fill up just so they can pay their workers while their own life savings dwindle and they build up additional debt). The economic rebound will be so much easier if we just control and manage the pace and give people the information they need to adjust accordingly.

Example: Jet fuel is backlogged. Can't unload it right now. Cargo containers are backing up at ports. That's not going to change because we "open." "White collar Jimmy" isn't jumping on a plane from LA to NYC this week because he wants to protect blue collar Johnny's job of shipping jet fuel. THE ECONOMY WILL FEEL THIS regardless. It's smarter to control and manage it than it is to just let it go, but free market economists aren't trained to think that way. They don't accept the fundamental truths of the doughnut model and think that "freedom of choice" is the only tool in the toolbox. It shows a huge lack of gray matter to not be able to understand that this is not a black and white situation. It's not as simple as open vs close. We should be debating 20% open or 60% open . . . AFTER we have the data to manage it. Anybody who suggest otherwise is uneducated or pushing self interests.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Todd4State

The only thing that can "beat" this is a vaccine or herd immunity. Staying inside and quarantining ourselves also may make the disease worse in the long run because it could cause the disease to last longer. There are advantages to exposure. There are disadvantages to quarantining ourselves for a long period of time too.

The bottom line for me is if you feel OK going out and doing things- do it. If you feel guilty about maybe getting someone sick or don't feel safe to go out- then don't.

But it's not anyone else's place to tell someone that they are being "selfish" or put them on a big guilt trip because they want to go out and live their life. It's also not my place to tell someone that doesn't feel safe that they don't have the right to stay inside. So yeah- it goes both ways.

The problem is somehow the focus has shifted from what flattening the curve was supposed to do and was intended to do which was not overwhelm the health care system so that we wouldn't be in a situation where we would have to pick and choose who gets a vent and who doesn't and make decisions like that. I'm in a hot spot and we haven't had to make those decisions. I'm very thankful for that. And here's the reality- yes, as we open things up there will be a spike. And the media will freak out and I probably won't be able to get toilet paper. But because we flattened the curve at least the people that need vents and things like that our healthcare system won't be overwhelmed and we will have actually saved lives because we won't have to make those difficult decisions. And I do envision that it won't be as bad as the first wave simply because more people have antibodies built up.

Somehow it has gotten to be we just need to stay inside until we wake up and this is gone- even if it takes years. And that's not the right way to approach this to beat it. You talk about it being a war- it's pretty rare to win a war by just hunkering down the entire time.

---

This.

I'd go and bring my boys with me. I would not hesitate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Todd4State

The bottom line for me is if you feel OK going out and doing things- do it. If you feel guilty about maybe getting someone sick or don't feel safe to go out- then don't.

But it's not anyone else's place to tell someone that they are being "selfish" or put them on a big guilt trip because they want to go out and live their life. It's also not my place to tell someone that doesn't feel safe that they don't have the right to stay inside. So yeah- it goes both ways.

---

Here is just the fundamental difference we have on this topic. I don't care if people want to go to the beach or go out to eat. Fine, to each his own. The transmission numbers based on that seem low and we all need to live our lives. Putting 60K to 100K in a stadium for 4 hours during a pandemic just goes beyond what we are talking about.

Also - how does someone not feel guilty if they get a loved one sick because they go to a football game and that person dies or ends up in the hospital? I would think that would be a universal truth. I mean who wouldn't feel guilty if that happened?

When you say "its also not my place to tell someone that doesn't feel safe that they have the right to stay inside" - you probably aren't that person's landlord or their children who depend on that obese middle aged dad to continue to work so that they can just get by. So what do you tell him? We live in Mississippi. Its one of the most unhealthy states in the country. This virus preys on the obese, diabetic, and unhealthy. Most people in MS have to leave the house to earn a living.

What do you say to these people? Stay inside? They need to work just like you and me. If the answer is simply "they're screwed, I'm living my life" then that's fine, but lets at least be honest. You can't have it both ways. If you want to go to a football game and run the risk of infecting people that are at high risk, that is obviously your choice, but lets be honest about the choice you are making.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HancockCountyDog

If you want to go to a football game and run the risk of infecting people that are at high risk, that is obviously your choice, but lets be honest about the choice you are making.

---

Why would people that are at high risk be at the game in the first place?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gtowndawg

Why would people that are at high risk be at the game in the first place?

---

You do realize that people that have the virus are contagious for anywhere between 7 to 14 days.

