The Corona Virus

[Rockphed]

And let's not forget, mustn't pay the players. Oh, how I'd clutch my pearls if the people doing all the actual work got fairly compensated.

Supposedly the players are paid in degrees. Since most scholarshipped players tend to have problems actually earning that degree, I am not convinced that anyone is going to honor said degrees. I know my alma mater put extensive effort in to getting the athletes to actually pass their classes, but they also tried very hard to be an undergraduate teaching institution, rather than a research university.

[Peelee]

Supposedly the players are paid in degrees.

Which is significantly under paying them. Not to mention the ban on them getting paid for their likeness or other licensing rights.

[veti]

I'm confused. If the teams lose money, what exactly is the point of maintaining them?

[snowblizz]

I'm confused. If the teams lose money, what exactly is the point of maintaining them?

The same reason why every Hollywood movie blockbuster made in recent years made no net profit at all. Other people make money off them.

[HandofShadows]

The same reason why every Hollywood movie blockbuster made in recent years made no net profit at all. Other people make money off them.

There is even a term for this called "Hollywood Accounting". It used loopholes, workarounds and some VERY sketchy practices to work.

[snowblizz]

There is even a term for this called "Hollywood Accounting". It used loopholes, workarounds and some VERY sketchy practices to work.

Indeed. I watched a youtube vid about that. Until that I didn't know it was more than a derogatory term for unspecific vague "they do stuff odd in Hollywood". Like some creative accounting is always implied in all major corporations, but that was impressive in it's scale.

[Vinyadan]

[warty goblin]

I'm confused. If the teams lose money, what exactly is the point of maintaining them?

Prestige and advertising. Big universities are all nonprofits, so they're not answerable to shareholders about why they do x or y non-profitable thing (thank heavens). Having a good whatever-ball team is considered a good way to attract students, and enhances the university's image.

After all, would the typical student want to go to Fun Cool School with a kickass football team and a big party every gameday, or Dork Loser Central who cut their team?

The really weird part is that this extends even to schools whose teams are Division 3 jokes. At the far end you get places that give you pizza to even show up at the game, but they gotta keep it around for some dumbass reason. That reason being, I suspect optics and to give the campus tour guides something to talk about.

[Roland St. Jude]

Sheriff: This all seems pretty off-topic. Maybe start a college athletics thread, if you want to keep discussing this here. And if you do, steer clear of discussing higher administration of state schools, which are essentially government entities.

[sihnfahl]

{scrubbed}

[Rogar Demonblud]

{scrubbed}

[Ibrinar]

Is there any site that has death per million "adjusted" for age demographics? Or maybe just calculates a multiplier how much deadlier/less deadly you would expect it to be (all else being equal which it of course isn't) because of age profile? Qatar (high number of infected low number of death) has made me curious. Qatar has an rather extreme age profile ("55-64 years: 3.44% (male 62,683 /female 18,731)
65 years and over: 1.06% (male 16,295 /female 8,799) (2018 est.)") so I am curious who else does. But smaller differences like the USA having a younger population than most developed nations is interesting too and am curious how high the theoretical difference would be. But collecting the demographics data and doing it myself sounds like too much work so does anyone know something like that?

[Rogar Demonblud]

The Johns Hopkins website may have that, seeing as how they've become a clearing house for most Covid info.

[veti]

I would treat a graph "adjusted" for that kind of parameter with some scepticism. It risks compounding the usual fog of inherently untrustworthy and hard-to-compare statistics with a whole new layer of obfuscation.

At the least, I'd want to know the precise quantitative rules used for weighting samples, the sources of raw data, and the basis on which sampled countries were selected. I suspect that with careful choices of these things, you could make a graph like that show pretty much anything you want.

[snowblizz]

I thought most countries break down the data into age categories.

The main problem remains though, none of the data collection in countries is any way standardidzed enough that we can really make very detailed comparisons.

It all reminds me of the search for the independent value of IS project implementation success. Every study had slightly different values going into it that were statistically significant but might not be so in another study. And the only values and instrument to investigate (i.e. questions to ask) was so generic and bland you couldn't derive anything particularly profound out of it.


Basically, we cannot pare down the data enough as in most cases we do not have it to really dig into the, who, what and why of corona.

[Rogar Demonblud]

I would treat a graph "adjusted" for that kind of parameter with some scepticism. It risks compounding the usual fog of inherently untrustworthy and hard-to-compare statistics with a whole new layer of obfuscation.

At the least, I'd want to know the precise quantitative rules used for weighting samples, the sources of raw data, and the basis on which sampled countries were selected. I suspect that with careful choices of these things, you could make a graph like that show pretty much anything you want.

It's actually pretty simple. Take number of people in specified age band from your census data, number of dead in that age band from the medical reporting system and do a bit of basic math. 800 dead out of two million (for instance) works out to 400 deaths per million.

If you actually follow the rules, statistics doesn't flex much.

[veti]

It's actually pretty simple. Take number of people in specified age band from your census data, number of dead in that age band from the medical reporting system and do a bit of basic math. 800 dead out of two million (for instance) works out to 400 deaths per million.

If you actually follow the rules, statistics doesn't flex much.

