Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 76 to 84 of 84

Thread: How does no sports in California until 2021 affect the Zags?

  1. #76
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    5,082

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sonuvazag View Post
    I believe it would be closer to 0.9% if you count the probable deaths, which gives you a number not far from the 1% Fauci presented last month.

    And 0.9% or 0.6% is not good. If 50 million Americans were infected you get between 300,000 and 450,000 deaths.

    38,800 traffic fatalities last year in the US. We passed that figure in a 45-day stretch with COVID-19. Something in that comparison just doesn't add up for me.
    Population adjusted for comorbidities/age

    https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1....05.20054361v1

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Opportunity, WA
    Posts
    1,941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JPtheBeasta View Post
    Population adjusted for comorbidities/age

    https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1....05.20054361v1
    I wonder how useful that line of thinking is when 40% of the US population over the age of 20 is obese.
    Agent provocateur

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    7,354

    Default

    The San Francisco Chronical just had a report of a woman that died on Feb 7. The Dr thought the virus that killed her was wierd, so he kept a tissue sample. He just had it tested and it was positive, along with that of two of her friends.
    I didn't read if she had travelled to China, I don't pay for the paper, so just get the highlights.

    https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/...baybriefing_am
    It's not funny.

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    5,082

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sonuvazag View Post
    I wonder how useful that line of thinking is when 40% of the US population over the age of 20 is obese.
    Are you suggesting we shut down the country for 20 year old obese persons?

  5. #80
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Opportunity, WA
    Posts
    1,941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JPtheBeasta View Post
    Are you suggesting we shut down the country for 20 year old obese persons?
    No, I'm suggesting if the risk is still significant for at least 40% of the adult population under the age of 65, the economy shuts itself down, as has happened. And I'm also suggesting 300,000 to 450,000 deaths is unacceptable, no matter what age or condition the people were in.

    In any case, nothing restarts, no matter how much some people want it to, until the following changes:
    Agent provocateur

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    5,082

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sonuvazag View Post
    No, I'm suggesting if the risk is still significant for at least 40% of the adult population under the age of 65, the economy shuts itself down, as has happened. And I'm also suggesting 300,000 to 450,000 deaths is unacceptable, no matter what age or condition the people were in.

    In any case, nothing restarts, no matter how much some people want it to, until the following changes:
    I appreciate the continued conversation. Your challenges to my line of thinking are refining my thoughts on this.

    Here is Arizona, elective procedures have been cleared to start May 1. I’m thinking your comment about nothing starting was a bit of hyperbole, but I get your point about public confidence.

    Per the CDC, as of April 23, in the age 15-24 category there were 21 Covid deaths and 38 influenza deaths. Obesity is not an existential threat to obese persons in this category. This may seem obtuse but I thought it was worth mentioning.

    To your larger point on obesity, I lost track of your line of reasoning and I think I had been tracking along up to this point, so please forgive me. I do agree that comorbidites are a huge issue. An article in JAMA showed that 4991 of 5700 persons admitted to the hospital in New York under their study had 2 or more comorbidities, 359 had one comirnidity, and only 350 had no comorbidities. In the obesity category 1737 had a BMI greater than 30 and 791 were greater than 791; this supports your concern about obese persons, especially considering that they are relatively likely to have another comorbidities, such as diabetes or hypertension.

    It seems reasonable to open up the country for persons without risk factors (potentially limiting those who live with at-risk persons). A significant number of obese persons also have one other comorbidities, so, again, I get your point there. I am starting to wonder if this is starting to turn into more of a moral question than a pragmatic one, however, which I would still think is a perfectly valid discussion. My tribe (immediate and extended circle of friends and family) would largely not be impacted if restrictions were removed. This very well may play into my perspective on this. Another is the psychological value of returning to more normalcy.

    This is the JAMA article:
    https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2765184

  7. #82
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Opportunity, WA
    Posts
    1,941

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JPtheBeasta View Post
    I appreciate the continued conversation. Your challenges to my line of thinking are refining my thoughts on this.

    Here is Arizona, elective procedures have been cleared to start May 1. I’m thinking your comment about nothing starting was a bit of hyperbole, but I get your point about public confidence.

    Per the CDC, as of April 23, in the age 15-24 category there were 21 Covid deaths and 38 influenza deaths. Obesity is not an existential threat to obese persons in this category. This may seem obtuse but I thought it was worth mentioning.

    To your larger point on obesity, I lost track of your line of reasoning and I think I had been tracking along up to this point, so please forgive me. I do agree that comorbidites are a huge issue. An article in JAMA showed that 4991 of 5700 persons admitted to the hospital in New York under their study had 2 or more comorbidities, 359 had one comirnidity, and only 350 had no comorbidities. In the obesity category 1737 had a BMI greater than 30 and 791 were greater than 791; this supports your concern about obese persons, especially considering that they are relatively likely to have another comorbidities, such as diabetes or hypertension.

    It seems reasonable to open up the country for persons without risk factors (potentially limiting those who live with at-risk persons). A significant number of obese persons also have one other comorbidities, so, again, I get your point there. I am starting to wonder if this is starting to turn into more of a moral question than a pragmatic one, however, which I would still think is a perfectly valid discussion. My tribe (immediate and extended circle of friends and family) would largely not be impacted if restrictions were removed. This very well may play into my perspective on this. Another is the psychological value of returning to more normalcy.

    This is the JAMA article:
    https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2765184
    Yes, "nothing restarting" is hyperbole. I'll say instead that there's no scenario where we can get back even close to the level of economic activity that existed before.

    In this hypothetical where society opens up to allow healthy people under 65 get to roam freely, I would expect it to be very weird to decide what to do for the under-65 people who have a risk factor such as obesity or hypertension. Do we say, you can go to work or you can choose to shelter in place. Will we somehow replace every worker who chooses to shelter in place and pay them unemployment if they choose to do so? Do you we allow the same freedom to shelter in place for low risk people who are also worried about reports of permanent lung damage, et cetera?

    Do people, like doctors and elder home workers, that are low risk but have no choice but to come in contact with high-risk people as a part of their work, also have to shelter in place apart from their work? Do they get compensated in some way for their sacrifice?

    I suspect I'm only touching the surface of the many complications that would arise.
    Last edited by sonuvazag; 04-23-2020 at 03:18 PM.
    Agent provocateur

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    North Side
    Posts
    5,753

    Default

    Experts now believe it was here in early January. If so Few and wifes doctor would be right.
    Love the zags for life

  9. #84
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Oklafriggenhoma
    Posts
    7,258

    Default

    University of Oklahoma preparing to open in Fall.
    https://www.newsweek.com/university-...sports-1500163
    Birddog

    Twas brillig, and the slithy toves
    Did gyre and gimble in the wabe:
    All mimsy were the borogoves,
    And the mome raths outgrabe.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •