That’s what I’m wondering about. I think to an extent a lot of criticism is of the hindsignt/20:20 variety, but this is an example of something where you’ve had the opportunity to come up with a plan based on best practices, and there’s a whole lot at stake both in terms of money, brand/reputation, and young people. All these are things that the university cares deeply about, claims to care deeply about, or both. I can’t say for sure, but if this ends up to be clearly an instance in which people employed by the university and drawing salaries well above six figures end up failing in a way that’s total and comprehensive, well, it wouldn’t be the first, second or fourteenth time that’s happened.
I’ll have to look again but I recall seeing a quote from an article someone posted indicating it was a female student athlete. That could definitely be incorrect, though. As you say, we are far from knowing all of the circumstances.
EDIT: Found a quote, actually from the original Daily article that kicked things off, though it is not verified by any entity other than “sources”:
A source told The Daily that there were five confirmed cases of the new COVID-19 B.1.1.7 variant, with 15 more presumed positives throughout the athletic department. The novel strain was first introduced at the beginning of the semester by a U-M athlete from the United Kingdom. All members of the athletic department are expected to quarantine for 14 days.
You’re right, I’m going off speculation on who patient 0 is for the athletic department. I have not seen confirmation of who it was (not that we will with nobody playing games at the moment).
Agree with pretty much everything you’ve said. I work in a school and we’ve been remote pretty much the whole school year. It’s a frustrating and sad situation. I know that no kid across the country is getting the education they deserve right now. And I have conflicting feelings about my district’s response all the time. But I know I would have conflicting feelings if they were doing something different. Terrible situation all around.
Yes, I read that, but, again, as with everything that floats around on social media there is a lot of misinformation out there. The report may have been from a legitimate journalist in a well researched article. But, as I said, I’ve read other accounts, too.
The other thing is, we really don’t know the sport that was involved so mentioning the names of other sports is just not helpful I don’t think. I know it’s out of frustration, but it’s really just not helpful for guys on here to mention Men’s Golf or Women’s swimming or indoor track, all of which I’ve seen referenced.
Edit: I was writing this before seeing your edit. I always find it interesting that journalists like to mention “sources” without revealing those sources. And, no, I don’t want to debate First Amendment rights, though I could. I DO believe it’s important for journalists to be able to protect their “sources,” but they need to really do their research, too! And I am NOT saying this particular journalist didn’t check his sources and research his work. I just tread lightly when I hear “sources,” and especially if I am not familiar with the journalist and how thorough he or she is in doing their research before publishing.
This Freep article also says based on “sources” that it was a female student athlete. It’s certainly possible the Daily and Freep could have the same source or different ones that are both wrong.
There are now five cases now confirmed with B.1.1.7, the highly contagious COVID-19 variant, in Washtenaw County. The outbreak traces back to one female student athlete, sources said.
The state’s patient zero had a negative coronavirus test two days before she traveled Jan. 3 from the U.K. to the U.S., said Susan Ringler Cerniglia, a spokeswoman for the Washtenaw County Health Department.
The woman also tested negative for the virus on Jan. 4 and Jan. 6. She got a positive coronavirus test result on Jan. 8 and began isolation on that date.
2 Likes
Thanks, MH. Very helpful information.
For me, the truly mind-boggling aspect of this is that an athletes was permitted to travel abroad - to a place that was at the top of the headlines for being the locus of more virulent new strain of the virus - and immediately commence team activity upon their return. Last I heard, the basketball team wasn’t allowed to leave their apartment.
I understand the AD isn’t government and has no legal authority - they can’t stop this person from travelling to a location that the federal government (and the foreign government) permits. But to let them back into team activity without a quarantine!!
12 Likes
Agreed. At this point, as an outsider, that’s very easy to wonder about.
interesting information, to let the person out on day 3 negative test failed, using a negative test on day 5 would’ve worked for this case. The current guideline for travelers to New York let people out if tested negative on Day 4. 
It’s possible it was an out of season athlete. If that’s the case and they were visiting family, I think it would be unreasonable to not let them go home. (This is to say, there’s a lot we don’t know so some caution in coming to conclusions.)
3 Likes
if they were out of season, the “team activities” they were allowed to resume would be pretty minimal
Warde has a lot of questions to answer: we don’t know what the department did after learned the positive test on Jan 8th. It was two weeks ago. Did they ask everyone who might in contact or use the same facility to self quarantine immediately?
Confirmed community spread outside of the athletic department
I mean at this point there’s basically zero chance you’re containing it to just the county without a complete county wide shutdown, like, 5 days ago.
2 Likes
maybe too late to contain at the county level … and the said female athlete may not be the only source.
1 Like
Don’t know if it is correct, but I read somewhere it was a field hockey student athlete. There are 2 or 3 field hockey players from England. Surely at least one of them may have gone home for Christmas vacation.
Has this been shared yet?
15 Likes
Feel like that is a very reasonable and well-written statement. If there is community spread as is being reported then the hay is out of the barn at this point. The whole county would need to be locked down to be effective and even that would be dubious. At this point, its either shut down the whole enterprise or get back to business. I still think a 7 day test/trace from here is reasonable and to create possible further plan.
4 Likes
To the athletes’ point though, a 7 day test/trace period would require no change from the current course of action already being taken. There’s no reason why they couldn’t play during that time, as they have been doing.
That’s the most influential point to me. The recommendations within the MDHHS mandate (wearing masks, daily testing, maintaining safe distance) don’t include anything more than what the athletes were already doing while still playing ball.
7 Likes
I’m never quite sure how to feel about any COVID related issues. I mean, I know that as a 54 year old (and a healthy one at that) I don’t want it, but that’s all I really know for sure. There are just so many facts and things that are presented as facts floating around that it’s very difficult to have an informed opinion on any bigger picture issues. I do think that’s a very well written and considered statement, and am not at all surprised that a significant percentage of Michigan student-athletes who have sacrificed so much to be able to compete thus far in their seasons would feel that way.
9 Likes