fivethirthyeight--2020-08-05--Are Penalty Kicks Easier Without Fans? Maybe Not.

When Mohamed Salah set up for a penalty kick in just the second minute of the 2018-19 UEFA Champions League final , he had a chance to score the potential deciding goal in one of global sports ’ biggest contests .
With a reported 63,272 fans in the stands , an estimated 380 million to 400 million people watching at home and the European club championship on the line , the pressure to convert was intense .
Fast-forward a little more than 14 months , and the 2019-20 edition of the competition is finally ready to restart after play was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Four teams have already earned a bid to the quarterfinals , and eight others will continue play in the round of 16 for the remaining spots .
And as with last year ’ s final , penalty kicks are likely to play a role throughout the rest of the knockout rounds .
But while the TV audience , the prize money and the trophy — “ Ol ’ Big Ears ” — will all be waiting for the eventual winner , there ’ s one major factor missing from when Salah slotted home @ @ @ @ @ @ @ people in the stands .
We already know that stress can affect penalty kicks .
A 2007 study in the Journal of Sports Sciences found that psychological factors , like stress , were more influential than ability or fatigue in penalty-kick conversion .
It seems like tens of thousands of people screaming at you would have a pretty big impact on your stress level .
But do fans really affect the outcome of a penalty kick ?
Now we can find out : Because of games played behind closed doors this summer , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with and without fans in attendance from four of Europe ’ s top five club leagues .
For the five years leading into this season , the Bundesliga , La Liga , Premier League and Serie A had annual leaguewide penalty conversion rates between 70.3 percent and 81.7 percent , with an overall across-five-years average of 75.7 percent .
There was a broad downward trend from 2015-16 through 2017-18 before conversion rates spiked in 2018-19 .
In the in-front-of-fans portion of 2019-20 , the average rate across the leagues climbed again slightly , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Germany , fewer penalties were awarded this season than the season before .
But in La Liga and Serie A , penalties were up — way up .
In fact , Serie A blew past its all-time record for spot-kicks awarded with eight games left to play — though a new handball rule is likely to blame for much of that .
VAR ( Video-Assisted Review ) might have also played a role here .
Serie A and the Bundesliga piloted VAR in 2017 ; in 2018-19 both leagues improved their implementations .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ season as well , and according to Sport24 , VAR changed close to 50 of La Liga ’ s 75 reviewed penalty decisions .
However , by 2019-20 , all four of these leagues had implemented VAR , and in two of them , the rate of awarded penalties per game actually went down .
After the break , all four leagues saw at least a slight increase in the rate of penalty kicks awarded .
Did officials feel more freedom to make potentially game-deciding calls ?
Did rusty players commit more in-the-box @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seemed to be universal : When it came to actually scoring with those opportunities , though , the empty-stadium effect was negligible .
Across four leagues , the overall conversion rate hardly changed , slightly dipping from 81.3 percent with fans to 81.1 percent without fans : That overall change , however , would be different if you discounted the Premier League .
Penalty takers in the English top flight buried 22 of 26 attempts , an 8.8 percentage-point increase in conversion rate from before the break .
According to the Journal of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pressure as it relates to level of competition does affect penalty kicks .
With the Premier League title effectively locked up before the restart began , there were fewer important league games left to play .
In the Bundesliga , Bayern Munich also ran away with the title — but only 6 points ultimately separated second-place Borussia Dortmund from fifth-place Bayer Leverkusen , making the race for 2020-21 Champions League qualification tighter in Germany than in England .
Pressure could also explain the difference in conversion rates between the Champions League and the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ been looking at .
As mentioned earlier , the success rate across the Bundesliga , La Liga , Premier League and Serie A over that five-year window was 75.7 percent .
But in the Champions League — which included the top teams and players from those same four leagues — the success rate was about 71.9 percent , almost 4 percentage points lower .
After that 2019 final , Salah told BeIN sports that taking the potential Champions League-winning penalty for favored Liverpool wasn ’ t the most stressful moment of his playing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which lifted us [ Egypt ] to the World Cup ; I got used to penalties.
” There ’ s no question that fans can affect the mood and performance of the players they ’ re watching .
A Champions League atmosphere without fans just won ’ t be the same .
“ I ’ d be lying if I said it was normal and everything was fine because football is all about playing in front of fans and being driven on by the atmosphere , ” Burnley striker Jay Rodriguez told ESPN @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on the games.
” But for all the ways this year ’ s Champions League will change because of the empty stands , the data shows fans can ’ t apply any more pressure to penalty-kick takers than the athletes already apply to themselves .

When Mohamed Salah set up for a penalty kick in just the second minute of the 2018-19 UEFA Champions League final, he had a chance to score the potential deciding goal in one of global sports’ biggest contests. With a reported 63,272 fans in the stands, an estimated 380 million to 400 million people watching at home and the European club championship on the line, the pressure to convert was intense.
Fast-forward a little more than 14 months, and the 2019-20 edition of the competition is finally ready to restart after play was suspended in March because of COVID-19. Four teams have already earned a bid to the quarterfinals, and eight others will continue play in the round of 16 for the remaining spots. And as with last year’s final, penalty kicks are likely to play a role throughout the rest of the knockout rounds.
But while the TV audience, the prize money and the trophy — “Ol’ Big Ears” — will all be waiting for the eventual winner, there’s one major factor missing from when Salah slotted home last year’s winning goal: people in the stands.
We already know that stress can affect penalty kicks. A 2007 study in the Journal of Sports Sciences found that psychological factors, like stress, were more influential than ability or fatigue in penalty-kick conversion. It seems like tens of thousands of people screaming at you would have a pretty big impact on your stress level. But do fans really affect the outcome of a penalty kick? Now we can find out: Because of games played behind closed doors this summer, we have data on penalty kicks taken with and without fans in attendance from four of Europe’s top five club leagues.
For the five years leading into this season, the Bundesliga, La Liga, Premier League and Serie A had annual leaguewide penalty conversion rates between 70.3 percent and 81.7 percent, with an overall across-five-years average of 75.7 percent. There was a broad downward trend from 2015-16 through 2017-18 before conversion rates spiked in 2018-19. In the in-front-of-fans portion of 2019-20, the average rate across the leagues climbed again slightly, to 81.3 percent.
In England and Germany, fewer penalties were awarded this season than the season before. But in La Liga and Serie A, penalties were up — way up. In fact, Serie A blew past its all-time record for spot-kicks awarded with eight games left to play — though a new handball rule is likely to blame for much of that.
VAR (Video-Assisted Review) might have also played a role here. Serie A and the Bundesliga piloted VAR in 2017; in 2018-19 both leagues improved their implementations. La Liga deployed VAR in 2018-19 that season as well, and according to Sport24, VAR changed close to 50 of La Liga’s 75 reviewed penalty decisions. However, by 2019-20, all four of these leagues had implemented VAR, and in two of them, the rate of awarded penalties per game actually went down.
After the break, all four leagues saw at least a slight increase in the rate of penalty kicks awarded. Did officials feel more freedom to make potentially game-deciding calls? Did rusty players commit more in-the-box fouls? Either way, the effect seemed to be universal:
Penalty kicks were awarded more often after the restart Penalty kicks per match during the 2019-20 season for four major European club soccer leagues before and after play was suspended in March Penalty kick attempts per match League Before suspension After suspension Diff. Serie A 0.469 0.540 0.071 Premier League 0.229 0.283 0.054 Bundesliga 0.232 0.256 0.024 La Liga 0.385 0.409 0.024 Combined 0.329 0.390 0.060 Source: ESPN STATS & INFORMATION GROUP
When it came to actually scoring with those opportunities, though, the empty-stadium effect was negligible. Across four leagues, the overall conversion rate hardly changed, slightly dipping from 81.3 percent with fans to 81.1 percent without fans:
But penalty kicks were converted less often Penalty kick conversion rate during the 2019-20 season for four major European club soccer leagues before and after play was suspended in March Penalty kick conversion rate League Before suspension After suspension Diff. Premier League 75.8% 84.6% +8.8 Serie A 81.7 80.6 -1.1 La Liga 83.7 82.2 -1.5 Bundesliga 82.7 76.2 -6.5 Combined 81.3 81.1 -0.2 Source: ESPN STATS & INFORMATION GROUP
That overall change, however, would be different if you discounted the Premier League. Penalty takers in the English top flight buried 22 of 26 attempts, an 8.8 percentage-point increase in conversion rate from before the break.
According to the Journal of Sports Sciences study cited earlier, perceived pressure as it relates to level of competition does affect penalty kicks. With the Premier League title effectively locked up before the restart began, there were fewer important league games left to play. In the Bundesliga, Bayern Munich also ran away with the title — but only 6 points ultimately separated second-place Borussia Dortmund from fifth-place Bayer Leverkusen, making the race for 2020-21 Champions League qualification tighter in Germany than in England.
Pressure could also explain the difference in conversion rates between the Champions League and the four European domestic leagues we’ve been looking at. As mentioned earlier, the success rate across the Bundesliga, La Liga, Premier League and Serie A over that five-year window was 75.7 percent. But in the Champions League — which included the top teams and players from those same four leagues — the success rate was about 71.9 percent, almost 4 percentage points lower.
After that 2019 final, Salah told BeIN sports that taking the potential Champions League-winning penalty for favored Liverpool wasn’t the most stressful moment of his playing career. “I shot the penalty which lifted us [Egypt] to the World Cup; I got used to penalties.”
There’s no question that fans can affect the mood and performance of the players they’re watching. A Champions League atmosphere without fans just won’t be the same.
“I’d be lying if I said it was normal and everything was fine because football is all about playing in front of fans and being driven on by the atmosphere,” Burnley striker Jay Rodriguez told ESPN. “They do have an effect on the games.”
But for all the ways this year’s Champions League will change because of the empty stands, the data shows fans can’t apply any more pressure to penalty-kick takers than the athletes already apply to themselves.
Check out our latest soccer predictions.


fivethirthyeight--2020-08-05--We’re Looking For A Temporary Producer For Our Politics Podcast

The next few months are going to be exciting — and busy !
— for the FiveThirtyEight Politics Podcast .
We ’ re hiring a producer in a temporary role through Inauguration Day 2021 to work 2-3 days a week in the beginning , and perhaps more often as the election approaches .
You ’ ll help with production on our politics podcast , particularly with audio editing and research .
You will also work with our producer and host , Galen Druke , every week , playing an integral role in what goes on the air .
A typical @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for our Monday show , helping book a guest for a Thursday show and pulling archival audio for a long-term documentary project .
We ’ re looking for someone with : • A deep understanding of the 2020 election and an ability to track political news as it develops .
• Some experience booking guests — we ’ ll be asking you to find sources , decide which sources are the best ones to speak to and prep for those interviews .
The job can be done remotely , regardless of the status @ @ @ @ @ @ @ appealing , please apply !
Send a cover letter with thoughts on the podcast and a resume to galen dot druke at fivethirtyeight dot com .

