nonpolitical medical issues

[Deleted member 2897]

When you start changing what he can do or wear on the course then you are changing the game itself. The PGA isn't going to do that. They also aren't going to let someone with COVID be around thousands of people because he promises to keep his distance. That is ridiculous for many reasons. Their rules for this are perfectly fine.

They knew he was exposed to someone with covid-19 and had close contact with them before he showed up at the tournament. So yes they did actually let him be around thousands of people.

Those are your words when I say 'thousands of people'. The truth is that you can play golf without being around anyone, so there is a lot of hyperbole here. The notion that a covid-positive guy playing golf could infect bystanders on the side of the course is devoid of any actual evidence its ever happened once in the world in any golf or non-golf setting.

 

[WreckinGT]

They knew he was exposed to someone before he showed up at the tournament. So yes they did actually let him be around thousands of people.

Letting him around thousands of people knowing he has COVID is pretty different than letting him around them when he is in contact tracing because he was around someone else who had COVID. However if your argument is that he never should have been allowed to play and that the PGA's contact tracing protocols are too relaxed then I might actually agree with you.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Letting him around thousands of people knowing he has COVID is pretty different than letting him around them when he is in contact tracing because he was around someone else who had COVID. However if your argument is that he never should have been allowed to play and that the PGA's contact tracing protocols are too relaxed then I might actually agree with you.

If their rules are consistent, then absolutely he should have never been allowed on the course. He had been in close contact with a known covid-positive person for an extended period of time.

If I ran the PGA, I would have allowed him on the course. But I would have put him into my contingency plans knowing his possible exposure. He wouldn't have been allowed in any common areas. His caddie would have to approve being with him, which might have resulted in both people wearing masks. So long as you follow behaviors like that, the risk to everyone there would have been 0.00000.

 

[BeachBuzz]

If their rules are consistent, then absolutely he should have never been allowed on the course. He had been in close contact with a known covid-positive person for an extended period of time.

If I ran the PGA, I would have allowed him on the course. But I would have put him into my contingency plans knowing his possible exposure. He wouldn't have been allowed in any common areas. His caddie would have to approve being with him, which might have resulted in both people wearing masks. So long as you follow behaviors like that, the risk to everyone there would have been 0.00000.

The PGA did pretty much what you would have done. He was restricted from common areas for the tournament and had to test ever day. Most golfers just have to test before the tournament. The PGA's policy of disqualifying someone for COVID is not because he is a threat to spread it. It would be fairly easy to keep him from spreading it. The policy is simply for PR reasons. What if he fist bumped someone and that person came up positive a week later. 99% that he didn't give COVID to the person that he fist bumped, they probably got it somewhere else. However, it would look really ,really bad and the media would cover it as if he had given it to them. The PGA was in a no win situation and did what it had to do to protect the brand.

 

[GT_EE78]

A California virologist who told Anthony Fauci that COVID-19 looks 'potentially engineered' and 'inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory' - only to later reverse course and publish a 'natural origin' paper 8 weeks later (before receiving a multi million-dollar NIH grant) has deleted more than 5,000 tweets.

ZeroHedge

ZeroHedge - On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero

www.zerohedge.com

 

[Northeast Stinger]

I don't think masking and social distancing alone has ever been recommended for people who have tested positive. Even if they'd put him in a more cautious protocol due to exposure, once he tested positive the guidelines are to isolate. I am not sure that has changed as we continue to learn about the virus.

He knew the rules, he knew the guidelines, he had a chance to be vaxxed, he rolled the dice. He lost.

Exactly. He knew the rules. To expect the PGA to change all their rules for one person is an absurd expectation. No one golfs alone in a tournament or gets a course all to themselves.

It also sounds like he knew he screwed up when he found out he had been exposed and tried desperately to head it off with a vaccination. That’s not recommended protocol either.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

If I were him, I would have gotten vaccinated a long time ago. But having said that, there’s no reason you can’t play golf with Covid.

Being vaccinated doesn’t stop you from getting it and testing positive. So there’s also no proof he wouldn’t still be in the same spot - a positive test but completely healthy and yet unable to play. At some point, especially with outdoor sports where you’re distanced from people, we have to grow up and start following the science.

Except that per PGA rules, asymptomatic fully vaccinated people don’t have to be tested, only those showing symptoms or those unvaccinated who have been exposed. Logical and sensible following of the science to me. On the other hand, unvaccinated exposure to the virus with a positive test needs a quarantine.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

If their rules are consistent, then absolutely he should have never been allowed on the course. He had been in close contact with a known covid-positive person for an extended period of time.

If I ran the PGA, I would have allowed him on the course. But I would have put him into my contingency plans knowing his possible exposure. He wouldn't have been allowed in any common areas. His caddie would have to approve being with him, which might have resulted in both people wearing masks. So long as you follow behaviors like that, the risk to everyone there would have been 0.00000.

Sounds pretty complicated just to make a special exception. But the other piece of this is that the PGA, to my knowledge, does not require people to self disclose their vaccination status. His status came to light when he was exposed, leading to testing.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

Sounds pretty complicated just to make a special exception. But the other piece of this is that the PGA, to my knowledge, does not require people to self disclose their vaccination status. His status came to light when he was exposed, leading to testing.

A couple thoughts. You've said a couple times now that me or some of us are asking the PGA for a special exception. I don't have a dog in this hunt, so I don't care about John Rahm. I also don't think there needs to be any exception - I'm saying their base rules in the first place are anti-science, illogical, and inconsistent.

Except that per PGA rules, asymptomatic fully vaccinated people don’t have to be tested, only those showing symptoms or those unvaccinated who have been exposed. Logical and sensible following of the science to me. On the other hand, unvaccinated exposure to the virus with a positive test needs a quarantine.

