ImageImageImage

Tatum to enter quarantine, miss 10 to 14 days

Moderators: sully00, djFan71, ParticleMan, Froob, canman1971, The Comedian, Parliament10

floyd
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,414
And1: 648
Joined: Aug 04, 2006

Re: Tatum to enter quarantine, miss 10 to 14 days 

Post#141 » by floyd » Mon Jan 11, 2021 4:42 am

Bill Bradley wrote:
floyd wrote:
PtruthP34 wrote:I don't think the PCR test should ever be used for diagnosis of a virus or any illness. Prove me wrong.

https://off-guardian.org/2020/06/27/covid19-pcr-tests-are-scientifically-meaningless/


I’ve worked for a diagnostic lab for 15 years. You are completely wrong. Well designed pcr tests are extremely sensitive and can detect very low copy numbers. They can also determine if an infection is active unlike antibody tests which will be positive after the infection has cleared.

PCR tests can have higher false positive rates as they are so sensitive that even small amounts of cross contamination can cause a positive signal but retesting mitigates that risk.


The inventor of the test itself disagrees with you. He said it was never intended to detect a virus and you can find anything with PCR since it’s so sensitive.



Sorry man, I’m not going down rabbit holes of conspiracy nonsense and watching **** youtube. Billions upon billions of dollars of research is based on the accuracy of pcr tests for viral contamination. Our lab processes thousands of samples per week.

Your point of “so sensitive” it detects anything makes no sense. The sensitivity is due to the amplification of the detected dna. That is why small copies can be detected. And if you’re running a quantitative analysis rather than endpoint it’s easy to tell if it’s a low copy finding and be suspicious of it. But a well designed assay will only bind to a sequence highly specific to what you are trying to detect. Can you have a poor performing assay that isn’t as specific? Sure, but it doesn’t invalidate the method of detection.

We frequently test by multiple methods including lots of antibody tests as positive finding can cost lots of money in remediation of the outbreak. If pcr were so unreliable it would be obvious and we wouldn’t use it.

Assays go through qualification processes to determine their accuracy. The scientific method guides here and data proves accuracy. It’s really not that complicated.
Bill Bradley
RealGM
Posts: 13,287
And1: 1,732
Joined: Mar 03, 2005
Location: Boston
 

Re: Tatum to enter quarantine, miss 10 to 14 days 

Post#142 » by Bill Bradley » Mon Jan 11, 2021 10:48 am

floyd wrote:
Bill Bradley wrote:
floyd wrote:
I’ve worked for a diagnostic lab for 15 years. You are completely wrong. Well designed pcr tests are extremely sensitive and can detect very low copy numbers. They can also determine if an infection is active unlike antibody tests which will be positive after the infection has cleared.

PCR tests can have higher false positive rates as they are so sensitive that even small amounts of cross contamination can cause a positive signal but retesting mitigates that risk.


The inventor of the test itself disagrees with you. He said it was never intended to detect a virus and you can find anything with PCR since it’s so sensitive.



Sorry man, I’m not going down rabbit holes of conspiracy nonsense and watching **** youtube. Billions upon billions of dollars of research is based on the accuracy of pcr tests for viral contamination. Our lab processes thousands of samples per week.

Your point of “so sensitive” it detects anything makes no sense. The sensitivity is due to the amplification of the detected dna. That is why small copies can be detected. And if you’re running a quantitative analysis rather than endpoint it’s easy to tell if it’s a low copy finding and be suspicious of it. But a well designed assay will only bind to a sequence highly specific to what you are trying to detect. Can you have a poor performing assay that isn’t as specific? Sure, but it doesn’t invalidate the method of detection.

We frequently test by multiple methods including lots of antibody tests as positive finding can cost lots of money in remediation of the outbreak. If pcr were so unreliable it would be obvious and we wouldn’t use it.

Assays go through qualification processes to determine their accuracy. The scientific method guides here and data proves accuracy. It’s really not that complicated.


Believe what you want. This is the man who invented the test you’re talking about and he said it should never be used to diagnose like this. If he were alive today, people like you would be calling this great scientist a “conspiracy theorist” as well. I happen to be a medical researcher, myself, and I realize that science can be misused.
floyd
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,414
And1: 648
Joined: Aug 04, 2006

Re: Tatum to enter quarantine, miss 10 to 14 days 

Post#143 » by floyd » Mon Jan 11, 2021 11:32 am

Bill Bradley wrote:
floyd wrote:
Bill Bradley wrote:
The inventor of the test itself disagrees with you. He said it was never intended to detect a virus and you can find anything with PCR since it’s so sensitive.