The next few months are going to be exciting — and busy! — for the FiveThirtyEight Politics Podcast. We’re hiring a producer in a temporary role through Inauguration Day 2021 to work two to three days a week in the beginning, and perhaps more often as the election approaches. You’ll help with production on our politics podcast, particularly with audio editing and research.
You will also work with our producer and host, Galen Druke, every week, playing an integral role in what goes on the air. A typical week might include doing a research roundup for our Monday show, helping book a guest for a Thursday show and pulling archival audio for a long-term documentary project.
We’re looking for someone with:
Fluency in audio-editing software, ideally Pro Tools or Hindenburg.
A deep understanding of the 2020 election and an ability to track political news as it develops.
Some experience reporting or producing political journalism. Student journalism counts!
Bonus skill:
Some experience booking guests — we’ll be asking you to find sources, decide which sources are the best ones to speak to and prep for those interviews.
The job can be done remotely, regardless of the status of the pandemic. If this sounds appealing, please apply! Send a cover letter with thoughts on the podcast and a resume to galen dot druke at fivethirtyeight dot com.


fivethirthyeight--2020-08-05--What Happened In Portland Shows Just How Fragile Our Democracy Is

In the video , Juniper Simonis screams as they are pushed to the ground , struggling , by a group of men in military fatigues who wield large , black weapons .
While Simonis is handcuffed and their service dog barks , the men surround them , a wall of camo , blocking the videographer from capturing the full extent of what ’ s happening .
Simonis wears shorts and a tank top , but the men appear dressed for war .
The officers ’ uniforms bear a large patch that says “ police , ” but they aren ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ agents , but with no name tags or badges , they are , in the moment of Simonis ’ s arrest , impossible to identify .
Simonis is an American scientist — a computational ecologist who does data analysis for researchers and the government .
Last month , Simonis was detained outside a federal courthouse in Portland , Oregon , by mysterious men now known to be agents of the Department of Homeland Security , a federal agency created to fight terrorism .
By Simonis ’ s own estimation , the scientist spent @ @ @ @ @ @ @ custody .
For the first 45 minutes or so , they said , they were held in a parking garage without having been read their rights .
Simonis was then transferred to a U.S.
Marshals ’ lockup .
Their request to call a lawyer or a friend was refused .
Eventually , Simonis was given a citation for vandalism related to chalking the sidewalk in front of the courthouse , and sent out the door in the middle of the night with no way home .
Simonis ’ s story is not how @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
But over the last few weeks , it ’ s become part of a familiar pattern .
DHS agents in Portland have tear-gassed protesters and pulled individuals into unmarked vans , and some of those people were banned from attending any more protests as a condition of being released from jail .
The agency also collected information on journalists who published leaked documents .
Late last week , a deal was struck with Oregon ’ s governor to withdraw the troops .
The governor said it was happening immediately , but DHS @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and that they wouldn ’ t leave until “ [ W ] e are assured that the courthouse and other federal facilities will no longer be attacked nightly.
” These events sit in a weird nexus .
They are extraordinary enough to draw the attention of legal scholars and criticism from civil liberties groups .
But politically , the response has been divided .
House Democrats called for an investigation , while Sen. Rand Paul is the only congressional Republican to speak out against the DHS response .
The media ’ s reaction @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with outlets like the National Review telling readers that the events in Portland were justified and The Atlantic saying justification was impossible .
That divided response makes some experts almost as concerned as the arrests .
Partisanship is dangerous , they told us , particularly when it ’ s accompanied by a long series of warning signs that could signal serious danger for American democracy .
Portland is not the first place the federal government has stepped in with disproportionate force against the will of local authorities .
In 1794 , George Washington @ @ @ @ @ @ @ into Pennsylvania to put down an anti-tax revolt .
And while that is a very long time to reach back for precedent , experts say it ’ s important to understand the context of American history when it comes to violation of democratic norms .
“ Contrary to what a lot of people assume , American democracy has always been fragile and in real danger of backsliding , ” said Suzanne Mettler , a professor of American politics at Cornell University and one of the authors of “ Four Threats : The Recurring @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and other experts , consider our current time period one in which authoritarianism poses a serious risk — but not because of what is happening with the DHS in Portland .
Instead , it ’ s more likely that recent events are a symptom of something bigger , a risk that has steadily grown in the last several decades .
Instead , they point to the political polarization evident in public opinion on Portland as indicative of the danger we ’ re in .
When it comes to Portland , specifically , the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a survey fielded by Data for Progress on July 28 , respondents were split about Trump ’ s decision to send DHS to Oregon , with 42 percent calling the deployment of federal police “ essential ” and 45 percent calling it an “ overstep.
” And that split was highly partisan .
Broken down by party affiliation , nearly three-quarters of Republicans favored the decision while a similar proportion of Democrats opposed it .
( Full disclosure : Shom Mazumder , one of the authors of this article , is a fellow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , by itself , isn ’ t much of a shock .
We are , for better or for worse , used to all sorts of issues dividing public opinion .
The terrifying thing is the way it links partisan politics and authoritarianism .
According to a recent report by the Democracy Fund ’ s Voter Study Group , support for democracy is in no way universal .
In fact , their findings show that 1 in 3 Americans have , at some point in the last three years , supported some kind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 80 percent said it was very important to live in a democracy .
And separate polling , commissioned by Mazumder before Portland , from YouGov Blue , an arm of YouGov that primarily serves Democratic and progressive clients , underscores this as well .
Although it found that Republicans were less supportive overall of democracy — 1 out of 4 Republicans said that democracy is a “ very bad ” or “ fairly bad ” way to govern the country compared to just four percent of Democrats .
There was also more support @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the survey as someone “ who does not have to bother with Congress and elections ” among Republicans .
But it wasn ’ t just Republicans driving these anti-democratic views .
A significant percentage of Democrats said they preferred to have “ experts , not the government ” make decisions on what they think is best for the country .
That isn ’ t necessarily all that surprising when you consider we ’ ve spent the last 30 years building up an increasingly apocalyptic view of our political opponents and their intentions .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ asked Americans about the amount of partisan animosity they held .
In that time , the percentage of people who rate the opposing party as “ very unfavorable ” has climbed from about 20 percent to more than 50 percent .
In fact , as of 2016 , more than 40 percent of both Republicans and Democrats said they saw the other side as a threat to the nation .
That poses a real threat to our democracy , too .
“ If we view that if one party gets into power they @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way of life or the nation as a whole , we ’ ll do whatever we can to keep them out or keep ourselves in , ” said Jennifer McCoy , a professor of political science at Georgia State University .
That , she added , is when people start to tolerate the violation of democratic norms .
“ The goal is to stay in power or get in power and it overrides the value of respecting democratic principles , ” she said .
In fact , research from political scientists Matt Graham @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that survey measures might even overestimate the American public ’ s commitment to upholding democratic norms , especially when subverting norms might help get one side ’ s preferred candidate pushed through .
Looking at situations in American history and around the world , McCoy , Mettler and other experts have found that extreme polarization is one major red flag that shows a democracy is in trouble .
That ’ s because people will condone all kinds of violence in the name of protecting themselves , said Christian Davenport , professor of political @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Violations of norms — even the law — become justifiable depending on who is doing the rule-breaking and who is being targeted .
Through that lens , it makes perfect sense why Americans are politically divided on Portland : It ’ s actually a divide over whether you see the protesters as a threat .
And that should make us all very uncomfortable — no matter which side of the aisle we ’ re on .
Because evidence points to the fact that many Americans , regardless of their party affiliation , are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ their political opponents .
Back in March , McCoy and other researchers surveyed nearly 3,000 Americans about their support for various anti-democratic policies under different scenarios where one party , or the other , was in power .
The results from this survey have not yet been published , but their preliminary analysis finds significantly higher support for such policies as prosecuting journalists , banning protests and disqualifying political opponents from elections in situations when a respondent ’ s preferred party was in power — and hoping to stay there .
The effect @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Republican power .
But it existed for Democrats , as well .
For instance , while 23.6 percent of Democrats and 22.7 percent of Republicans said the president should do what the people want , even if it goes against existing laws , when their party was out of power , those numbers jumped to 29.6 percent and 35.1 percent , respectively , when the rule of law became inconvenient to keeping the other side at bay .
Not all experts who study democratic erosion think what ’ s going on in Portland @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Robert Mickey , a professor of political science at the University of Michigan , told us he ’ s more concerned with threats to voting rights and sees Portland as especially dangerous political theater .
But all of the experts we spoke to said our democracy is in a dangerous place , and that the partisan split we see over things like federal agents dragging a screaming woman into a courthouse is part of that .
“ We ’ re not immune to the rise of authoritarianism in the United States , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can ’ t be cavalier in thinking we are.
” CORRECTION ( August 5 , 2020 , 1:58 p.m. ) : An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated the percentage of Americans who said it was very important to live in a democracy .
It was 80 percent , not 20 percent .
It also said that survey measures might underestimate the American public ’ s commitment to upholding democratic norms , when in fact , they might overestimate them .

