I had one column this week for subscribers to The Athletic, looking at the demotion calculus in a short season with no minor leagues, plus notes on Spencer Howard, Ryan Castellani, and Luis Basabe. I held a Klawchat on Thursday.
My podcast guest this week was Dr. Angela Duckworth, author of Grit: The Power of Passion and Perseverance, discussing concepts from her book and how baseball scouts and executives might apply them – and how to avoid the pitfalls of using “intangibles” as a cover for more insidious biases. You can buy Grit here via bookshop.org.
You can also buy my new book, The Inside Game: Bad Calls, Strange Moves, and What Baseball Behavior Teaches Us about Ourselves, which came out this April, via the same site. I’ll send out the next issue of my free email newsletter as soon as my fall board game preview comes out over at Paste.
And now, the links…
- Longreads first: Carina Chocano spent hours taking MasterClass sessions and wrote about the product for The Atlantic, asking what it is they’re really selling since they’re not selling actual education.
- At Slate, William Saletan lays out the timeline of how Trump’s bad decisions have led to over 171,000 U.S. deaths from COVID-19.
- Current Affairs’ Nathan J. Robinson points how, increasingly, verifiable information is behind paywalls while alt-right bullshit is free, and looks at the consequences of that dichotomy.
- Novelist Chimamanda Adichie suffered a concussion earlier this year, and wrote about the experience, including the introspection that came with the temporary loss of part of her brain function.
- The World Health Organization has created a one-stop shop for correct answers to common myths about COVID-19.
- The Delaware Interscholastic Athletic Association made the correct decision to delay fall sports until February. Some parents are pushing a petition to demand they reverse this, and the comments from parents in that article drip with ignorance and privilege.
- A Florida church leader has been arrested for pushing the fake cure known as “miracle mineral solution” (MMS), which is really just bleach.
- Mom influencers on Instagram are spreading anti-mask propaganda. Instagram is owned by Facebook and neither site seems willing to clean up their own shit.
- Almost a third of elite sportswomen reported harassment or trolling on social media according to a survey by BBC Sport.
- The opposition to masks is beyond belief at this point. You probably read about the sheriff in Marion County, Florida, who banned masks in his offices, and banned his deputies from wearing them. He eased those restrictions slightly after the backlash, but really, why is anyone objecting to mask mandates at this point other than ignorance or selfishness?
- Putting more healthful, nutritious foods into school lunches appears to have improved health outcomes like obesity for children who receive them – so of course the Trump Administration’s USDA has rolled back those changes.
- A major Iowa Republican donor who ‘somehow’ won a no-bid contract to provide PPE from China to the state is now under investigation for prostitution and possession of child pornography.
- The Massachusetts Democratic Party helped a college group orchestrate a campaign to entrap and smear a local Democratic candidate for the state’s 1st Congressional District.
- That Georgia high school that suspended a student for taking a picture of all of the maskless kids packed in the halls as they resumed classes? They had to shut down for several days due to an outbreak.
- Reproductive rights took a huge hit this week at the Supreme Court thanks to John Roberts’ conservative majority and their decision to allow several anti-abortion and outright misogynistic laws in Arkansas to stand.
- A telling comparison of the different speaker lists at anti-vaxx and pro-vaccine conferences.
- We watched season one of Perry Mason on HBO and I agree with everything Alan Sepinwall said about it.
- Board game news: There’s an Umbrella Academy card game in the works, for fans of that Netflix series.
- I’ve never played Arkwright given its length and complexity, although it’s pretty highly regarded. Now there’s a simpler version coming as a card game, on Kickstarter this week.
- I enjoyed Elizabeth Hargrave’s Designer Diaries around her newest game, Mariposas, due out later this month.
Is the link missing for the Perry Mason bullet point?
The WHO article frequently cites 1M as the necessary distance to be, well, socially distant. I heard that we landed on 6 feet because officials in Britain figured 1M good, 2M better. Not sure if that story is true and obviously increased distance is better but at what cost? How many decisions — particularly in schools and workplaces — are being made based on 6 feet and limiting the options as a result? One of the biggest flaws in our collective response to Covid has been an apparent inability to just look at the data, make sense of it, and apply that sense.
Looks like 1m is generally OK if masks are worn and talking is limited and/or at lower volume. In general, then, given that schools and (especially) restaurants involve lots of talking (often at volume), six feet seems like a good compromise. This seems especially true in restaurants/bars were the ambient noise (and alcohol) can often lead to lots of (loud) and mask-less talking.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-distance-explainer/one-meter-or-two-how-social-distancing-affects-covid-19-risk-idUSKBN23U22W
Is it really fair to call the GA school an “outbreak”? I’m not trying to start a flame war, but the article reported 9 total cases and offered no info on contact tracing to determine if the cases were contracted at the school. It’s possible some or even all of the persons infected contracted it elsewhere. It’s also possible some or all contracted it at school. And we certainly don’t know how many more in the school community have Covid, either from attending the school or elsewhere.
Personally, I think we need to be more careful with language. Again, I think we are creating a scenario wherein we hold schools to an impossible standard even though the difference in value added by in-person versus virtual far outpaces most other arenas. If we learned that 9 people who went to the local mall near me tested positive, would we call it an outbreak? Shut down the mall? And that’s for a frickin’ mall.
To be clear, I think that school did everything wrong. But the reports of the “outbreak” are now making people here in my town — where we had 2 reported cases all last week — want to walk back our 25% re-opening plan, where fewer than 50% of students are in school and everyone is masked up (on top of dozens of other protocols).
I think the part you are missing is that 9 cases would be an outbreak if we ever got the virus under control. The virus is still out of control in the US and so it’s very hard to call any specific instance an outbreak here.
However, if we had the virus at a manageable level then yes, 9 cases would be an outbreak. If you found 9 cases of a highly infectious disease, where there are minimal treatments and little to no herd immunity, you absolutely should shut down a mall, especially with the level of asymptomatic cases covid-19 comes with. 9 cases grows very quickly with this kind of pathogen.
If you found 9 cases of West Nile virus in a town, not even a mall, you would call that an outbreak. Sadly, we have just become numb to the fact that there are 3000+ identified covid cases in Georgia every day.
Yes but you sort of make my point that context matters.
I just looked it up and saw that North Paulding had an enrollment of 2434 in 2018-19 and the number of staff is 123. So, in a population of approximately 2550, we have 9 cases. How does that compare to the surrounding area?
In the lats two weeks, Paulding County has 430 cases in a population of 172K.
County wide, that is an infection rate of .25%.
In the school, it’s .35%. So, definitely elevated.
But the wording implies that the virus is spreading at the school. That the school is the source of the “outbreak”. And maybe it is. But I haven’t seen anything to confirm that it is. And that, to me, seems pretty important.
If schools are sources of outbreaks, we need to know that. If the disease is spreading elsewhere and getting into the schools as a result, we need to know that.
On one level, the language used here or in headlines shouldn’t matter. Policy shouldn’t be dictated by headlines. But, sadly, in too many directions we are seeing just that. In a conversation with our superintendent, he sent us a link to a story about the Georgia school. Why? I don’t want my superintendent making decisions based on news reports. Not in our current climate of news reporting. I want him looking at the local data and the science.
Emory Expert: “It’s going to be hard to avoid outbreaks in schools”
Kazzy, you keep saying you want people to listen to “the data and the science” when arguing that schools should be open for in-person instruction (which has been your position since at least May). Here’s yet another epidemiologist saying opening schools will lead to more outbreaks. What data or science would help convince you that fully reopening schools is the wrong policy?
I have no advocated for fully reopening schools. I have advocated for the school reopenings to be prioritized. Do I need to link to the AAP statement again? Or does their expertise not count?
And you’re dodging my question here. I am not defending the GA school’s opening. I’m questioning your use of the term “outbreak” and whether it is accurate and appropriate.
I didn’t dodge it. I answered it, and Tony did too. An Emory epidemiologist had no problem calling it an outbreak, because it is one.
The AAP clarified that statement, emphasizing that science should determine when it is safe to reopen:
Where did you answer my question?
Again, here was my question: “Is it really fair to call the GA school an “outbreak”?”
I’m asking if it is accurate and appropriate to call 9 cases in a population of 2500+ an “outbreak”? I’m not defending the school. I’m not advocating any particular policy. I’m looking at the way we are discussing this and whether it is adding clarity or adding obfuscation. If you want to consider any questioning of your position in the defensive manner you’ve offered here, I’ll again bow out.
Good grief, you are really being combative here for no reason – accusing me of “dodging” your question, asking if AAP’s expertise doesn’t count, now calling my manner “defensive.” You’ve commented here for years and even when you’ve disagreed with me, you’ve certainly never given me the feeling that you were hostile towards me. That has been the case here since you started commenting on the pandemic, and I don’t understand why I am your target.
Yes, it is appropriate to call 9 cases in a population of 2500 an outbreak. That’s about 1 in 275. Dallas, Georgia, has a population of 13,000, so the rate of cases within the city population is about 1 in 1500. The SARS outbreak in 2002-04 saw about 5100 cases in Guangdong province, with a population of 110 million, or about 1 in 21,500. The WHO and CDC call that an outbreak.
Read my initial comment and your first response. Then decide who is being combative here.
Kazzy,
Don’t you think after months of making little progress we should err on the side of caution. The US has 25% of the global cases and 4% of the population, hard to say that’s anything but a complete failure and it should cause us to want to change that shit ASAP. . I think what people aren’t talking about enough is that we are such an unhealthy country (obesity, diabetes, hypertension etc…) that we should probably be more cautious than country’s with a healthier population. If you don’t care if the death toll is 200,000 or 400,000 than I guess it all doesn’t matter as much
Erring on the side of caution assumes there is no cost to doing so. There are immense costs to doing so. There are also immense costs to recklessness. Hindsight is 20/20 and I wish we had put more energy into re-opening schools than bars/restaurants/retail. I think (and have seen) better paths forward for schools than what is happening, that offer more robust educational environments than the most cautious approaches are offering and without the risk that the more reckless plans have shown. There is no one size fits all approach (when is there?) which is why I am not advocating any particular approach. I was questioning the framing of a particular event and, per the comment below, withdraw that question.
Erring on the side of caution assumes there is no cost to doing so.
That’s incorrect. Erring on the side of caution assumes, or realizes, that such a course of action is less costly, or brings a better cost/benefit ratio, than erring on the side of incaution. Because the costs of the latter include more deaths, hospitalizations, and long-term negative health effects, it’s going to be tough for the former to be more costly.
You continue to focus on only one side of the ledger. And also seem to be ignoring the emerging data that calls into question hard lockdowns impact on death rates.
The great lockdown: Was it worth it? (The author concludes that yes, in economic terms, it was.)
COVID-19 lockdowns cause global air pollution declines.
Modelers Suggest Suggest Pandemic Lockdowns Saved Millions From Dying Of COVID-19
COVID-19 Lockdowns and Decline in Traffic Related Deaths and Injuries
I can’t find any “emerging data that calls into question hard lockdowns impact on death rates.” All I see are paper after paper arguing that lockdowns saved lives, and that the second lockdowns in Spain and Italy appear to have arrested the virus’ spread in those countries.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-africa-hunger-feat/africa-faces-hunger-pandemic-as-coronavirus-destroys-jobs-and-fuels-poverty-idUSKCN22629V
https://www.who.int/news-room/detail/15-07-2020-who-and-unicef-warn-of-a-decline-in-vaccinations-during-covid-19
Let’s recap… I asked a simple question about your framing. I engaged in an amicable back and forth with other commenters. A different commenter was able to answer my question. You’ve come in all hot, attacking me personally. Who’s being combative?
You manage to troll on your own blog. Well done. You’ve become everything you claim to hate. Later.
I did not attack you personally, Kazzy.
I also still don’t see where those links, while certainly important to weigh in any cost/benefit analysis, call into question hard lockdowns’ impact on death rates – especially not in the U.S. The effects of the pandemic on the developing world are another matter – it will devastate economies, but many countries in developing nations have just a few ventilators for populations in the millions, so failing to lock down to stop the spread could be even more devastating as there aren’t adequate facilities to save the lives of those who fall gravely ill.
Kazzy: I’m not 100% sure if you truly looking for the formal definition on an “outbreak” or not. (After all, you clearly could have just Googled it yourself.) But in case this helps:
“The terms “outbreak” and “epidemic” have often been used interchangeably. Researchers Manfred S. Green and colleagues propose that the latter term be restricted to larger events, pointing out that Chambers Concise Dictionary and Stedman’s Medical Dictionary acknowledge this distinction.“
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disease_outbreak
So, yes, the school definitely had an outbreak (as part of a much larger epidemic).
Hope this helps.
Let’s just say I won’t be sharing the WHO link with a few people I know, seeing as it headlines hydroxychloroquine as ineffective, only to then asterisk it to say more research is needed.
A clarification: John Roberts and the Supreme Court did not participate in the Arkansas abortion case; the 8th Circuit is the lower appeals court that sent the case back to the district court for reconsideration in light of the recent Supreme Court case from June. The Supreme Court has not been asked to rule on the validity of the Arkansas laws and will not be asked for a while now that the case has been sent back to the district court. While the 8th Circuit’s decision is bad sign for abortion rights supporters, its just one (out of eleven) federal appeals court’s opinion about the state of abortion law, and federal courts are only in the beginning stages of hashing out whether the most recent Supreme Court case actually changed abortion law.
I think MasterClass is a fine product as long as your expectations are realistic. My wife bought me a subscription recently as a gift and I’m doing Kasparov’s class and I think it is great. Now, I’m not a professional chess player and I don’t intend to become one, but I was a decent player considering the fact I never had any formal education on it. I feel like having access to even some of Kasparov’s tips and tricks have already made a me a better player. Do I think it is going to replace having a coach for somebody looking to compete professionally? Of course not. It’s just a good option to learn something from somebody great at it. It won’t suddenly convert you into that person.