Source: Trevor Thomas
Multiple outlets have recently reported on a new “scientific paper” published by the CDC in partnership with the NFL. The paper was authored by “medical experts” from both the NFL and the NFL Players Association. The paper details the efforts by the NFL to conduct its season in the midst of the Wuhan virus. As the lockdown narrative still prevails across much of the U.S., this paper provides some important revelations.
Before discussing the paper, it is important to note that, despite a few postponements and unlike the NCAA and thousands of high schools across the U.S. that caved to the Wuhan virus fear narrative, every NFL regular season game was played. Only the Super Bowl remains.
Reporting on the CDC/NFL paper, Fox News notes that “from Aug. 9 to Nov. 21 approximately 623,000 COVID-19 tests were performed on approximately 11,400 players and staff members and 329 tested positive (2.9%).” That’s about 55 tests per individual conducted over a 105-day period. (This period constitutes the bulk of the NFL regular season.) That means, on average, that NFL employees were getting tested once every two days.
The 2.9% number is calculated by dividing the number who tested positive (329) by the total number tested (11,400). However, it would be more revealing to note, of the 623,000 tests, how many tests were positive. Almost certainly this number is significantly lower than 2.9%. It’s also important to note that in spite of these “positive” tests, almost zero serious illnesses from the Wuhan virus were reported.
In other words, though the NFL’s rampant testing yielded a few “positives,” virtually no one got sick. Almost every player or coach who was reported to have missed a game had to do so because of a “positive test.” Thus, as we have seen throughout the past ten months, a “positive test” does not in any way indicate an actual Wuhan virus case.
Only two NFL employees — Denver’s defensive coordinator Ed Donatell and Jacksonville running back Ryquell Armstead — reportedly had to be hospitalized due to Wuhan virus complications. Both have fully recovered. It seems that for NFL players — and for football players at any level — the dangers from the Wuhan virus pale in comparison to the dangers that come from playing in football games.
Most telling from the CDC/NFL paper was the fact that, according to Dr. Allen Sills, the NFL’s chief medical officer, “We have not seen any evidence of on-field transmission in NFL games or practices.” Dr. Sills added,
I think that that is an important observation. It’s certainly a question that many people raised before we started as to why that occurred. I think there are a number of theories that people have advanced. One of them is that obviously we’re playing either in an open area or at least an extremely large air environment where we’ve got a lot of ventilation, a lot of movement and likely quick dispersal of any droplets or particles.
Football is akin to ritualized combat. Every play involves multiple boys or men engaged in blocking, tackling, pushing, pulling, and so on. What’s more, because this is done over a multiple-hour period while running in full (or, in the case of practice, sometimes partial) pads, this variety of numerous close contacts is done while players are profusely expelling bodily fluids via sweating, spitting, bleeding, and the like.
So after thousands of hours involving hundreds of thousands of extremely close, maskless contacts in which bodily fluids were almost always present, the NFL and the CDC are telling us that there were zero person-to-person transmissions of the Wuhan virus! Don’t tell me this had anything to do with the fact that some players wear face shields (many, if not most, did not — they were not required). In fact, the CDC does not recommend face shields to prevent the spread of the Wuhan virus.
If, as Dr. Sills suggests, this lack of transmission is due to the fact that NFL games and practices are conducted “in an open area or at least an extremely large air environment where we’ve got a lot of ventilation,” then why in the world would any government official or municipality mandate masks, etc. for outdoor activity?! In fact, given that many NFL games and practices are in large indoor facilities — and given that there was zero person-to-person transmission where rampant close contact was present — why would any mall, church, school, or Walmart, mandate masks?
Why did the NFL mandate masks on its sidelines? If sweaty, bleeding players engaged in hand-to-hand battles did not spread the virus, why in the world would merely standing on a sideline be any more dangerous?
This data from the NFL should again make it clear that, for the young and healthy, the Wuhan virus presents little to no danger. Along with the fact that a mountain of other data has shown that masks and mask mandates do not prevent the spread of the Wuhan virus, this data from the NFL should also put an end to the widespread masking of Americans. This is especially true for the young and any who are asymptomatic.