In the video, Juniper Simonis screams as they are pushed to the ground, struggling, by a group of men in military fatigues who wield large, black weapons. While Simonis is handcuffed and their service dog barks, the men surround them, a wall of camo, blocking the videographer from capturing the full extent of what’s happening. Simonis wears shorts and a tank top, but the men appear dressed for war. The officers’ uniforms bear a large patch that says “police,” but they aren’t police. They’re federal agents, but with no name tags or badges, they are, in the moment of Simonis’s arrest, impossible to identify.
Simonis is an American scientist — a computational ecologist who does data analysis for researchers and the government. Last month, Simonis was detained outside a federal courthouse in Portland, Oregon, by mysterious men now known to be agents of the Department of Homeland Security, a federal agency created to fight terrorism. By Simonis’s own estimation, the scientist spent around eight hours in the agents’ custody. For the first 45 minutes or so, they said, they were held in a parking garage without having been read their rights. Simonis was then transferred to a U.S. Marshals’ lockup. Their request to call a lawyer or a friend was refused. Eventually, Simonis was given a citation for vandalism related to chalking the sidewalk in front of the courthouse, and sent out the door in the middle of the night with no way home.
Simonis’s story is not how most Americans expect law enforcement to work. But over the last few weeks, it’s become part of a familiar pattern. DHS agents in Portland have tear-gassed protesters and pulled individuals into unmarked vans, and some of those people were banned from attending any more protests as a condition of being released from jail. The agency also collected information on journalists who published leaked documents.
Late last week, a deal was struck with Oregon’s governor to withdraw the troops. The governor said it was happening immediately, but DHS officials said it was a phased withdrawal and that they wouldn’t leave until “[W]e are assured that the courthouse and other federal facilities will no longer be attacked nightly.”
These events sit in a weird nexus. They are extraordinary enough to draw the attention of legal scholars and criticism from civil liberties groups. But politically, the response has been divided. House Democrats called for an investigation, while Sen. Rand Paul is the only congressional Republican to speak out against the DHS response. The media’s reaction has also fallen along well-worn lines, with outlets like the National Review telling readers that the events in Portland were justified and The Atlantic saying justification was impossible. That divided response makes some experts almost as concerned as the arrests. Partisanship is dangerous, they told us, particularly when it’s accompanied by a long series of warning signs that could signal serious danger for American democracy.
Portland is not the first place the federal government has stepped in with disproportionate force against the will of local authorities. In 1794, George Washington himself led a militia of 13,000 men into Pennsylvania to put down an anti-tax revolt. And while that is a very long time to reach back for precedent, experts say it’s important to understand the context of American history when it comes to violation of democratic norms. “Contrary to what a lot of people assume, American democracy has always been fragile and in real danger of backsliding,” said Suzanne Mettler, a professor of American politics at Cornell University and one of the authors of “Four Threats: The Recurring Crises of American Democracy.”
She, and other experts, consider our current time period one in which authoritarianism poses a serious risk — but not because of what is happening with the DHS in Portland. Instead, it’s more likely that recent events are a symptom of something bigger, a risk that has steadily grown in the last several decades. Instead, they point to the political polarization evident in public opinion on Portland as indicative of the danger we’re in.
When it comes to Portland, specifically, the partisan divide is definitely real. In a survey fielded by Data for Progress on July 28, respondents were split about Trump’s decision to send DHS to Oregon, with 42 percent calling the deployment of federal police “essential” and 45 percent calling it an “overstep.” And that split was highly partisan. Broken down by party affiliation, nearly three-quarters of Republicans favored the decision while a similar proportion of Democrats opposed it. (Full disclosure: Shom Mazumder, one of the authors of this article, is a fellow at Data for Progress.)
That, by itself, isn’t much of a shock. We are, for better or for worse, used to all sorts of issues dividing public opinion. The terrifying thing is the way it links partisan politics and authoritarianism. According to a recent report by the Democracy Fund’s Voter Study Group, support for democracy is in no way universal. In fact, their findings show that 1 in 3 Americans have, at some point in the last three years, supported some kind of authoritarian view, and only about 80 percent said it was very important to live in a democracy.
And separate polling, commissioned by Mazumder before Portland, from YouGov Blue, an arm of YouGov that primarily serves Democratic and progressive clients, underscores this as well. Although it found that Republicans were less supportive overall of democracy — 1 out of 4 Republicans said that democracy is a “very bad” or “fairly bad” way to govern the country compared to just four percent of Democrats. There was also more support for a strong leader, defined in the survey as someone “who does not have to bother with Congress and elections” among Republicans. But it wasn’t just Republicans driving these anti-democratic views. A significant percentage of Democrats said they preferred to have “experts, not the government” make decisions on what they think is best for the country.
That isn’t necessarily all that surprising when you consider we’ve spent the last 30 years building up an increasingly apocalyptic view of our political opponents and their intentions. Since 1994, Pew Research Center has asked Americans about the amount of partisan animosity they held. In that time, the percentage of people who rate the opposing party as “very unfavorable” has climbed from about 20 percent to more than 50 percent. In fact, as of 2016, more than 40 percent of both Republicans and Democrats said they saw the other side as a threat to the nation.
That poses a real threat to our democracy, too. “If we view that if one party gets into power they’ll be a threat to my way of life or the nation as a whole, we’ll do whatever we can to keep them out or keep ourselves in,” said Jennifer McCoy, a professor of political science at Georgia State University. That, she added, is when people start to tolerate the violation of democratic norms. “The goal is to stay in power or get in power and it overrides the value of respecting democratic principles,” she said.
In fact, research from political scientists Matt Graham and Milan Svolik of Yale University found that survey measures might even overestimate the American public’s commitment to upholding democratic norms, especially when subverting norms might help get one side’s preferred candidate pushed through.
Looking at situations in American history and around the world, McCoy, Mettler and other experts have found that extreme polarization is one major red flag that shows a democracy is in trouble. That’s because people will condone all kinds of violence in the name of protecting themselves, said Christian Davenport, professor of political science at the University of Michigan. Violations of norms — even the law — become justifiable depending on who is doing the rule-breaking and who is being targeted.
Through that lens, it makes perfect sense why Americans are politically divided on Portland: It’s actually a divide over whether you see the protesters as a threat. And that should make us all very uncomfortable — no matter which side of the aisle we’re on. Because evidence points to the fact that many Americans, regardless of their party affiliation, are willing to condone violence and repression against their political opponents.
Back in March, McCoy and other researchers surveyed nearly 3,000 Americans about their support for various anti-democratic policies under different scenarios where one party, or the other, was in power. The results from this survey have not yet been published, but their preliminary analysis finds significantly higher support for such policies as prosecuting journalists, banning protests and disqualifying political opponents from elections in situations when a respondent’s preferred party was in power — and hoping to stay there. The effect was larger among Republicans hoping to consolidate Republican power. But it existed for Democrats, as well. For instance, while 23.6 percent of Democrats and 22.7 percent of Republicans said the president should do what the people want, even if it goes against existing laws, when their party was out of power, those numbers jumped to 29.6 percent and 35.1 percent, respectively, when the rule of law became inconvenient to keeping the other side at bay.
Not all experts who study democratic erosion think what’s going on in Portland is a threat to democracy, though. Robert Mickey, a professor of political science at the University of Michigan, told us he’s more concerned with threats to voting rights and sees Portland as especially dangerous political theater.
But all of the experts we spoke to said our democracy is in a dangerous place, and that the partisan split we see over things like federal agents dragging a screaming woman into a courthouse is part of that. “We’re not immune to the rise of authoritarianism in the United States,” Mettler said. “And we can’t be cavalier in thinking we are.”
CORRECTION (August 5, 2020, 1:58 p.m.): An earlier version of this article incorrectly stated the percentage of Americans who said it was very important to live in a democracy. It was 80 percent, not 20 percent. It also said that survey measures might underestimate the American public’s commitment to upholding democratic norms, when in fact, they might overestimate them.


