COVID in Texas

BWGophers wrote:FWIW...

I've been doing my own tracking of COVID in Texas using the data published by Texas DSHS and local county health websites.  Since Memorial Day, there has been a rapid rise in new cases of COVID in Texas, but this time, there has also been a parallel increase in COVID hospitalizations that suggests we are seeing an increase in disease spread, not just an increase in cases due to increased testing.  Daily deaths have been flat (gold curve referenced to the right hand scale on the graph), and down from their peak in Mid-May, but let's hope they stay that way and don't start to increase with the hospitalizations.

Long story short...  Stay aware and stay safe!

Mbappé7 wrote:1. what would all the leagues do  if  any of the kids is tested positive for covid?
2. what would the clubs do?
Do they even have a plan of action. You’ll know it’s coming right.
one thing we all know is hand a big fat check on july 1st with so many unknowns

ResidentOne wrote:

Mbappé7 wrote:1. what would all the leagues do  if  any of the kids is tested positive for covid?
2. what would the clubs do?
Do they even have a plan of action. You’ll know it’s coming right.
one thing we all know is hand a big fat check on july 1st with so many unknowns

I agree!  Here is my belief.  Act as if everything is normal until July 1st, collect as many checks as possible.  After that, who cares, they have our money.  

I posted in another topic but I suggest us parents look at month to month to options.  

smugrr wrote:Which leagues? I know men's league had scheduled games (rained out last weekend).

Big Ern wrote:If we're being honest with ourselves, it's a safe bet that there isn't a single team out there that doesn't have at least a player that hasn't had it or been exposed to someone that has.  Of course there will be kids and coaches that test positive and we can all expect to get it ourselves (if we haven't already) at some point.  It is what it is and not likely to go away ... Like, in your lifetime ... Ya can't fight mother nature.

I'd also say that it isn't so much that CV19 is "ramping up", it's just that there are more than 100x the testing being done now than in the recent past.  I have a neighbor that is a nurse on the testing front lines. Says a month ago they had to jump through hoops to get a patient tested.  Now they have 7 lab companies offering to do it for free because the state was paying them per test ... were pushing them on everyone (not to mention those hospitals handing CV19 related illness are being paid $7k per managed case).  Now the state is shutting down that line of funding ... Why would they do that? ... Hmmm ...  
His guess is they are gonna shut things down again and slow down testing, which = fewer "record" numbers, and wahlah ... their mandates "worked" yet again.  

The lack of logical thought behind decisions made by the powers that be ... astounding.

That all said, I hope to see you guys out there!

smugrr wrote:I understand at least one team dropped out of last weekends tournament because of a possible exposure to someone positive by someone other than a player, maybe a parent.

Mbappé7 wrote:Will youth sports happen in Texas any time soon. Even fcd withdrew from mls cup ?

cenTex wrote:

Mbappé7 wrote:Will youth sports happen in Texas any time soon. Even fcd withdrew from mls cup ?

What pro teams do should have zero bearing on what youth teams do. Entirely different risk profiles.

Pro teams (or even college teams) who spend a half dozen plus hours a day together in close spaces (often indoor), eating, working out, and traveling together need a bubble to ensure infections don't spread and also need closed stadiums so that tens of thousands of people don't congregate at their games and become super spreader events.

Outdoor youth sports are extremely low risk. To date, there hasn't been a single documented case of youth player to player transmission on any outdoor soccer field.  

Not one.

Anybody who says "the kids can't play because the grownups shouldn't play" or the "kids can't play outdoors because indoor activities such as bars and schools are causing the spread" is using a sledgehammer to solve the problem when a scalpel would be a better idea.

The danger of this virus is real and should be taken seriously.  High risk activities that are not essential should absolutely be limited. Perhaps traveling for soccer is a bad idea because there are risks with that, and the number of parents on the sideline should be limited to what can be safely distanced.

But local practices and games should absolutely continue this fall as long as the facts suggest they pose very little risk of transmission.

Very low risk does not mean zero risk, though. So if a kid is in a high risk home with the elderly or immunocompromised in their orbit and the family isn't willing to take any increased risk such as letting their child play youth outdoor soccer, then it seems reasonable that they should opt out and stay home until the risk profile changes.

For those that aren't in that situation and do want to play, the risk is low enough that it seems reasonable that they should be able to do so as long as they are responsible about it.

Let's use the data and common sense to guide our decisions here and not get swept up in the politics or ignorance.

Truthiness wrote:

cenTex wrote:

Mbappé7 wrote:Will youth sports happen in Texas any time soon. Even fcd withdrew from mls cup ?

What pro teams do should have zero bearing on what youth teams do. Entirely different risk profiles.

Pro teams (or even college teams) who spend a half dozen plus hours a day together in close spaces (often indoor), eating, working out, and traveling together need a bubble to ensure infections don't spread and also need closed stadiums so that tens of thousands of people don't congregate at their games and become super spreader events.

Outdoor youth sports are extremely low risk. To date, there hasn't been a single documented case of youth player to player transmission on any outdoor soccer field.  

Not one.

Anybody who says "the kids can't play because the grownups shouldn't play" or the "kids can't play outdoors because indoor activities such as bars and schools are causing the spread" is using a sledgehammer to solve the problem when a scalpel would be a better idea.

The danger of this virus is real and should be taken seriously.  High risk activities that are not essential should absolutely be limited. Perhaps traveling for soccer is a bad idea because there are risks with that, and the number of parents on the sideline should be limited to what can be safely distanced.

But local practices and games should absolutely continue this fall as long as the facts suggest they pose very little risk of transmission.

Very low risk does not mean zero risk, though. So if a kid is in a high risk home with the elderly or immunocompromised in their orbit and the family isn't willing to take any increased risk such as letting their child play youth outdoor soccer, then it seems reasonable that they should opt out and stay home until the risk profile changes.

For those that aren't in that situation and do want to play, the risk is low enough that it seems reasonable that they should be able to do so as long as they are responsible about it.

Let's use the data and common sense to guide our decisions here and not get swept up in the politics or ignorance.

Amen.

Seems unwise to mandate that low risk families must refrain from relatively low risk activities just because it's easier to make blanket policies that refuse to account for nuance for the sake of appearing to be doing something proactive.

Follow the data and prohibit the things that are spreading the virus. Outdoor youth activities isn't one of those things.