Furman College DT passes away after practice

[jazzcat22]

https://nypost.com/2024/02/09/sports/furman-defensive-tackle-bryce-stanfield-dead-at-21/

Was not really sure where to put this, so added it here.

This was my ex wife’s nephew. I never met him. But knew her brother since he was around 9. And met his wife a few times.

He told her a blood clot from his leg, caused it. Had some heart attacks and then lungs collapsed. They made the decision to remove him from life support. As he was brain dead.

It says DT but a few years ago he was at LB

 

[BoysForLife]

https://nypost.com/2024/02/09/sports/furman-defensive-tackle-bryce-stanfield-dead-at-21/

Was not really sure where to put this, so added it here.

This was my ex wife’s nephew. I never met him. But knew her brother since he was around 9. And met his wife a few times.

He told her a blood clot from his leg, caused it. Had some heart attacks and then lungs collapsed. They made the decision to remove him from life support. As he was brain dead.

that's horrible. Condolences to you and your family on your loss.
Sounds like a good kid with a bright future ahead. Very tragic. Hope the best for his parents, they have some tough days ahead.

 

[John813]

Unreal.

My condolences to his family and you.

21 years old, too damn young. RIP

 

[shabazz]

Thoughts and prayers.....truly sad situation

 

[conner01]

So sad.

 

[RoboQB]

Sad news.
Whole lotta "died suddenly" going on.
Blood clots in the leg of a young athlete.
Heart attack, collapsed lung. Sheesh.

 

[ghst187]

Terrible, I remember back when stuff like this almost never happened to young athletes…..
Can’t place the catalyst……

 

[TheDude]

Terrible, I remember back when stuff like this almost never happened to young athletes…..
Can’t place the catalyst……

probably climate change.....

 

[Sydla]

Terrible, I remember back when stuff like this almost never happened to young athletes…..
Can’t place the catalyst……

Except this isn't true. Sudden death in athletes isn't new and there have been some studies in the 2000s and 2010s looking at the issue. 60 Minutes also did a show on this issue long before you know what.

 

[ghst187]

Except this isn't true. Sudden death in athletes isn't new and there have been some studies in the 2000s and 2010s looking at the issue. 60 Minutes also did a show on this issue long before you know what.

Well believe what you will, I don’t buy it, my eyeballs tell me something different than the “studies” funded by the perpetrators.

 

[Sydla]

Well believe what you will, I don’t buy it, my eyeballs tell me something different than the “studies” funded by the perpetrators.

I believe actual evidence. Not "feels" or eyeball test. Athletes dying due to sudden cardiac events isn't anything new. It's been happening for years and years. In fact, there was another study that showed over the last 20 years (data through 2022 or 2023, can't remember) that sudden cardiac deaths for athletes were on the decline.

It's easy to write off studies that don't agree with you and just assume that they have to be biased but that's just intellectual laziness on one's part. You see it all the time. You can't refute the data so just claim that the data and people analyzing it have to be biased.

 

[ghst187]

I believe actual evidence. Not "feels" or eyeball test. Athletes dying due to sudden cardiac events isn't anything new. It's been happening for years and years. In fact, there was another study that showed over the last 20 years (data through 2022 or 2023, can't remember) that sudden cardiac deaths for athletes were on the decline.

It's easy to write off studies that don't agree with you and just assume that they have to be biased but that's just intellectual laziness on one's part. You see it all the time. You can't refute the data so just claim that the data and people analyzing it have to be biased.

Were you paying attention the past few years?

 

[Sydla]

Were you paying attention the past few years?

Were you paying attention during the years before said event?

Likely not if you think athletes having heart events is some relatively new concept or happening in numbers more than years ago. The research and data shows there were sudden cardiac events in athletes long before what you claim is the reason. And they were significant in numbers that studies were conducted looking into these events again before said event. I go by data and research, not my feels or whatever fringe website is telling you this is happening in eye opening numbers all of a sudden.

 

[TheDude]

I believe actual evidence. Not "feels" or eyeball test. Athletes dying due to sudden cardiac events isn't anything new. It's been happening for years and years. In fact, there was another study that showed over the last 20 years (data through 2022 or 2023, can't remember) that sudden cardiac deaths for athletes were on the decline.