fivethirthyeight--2020-08-06--What To Watch For In Tennessee’s Primary

Five states already voted on Tuesday , but this election week isn ’ t over yet — an idea we should all get accustomed to as November nears .
Tennessee , the only state that holds its primaries on a Thursday , goes to the polls today .
The marquee race is a Senate primary , but there are also a handful of House contests worth keeping an eye on , so here ’ s an overview of what to watch in the Volunteer State .
In the Republican primary for U.S. Senate , the race to succeed retiring GOP @ @ @ @ @ @ @ close battle between former U.S .
Ambassador to Japan Bill Hagerty and orthopedic surgeon Dr. Manny Sethi .
And the stakes are high : The eventual Republican nominee is all but guaranteed to win in November because of Tennessee ’ s dark red hue .
Initially , the race wasn ’ t all that competitive either .
With President Trump ’ s endorsement , Hagerty had long been the favorite , but recent polls show that this race has tightened considerably .
A mid-July poll from JMC Analytics found Hagerty ahead by just @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 32 percent , while The Trafalgar Group gave Hagerty only a 3-point edge , 42 percent to 39 percent , earlier in July .
It ’ s also grown nastier as both Hagerty and Sethi try to one-up each other in proving their conservative bona fides .
For his part , Sethi has tried to target conservatives who might be upset with the anti-police brutality protests following George Floyd ’ s death , asking if they ’ re “ sick of the mobs yet.
” And in another ad , Sethi played up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ believe “ Black lives matter ” because Planned Parenthood places clinics near neighborhoods occupied primarily by people of color .
Meanwhile , as the Trump-backed candidate , Hagerty has taken every opportunity to echo the president , including blaming China for initially covering up the coronavirus .
He ’ s also repeatedly stressed his “ conservative Tennessee values ” as a native son of the state and introduced a dark racial undertone to the race by consistently mispronouncing Sethi ’ s last name as “ Set-ee ” instead of “ Seth-ee.
” According @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was inadvertent , and that “ he didn ’ t know which pronunciation Sethi , the son of Indian immigrants , prefers.
” Hagerty and his allies have also repeatedly hit Sethi for making a $ 50 donation to a Democratic congressional candidate in 2008 through ActBlue , a liberal online fundraising platform .
In one ad , Hagerty made the dubious link between this contribution and the recent protests , claiming that Sethi is “ bankrolling the rioters.
” Standing With Conservatives , a Hagerty-aligned group , also attacked the donation , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ as abortion rights and gun control .
But Sethi hasn ’ t been afraid to fire back , running an ad in which his wife took responsibility for the 2008 contribution , then attacking Hagerty for making much larger donations to Mitt Romney and Al Gore in past presidential campaigns .
That said , Hagerty has a clear resource advantage : He had raised $ 12.3 million as of July 17 , $ 6.5 million of which came from personal loans , while Sethi had raised only $ 4.6 million ( $ 1.9 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ pocket ) .
Hagerty entered the final stretch with seven times more cash on hand — about $ 2.7 million to Sethi ’ s $ 386,000 .
Still , Sethi has benefited from slightly more outside spending , either from groups supporting him or attacking Hagerty , about $ 2.5 million compared to roughly $ 1.7 million for Hagerty .
Plus , Sethi has endorsements from GOP notables such as Sens .
Ted Cruz and Rand Paul .
Paul , from next-door Kentucky , even cut an ad for Sethi asking voters to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” But that doesn ’ t mean every GOP senator is behind Sethi — Tennessee ’ s other senator , Marsha Blackburn , has endorsed Hagerty .
Don ’ t be surprised if this race proves to be a nailbiter .
There ’ s also a crowded , fractious GOP primary in Tennessee ’ s 1st Congressional District .
The eastern Tennessee seat is the most Republican-leaning district in the state , and Republican Rep. Phil Roe ’ s retirement has attracted a number of viable contenders .
It ’ s nigh impossible @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but the candidates with the most money are drawing a lot from their own bank accounts .
Pharmacist Diana Harshbarger has raised nearly $ 1.5 million and pathologist Joshua Gapp has raised about $ 850,000 , but nearly all their money comes from personal loans .
Additionally , former Kingsport Mayor John Clark has loaned himself nearly $ 500,000 of the roughly $ 650,000 he ’ s put together .
Three other notable candidates — state Sen. Rusty Crowe , former Johnson City Mayor Steve Darden and state Rep. Timothy Hill — @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but they have managed to raise between $ 230,000 and $ 375,000 .
And crucially for Hill , he ’ s also benefited from about $ 945,000 in spending by the campaign arm of the Club for Growth , which endorsed him .
No other candidate has received much outside assistance .
In addition to supporting Hill , the Club ’ s ad spending has mostly targeted Harshbarger and Crowe , which suggests they may be the leading contenders .
The most recent poll confirms this to some extent , though it showed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ late-July survey by Spry Strategies/WJHL found Crowe and Harshbarger tied for the lead with 16 percent , followed by Gapp at 12 percent , Hill at 10 percent and both Clark and Darden at 9 percent .
Two other primaries are also on our radar .
In the Nashville-based 5th Congressional District , Democratic Rep. Jim Cooper , who has held the seat since 2003 , faces attorney Keeda Haynes .
Haynes , who is Black , served almost four years in jail for a marijuana-related offense she denies committing before becoming a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Cooper from the left in a highly-educated district that has become more liberal over the last few cycles .
( Cooper is a long-standing member of the Blue Dog Coalition . )
Haynes might have a difficult time unseating Cooper , though , as he ’ s raised about seven times as much and the district isn ’ t as urban or racially diverse as some of the other districts that have cast out white Democratic incumbents in recent years .
However , that ’ s not the case in the Memphis-based 9th @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s residents are Black , but the seat is held by seven-term Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen , who is white .
However , Cohen has regularly fended off Black primary challengers , so former Shelby County Democratic Party Chair and Navy veteran Corey Strong will be looking to pull an upset as Strong has little money while Cohen is sitting on $ 1.2 million in the bank .
We ’ ll be sure to keep you updated if something significant happens in any of these races .
And if you ’ re @ @ @ @ @ @ @ remember that Hawaii ’ s primaries are this Saturday .

Five states already voted on Tuesday, but this election week isn’t over yet — an idea we should all get accustomed to as November nears. Tennessee, the only state that holds its primaries on a Thursday, goes to the polls today. The marquee race is a Senate primary, but there are also a handful of House contests worth keeping an eye on, so here’s an overview of what to watch in the Volunteer State.
In the Republican primary for U.S. Senate, the race to succeed retiring GOP Sen. Lamar Alexander has turned into a close battle between former U.S. Ambassador to Japan Bill Hagerty and orthopedic surgeon Dr. Manny Sethi. And the stakes are high: The eventual Republican nominee is all but guaranteed to win in November because of Tennessee’s dark red hue.
Initially, the race wasn’t all that competitive either. With President Trump’s endorsement, Hagerty had long been the favorite, but recent polls show that this race has tightened considerably. A mid-July poll from JMC Analytics found Hagerty ahead by just 4 percentage points, 36 percent to 32 percent, while The Trafalgar Group gave Hagerty only a 3-point edge, 42 percent to 39 percent, earlier in July. It’s also grown nastier as both Hagerty and Sethi try to one-up each other in proving their conservative bona fides.
For his part, Sethi has tried to target conservatives who might be upset with the anti-police brutality protests following George Floyd’s death, asking if they’re “sick of the mobs yet.” And in another ad, Sethi played up his anti-abortion views by questioning whether liberals believe “Black lives matter” because Planned Parenthood places clinics near neighborhoods occupied primarily by people of color. Meanwhile, as the Trump-backed candidate, Hagerty has taken every opportunity to echo the president, including blaming China for initially covering up the coronavirus. He’s also repeatedly stressed his “conservative Tennessee values” as a native son of the state and introduced a dark racial undertone to the race by consistently mispronouncing Sethi’s last name as “Set-ee” instead of “Seth-ee.” According to Politico, Hagerty said the mispronunciation was inadvertent, and that “he didn’t know which pronunciation Sethi, the son of Indian immigrants, prefers.”
Hagerty and his allies have also repeatedly hit Sethi for making a $50 donation to a Democratic congressional candidate in 2008 through ActBlue, a liberal online fundraising platform. In one ad, Hagerty made the dubious link between this contribution and the recent protests, claiming that Sethi is “bankrolling the rioters.” Standing With Conservatives, a Hagerty-aligned group, also attacked the donation, arguing that Sethi supports liberal policies such as abortion rights and gun control. But Sethi hasn’t been afraid to fire back, running an ad in which his wife took responsibility for the 2008 contribution, then attacking Hagerty for making much larger donations to Mitt Romney and Al Gore in past presidential campaigns.
That said, Hagerty has a clear resource advantage: He had raised $12.3 million as of July 17, $6.5 million of which came from personal loans, while Sethi had raised only $4.6 million ($1.9 million of which came from his own pocket). Hagerty entered the final stretch with seven times more cash on hand — about $2.7 million to Sethi’s $386,000. Still, Sethi has benefited from slightly more outside spending, either from groups supporting him or attacking Hagerty, about $2.5 million compared to roughly $1.7 million for Hagerty. Plus, Sethi has endorsements from GOP notables such as Sens. Ted Cruz and Rand Paul. Paul, from next-door Kentucky, even cut an ad for Sethi asking voters to back “the constitutional conservative Tennessee deserves.” But that doesn’t mean every GOP senator is behind Sethi — Tennessee’s other senator, Marsha Blackburn, has endorsed Hagerty. Don’t be surprised if this race proves to be a nailbiter.
There’s also a crowded, fractious GOP primary in Tennessee’s 1st Congressional District. The eastern Tennessee seat is the most Republican-leaning district in the state, and Republican Rep. Phil Roe’s retirement has attracted a number of viable contenders.
It’s nigh impossible to pick out who the front-runners are, but the candidates with the most money are drawing a lot from their own bank accounts. Pharmacist Diana Harshbarger has raised nearly $1.5 million and pathologist Joshua Gapp has raised about $850,000, but nearly all their money comes from personal loans. Additionally, former Kingsport Mayor John Clark has loaned himself nearly $500,000 of the roughly $650,000 he’s put together. Three other notable candidates — state Sen. Rusty Crowe, former Johnson City Mayor Steve Darden and state Rep. Timothy Hill — haven’t self-funded as much, but they have managed to raise between $230,000 and $375,000. And crucially for Hill, he’s also benefited from about $945,000 in spending by the campaign arm of the Club for Growth, which endorsed him. No other candidate has received much outside assistance.
In addition to supporting Hill, the Club’s ad spending has mostly targeted Harshbarger and Crowe, which suggests they may be the leading contenders. The most recent poll confirms this to some extent, though it showed a pretty unpredictable race overall: A late-July survey by Spry Strategies/WJHL found Crowe and Harshbarger tied for the lead with 16 percent, followed by Gapp at 12 percent, Hill at 10 percent and both Clark and Darden at 9 percent.
Two other primaries are also on our radar. In the Nashville-based 5th Congressional District, Democratic Rep. Jim Cooper, who has held the seat since 2003, faces attorney Keeda Haynes. Haynes, who is Black, served almost four years in jail for a marijuana-related offense she denies committing before becoming a public defender. She is now challenging Cooper from the left in a highly-educated district that has become more liberal over the last few cycles. (Cooper is a long-standing member of the Blue Dog Coalition.) Haynes might have a difficult time unseating Cooper, though, as he’s raised about seven times as much and the district isn’t as urban or racially diverse as some of the other districts that have cast out white Democratic incumbents in recent years. However, that’s not the case in the Memphis-based 9th Congressional District. Two-thirds of the district’s residents are Black, but the seat is held by seven-term Democratic Rep. Steve Cohen, who is white. However, Cohen has regularly fended off Black primary challengers, so former Shelby County Democratic Party Chair and Navy veteran Corey Strong will be looking to pull an upset as Strong has little money while Cohen is sitting on $1.2 million in the bank.
We’ll be sure to keep you updated if something significant happens in any of these races. And if you’re craving even more elections this week, remember that Hawaii’s primaries are this Saturday.