Sorry man, I’m not going down rabbit holes of conspiracy nonsense and watching **** youtube. Billions upon billions of dollars of research is based on the accuracy of pcr tests for viral contamination. Our lab processes thousands of samples per week.

Your point of “so sensitive” it detects anything makes no sense. The sensitivity is due to the amplification of the detected dna. That is why small copies can be detected. And if you’re running a quantitative analysis rather than endpoint it’s easy to tell if it’s a low copy finding and be suspicious of it. But a well designed assay will only bind to a sequence highly specific to what you are trying to detect. Can you have a poor performing assay that isn’t as specific? Sure, but it doesn’t invalidate the method of detection.

We frequently test by multiple methods including lots of antibody tests as positive finding can cost lots of money in remediation of the outbreak. If pcr were so unreliable it would be obvious and we wouldn’t use it.

Assays go through qualification processes to determine their accuracy. The scientific method guides here and data proves accuracy. It’s really not that complicated.


Believe what you want. This is the man who invented the test you’re talking about and he said it should never be used to diagnose like this. If he were alive today, people like you would be calling this great scientist a “conspiracy theorist” as well. I happen to be a medical researcher, myself, and I realize that science can be misused.


Saying pcr tests can’t detect viral infection is a conspiracy theory. The whole medical / biotech / pharmaceutical world uses them everyday and has published a mountain of data with their accuracy. Your position is akin to planes can’t fly. It’s absurd.
keevsnick1
Pro Prospect
Posts: 976
And1: 1,392
Joined: Feb 27, 2017
       

Re: Tatum to enter quarantine, miss 10 to 14 days 

Post#145 » by keevsnick1 » Mon Jan 11, 2021 5:08 pm

Here's a question, Bradley Beal has already been cleared to return (after missing just one game) after having a long, non masked conversation with Tatum after the Celtics Wizards game. I'm so confused as to how exactly these determinations are made. Are Semi, Jaylen and Javonte all entering quarantine and out for a week? Or are they still contact tracing and its possible they return sooner like Beal? How does the league make that determination? We need some reporter somewhere to do a deep dive on how the league makes these determinations.
User avatar
Ernest
Rookie
Posts: 1,007
And1: 828
Joined: Jun 16, 2019
 

Re: Tatum to enter quarantine, miss 10 to 14 days 

Post#146 » by Ernest » Mon Jan 11, 2021 5:09 pm

SmartWentCrazy wrote:
Ernest wrote:
SmartWentCrazy wrote:
They have families. Jaylen Browns grandfather, whom he lived with in the first part of quarantine, has cancer. Why is this hard to understand. Like, look at anything related to KAT before your spout that ignorant **** BS.

Further, I’m assuming youre local and know who Eduardo Rodrgiuez is— perhaps you could tell me how he pitched last year after getting COVID?


Dude. We were talking about the players health. Not their grandparents. I asked a question if any players were really getting sick from it as I was wondering- All I have heard was they get it but have no symptoms. No, I'm not local, where I am has just about no cases now so I really don't know and that's why I asked.

But it's not really about this. I told you to calm down or something because you were calling someone names a week or 2 ago and since then you have been replying to posts I make trying to bate me into something or whatever it is you are doing. I'm just going to block you and be done with it.


This was the first reply I’ve made to you since you made a bigoted joke. I replied because you made an incredibly ignorant statement. Stop saying dumb things that need a reply and, trust me, I wont interact with you.


Can you please just leave me alone. The site won't let me block you- could you just block me? No hard feelings.
User avatar
bisme37
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,377
And1: 14,357
Joined: May 24, 2014
 

Re: Tatum to enter quarantine, miss 10 to 14 days 

Post#147 » by bisme37 » Mon Jan 11, 2021 5:14 pm

I didn"t realize AB had tested positive until I saw this tweet. He may be the culprit of causing our current situation. (not that it's his fault or anything.)