Everyone else in his threesome pairing on Saturday had already had covid late last year. Those people have natural immunity that as far as we can all tell so far is similar to that of vaccination. To treat those two groups differently doesn't make sense. And most importantly, we're talking about a sport that is played outdoors by yourself. They don't share a golf cart, they walk the course. They could have easily like an entire year ago come up with a contingency plan for anybody who is covid positive or a suspected covid positive. They let an unvaccinated guy who was known to have prolonged exposure to a covid positive person come play three rounds and mix in with all the close contact areas like the locker room, restaurant/bar, scoring room, media room etc. That's not recommended by anybody. The PGA has bungled this entire thing from the beginning.

 

[BeachBuzz]

They let an unvaccinated guy who was known to have prolonged exposure to a covid positive person come play three rounds and mix in with all the close contact areas like the locker room, restaurant/bar, scoring room, media room etc. That's not recommended by anybody. The PGA has bungled this entire thing from the beginning.

He was in the contact tracing protocol and was not allowed in the locker room or other indoor areas. I posted that above. The PGA followed their protocol just like they have for the last 50 events. This has happened to other golfers several times, they just weren't leading the golf tournament so no one noticed.

 

[GT_EE78]

I wonder if there's any truth to the rumor that Fauci will next recommend wearing the mask over the eyes to prevent viewing the FOIA emails?

 

[Deleted member 2897]

He was in the contact tracing protocol and was not allowed in the locker room or other indoor areas. I posted that above. The PGA followed their protocol just like they have for the last 50 events. This has happened to other golfers several times, they just weren't leading the golf tournament so no one noticed.

Oh my bad, I missed that. Truly bizarre that they have a protocol to keep everyone safe, but apparently they don't think it actually keeps everyone safe.

 

[armeck]

I wonder if there's any truth to the rumor that Fauci will next recommend wearing the mask over the eyes to prevent viewing the FOIA emails?

Man, get out of here with this kind of posting unless you want this thread closed too.

 

[BeachBuzz]

Oh my bad, I missed that. Truly bizarre that they have a protocol to keep everyone safe, but apparently they don't think it actually keeps everyone safe.

It's not about keeping people safe. It's about not getting killed in the media for letting someone they know has COVID play in a tournament. It's probably also about some liability from the same thing. If they let someone they know has it play and someone else that was anywhere near them gets sick and dies, they lose a bunch of money. Won't matter how the second person actually got it because I'm guessing it's hard to prove.

 

[GT_EE78]

Man, get out of here with this kind of posting unless you want this thread closed too.

I do share your concerns in that arena but think the healthcare folk are fair game for criticism.
there are leaders of all persuasions who want to prove the origin of the virus, however it may turn out.
As you suggested I'll try to be careful and hope others will too.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

It's not about keeping people safe. It's about not getting killed in the media for letting someone they know has COVID play in a tournament. It's probably also about some liability from the same thing. If they let someone they know has it play and someone else that was anywhere near them gets sick and dies, they lose a bunch of money. Won't matter how the second person actually got it because I'm guessing it's hard to prove.

And to double down on your reply, you cannot guarantee anyone’s safety. All you can do is try to mitigate risk. They simply showed that they were making a good faith effort at mitigating everyone’s risk.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

And to double down on your reply, you cannot guarantee anyone’s safety. All you can do is try to mitigate risk. They simply showed that they were making a good faith effort at mitigating everyone’s risk.

Yep. I still think if you haven’t been vaccinated and haven’t had it before and you had prolonged exposure to someone who just tested positive, then you can’t play, sorry. Otherwise if you think it’s okay for them to play while keeping distance and avoiding common areas, then the same should apply if you test positive too. We had a lot of these same conversations back when they were talking about playing football or not (and other sports). When you’re worried about optics and liability, this is what you end up with - inconsistent weird policies.

 

[Buzzbomb]

F.D.A. advisors were against this new drug(one think tank claims it works, the other study is inconclusive at best, while claiming it won’t). First Alzheimer’s treatment in the last 20 years(per C.N.N.)and here is the N.Y. Times heading:

F.D.A. Approves Alzheimer’s Drug Despite Fierce Debate Over Whether It Works​

Aducanumab, or Aduhelm, is the first new Alzheimer’s treatment in 18 years and the first to attack the disease process. But some experts say there’s not enough evidence it can address cognitive symptoms.

 

[Deleted member 2897]

F.D.A. advisors were against this new drug(one think tank claims it works, the other study is inconclusive at best, while claiming it won’t). First Alzheimer’s treatment in the last 20 years(per C.N.N.)and here is the N.Y. Times heading:

F.D.A. Approves Alzheimer’s Drug Despite Fierce Debate Over Whether It Works​

Aducanumab, or Aduhelm, is the first new Alzheimer’s treatment in 18 years and the first to attack the disease process. But some experts say there’s not enough evidence it can address cognitive symptoms.

And it can all be yours for $56,000 per year.

 

[Northeast Stinger]

Yep. I still think if you haven’t been vaccinated and haven’t had it before and you had prolonged exposure to someone who just tested positive, then you can’t play, sorry. Otherwise if you think it’s okay for them to play while keeping distance and avoiding common areas, then the same should apply if you test positive too. We had a lot of these same conversations back when they were talking about playing football or not (and other sports). When you’re worried about optics and liability, this is what you end up with - inconsistent weird policies.

Right. Don’t disagree in principle, just not sure about particular facts. I understood that vaccination status was an honor code. That would throw an extra kink into how to respond to a contact tracing reveal moment.