fivethirthyeight--2020-08-06--The Champions League Is Back, And All We Want To Talk About Is Atalanta

cwick ( Chadwick Matlin , deputy editor ) : Grace , Ryan , Tony , we ’ re back to talk about soccer on the eve of the Champions League !
Tell me true : How many of you remember where we left off in March ?
( I do not . )
ryan ( Ryan O ’ Hanlon , FiveThirtyEight contributor and author of the No Grass in the Clouds newsletter ) : I vaguely remember Marcos Llorente becoming the best striker in the world .
tchow ( Tony Chow , video producer ) : If I could send @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tabs right now , you would know that clearly I remembered nothing from March .
grace ( Grace Robertson , FiveThirtyEight contributor and author of the Grace on Football newsletter ) : I remember Pep Guardiola did all his tinkering against Real Madrid in the first leg , and everyone had the usual takes ready , but it actually worked this time !
tchow : I did remember that Sergio Ramos got a red card .
But I had to double check it was from late February and not , you know … @ @ @ @ @ @ @ sure if it was my imagination , but did PSG actually advance past the Round of 16 , too ?
tchow : Ryan , you weren ’ t imagining it .
I think your brain blocked it out because they eliminated Dortmund , which robbed us all of more Erling Haaland time .
cwick : Well , that ’ s what ’ s so crazy about this !
Some teams are already in the quarterfinals , and others still have to complete the second leg of their fixtures , just with radically fresher @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Liverpool fan — and , wait , I am — I ’ d be furious that England didn ’ t shut down sooner for many reasons , including its loss to Atletico .
grace : I spent that whole game emotionally disconnected because it felt inevitable the Champions League would be canceled , and I was close to being right .
But here we are , ready to finish off the tournament as Jürgen Klopp watches on TV .
tchow : You think the end-of-season Liverpool that you saw the past couple of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shot of advancing if they waited till now ?
ryan : I ’ m glad we ’ ve already made this about Liverpool .
grace : The trophy is still in Liverpool !
You can take as many photos with it as you like until someone wins this !
cwick : So let ’ s discuss the lay of the land : PSG , RB Leipzig , Atlético Madrid and Atalanta are in the quarterfinals .
Manchester City , Bayern Munich and Barcelona still have work to do but , according to our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it to the next round .
And Lyon vs. Juventus is the only close fixture remaining ( 64 percent chance Lyon moves on , according to FiveThirtyEight ’ s model ) .
What are you going to be watching for on Friday and Saturday ?
tchow : I dispute the idea that anyone other than Bayern are clear favorites to advance .
I want to talk to whoever makes that FiveThirtyEight model .
grace : I ’ ll be watching Man City vs. Real Madrid .
City can be extremely good or kind @ @ @ @ @ @ @ always fun to watch .
Juventus vs. Lyon is just kind of a dull matchup by comparison .
ryan : It ’ ll be interesting to see Zinedine Zidane try to game-plan a big come-from-behind victory .
I don ’ t think he ’ s ever had to do that before , and Real ’ s success this year came from a more defense-oriented approach .
He ’ s also never been knocked out of the Champions League .
grace : Real is probably set up to do well in this tournament … @ @ @ @ @ @ @ part and turns it around against City .
tchow : Yeah , I will be watching the Man City .
vs. Real Madrid game closely .
The FiveThirtyEight model gives City a 90 percent chance to advance , which is high in my opinion .
City won the first leg in Madrid , 2-1 , so those away goals are important , but this is still anyone ’ s game , I think .
ryan : If the Champions League has taught us anything over the past few years , it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
tchow : This is also a very different Real Madrid team than in March .
Since the restart , it has won 10 out of its last 11 games and won another La Liga title .
cwick : Tony , in full transparency , I think you have to share the picture of you and your son in coordinated Real Madrid kits .
It ’ s vital context to your analysis .
tchow : You mean this one of me and my son , whom I named Eden ?
I promise I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Maybe Grace and Ryan will tell me I ’ m wrong .
grace : The model really likes City , and who am I to argue with it , but I really do think the team can be a little lax out of possession in these big games .
The FA Cup semifinal against Arsenal was a perfect example when City just got hit so easily .
Same with the league game against Chelsea .
ryan : It certainly could happen .
City ’ s defense is good overall , but the few @ @ @ @ @ @ @ high quality .
It ’ s just that City pretty comprehensively dismantled Madrid on the road in the first leg , and it did it with a not-super-high-possession approach .
A similar look in this match should work again .
grace : Zidane tends to be frustratingly conservative in these kinds of games and trusts experienced players , but I really wish he would start both Vinicius and Rodrygo here .
I think they ’ re best off hitting City with speed , and the older guys are short of that .
tchow @ @ @ @ @ @ @ big names missing from this matchup , though .
And actually , that seems to be a common thread among all of these second-leg matchups .
But for Real Madrid , Sergio Ramos is suspended because of that aforementioned red card .
Marcelo still isn ’ t 100 percent .
And City will be missing Sergio Agüero due to injury and Benjamin Mendy due to suspension .
ryan : Ramos , who was Madrid ’ s second-leading goal-scorer in La Liga this season .
grace : If Zidane ’ s first era was @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is kind of Ramos ’ s team .
Horrible to play against and solid .
tchow : Toward the end of the season , Zidane slotted in Éder Militão to pair with Raphaël Varane instead of Ramos , and even though they didn ’ t lose , let ’ s just say there were some major gaps in defense .
ryan : That ’ s why I don ’ t think Real is really set up to make the comeback .
This team just hasn ’ t scored as much as Real teams @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because of a dialed-back approach that solidified things on the other end , or perhaps it ’ s because the team spent a ton of money on Eden Hazard , who wore his own jersey fewer times than Tony has this year .
But either way , I have a hard time seeing them scoring enough while also not conceding .
cwick : It ’ s easy to overlook City ’ s greatness , but this is a team that is the best in the world , according to FiveThirtyEight ’ s metrics @ @ @ @ @ @ @ team with a lesser offense .
I don ’ t see it all falling apart .
ryan : Weird shit , though , will happen .
That ’ s sort of the rule of the modern version of the Champions League .
tchow : For what it ’ s worth , City has never lost a European match when it has won the first leg away .
So history should repeat itself here I guess .
cwick : I am particularly bummed that the Chelsea vs. Bayern match is weighed down by Bayern @ @ @ @ @ @ @ like the post-restart Chelsea had the offense to really push Bayern , but three away goals is a nearly impossible burden ( just a 2 percent chance of advancing ) .
So let ’ s look beyond this match — and avoid talking about Kepa Arrizabalaga : Who is likeliest to stop Bayern as the tournament goes on ?
ryan : It ’ s got ta be City , right ?