I wouldn't think an at risk person would be at the game. He will be at his/her job interacting with people that went to the game and that is where that person catches it. All he decided to do was make a living. He doesn't get to make the choice of going to the football game. He decided that he wanted to work and now potentially a lot more people have the damn virus because 60 to 100 thousand people decided to hang out together in a stadium for 4 hours.

Like I said before, if the virus wasn't contagious and the only people that could catch it, were the people at the game then I'd say play ball and everyone knows the risk.

The problem is the people that don't want to take the risk, but need to work to survive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gtowndawg

Why would people that are at high risk be at the game in the first place?

---

They don't have to be at the game to be affected by someone who was at the game. You can be contagious several days before showing symptoms...if you show symptoms.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HancockCountyDog

Here is just the fundamental difference we have on this topic. I don't care if people want to go to the beach or go out to eat. Fine, to each his own. The transmission numbers based on that seem low and we all need to live our lives. Putting 60K to 100K in a stadium for 4 hours during a pandemic just goes beyond what we are talking about.

Also - how does someone not feel guilty if they get a loved one sick because they go to a football game and that person dies or ends up in the hospital? I would think that would be a universal truth. I mean who wouldn't feel guilty if that happened?

When you say "its also not my place to tell someone that doesn't feel safe that they have the right to stay inside" - you probably aren't that person's landlord or their children who depend on that obese middle aged dad to continue to work so that they can just get by. So what do you tell him? We live in Mississippi. Its one of the most unhealthy states in the country. This virus preys on the obese, diabetic, and unhealthy. Most people in MS have to leave the house to earn a living.

What do you say to these people? Stay inside? They need to work just like you and me. If the answer is simply "they're screwed, I'm living my life" then that's fine, but lets at least be honest. You can't have it both ways. If you want to go to a football game and run the risk of infecting people that are at high risk, that is obviously your choice, but lets be honest about the choice you are making.

---

So you think MSU is going to be selling out games this year if football is played?

Even a place as big as Neyland wouldn't even reach half capacity. Don't act like there are going to be sell-out crowds this year at any sporting event.

Yes, I ask my Gma to stay inside. She can go to certain places. It's not a death sentence. I haven't heard her complain once about being "screwed" and hating on us for living our lives. She just tells me to be careful of course. The flu is a threat to the elderly and small children also. So I guess they are all screwed there too right?

I get your side of this completely but this mindset is like we are in kindergarten and get caught with a piece of candy and the teacher takes it away because we didn't bring enough for the rest of the class. Not all lives can or will or could have ever been saved during this. Don't pretend like they could have or will be. No, I'm not saying throw them to the wolves. They have to be responsible for their side of it also. They are just as obligated to say you can't come around if you have been around a lot of people or going out and doing your thing.

Also, my life hasn't changed that much since February other than having to actively search for TP for a bit at one point. Fortunately, I've had a job to work and come to every day. I just moved into a new house so I've had plenty of weekend projects to keep me occupied and around the house.

I also fish nearly every day and have gotten out and done stuff like hike and spend time outside as much as I have wanted. My normal routine. I'm also in TN if that makes a difference but it shouldn't because I'm pretty sure we have been under the same restrictions as MS up until this past weekend.


ETA: I would go to a game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HancockCountyDog

Assuming you don't have the virus before you go to the game, and are going to self quarantine for 14 days after the game - then you are correct, you are really only putting yourself at risk.

If you are going to interact with people after the game, then yeah - you are risking a lot of people. Problem is that most people that will go to a football game right now, are most likely not going to self quarantine for 14 days after the game.

That means that your risk - is now everyone who you come into contact with risk as well. How is that fair to someone who may not think its worth the risk?

This seems to be the biggest problem about starting back.

---

Exactly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FISHDAWG

this is the exact response I would expect from you .... anyone that's out and about is putting themselves at risk ./.. not me - you're type is always looking to lay blame somewhere else .... stay your ass inside then

---

Actually YOU are trying to put the blame for you wanting to act irresponsibly on others. If you were only putting yourself at risk then I'd have no problem with it. Heck I'd be right there at the game with you if that were the case. It is very much NOT the case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by starkvegasdawg

They don't have to be at the game to be affected by someone who was at the game. You can be contagious several days before showing symptoms...if you show symptoms.

---

Yep. It's probably a moot point. I don't think we play unless it's behind closed doors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HancockCountyDog

You do realize that people that have the virus are contagious for anywhere between 7 to 14 days.

