Hooked on Huskers Posted October 26, 2020 Share Posted October 26, 2020 https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/30192331/wisconsin-qb-graham-mertz-awaiting-confirmation-positive-covid-19-test-per-reports If legit, Huskers will face 3rd string QB ....... but no problem. See Purdue & Indiana results last year. Quote Link to comment
Undone Posted October 26, 2020 Share Posted October 26, 2020 He'll have to take a PCR test tomorrow morning. If it shows positive, he's out. Quote Link to comment
krc1995 Posted October 26, 2020 Share Posted October 26, 2020 Will our results be made public like this? Quote Link to comment
lo country Posted October 26, 2020 Share Posted October 26, 2020 30 minutes ago, Undone said: He'll have to take a PCR test tomorrow morning. If it shows positive, he's out. 21 days.......Ridiculous. I don't know why it can be the CDC 10-14 days... Especially with the availability of the testing the players have access to. 16 minutes ago, krc1995 said: Will our results be made public like this? IIRC, Frost or Moos said we wouldn't make the names public. Quote Link to comment
Undone Posted October 26, 2020 Share Posted October 26, 2020 10 minutes ago, lo country said: I don't know why it can be the CDC 10-14 days.. Because if anybody winds up in court they want the maximum CYA defense possible. 3 Quote Link to comment
lo country Posted October 26, 2020 Share Posted October 26, 2020 1 minute ago, Undone said: Because if anybody winds up in court they want the maximum CYA defense possible. Great point. Quote Link to comment
WyoHusker56 Posted October 26, 2020 Share Posted October 26, 2020 38 minutes ago, lo country said: 21 days.......Ridiculous. I don't know why it can be the CDC 10-14 days... Especially with the availability of the testing the players have access to. IIRC, Frost or Moos said we wouldn't make the names public. I believe the reasoning was 14 days for quarantine/cardiac testing and then 7 days to get back up to speed/game ready as they can't practice for 14. 3 1 Quote Link to comment
Popular Post drfish Posted October 26, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted October 26, 2020 Just for reference. The 21 day issue is present due to the following. The American College of Cardiology has recommended that all athletes who test positive for COVID-19 should have total rest (not bed rest, but no training at all) for a period of 14 days. Following 14 days of no conditioning and no weight lifting, they are probably put into a 7 days (assuming they perform adequately ) "re-conditioning" protocol. The concern is that there has been evidence that COVID-19 may cause myocarditis. Ohio State released some preliminary data in September where cardiac MRI's were done on 20 some athletes. 8 of these athletes met the MRI criteria for myocarditis. 4 had no symptoms and 4 had minimal symptoms. Myocarditis is an infection/inflammation of the heart muscle. Exercise during myocarditis can increase the severity. Myocarditis is the 3rd leading cause of sudden death among athletes. In Italy during their initial peak of COVID, there was a substantial rise in out of hospital sudden cardiac death, almost all of which was COVID related. That is the crux of the concern. 21 days is about the minimum that you could be out. 3 7 Quote Link to comment
hskrfan4life Posted October 26, 2020 Share Posted October 26, 2020 58 minutes ago, krc1995 said: Will our results be made public like this? Names won't be released. We'd know on gameday. Quote Link to comment
Popular Post drfish Posted October 26, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted October 26, 2020 Sorry to post again, but I was not complete. The time off could be longer if the re-conditioning doesn't go well. Also if there is evidence of myocarditis, the treatment is 3-6 months of rest. A lost season. I was involved in drafting the COVID protocol for our local area schools. The Big Ten's protocol is consistent with the American College of Cardiology recommendations. I believe the Big Ten would say that if it prevents one athlete from dying from Sudden Cardiac Death due to COVID, it was worth it. I would agree. The second test would indeed be a nucleic amplification test which is a more accurate test. All tests can have both false positives and false negatives. 5 6 Quote Link to comment