They ’ re on the same side of the bracket , so they ’ ll play before the final .
grace : @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tie is the most likely , but Bayern is still the favorite in my view .
tchow : When Bayern advances , it will play the winner of Barça vs. Napoli .
Could either of these teams cause the Bavarians problems ?
grace : Messi is Messi , but this is the poorest Barcelona team in over a decade .
The way it ’ s been playing since the restart , I can ’ t see it .
Napoli has improved under Gennaro Gattuso , but we ’ re still talking about the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Barça would have a shot because it ’ s a one-leg tie and it would have the best player on the field .
A couple moments of Messi magic would be enough to steal a win .
I have some questions about Bayern ’ s defense , but neither Bayern nor Napoli would really be able to ask them enough over a 90-minute stretch .
grace : Maybe Barcelona should have hired Carlos Bilardo to manage this side and he could ’ ve drawn up his “ defend defend defend , then let @ @ @ @ @ @ @ something amazing ” plan that won the 1986 World Cup .
ryan : That ’ s basically the Quique Setien blueprint , but replace “ defend ” with “ pass sideways.
” tchow : Fair .
Then I agree .
I had my gripes about our model earlier on , but if the question is who will cause Pep Guardiola ’ s former team the most problems , it ’ s got ta be Pep ’ s current team .
ryan : Per FBRef , Bayern allowed the 17th-fewest expected goals in Europe @ @ @ @ @ @ @ — and it played only 34 games , compared with the 38 in most of the other continental competitions .
That ’ s not bad by any stretch , but it ’ s also not the kind of thing that I would expect to hold up particularly well against City , who have been scoring for fun since the restart .
grace : I think the case for Bayern is that it can go into a slightly different mode in this knockout tournament than when it ’ s trying to dominate against lesser @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Leon Goretzka-Joshua Kimmich midfield doesn ’ t seem like it will work as the team gets deeper into this thing .
grace : Bayern manager Hansi Flick was part of Germany ’ s coaching staff under Jogi Low that won the 2014 World Cup .
He ’ s good at finding creative solutions to problems in the condensed time frame of these tournaments .
cwick : All right , to Juventus-Lyon , which Juve trails 0-1 .
Neither team has a greater than 10 percent chance of making the semifinals as of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ out for there ?
ryan : In a strange turn of events , Juventus has the worst-rated defense , per the FiveThirtyEight model , among all the remaining teams .
tchow : That defense allowed 43 goals in Serie A this season , the most the team has allowed since 2011. grace : I ’ ll be watching whether Juventus is still suited to these kinds of comebacks under Maurizio Sarri .
It feels like he ’ s made the team a little bit worse at the traditional Juventus qualities of keeping it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ but without a complete enough version of his possession-based style to make up for it .
ryan : The FiveThirtyEight model really doesn ’ t like Juventus : 20th in the world , behind the likes of Leicester , Wolves and RB Salzburg .
grace : Lyon had a weird year in Ligue 1 , finishing seventh , but it had the second-best xG differential behind PSG , according to FBRef , so it might cause more problems than you think .
tchow : Uh … both seventh-place teams in Serie A and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Maybe this being their only hope of more Champions League football next season will make both Lyon and Napoli overperform ?
grace : The model thinks Atalanta is the best team in Italy , so it is perfect .
ryan : My only issue with the model is that it doesn ’ t think Atalanta is the best team in the world .
tchow : Atalanta vs. Bayern would be quite a final .
grace : I really want to believe Atalanta can do it .
ryan : It ’ s probably @ @ @ @ @ @ @ which is not great .
But Atalanta absolutely can do it .
It ’ s on the “ easy ” side of the bracket .
Three wins , and it ’ s champs .
cwick : It ’ s telling that we quickly moved from discussing Juventus-Lyon to extolling Atalanta .
ryan : Neither team has a greater than less-than-1-percent-chance of winning the whole thing !
cwick : Let ’ s finally alight on Napoli vs. Barcelona .
Both teams are tied 1-1 after the first leg .
We spent a chat earlier @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is it so bad as to not be able to get past Napoli ?
tchow : Napoli has been undefeated in this year ’ s Champions League !
It drew with Liverpool in Anfield back when Liverpool was still trying .
ryan : It also had a different coach back then .
grace : I think it should be capable of hanging on with that away goal .
I just hope nobody watches expecting a thriller .
ryan : I think the key for Barça here is that it didn ’ t win @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not good at holding onto leads .
Brilliant move to go for the 1-1 draw .
grace : The talk in the Catalan press is that Barcelona intends to switch to a back three with just Messi and Luis Suárez upfront .
tchow : Also , going back to injuries/suspensions , this is another game in which the players missing out could be the story .
Barcelona won ’ t have Arturo Vidal or Sergio Busquets due to suspension , and I think Ousmane Dembélé may still be recovering from injury .
Missing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for Barcelona .
He ’ s been great .
ryan : The team isn ’ t as good as it used to be , but with Dries Mertens and Lorenzo Insigne , Napoli does have the kind of attacking talent that could steal a game like this .
tchow : Here ’ s hoping Insigne is healthy enough to play this week .
grace : Even if Napoli pulls this off , I ’ m not convinced it ’ ll be able to do something on the “ hard ” side of the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s a much more boring , much less capable Napoli side than the team of the past few seasons .
grace : It ’ s trying to become the poor man ’ s Juventus as Juventus tries to become the rich man ’ s Napoli .
cwick : We aren ’ t going to be assembled again until just before the Champions League final , so I thought we could do a little bit of spitballing ( unlike the rest of these chats ) and predict who we ’ ll say is @ @ @ @ @ @ @ two weeks ’ time .
Ryan , since this is your specialty , I thought you could lead us .
grace : This is the kind of big-game setting where the space interpreter thrives so I ’ m going to throw out Thomas Müller as a guy everyone might be raving about once again after this .
tchow : If we ’ re going Champs League focused , I want to take this time to introduce everyone to Canada ’ s and Bayern ’ s Alphonso Davies if they haven ’ t seen @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ryan : That ’ s very Wenger-esque of you , Tony .
Spotting a prospect after he ’ s already broken out .
tchow : Like Wenger , I ’ m gon na say I had my eye on him forever .
I ’ m just telling you now .
cwick : The Canadian model has everyone with an equal shot of winning .
tchow : Chad , if we had known we wouldn ’ t chat again until just before the final , we would ’ ve suggested to chat about nothing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ match instead .
What a missed opportunity here .
cwick : Whenever Neymar loses it ’ s cause for an emergency chat .
grace : Atalanta could have three Neymars and they couldn ’ t resist the unstoppable force from Bergamo .

