Research is no black and white issue

THE first case control study to document a link between smoking and lung cancer was produced in 1943. It wasn’t widely acknowledged because, well, the doctors behind it were Nazis. Literally, Nazis. One of them assisted in the euthanasia of 200,000 mental and physically disabled citizens as part of the Final Solution and committed suicide at the end of the war.

Meaning Sir Richard Doll and Austin Bradford Hill get the lion’s share of credit for establishing the link we accept as scientific fact now, even if it was seven years later. As a result of their findings, in 1954, the British Doctors Study into the effects of smoking began. It concluded in 2001.

So, it is fair to say, statistical studies in science work on a different timescale to those that are considered worthwhile in sport. Linking smoking to cancer is not the same as proving the centre forward should run more. It takes years, often decades, for the information to be trustworthy.

So any link between Covid-19 and skin colour is in its infancy and very much unproven. Just the loose term BAME is bad science given the wide range of minority ethnic groups.

And if black people are more vulnerable to coronavirus, how come only 2,708 deaths have been recorded among the entire African continent of 1.216billion people? It cannot all be down to poor data collection.

The Premier League needs to be explaining this to players because, understandably, the news they are hearing is causing much disquiet.

Given what is being fed to them in bulletins and headlines, those such as Troy Deeney are entitled to be cautious.

Any player is within his rights to stay home. Yet, equally, the Premier League should be able to offer clearer direction.

Little of what we know of coronavirus is black and white, and certainly not the black and white of it.