Read on Twitter
PtruthP34
Senior
Posts: 589
And1: 78
Joined: Dec 16, 2003

Re: Tatum to enter quarantine, miss 10 to 14 days 

Post#148 » by PtruthP34 » Tue Jan 12, 2021 2:00 am

floyd wrote:
PtruthP34 wrote:I don't think the PCR test should ever be used for diagnosis of a virus or any illness. Prove me wrong.

https://off-guardian.org/2020/06/27/covid19-pcr-tests-are-scientifically-meaningless/


I’ve worked for a diagnostic lab for 15 years. You are completely wrong. Well designed pcr tests are extremely sensitive and can detect very low copy numbers. They can also determine if an infection is active unlike antibody tests which will be positive after the infection has cleared.

PCR tests can have higher false positive rates as they are so sensitive that even small amounts of cross contamination can cause a positive signal but retesting mitigates that risk.


Thanks for the reply. Perhaps your experience in the lab can help clarify a few concerns that the article I linked raises.

Well designed pcr tests are extremely sensitive and can detect very low copy numbers.


Isn't this part of the problem? The PCR test is not a binary yes or no. The article I posted states:

"Another essential problem is that many PCR tests have a “cycle quantification” (Cq) value of over 35, and some, including the “Drosten PCR test”, even have a Cq of 45.

The Cq value specifies how many cycles of DNA replication are required to detect a real signal from biological samples.

“Cq values higher than 40 are suspect because of the implied low efficiency and generally should not be reported,” as it says in the MIQE guidelines.

MIQE stands for “Minimum Information for Publication of Quantitative Real-Time PCR Experiments”, a set of guidelines that describe the minimum information necessary for evaluating publications on Real-Time PCR, also called quantitative PCR, or qPCR."


From a more recent article (https://off-guardian.org/2020/12/18/who-finally-admits-pcr-tests-create-false-positives/)
"Even Dr Anthony Fauci has publicly admitted that a cycle threshold over 35 is going to be detecting “dead nucleotides”, not a living virus.

Despite all this, it is known that many labs around the world have been using PCR tests with CT values over 35, even into the low 40s."


In other words, case numbers can dramatically fluctuate up or down based simply on how many cycles a particular lab performs (or is instructed to perform by CDC/WHO guidelines).

And since the PCR test is analyzing a tiny sample taken from a swab, and replicating the RNA enough times to allow for identification, the test does nothing to determine the actual viral load - or the amount of virus particles present in the body.

"Moreover, in the product descriptions of the RT-qPCR tests for SARS-COV-2 it says they are “qualitative” tests, contrary to the fact that the “q” in “qPCR” stands for “quantitative.” And if these tests are not “quantitative” tests, they don’t show how many viral particles are in the body.

That is crucial because, in order to even begin talking about actual illness in the real world not only in a laboratory, the patient would need to have millions and millions of viral particles actively replicating in their body."


Lastly, and most importantly, how was the genome profile of covid determined to begin with, if the virus was never scientifically purified or isolated, and there has never been a "gold standard" provided to compare PCR test results against? Unpurified samples were taken and fed into a computer model to create this "novel" rna sequence that had never been seen before. In other words, they are testing for a hypothetical rna sequence that could very well be from cellular debris naturally occurring in humans, or effects of a general immune system response (e.g., exosomes), or any pathogen for that matter and not specific to any particular virus.

(excerpt from https://off-guardian.org/2020/06/27/covid19-pcr-tests-are-scientifically-meaningless/)
"Thus, the authors of four of the principal, early 2020 papers claiming discovery of a new coronavirus concede they had no proof that the origin of the virus genome was viral-like particles or cellular debris, pure or impure, or particles of any kind. In other words, the existence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA is based on faith, not fact.

We have also contacted Dr Charles Calisher, who is a seasoned virologist. In 2001, Science published an “impassioned plea…to the younger generation” from several veteran virologists, among them Calisher, saying that:

[modern virus detection methods like] sleek polymerase chain reaction […] tell little or nothing about how a virus multiplies, which animals carry it, [or] how it makes people sick. [It is] like trying to say whether somebody has bad breath by looking at his fingerprint.”[3]

And that’s why we asked Dr Calisher whether he knows one single paper in which SARS-CoV-2 has been isolated and finally really purified. His answer:

I know of no such a publication. I have kept an eye out for one.”[4]

This actually means that one cannot conclude that the RNA gene sequences, which the scientists took from the tissue samples prepared in the mentioned in vitro trials and for which the PCR tests are finally being “calibrated,” belong to a specific virus — in this case SARS-CoV-2."