I wouldn't think an at risk person would be at the game. He will be at his/her job interacting with people that went to the game and that is where that person catches it. All he decided to do was make a living. He doesn't get to make the choice of going to the football game. He decided that he wanted to work and now potentially a lot more people have the damn virus because 60 to 100 thousand people decided to hang out together in a stadium for 4 hours.

Like I said before, if the virus wasn't contagious and the only people that could catch it, were the people at the game then I'd say play ball and everyone knows the risk.

The problem is the people that don't want to take the risk, but need to work to survive.

---

Exactly. Very well said. In my case, I'm slightly at risk if I get it. The problem is my wife is highly at risk. She has to work, and much of it can't be done at home. She is a essential worker in an essential field. She isn't at much risk of exposure the way her work is set up. On the other hand I'm at extreme risk of getting by the nature of what I do. I'm also in a essential field. We can cut back what we do, but we can't cut it out completely and it is impossible to do at home. It's people like me and my wife that fools who show no responsibility are by their choices putting at risk. They are choosing for us. We have no choice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HancockCountyDog

You do realize that people that have the virus are contagious for anywhere between 7 to 14 days.

I wouldn't think an at risk person would be at the game. He will be at his/her job interacting with people that went to the game and that is where that person catches it. All he decided to do was make a living. He doesn't get to make the choice of going to the football game. He decided that he wanted to work and now potentially a lot more people have the damn virus because 60 to 100 thousand people decided to hang out together in a stadium for 4 hours.

Like I said before, if the virus wasn't contagious and the only people that could catch it, were the people at the game then I'd say play ball and everyone knows the risk.

The problem is the people that don't want to take the risk, but need to work to survive.

---

The evidence shows this is nothing to worry about for 98% of people. I'm not worried for myself or my family. I don't listen to the hysteria, I look at the evidence and talk to my friends in the medical community (one of which is the director for a major hospital chain in the South). I doubt my Dad will go (he's older and has a heart issue) but he's the first one to say get out there and don't worry about it. I'm not going to lick the handrails at the games or anything like that but I'm certainly not going to live my life based on hypothetical what if's that make little to no sense (and the evidence is starting to debunk anyway). Heck, I'm far more concerned about the drive to the game. Sorry, we just see it different. Not going to argue about it though. That's what the COVID thread is for.

edited: I'm sure you guys are great Bulldogs, obviously I wish you nothing but great health and professional success. I want to be clear on that one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gtowndawg

The evidence shows this is nothing to worry about for 98% of people. I'm not worried for myself or my family. I don't listen to the hysteria, I look at the evidence and talk to my friends in the medical community (one of which is the director for a major hospital chain in the South). I doubt my Dad will go (he's older and has a heart issue) but he's the first one to say get out there and don't worry about it. I'm not going to lick the handrails at the games or anything like that but I'm certainly not going to live my life based on hypothetical what if's that make little to no sense (and the evidence is starting to debunk anyway). Heck, I'm far more concerned about the drive to the game. Sorry, we just see it different. Not going to argue about it though. That's what the COVID thread is for.

edited: I'm sure you guys are great Bulldogs, obviously I wish you nothing but great health and professional success. I want to be clear on that one.

---

So are you going to keep away from your Dad, no contact, for the entire football season. Are you going to be able to keep him away from anyone who has any degree of contact from those who went? And those who had contact with them, and them, and so on? It's not just your Dad. Do you have co-workers? Others that you are in contact with? Are they comfortable with the choice you made for them?

You have a greater chance of getting hurt on your way the game than getting COVID19.
Y'all continue to live in fear.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SheltonChoked

So you will volunteer to get it today? And your family?


Is there no One you interact with that might be at higher risk?

---

Yo homes I protect myself so I don't have to concern myself with what others do......and I do know several people who have very compromised health situations where this virus would be a death sentence...so they are taking personal responsibility for their health and self isolating...it's hard but it's the reality of their health situation. Personal responsibility...what a concept....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dawgfan77

You have a greater chance of getting hurt on your way the game than getting COVID19.
Y'all continue to live in fear.

---

yep ... when I took up skydiving the instructor told me I had a much better chance at surviving by jumping out as opposed to remaining in the plane for the landing ... I looked up the stats later on and he was right ... I won't live in fear and I damn sure won't let someone send me on a guilt trip