The Champions League Is Back, And All We Want To Talk About Is Atalanta
cwick (Chadwick Matlin, deputy editor): Grace, Ryan, Tony, we’re back to talk about soccer on the eve of the Champions League! Tell me true: How many of you remember where we left off in March? (I do not.)
ryan (Ryan O’Hanlon, FiveThirtyEight contributor and author of the No Grass in the Clouds newsletter): I vaguely remember Marcos Llorente becoming the best striker in the world.
tchow (Tony Chow, video producer): If I could send you a screenshot of all my browser tabs right now, you would know that clearly I remembered nothing from March.
grace (Grace Robertson, FiveThirtyEight contributor and author of the Grace on Football newsletter): I remember Pep Guardiola did all his tinkering against Real Madrid in the first leg, and everyone had the usual takes ready, but it actually worked this time!
tchow: I did remember that Sergio Ramos got a red card. But I had to double check it was from late February and not, you know … the other times.
ryan: Not sure if it was my imagination, but did PSG actually advance past the Round of 16, too?
tchow: Ryan, you weren’t imagining it. I think your brain blocked it out because they eliminated Dortmund, which robbed us all of more Erling Haaland time.
cwick: Well, that’s what’s so crazy about this! Some teams are already in the quarterfinals, and others still have to complete the second leg of their fixtures, just with radically fresher legs. If I’m a Liverpool fan — and, wait, I am — I’d be furious that England didn’t shut down sooner for many reasons, including its loss to Atletico.
grace: I spent that whole game emotionally disconnected because it felt inevitable the Champions League would be canceled, and I was close to being right. But here we are, ready to finish off the tournament as Jürgen Klopp watches on TV.
tchow: You think the end-of-season Liverpool that you saw the past couple of weeks would’ve had a better shot of advancing if they waited till now?
cwick: Good point, Tony.
ryan: I’m glad we’ve already made this about Liverpool.
grace: The trophy is still in Liverpool! You can take as many photos with it as you like until someone wins this!
cwick: So let’s discuss the lay of the land: PSG, RB Leipzig, Atlético Madrid and Atalanta are in the quarterfinals. Manchester City, Bayern Munich and Barcelona still have work to do but, according to our model, are clear favorites to make it to the next round. And Lyon vs. Juventus is the only close fixture remaining (64 percent chance Lyon moves on, according to FiveThirtyEight’s model). What are you going to be watching for on Friday and Saturday?
tchow: I dispute the idea that anyone other than Bayern are clear favorites to advance. I want to talk to whoever makes that FiveThirtyEight model.
grace: I’ll be watching Man City vs. Real Madrid. City can be extremely good or kind of bad, but it’s always fun to watch. Juventus vs. Lyon is just kind of a dull matchup by comparison.
ryan: It’ll be interesting to see Zinedine Zidane try to game-plan a big come-from-behind victory. I don’t think he’s ever had to do that before, and Real’s success this year came from a more defense-oriented approach. He’s also never been knocked out of the Champions League.
grace: Real is probably set up to do well in this tournament … but only if it does the hard part and turns it around against City.
tchow: Yeah, I will be watching the Man City. vs. Real Madrid game closely. The FiveThirtyEight model gives City a 90 percent chance to advance, which is high in my opinion. City won the first leg in Madrid, 2-1, so those away goals are important, but this is still anyone’s game, I think.
ryan: If the Champions League has taught us anything over the past few years, it’s that literally no lead is big enough.
tchow: This is also a very different Real Madrid team than in March. Since the restart, it has won 10 out of its last 11 games and won another La Liga title.
cwick: Tony, in full transparency, I think you have to share the picture of you and your son in coordinated Real Madrid kits. It’s vital context to your analysis.
tchow: You mean this one of me and my son, whom I named Eden?
I promise I am trying to be unbiased here. Maybe Grace and Ryan will tell me I’m wrong.
grace: The model really likes City, and who am I to argue with it, but I really do think the team can be a little lax out of possession in these big games. The FA Cup semifinal against Arsenal was a perfect example when City just got hit so easily. Same with the league game against Chelsea.
ryan: It certainly could happen. City’s defense is good overall, but the few chances it gives up are generally pretty high quality. It’s just that City pretty comprehensively dismantled Madrid on the road in the first leg, and it did it with a not-super-high-possession approach. A similar look in this match should work again.
grace: Zidane tends to be frustratingly conservative in these kinds of games and trusts experienced players, but I really wish he would start both Vinicius and Rodrygo here. I think they’re best off hitting City with speed, and the older guys are short of that.
tchow: There are going to be some big names missing from this matchup, though. And actually, that seems to be a common thread among all of these second-leg matchups. But for Real Madrid, Sergio Ramos is suspended because of that aforementioned red card. Marcelo still isn’t 100 percent. And City will be missing Sergio Agüero due to injury and Benjamin Mendy due to suspension.
ryan: Ramos, who was Madrid’s second-leading goal-scorer in La Liga this season.
grace: If Zidane’s first era was built around Cristiano Ronaldo, then this is kind of Ramos’s team. Horrible to play against and solid.
tchow: Toward the end of the season, Zidane slotted in Éder Militão to pair with Raphaël Varane instead of Ramos, and even though they didn’t lose, let’s just say there were some major gaps in defense.
ryan: That’s why I don’t think Real is really set up to make the comeback. This team just hasn’t scored as much as Real teams of old. Perhaps that’s because of a dialed-back approach that solidified things on the other end, or perhaps it’s because the team spent a ton of money on Eden Hazard, who wore his own jersey fewer times than Tony has this year. But either way, I have a hard time seeing them scoring enough while also not conceding.
cwick: It’s easy to overlook City’s greatness, but this is a team that is the best in the world, according to FiveThirtyEight’s metrics, up an away goal against a team with a lesser offense. I don’t see it all falling apart.
grace: City should be fine.
ryan: Weird shit, though, will happen. That’s sort of the rule of the modern version of the Champions League.
tchow: For what it’s worth, City has never lost a European match when it has won the first leg away. So history should repeat itself here I guess.
grace: Football heritage.
cwick: I am particularly bummed that the Chelsea vs. Bayern match is weighed down by Bayern’s 3-0 advantage. It seemed like the post-restart Chelsea had the offense to really push Bayern, but three away goals is a nearly impossible burden (just a 2 percent chance of advancing). So let’s look beyond this match — and avoid talking about Kepa Arrizabalaga: Who is likeliest to stop Bayern as the tournament goes on?
ryan: It’s gotta be City, right? They’re on the same side of the bracket, so they’ll play before the final.
grace: Whoever wins the City vs. Real Madrid tie is the most likely, but Bayern is still the favorite in my view.
tchow: When Bayern advances, it will play the winner of Barça vs. Napoli. Could either of these teams cause the Bavarians problems?
grace: Messi is Messi, but this is the poorest Barcelona team in over a decade. The way it’s been playing since the restart, I can’t see it. Napoli has improved under Gennaro Gattuso, but we’re still talking about the seventh-place team in Serie A.
ryan: Barça would have a shot because it’s a one-leg tie and it would have the best player on the field. A couple moments of Messi magic would be enough to steal a win. I have some questions about Bayern’s defense, but neither Bayern nor Napoli would really be able to ask them enough over a 90-minute stretch.
grace: Maybe Barcelona should have hired Carlos Bilardo to manage this side and he could’ve drawn up his “defend defend defend, then let the best player in the world do something amazing” plan that won the 1986 World Cup.
ryan: That’s basically the Quique Setien blueprint, but replace “defend” with “pass sideways.”
tchow: Fair. Then I agree. I had my gripes about our model earlier on, but if the question is who will cause Pep Guardiola’s former team the most problems, it’s gotta be Pep’s current team.
ryan: Per FBRef, Bayern allowed the 17th-fewest expected goals in Europe’s Big Five leagues this season — and it played only 34 games, compared with the 38 in most of the other continental competitions. That’s not bad by any stretch, but it’s also not the kind of thing that I would expect to hold up particularly well against City, who have been scoring for fun since the restart.
grace: I think the case for Bayern is that it can go into a slightly different mode in this knockout tournament than when it’s trying to dominate against lesser Bundesliga sides.
ryan: Yeah, a Leon Goretzka-Joshua Kimmich midfield doesn’t seem like it will work as the team gets deeper into this thing.
grace: Bayern manager Hansi Flick was part of Germany’s coaching staff under Jogi Low that won the 2014 World Cup. He’s good at finding creative solutions to problems in the condensed time frame of these tournaments.
cwick: All right, to Juventus-Lyon, which Juve trails 0-1. Neither team has a greater than 10 percent chance of making the semifinals as of right now. What should people watch out for there?
ryan: In a strange turn of events, Juventus has the worst-rated defense, per the FiveThirtyEight model, among all the remaining teams.
tchow: That defense allowed 43 goals in Serie A this season, the most the team has allowed since 2011.
grace: I’ll be watching whether Juventus is still suited to these kinds of comebacks under Maurizio Sarri. It feels like he’s made the team a little bit worse at the traditional Juventus qualities of keeping it tight and always finding a result, but without a complete enough version of his possession-based style to make up for it.
ryan: The FiveThirtyEight model really doesn’t like Juventus: 20th in the world, behind the likes of Leicester, Wolves and RB Salzburg.
grace: Lyon had a weird year in Ligue 1, finishing seventh, but it had the second-best xG differential behind PSG, according to FBRef, so it might cause more problems than you think.
tchow: Uh … both seventh-place teams in Serie A and Ligue 1 are still in this competition. Maybe this being their only hope of more Champions League football next season will make both Lyon and Napoli overperform?
grace: The model thinks Atalanta is the best team in Italy, so it is perfect.
ryan: My only issue with the model is that it doesn’t think Atalanta is the best team in the world.
tchow: Atalanta vs. Bayern would be quite a final.
grace: I really want to believe Atalanta can do it.
ryan: It’s probably not gonna have Josip Iličić, which is not great. But Atalanta absolutely can do it. It’s on the “easy” side of the bracket. Three wins, and it’s champs.
cwick: It’s telling that we quickly moved from discussing Juventus-Lyon to extolling Atalanta.
ryan: Neither team has a greater than less-than-1-percent-chance of winning the whole thing!
cwick: Let’s finally alight on Napoli vs. Barcelona. Both teams are tied 1-1 after the first leg. We spent a chat earlier this summer ragging on Barcelona, but is it so bad as to not be able to get past Napoli?
tchow: Napoli has been undefeated in this year’s Champions League! It drew with Liverpool in Anfield back when Liverpool was still trying.
ryan: It also had a different coach back then.
grace: I think it should be capable of hanging on with that away goal. I just hope nobody watches expecting a thriller.
ryan: I think the key for Barça here is that it didn’t win the first leg. It’s not good at holding onto leads. Brilliant move to go for the 1-1 draw.
grace: The talk in the Catalan press is that Barcelona intends to switch to a back three with just Messi and Luis Suárez upfront.
tchow: Also, going back to injuries/suspensions, this is another game in which the players missing out could be the story. Barcelona won’t have Arturo Vidal or Sergio Busquets due to suspension, and I think Ousmane Dembélé may still be recovering from injury. Missing Vidal in particular could be really bad for Barcelona. He’s been great.
ryan: The team isn’t as good as it used to be, but with Dries Mertens and Lorenzo Insigne, Napoli does have the kind of attacking talent that could steal a game like this.
tchow: Here’s hoping Insigne is healthy enough to play this week.
grace: Even if Napoli pulls this off, I’m not convinced it’ll be able to do something on the “hard” side of the draw.
ryan: Agreed — it’s a much more boring, much less capable Napoli side than the team of the past few seasons.
grace: It’s trying to become the poor man’s Juventus as Juventus tries to become the rich man’s Napoli.
cwick: We aren’t going to be assembled again until just before the Champions League final, so I thought we could do a little bit of spitballing (unlike the rest of these chats) and predict who we’ll say is the greatest player in the world in two weeks’ time. Ryan, since this is your specialty, I thought you could lead us.
ryan: It’s Duvan Zapata time, baby!
grace: This is the kind of big-game setting where the space interpreter thrives so I’m going to throw out Thomas Müller as a guy everyone might be raving about once again after this.
tchow: If we’re going Champs League focused, I want to take this time to introduce everyone to Canada’s and Bayern’s Alphonso Davies if they haven’t seen him already. Remember the name.
ryan: That’s very Wenger-esque of you, Tony. Spotting a prospect after he’s already broken out.
tchow: Like Wenger, I’m gonna say I had my eye on him forever. I’m just telling you now.
grace: Tony is now joining FiveThirtyEight.ca.
cwick: The Canadian model has everyone with an equal shot of winning.
tchow: Chad, if we had known we wouldn’t chat again until just before the final, we would’ve suggested to chat about nothing else but the Atalanta vs. PSG quarterfinal match instead. What a missed opportunity here.
cwick: Whenever Neymar loses it’s cause for an emergency chat.
grace: Atalanta could have three Neymars and they couldn’t resist the unstoppable force from Bergamo.