Call me a conspiracy theorist if you want to, I'm just trying my best to understand a process that seems to obfuscate the scientific method and raises more questions than answer, and I am not one to put blind faith in the "experts".
User avatar
jmr07019
Head Coach
Posts: 6,568
And1: 5,170
Joined: Oct 29, 2009
       

Re: Tatum to enter quarantine, miss 10 to 14 days 

Post#149 » by jmr07019 » Tue Jan 12, 2021 2:08 am

keevsnick1 wrote:Here's a question, Bradley Beal has already been cleared to return (after missing just one game) after having a long, non masked conversation with Tatum after the Celtics Wizards game. I'm so confused as to how exactly these determinations are made. Are Semi, Jaylen and Javonte all entering quarantine and out for a week? Or are they still contact tracing and its possible they return sooner like Beal? How does the league make that determination? We need some reporter somewhere to do a deep dive on how the league makes these determinations.


According to the league there was no risk of transmission from plays like this

Image
Show Love Spread Love
TheSheriff
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,761
And1: 2,394
Joined: Aug 04, 2007

Re: Tatum to enter quarantine, miss 10 to 14 days 

Post#150 » by TheSheriff » Tue Jan 12, 2021 2:26 am

jmr07019 wrote:
keevsnick1 wrote:Here's a question, Bradley Beal has already been cleared to return (after missing just one game) after having a long, non masked conversation with Tatum after the Celtics Wizards game. I'm so confused as to how exactly these determinations are made. Are Semi, Jaylen and Javonte all entering quarantine and out for a week? Or are they still contact tracing and its possible they return sooner like Beal? How does the league make that determination? We need some reporter somewhere to do a deep dive on how the league makes these determinations.


According to the league there was no risk of transmission from plays like this

Image


It’s not like players breathe heavily during games.
Bluewhale
General Manager
Posts: 7,884
And1: 280
Joined: Dec 03, 2003

Re: Tatum to enter quarantine, miss 10 to 14 days 

Post#151 » by Bluewhale » Tue Jan 12, 2021 2:42 am

Bill Bradley wrote:Believe what you want. This is the man who invented the test you’re talking about and he said it should never be used to diagnose like this. If he were alive today, people like you would be calling this great scientist a “conspiracy theorist” as well. I happen to be a medical researcher, myself, and I realize that science can be misused.


Your argument is a big fallacy.

You assume Mr. X invent Tech Z, then he knows EVERYTHIING about Tech Z to the END OF TIME.

In this theory:

Mr. Edison will be the greatest film director and movie star all time.

Mr. Naismith will be the GOAT of basketball, better than Michael Jordan.

The inventor knows a lot of the Tech Z, but as the time goes, some new trick develops.

Edit. Sorry for putting the wrong quote name.
floyd
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,414
And1: 648
Joined: Aug 04, 2006

Re: Tatum to enter quarantine, miss 10 to 14 days 

Post#152 » by floyd » Tue Jan 12, 2021 2:56 am

Bluewhale wrote:
floyd wrote:Believe what you want. This is the man who invented the test you’re talking about and he said it should never be used to diagnose like this. If he were alive today, people like you would be calling this great scientist a “conspiracy theorist” as well. I happen to be a medical researcher, myself, and I realize that science can be misused.


Your argument is a big fallacy.

You assume Mr. X invent Tech Z, then he knows EVERYTHIING about Tech Z to the END OF TIME.

In this theory:

Mr. Edison will be the greatest film director and movie star all time.

Mr. Naismith will be the GOAT of basketball, better than Michael Jordan.

The inventor knows a lot of the Tech Z, but as the time goes, some new trick develops.


Hey man - I didn’t write that!
floyd
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,414
And1: 648
Joined: Aug 04, 2006

Re: Tatum to enter quarantine, miss 10 to 14 days 

Post#153 » by floyd » Tue Jan 12, 2021 4:43 am

Spoiler:
PtruthP34 wrote:
floyd wrote:
PtruthP34 wrote:I don't think the PCR test should ever be used for diagnosis of a virus or any illness. Prove me wrong.

https://off-guardian.org/2020/06/27/covid19-pcr-tests-are-scientifically-meaningless/


I’ve worked for a diagnostic lab for 15 years. You are completely wrong. Well designed pcr tests are extremely sensitive and can detect very low copy numbers. They can also determine if an infection is active unlike antibody tests which will be positive after the infection has cleared.

PCR tests can have higher false positive rates as they are so sensitive that even small amounts of cross contamination can cause a positive signal but retesting mitigates that risk.


Thanks for the reply. Perhaps your experience in the lab can help clarify a few concerns that the article I linked raises.