drfish Posted October 26, 2020 Share Posted October 26, 2020 One last item. The CDC's 10 day recommendation which is that you may end self-isolation when you are 10 days post onset of symptoms AND have no fever for 24 hours without taking any fever reducing medications AND have improvement in symptoms, though resolution of symptoms is not required. The former re-testing protocol has been discontinued because they have not been able to isolate replicable viral RNA (essentially infectious virus) by 10 days in anyone with mild or moderate symptoms that meets those criteria. They have been able to isolate non-replicable viral RNA in many people for weeks after infection. So CDC says you can end self-isolation 10 days after symptoms start or 10 days after a positive test if you were tested due to a COVID contact. In terms of athletes as an example, if an athlete has symptoms on Nov 1 and has a positive test on Nov 3, they would be required to self-isolate until Nov 11, at which point thay could return to in person activities, like classroom activities etc. They would be evaluated with EKG, high sensitivity troponin (a marker for cardiac injury) and an echocardiogram. I believe that they also may have to get a cardia MRI. If these are negative, they are put in a monitored re-conditioning protocol. This usually is 10-15 minutes of sub maximal exercise and gradually increases over the next 6 days to full participation. One final thought on the positive antigen test. I suspect that Nick Saban had a false positive rapid antigen test and then had 3 neg PCR tests so he was allowed to return to the sideline. Don't know that for certain, but seems logical. 3 5 Quote Link to comment
krc1995 Posted October 26, 2020 Share Posted October 26, 2020 This reminds me what happened to 84huskerlaw? 1 5 Quote Link to comment
Hilltop Posted October 26, 2020 Share Posted October 26, 2020 The vast majority of people don't have heart problems from Covid. Why not test people for the rare issue instead of making everyone miss the extra week? I'm up to 43 friends and members of family that have had it. From my personal experience, I don't think longer periods out of football are justified. After all, we don't even check people after other illnesses that are proven to cause the same side effects. 1 Quote Link to comment
Popular Post drfish Posted October 26, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted October 26, 2020 58 minutes ago, Hilltop said: The vast majority of people don't have heart problems from Covid. Why not test people for the rare issue instead of making everyone miss the extra week? I'm up to 43 friends and members of family that have had it. From my personal experience, I don't think longer periods out of football are justified. After all, we don't even check people after other illnesses that are proven to cause the same side effects. Myocarditis is the 3rd leading cause of sudden death in athletes. COVID causes myocarditis, including MRI findings in athletes with MILD or NO symptoms. /rant Additionally, I suspect that you and your 43 friends would not be a very close match for the stresses put on a body by the rigors of division 1 competitive athletics, so your observations are pretty meaningless in assessing the risk to said athletes. Except, perhaps the incautious nature of people of that age. I know quite a few people who have dealt with COVID as well. 2 or 3 who had it in May are still having headaches and fatigue causing a major impact on their ability to return to their previous level of function. I know several more who had a rough time of it, including hospitalization. This group does not compare well with the athletes in question either. I also know people who have lost friends and family members to COVID, so take that for what it is worth as well. It is possible that we are being more cautious than is necessary, but we do not know enough to know that. Is it better to err on the side of caution or err on the side of recklessness. How many potentially preventable deaths are acceptable in your estimation? I don't necessarily mean to be harsh, but being on the front lines, I am losing patience with COVID minimizers. If your point is to imply that COVID is not as bad as it is being made out to be, please spare me. There have been 300,000 more deaths in 2020 than would be expected to occur based on usual all-cause mortality. It is likely that COVID related deaths are being under-reported not over-reported. /endrant Back to the thread. Anyway, if Mertz is unable to go and Wisconsin doesn't have an outbreak that prevents the game from occuring, this is a stroke of luck for the Huskers since they will be down two DB starters for the first half. Hopefully, he does not have it, though. 8 4 2 Quote Link to comment
Popular Post El Straino Posted October 26, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted October 26, 2020 Whoa, whoa, whoa there...actual medical science combined with logical caution and basic human decency? I'm not sure some on here are ready for THAT. WHY FOOTBALL MAN NO PLAY LONG TIME?!!! *Knuckles dragging on ground* 8 2 1 Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.