What age bands, specifically? Census data at what level - country, region, state, city? Which "medical reporting system" are you using? What start and end dates are you choosing, and why? How are you deciding which countries to include? Are you including all dead in that age group, or just those reported as coronavirus related? How are you allowing for differences in reporting methodology between different sources? And we haven't even touched on this "basic math" yet.

Of course it's perfectly possible to do real, honest science with statistics, but it's also disturbingly easy to do highly dishonest science with them. How do you know which kind you're looking at?

[Rogar Demonblud]

I would argue with you, but you seem to not understand epidemiology so I suspect we'd just end up talking past each other. Besides we have a new problem to discuss.

Bloomberg has broken the news that Hope Hicks has tested positive and is already quite sick. So potentially every member of the inner circle, including the President of the United States, are now sick. They've definitely been exposed and should quarantine for the next two weeks.

[snowblizz]

I would argue with you, but you seem to not understand epidemiology so I suspect we'd just end up talking past each other. Besides we have a new problem to discuss.

Bloomberg has broken the news that Hope Hicks has tested positive and is already quite sick. So potentially every member of the inner circle, including the President of the United States, are now sick. They've definitely been exposed and should quarantine for the next two weeks.

Too late.

Corona moves fast.

[Ibrinar]

Potentially big but even at his age good chance it won't become serious. If it does I will be a bit annoyed that we can't talk about the implications here. But there really isn't much we can say about it here.

[Rogar Demonblud]

Too late.

Corona moves fast.

And goes slow.

[Tyndmyr]

Potentially big but even at his age good chance it won't become serious. If it does I will be a bit annoyed that we can't talk about the implications here. But there really isn't much we can say about it here.

Gotta avoid the politics, yeah.

But it might have some implications for the lockdowns and stuff. More prominent infections might mean we spend longer before reopening or lifting various mitigation strategies.

It seems like it's been going forever at this point. I'm hoping we get past it soon, but....it's been a slog thus far.

[Rogar Demonblud]

We aren't likely to have a vaccine widely available worldwide until this time next year. In my darker moments, I wonder if we'll already be dealing with Covid-21 by then.

[Grey_Wolf_c]

We aren't likely to have a vaccine widely available worldwide until this time next year. In my darker moments, I wonder if we'll already be dealing with Covid-21 by then.

There are also very worrying reports of widespread skepticism if not outright suspicion of the vaccine, partially building on the anti-vaccine movement's groundwork, partially due to politics I won't go into, but regardless of source, it is out there - and if sufficient number of people refuse the vaccine, COVID might simply not go away.

GW

[Rogar Demonblud]

They had skepticism in about the same ratio over the polio vaccine, and people came around on that fairly quickly once it was shown to not make you sick. People also were leery of the smallpox and MMR shots, but also adapted. So I have hopes history will repeat.

[Keltest]

There are also very worrying reports of widespread skepticism if not outright suspicion of the vaccine, partially building on the anti-vaccine movement's groundwork, partially due to politics I won't go into, but regardless of source, it is out there - and if sufficient number of people refuse the vaccine, COVID might simply not go away.

GW

I think that depends in part on which vaccine youre talking about. There are a few different ones, and some of them have given me, at least, good reason to think that they arent being honest/ethical about it.

[Ashtagon]

Bit of public health advice...

If you've been asked to self-isolate by your government because you've either tested positive or you had close contact with someone who tested positive, that usually means 14 days self-isolation (depending on the advice your particular government has given).

That self-isolation period does not automatically end at the end of those two weeks.

If you develop symptoms during those two weeks, and especially if you still have symptoms at the end of those two weeks, you should continue to self-isolate, and should almost certainly seek further medical advice. At least within the UK, the current official advice is that the self-isolation period continues as long as symptoms persist, and for two more days after that.

[Ibrinar]

Gotta avoid the politics, yeah.

But it might have some implications for the lockdowns and stuff. More prominent infections might mean we spend longer before reopening or lifting various mitigation strategies.

It seems like it's been going forever at this point. I'm hoping we get past it soon, but....it's been a slog thus far.

And now Trump went to the Walter Reed National Military Medical Center, weird. Since that would be a super fast progression if he didn't have symptoms when the debate happened I actually believe them that it is just extreme caution.

About lockdowns prominent people dying might contribute to that on the other hand prominent people having a mild case might do the opposite. Not that either makes much sense.

And yeah kinda feels longer than what? About half a year since it really got going and was more than a potential problem? Though it wasn't too bad in germany.

[veti]

They had skepticism in about the same ratio over the polio vaccine, and people came around on that fairly quickly once it was shown to not make you sick. People also were leery of the smallpox and MMR shots, but also adapted. So I have hopes history will repeat.

That was a different world. Most people really believed in science, back then.

But it doesn't really matter, I think, if people do refuse the vaccine. So long as it's available to those who do want it, and particularly to vulnerable people, we can start treating Covid-19 like a normal flu - there'll be no need for all the extraordinary measures, even if it remains endemic.

[Razade]

That was a different world. Most people really believed in science, back then.

[Citation Needed]

People have been science denying since the first man made fire. There's no indication that I can tell that we live in a world that is more science-adverse today than 70 years ago. Science literacy by all metrics is up in 2020 world wide compared to 1950 not to mention the 1930's when a vaccine was first made and then dropped.