Well designed pcr tests are extremely sensitive and can detect very low copy numbers.


Isn't this part of the problem? The PCR test is not a binary yes or no. The article I posted states:

"Another essential problem is that many PCR tests have a “cycle quantification” (Cq) value of over 35, and some, including the “Drosten PCR test”, even have a Cq of 45.

The Cq value specifies how many cycles of DNA replication are required to detect a real signal from biological samples.

“Cq values higher than 40 are suspect because of the implied low efficiency and generally should not be reported,” as it says in the MIQE guidelines.

MIQE stands for “Minimum Information for Publication of Quantitative Real-Time PCR Experiments”, a set of guidelines that describe the minimum information necessary for evaluating publications on Real-Time PCR, also called quantitative PCR, or qPCR."


From a more recent article (https://off-guardian.org/2020/12/18/who-finally-admits-pcr-tests-create-false-positives/)
"Even Dr Anthony Fauci has publicly admitted that a cycle threshold over 35 is going to be detecting “dead nucleotides”, not a living virus.

Despite all this, it is known that many labs around the world have been using PCR tests with CT values over 35, even into the low 40s."


In other words, case numbers can dramatically fluctuate up or down based simply on how many cycles a particular lab performs (or is instructed to perform by CDC/WHO guidelines).

And since the PCR test is analyzing a tiny sample taken from a swab, and replicating the RNA enough times to allow for identification, the test does nothing to determine the actual viral load - or the amount of virus particles present in the body.

"Moreover, in the product descriptions of the RT-qPCR tests for SARS-COV-2 it says they are “qualitative” tests, contrary to the fact that the “q” in “qPCR” stands for “quantitative.” And if these tests are not “quantitative” tests, they don’t show how many viral particles are in the body.

That is crucial because, in order to even begin talking about actual illness in the real world not only in a laboratory, the patient would need to have millions and millions of viral particles actively replicating in their body."


Lastly, and most importantly, how was the genome profile of covid determined to begin with, if the virus was never scientifically purified or isolated, and there has never been a "gold standard" provided to compare PCR test results against? Unpurified samples were taken and fed into a computer model to create this "novel" rna sequence that had never been seen before. In other words, they are testing for a hypothetical rna sequence that could very well be from cellular debris naturally occurring in humans, or effects of a general immune system response (e.g., exosomes), or any pathogen for that matter and not specific to any particular virus.

(excerpt from https://off-guardian.org/2020/06/27/covid19-pcr-tests-are-scientifically-meaningless/)
"Thus, the authors of four of the principal, early 2020 papers claiming discovery of a new coronavirus concede they had no proof that the origin of the virus genome was viral-like particles or cellular debris, pure or impure, or particles of any kind. In other words, the existence of SARS-CoV-2 RNA is based on faith, not fact.

We have also contacted Dr Charles Calisher, who is a seasoned virologist. In 2001, Science published an “impassioned plea…to the younger generation” from several veteran virologists, among them Calisher, saying that:

[modern virus detection methods like] sleek polymerase chain reaction […] tell little or nothing about how a virus multiplies, which animals carry it, [or] how it makes people sick. [It is] like trying to say whether somebody has bad breath by looking at his fingerprint.”[3]

And that’s why we asked Dr Calisher whether he knows one single paper in which SARS-CoV-2 has been isolated and finally really purified. His answer:

I know of no such a publication. I have kept an eye out for one.”[4]

This actually means that one cannot conclude that the RNA gene sequences, which the scientists took from the tissue samples prepared in the mentioned in vitro trials and for which the PCR tests are finally being “calibrated,” belong to a specific virus — in this case SARS-CoV-2."


Call me a conspiracy theorist if you want to, I'm just trying my best to understand a process that seems to obfuscate the scientific method and raises more questions than answer, and I am not one to put blind faith in the "experts".


Lot there friend and pretty sure we’re way ot. I’m not familiar with the specific COVID assays or other labs but in general we perform an assay validation using positive and negative samples which determines things like limit of detection, generate ROC curves, stuff like that. The data for this would be published so it can be reviewed and criticized by other scientists. I have stacks of journal articles on assay validation gathering dust somewhere, I’m sure you can find stuff and read up.

For routine use we would establish cutoffs to classify low signal as negative or equivocal. So your high Ct (i.e. weak signal) are not treated the same as a “screaming positive”. We would establish SOPs for when to retest, confirm by an alternate method, or resample. We run controls to determine both system and sample suitability. We perform qualifications for each new lot of new reagents.