fivethirthyeight--2020-08-06--Some Volunteers Want To Be Infected With Coronavirus To Help Find A Vaccine. But It Isn’t That Simpl

Gavriel Kleinwaks wants to get COVID-19 , and she can ’ t understand why I find that surprising .
The 23-year-old grad student is one of more than 30,000 volunteers who have signed up with an organization to be potential participants in a human challenge trial for COVID-19 vaccines .
If selected , she would be given a dose of the vaccine and then given a dose of the live virus to see how well the vaccine works .
When I asked her why this was important to her , she struggled to respond .
“ I don ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is saving lives important to me ?
” she said .
Given the urgency to find a vaccine for COVID-19 , these kinds of trials are attracting a lot of attention from researchers , bioethicists and the public at large .
It ’ s encouraging that there are tens of thousands of people like Kleinwaks willing to put their health , and their lives , on the line to get a vaccine sooner .
But human challenge trials are not as simple a proposition as they seem , and there ’ s ongoing @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the risks outweigh the benefits .
In the normal course of vaccine development , the vaccine is tested for efficacy in what ’ s called a phase 3 trial .
A large number of people are given either the vaccine or a placebo and then sent back to live their lives , assuming that some of them , at some point , will be exposed to the virus .
If a large percentage of the people who got the vaccine never become infected , and people who got the placebo do , you @ @ @ @ @ @ @ human challenge trial , rather than waiting for participants to encounter the virus naturally , the researchers go ahead and expose participants to the virus directly ( this can be done in a variety of ways , from ingesting it orally , to dripping a virus-laced fluid into their noses ) .
Participants in the trial stay in a secure medical facility and are treated if they get sick .
In theory , it ’ s a really practical design .
Want to see how someone with the vaccine does when exposed to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the virus !
But even in the best-case scenario , these kinds of trials require a lot of ethical considerations .
And the novel coronavirus , a pathogen we ’ re still only just beginning to understand , is not the best-case scenario .
Human challenge trials have been used in the past to study everything from seasonal flu to malaria , but there are noticeable differences between those diseases and COVID-19 .
In the case of flu , the risk of serious illness or death for healthy participants is low .
In @ @ @ @ @ @ @ proven treatments that cure the disease .
We don ’ t have the same luxuries with COVID-19 , which means it doesn ’ t meet some of the regulations that medical ethicists have laid out for researchers considering using a human challenge model .
“ We traced a pretty clear line in the sand saying that you couldn ’ t do challenge studies if participants would be exposed to risk of irreversible , incurable or possibly fatal infections , ” said Charles Weijer , a bioethicist at Western University in Canada who co-authored @ @ @ @ @ @ @ As a result , he said , COVID-19 trials , are “ not currently ethical.
” Researchers who have proposed considering human challenge trials for COVID-19 vaccines say those risks can be mitigated by enrolling healthy , young participants at a lower risk of serious or deadly infection and providing access to high-quality medical treatment .
“ Some people are many thousands of times less at risk for severe disease following infection than others , ” said Nir Eyal , a bioethicist at Rutgers University who co-authored a paper in support of human @ @ @ @ @ @ @ If you select those at lowest risk , the remaining risk is not nil , but it is very low indeed.
” Typically , risks of serious negative outcomes are only taken if the participant has some potential benefit ( think of experimental cancer treatments , for example ) , but that ’ s not exclusively the case .
Eyal pointed to live kidney donation , a practice that carries risk and no physical benefit for the donor , but is widely accepted .
Kleinwaks said she is well aware of the risks @ @ @ @ @ @ @ benefits — helping develop a vaccine more quickly — would be worth it .
And she noted that not participating in a human challenge trial is no guarantee that she won ’ t get COVID-19 anyway .
“ I don ’ t think infection is completely avoidable through my own actions , ” said Kleinwaks , who lives in Boulder , Colorado .
“ The risks [ after infection ] might be a little better and certainly not worse if I undergo a challenge trial where I ’ ll be under really close @ @ @ @ @ @ @ best care available.
” But Weijer stressed that because there ’ s so much we still don ’ t know about COVID-19 , especially its potential long-term effects , it ’ s really difficult to estimate the risks , even for young , healthy participants .
The most compelling argument against human challenge trials for a COVID-19 vaccine , though , is that it might not actually be any faster .
In order to infect people with the virus , we have to have a tested viral dose — one that is strong @ @ @ @ @ @ @ so strong it gives an infection worse than natural spread — which can take up to a year to develop , according to Weijer .
Meanwhile , seven vaccine candidates have entered phase 3 trials .
Researchers are developing these vaccines faster than any vaccines have been made in history , and by the time a viral dose is created for a human challenge trial , we might not need it .
Still , some researcher groups have started pursuing the idea .
Participants are being recruited for a human challenge trial at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ University of Antwerp is building a facility specifically designed to conduct these kinds of trials .
While the current development of vaccines might outpace a challenge trial , they could play a role going forward .
Seema Shah , a bioethicist at Lurie Children ’ s Hospital of Chicago , said researchers should be preparing for human challenge trials and keeping it as a possibility in their back pocket .
“ That would be especially important if the first vaccine out of the gate is one that isn ’ t as effective as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Until then , there are tens of thousands of volunteers like Kleinwaks waiting and willing to be called in if needed .
After thinking about it a bit , Kleinwaks was able to give me an answer to why she ’ s willing to do all this .
“ I feel incredibly lucky to have good health , ” she said .
“ I ’ m a grad student , I don ’ t have a lot of time or money to donate .
But this is a way I can donate @ @ @ @ @ @ @ I can do .
”

Some Volunteers Want To Be Infected With Coronavirus To Help Find A Vaccine. But It Isn’t That Simple.
Gavriel Kleinwaks wants to get COVID-19, and she can’t understand why I find that surprising. The 23-year-old grad student is one of more than 30,000 volunteers who have signed up with an organization to be potential participants in a human challenge trial for COVID-19 vaccines. If selected, she would be given a dose of the vaccine and then given a dose of the live virus to see how well the vaccine works.
When I asked her why this was important to her, she struggled to respond.
“I don’t know how to answer that. Why is saving lives important to me?” she said.
Given the urgency to find a vaccine for COVID-19, these kinds of trials are attracting a lot of attention from researchers, bioethicists and the public at large. It’s encouraging that there are tens of thousands of people like Kleinwaks willing to put their health, and their lives, on the line to get a vaccine sooner. But human challenge trials are not as simple a proposition as they seem, and there’s ongoing debate within the scientific community about whether the risks outweigh the benefits.
In the normal course of vaccine development, the vaccine is tested for efficacy in what’s called a phase 3 trial. A large number of people are given either the vaccine or a placebo and then sent back to live their lives, assuming that some of them, at some point, will be exposed to the virus. If a large percentage of the people who got the vaccine never become infected, and people who got the placebo do, you know the vaccine works. In a human challenge trial, rather than waiting for participants to encounter the virus naturally, the researchers go ahead and expose participants to the virus directly (this can be done in a variety of ways, from ingesting it orally, to dripping a virus-laced fluid into their noses). Participants in the trial stay in a secure medical facility and are treated if they get sick.
In theory, it’s a really practical design. Want to see how someone with the vaccine does when exposed to the virus? Just expose them to the virus! But even in the best-case scenario, these kinds of trials require a lot of ethical considerations. And the novel coronavirus, a pathogen we’re still only just beginning to understand, is not the best-case scenario.
Human challenge trials have been used in the past to study everything from seasonal flu to malaria, but there are noticeable differences between those diseases and COVID-19. In the case of flu, the risk of serious illness or death for healthy participants is low. In the case of malaria, we have proven treatments that cure the disease. We don’t have the same luxuries with COVID-19, which means it doesn’t meet some of the regulations that medical ethicists have laid out for researchers considering using a human challenge model.
“We traced a pretty clear line in the sand saying that you couldn’t do challenge studies if participants would be exposed to risk of irreversible, incurable or possibly fatal infections,” said Charles Weijer, a bioethicist at Western University in Canada who co-authored expert criteria for human challenge trials. As a result, he said, COVID-19 trials, are “not currently ethical.”
Researchers who have proposed considering human challenge trials for COVID-19 vaccines say those risks can be mitigated by enrolling healthy, young participants at a lower risk of serious or deadly infection and providing access to high-quality medical treatment.
“Some people are many thousands of times less at risk for severe disease following infection than others,” said Nir Eyal, a bioethicist at Rutgers University who co-authored a paper in support of human challenge trials for COVID-19 vaccines. “If you select those at lowest risk, the remaining risk is not nil, but it is very low indeed.”
Typically, risks of serious negative outcomes are only taken if the participant has some potential benefit (think of experimental cancer treatments, for example), but that’s not exclusively the case. Eyal pointed to live kidney donation, a practice that carries risk and no physical benefit for the donor, but is widely accepted.
Kleinwaks said she is well aware of the risks, but feels as though the potential benefits — helping develop a vaccine more quickly — would be worth it. And she noted that not participating in a human challenge trial is no guarantee that she won’t get COVID-19 anyway.
“I don’t think infection is completely avoidable through my own actions,” said Kleinwaks, who lives in Boulder, Colorado. “The risks [after infection] might be a little better and certainly not worse if I undergo a challenge trial where I’ll be under really close medical observation and have access to the best care available.”
But Weijer stressed that because there’s so much we still don’t know about COVID-19, especially its potential long-term effects, it’s really difficult to estimate the risks, even for young, healthy participants.
The most compelling argument against human challenge trials for a COVID-19 vaccine, though, is that it might not actually be any faster. In order to infect people with the virus, we have to have a tested viral dose — one that is strong enough to infect people, but not so strong it gives an infection worse than natural spread — which can take up to a year to develop, according to Weijer.
Meanwhile, seven vaccine candidates have entered phase 3 trials. Researchers are developing these vaccines faster than any vaccines have been made in history, and by the time a viral dose is created for a human challenge trial, we might not need it.
Still, some researcher groups have started pursuing the idea. Participants are being recruited for a human challenge trial at the University of Oxford, and the University of Antwerp is building a facility specifically designed to conduct these kinds of trials. While the current development of vaccines might outpace a challenge trial, they could play a role going forward.
Seema Shah, a bioethicist at Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago, said researchers should be preparing for human challenge trials and keeping it as a possibility in their back pocket. “That would be especially important if the first vaccine out of the gate is one that isn’t as effective as we would like,” she said.
Until then, there are tens of thousands of volunteers like Kleinwaks waiting and willing to be called in if needed. After thinking about it a bit, Kleinwaks was able to give me an answer to why she’s willing to do all this.
“I feel incredibly lucky to have good health,” she said. “I’m a grad student, I don’t have a lot of time or money to donate. But this is a way I can donate my health. This is the thing I can do.”