It's easy to write off studies that don't agree with you and just assume that they have to be biased but that's just intellectual laziness on one's part. You see it all the time. You can't refute the data so just claim that the data and people analyzing it have to be biased.

well data can drive primary and secondary effects if not always homogenous. I live in LA, when you look at felony theft, it looks down. but they raised the amount from $500 to 1000. so people don't report and the city can say "crime is steady or down.

 

[TheDude]

Were you paying attention during the years before said event?

Likely not if you think athletes having heart events is some relatively new concept or happening in numbers more than years ago. The research and data shows there were sudden cardiac events in athletes long before what you claim is the reason. And they were significant in numbers that studies were conducted looking into these events again before said event. I go by data and research, not my feels or whatever fringe website is telling you this is happening in eye opening numbers all of a sudden.

this science was just published. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X24001270

 

[RoboQB]

this science was just published. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X24001270

That was a perfect strike, Dude!

 

[Sydla]

this science was just published. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264410X24001270

I saw that study and actually read a lot about it.

One, the study doesn't say what you think it says. Two, nowhere in the study does it say that athletes are dying at a much higher rate now due to sudden cardiac events. Because they aren't.

 

[TheDude]

I saw that study and actually read a lot about it.

One, the study doesn't say what you think it says. Two, nowhere in the study does it say that athletes are dying at a much higher rate now due to sudden cardiac events. Because they aren't.

Does it say Myocarditis and guillain barre occurs at a higher rate? seems to be a binary answer

 

[Sydla]

Does it say Myocarditis and guillain barre occurs at a higher rate? seems to be a binary answer

It does but it's more nuanced than that which is why one should read the actual study or good summations of the study and not just headlines. For example, the increase in side effects seen was over an expected incident rate but were still extremely rare overall. Further, the study also states and provides data that shows getting COVID had a higher incident rate of side effects than getting the vaccine. For example, in British Columbia, they viewed a myocarditis incident rate of one to 10 per million vaccinated. The myocarditis incident rate amongst those who got COVID was 40 in a million. Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM) was another side effect noted in the mRNA vaccine. While there was an increase in ADEM reported in the study - it was just 5 more cases over expectation from over 1,000,000 vaccinated persons. Further, the study noted that getting COVID would result in that risk increasing by 617-fold.

So people trying to sell this study as proving the vaccines are causing significant issues are overselling what the study actually says. Further, it most definitely doesn't prove or show young athletes are dying at a higher rate from sudden cardiac events.

 

[TheDude]

It does but it's more nuanced than that which is why one should read the actual study or good summations of the study and not just headlines. For example, the increase in side effects seen was over an expected incident rate but were still extremely rare overall. Further, the study also states and provides data that shows getting COVID had a higher incident rate of side effects than getting the vaccine. For example, in British Columbia, they viewed a myocarditis incident rate of one to 10 per million vaccinated. The myocarditis incident rate amongst those who got COVID was 40 in a million. Acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (ADEM) was another side effect noted in the mRNA vaccine. While there was an increase in ADEM reported in the study - it was just 5 more cases over expectation from over 1,000,000 vaccinated persons. Further, the study noted that getting COVID would result in that risk increasing by 617-fold.

So people trying to sell this study as proving the vaccines are causing significant issues are overselling what the study actually says. Further, it most definitely doesn't prove or show young athletes are dying at a higher rate from sudden cardiac events.

it's not nuanced. people were shouting that higher incidents were fake news and unequivocally DID NOT happen. Those that thought it did were "conspiracy theorists" and asking the question was not worth even addressing as serious humans, because derp science of a 99% effective vaccine that "made you immune" from getting covid, that was redefined to "well you can get covid if you have the vaccine, but not bad covid" ......... etc, etc.

the study shows that if you never got covid and got the vaccine, there is an increase. that scenario is the science you now must accept.

I didn't mention the study said anything about young athletes. but it did not refute it either. you seem to be of the camp that science is NOT about asking questions but "obey the initial assertion from for profit drug manufacturers and governments"

I'm vaccinated not boosted, so I am not a ideologue. but the one side that shuts every thing and questiondown and then has to incrementally move the goalposts is definitely the side I'm watching versus the "make your own call" side.

the fact Novak Djokovic, elite athlete in an isolated outdoor sport, was banned from the US Open while refugees, immigrants and illegals were never sent back based on vaccine status shows how unserious a country and debate this is

and just so you are clear this isn't a immigration rant and move the goal posts, it is not. it is about numbers (1 vs 1000s) and consistency of applying the law based on "science"