The process is generally the same regardless of the assay method because the goal is the same. Producing an assays with good accuracy. Your link is very concerned with what we call background noise in pcr tests. Apparently they assume this does not exist in other assays like elisa. They are incorrect. Those have cutoffs too.

The sequencing stuff is out of my depth as I’m not a geneticist but the vaccines were developed extremely quickly because they were able to sequence the virus like a year ago if I’m not mistaken so it sounds pretty dubious to me.

But my point was PCR tests are industry standard. Saying you would never trust a pcr test to detect any virus makes you sound extremely uninformed.
User avatar
Saint Lazarus
Veteran
Posts: 2,693
And1: 4,582
Joined: May 20, 2018
Location: Vancouver --> Hong Kong

Re: Tatum to enter quarantine, miss 10 to 14 days 

Post#154 » by Saint Lazarus » Tue Jan 12, 2021 9:51 am

sunshinekids99 wrote:
floyd wrote:There’s not enough vaccine available to give it to lower risk populations like NBA players. Health care workers and the elderly are first in line.


Exactly. Too many at risk people need it right now. Seems NBA is going with the NFL model of just pushing through.


The NBA should wait because of PR reasons, but this is a bogus reason imo. There's, what, like max 700 people that need to be vaccinated in the NBA?

Considering the biggest issue with vaccinations right now is distribution and not the actual supply, I'm sure the NBA could worked something out and got their people vaccinated. They probably won't just because the general public will get up in arms.

Anyway, only around 700 people would get vaccinated, it's not like they're going to cause a huge delay in vaccinations for regular people.
Image

dorkestra wrote:Embiid is embarrassing the whole city of Philadelphia. Wake up you little bitch

The Comedian wrote:Saint Lazarus playing 4D chess right now.

This dude legit has other Celtics fans arguing with him :lol:
User avatar
Ernest
Rookie
Posts: 1,007
And1: 828
Joined: Jun 16, 2019
 

Re: Tatum to enter quarantine, miss 10 to 14 days 

Post#155 » by Ernest » Tue Jan 12, 2021 1:27 pm

Bill Bradley wrote:
floyd wrote:
Bill Bradley wrote:
The inventor of the test itself disagrees with you. He said it was never intended to detect a virus and you can find anything with PCR since it’s so sensitive.



Sorry man, I’m not going down rabbit holes of conspiracy nonsense and watching **** youtube. Billions upon billions of dollars of research is based on the accuracy of pcr tests for viral contamination. Our lab processes thousands of samples per week.

Your point of “so sensitive” it detects anything makes no sense. The sensitivity is due to the amplification of the detected dna. That is why small copies can be detected. And if you’re running a quantitative analysis rather than endpoint it’s easy to tell if it’s a low copy finding and be suspicious of it. But a well designed assay will only bind to a sequence highly specific to what you are trying to detect. Can you have a poor performing assay that isn’t as specific? Sure, but it doesn’t invalidate the method of detection.

We frequently test by multiple methods including lots of antibody tests as positive finding can cost lots of money in remediation of the outbreak. If pcr were so unreliable it would be obvious and we wouldn’t use it.

Assays go through qualification processes to determine their accuracy. The scientific method guides here and data proves accuracy. It’s really not that complicated.


Believe what you want. This is the man who invented the test you’re talking about and he said it should never be used to diagnose like this. If he were alive today, people like you would be calling this great scientist a “conspiracy theorist” as well. I happen to be a medical researcher, myself, and I realize that science can be misused.



Hey guys, I think I can clear up a few things here. First off, I'm a scientist.
TheSheriff
Lead Assistant
Posts: 4,761
And1: 2,394
Joined: Aug 04, 2007

Re: Tatum to enter quarantine, miss 10 to 14 days 

Post#156 » by TheSheriff » Tue Jan 12, 2021 2:36 pm

The Athletic has an article about this:

The problem, according to two infectious disease experts who spoke to The Athletic, is the league established its procedures without accounting for the extenuating circumstances of a professional basketball game.

The Athletic has acquired a copy of the league’s health and safety protocols. The document begins its section on contract tracing by defining “close contact,” which is what contact tracing is generally looking for.

Consistent with current CDC guidance, close contacts are defined as any individual who (a) has been within six feet of an infected person for a cumulative total of 15 minutes or more over a 24-hour period (i.e., consecutively all at once or in multiple separate time blocks), starting from two days before illness onset for symptomatic individuals, and two days before specimen collection for asymptomatic individuals or (b) had direct contact with infectious secretions or excretions of the infected individual (e.g., being coughed on or bare-handed palm- to-palm handshakes or hugs).



But the CDC guidelines are approximations set forth for average circumstances. Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security and infectious disease physician, is concerned the league has applied them without consideration for the extraordinary circumstances of an actual NBA game. “That guidance is probably not applicable in those situations,” he says.

“We know that when people are engaged in athletic activity they’re often breathing faster,” Adalja adds. “(It’s) more likely for more viral droplets to emanate during high intensity exercise, especially in indoor environments where people are less than six feet apart.”

Dr. Abraar Karan, a doctor of internal medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School in Boston, shares Adalja’s concerns regarding physical activity.

“Transmission can happen sooner than 15 minutes,” Karan said. “The protocols here are for what an average transmission risk may be, but not if somebody is infectious and breathing extremely heavily, like they do in sports: face to face. Though you are running most of the time, there are lots of times when you’re not, like during free throws, boxing out and during a timeout.”



https://theathletic.com/2315781/2021/01/11/nba-covid-19-testing-protocols-basketball/
User avatar
sunshinekids99
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 19,646
And1: 165
Joined: Apr 10, 2001

Re: Tatum to enter quarantine, miss 10 to 14 days 

Post#157 » by sunshinekids99 » Tue Jan 12, 2021 7:18 pm

Saint Lazarus wrote:
sunshinekids99 wrote:
floyd wrote:There’s not enough vaccine available to give it to lower risk populations like NBA players. Health care workers and the elderly are first in line.


Exactly. Too many at risk people need it right now. Seems NBA is going with the NFL model of just pushing through.


The NBA should wait because of PR reasons, but this is a bogus reason imo. There's, what, like max 700 people that need to be vaccinated in the NBA?

Considering the biggest issue with vaccinations right now is distribution and not the actual supply, I'm sure the NBA could worked something out and got their people vaccinated. They probably won't just because the general public will get up in arms.

Anyway, only around 700 people would get vaccinated, it's not like they're going to cause a huge delay in vaccinations for regular people.


Its a terrible look for the league as you mention. But there are many people who need before a professional athlete regardless if its just 700 vaccinations. The distributions by states is a whole other discussion.
Image
return2glory
RealGM
Posts: 14,435
And1: 6,691
Joined: Feb 24, 2005

Re: Tatum to enter quarantine, miss 10 to 14 days 

Post#158 » by return2glory » Wed Jan 13, 2021 4:53 am

https://www.bostonherald.com/2021/01/12/0112-bh-s-celtics/

3rd straight game postponed for the Celtics. They don’t have the minimum 8 players required yet.

Seems like Grant, TT, Brown, Semi and Green might have tested positive too. Contact tracing doesn’t that this long. Beal already played.

Not sure if this has been posted here yet.
Bill Bradley
RealGM
Posts: 13,287
And1: 1,732
Joined: Mar 03, 2005
Location: Boston
 

Re: Tatum to enter quarantine, miss 10 to 14 days 

Post#159 » by Bill Bradley » Wed Jan 13, 2021 4:56 am

The studies on the vaccines do not show that they reduce transmission risk, just that they reduce symptoms. So there isn’t a scientific basis to argue that giving everyone the vaccine would stop the spread.
User avatar
grindtime22
Analyst
Posts: 3,479
And1: 3,683
Joined: Jan 30, 2012
     

Re: Tatum to enter quarantine, miss 10 to 14 days 

Post#160 » by grindtime22 » Wed Jan 13, 2021 10:50 am

return2glory wrote:https://www.bostonherald.com/2021/01/12/0112-bh-s-celtics/

3rd straight game postponed for the Celtics. They don’t have the minimum 8 players required yet.

Seems like Grant, TT, Brown, Semi and Green might have tested positive too. Contact tracing doesn’t that this long. Beal already played.

Not sure if this has been posted here yet.


They must have kind of backed off on the seriousness of the Beal interaction? I don't know. I don't think Javonte had Covid the 1st time did he? That was a week. I think a bunch of the Rockets ended up out a week when they didn't test positive either.

Something happened to take us from 8 to less than 8, so I wouldn't be surprised if somebody that we don't know about has tested positive.

Return to Boston Celtics