A WaPo headline,
quoted along with substantial text from the article by my son John at Facebook, where I expressed surprise that the factor was so low and asked:
Did they count obesity as a "condition" when they did that calculation?
Then:
I looked at the CDC report, and I see it only counted "severe obesity (body mass index ≥40 kg/m2)" as a condition. I'm a 5'5" woman, and I would need to weigh more than 240 pounds — more than 100 pounds over normal weight — to enter that BMI range.
Obesity begins at a 30 BMI, which would be 180 pounds for my height. That's 60 pounds less than the weight the CDC counted as a "condition" when it did its calculation. It wouldn't be 12 times as likely but what? — 100 times? — if they'd included the merely obese. And what if they'd counted the overweight but not obese? That would go all the way down to 150 for my height. It would be useful to know, because we have some power over our own weight!
ADDED: My son questions my observation. The factor should be lower if they included less severe conditions. I agree with him. I'm thinking in terms of being less likely to die. When you're trying to figure out how dangerous the illness is to you, you consider how likely it is for a person in your condition to die if they get the disease. Perhaps it's the case that 99.9% of those who died of the disease were obese. Of course, that's not the same as saying if you get the disease and you're obese, you have a 99.9% chance of dying. But if the overall percentage of those who get the disease and die is 0.1%, then I'd like to know what's the percentage for those who get the disease but are not obese? Is it 0.01%? That would be extremely useful information! For one thing, it would give people something to do to protect themselves: lose weight. But also, it would show us who should continue the more extreme form of social distancing and who should feel free to get out and about.
पोस्ट्स
८८ टिप्पण्या:
I echo your frustration at CDC findings. They always seem far too vague for me as far as what constitutes 'underlying conditions'. It's like the CDC is trying too hard not to make a(nother) mistake in its handling and understanding of this pandemic.
Math is hard and that author is wrong.
Seriously, the numbers would go the opposite of what the author believes.
Read: Covid patients with comorbidities were more likely to have their cause of death miscategorized by the numbers people.
"It wouldn't be 12 times as likely but what? — 100 times? — if they'd included the merely obese."
No. The excerpt is about comparing rates between "otherwise healthy" and "people with comorbidities". As you broaden the category of "people with comorbidities" to include people closer to the "otherwise healthy" category, the two rates will grow closer together, not further apart.
By choosing the conditions, you can manipulate the factor, so I think the issue should be what's most enlightening or useful.
Where are the big jumps in danger? Is it between obesity and severe obesity? Is it between diabetic and pre-diabetic?
"It wouldn't be 12 times as likely but what? — 100 times? — if they'd included the merely obese"
But that would make it even more clear that WuFlu is a disease of the sick, fat, and old, that we are not in this together, that the panic about a general epidemic was entirely misguided, that for the vast majority of people under 65 WuFlu is no worse than other diseases, that there is no justification for prog lockdowns, and that we should go about our business without fear.
The people who wrote this are probably so afraid of getting cancelled that they didn't want to be accused of fat-shaming. Thanks, Progressives!
I think the term "fat shaming" should be reserved for criticizing people who are mostly telling overweight people that they *look* bad. It's not shaming to inform them of the serious health risk. I was very motivated to lose weight when I saw my glucose number go over the line into the "pre-diabetic" range, and I was able to lose 20 pounds with that motivation.
I agree that knowledge is power but there is some knowledge that we can not know. Today it is deemed "too hurtful". You can NOT ever fat shame anyone for any reason regardless of how it might improve their lives and health. We all MUST be body positive and not just accept but publicly celibate overweight and even severely overweight people.
Question, which is the greater threat to a person's health? Being 100 or more pounds overweight or smoking cigarettes to drop the weight and keep it off?
Question 2, which is the greater threat to a person's health? Being 100 or more pounds overweight or vaping to drop the weight and keep it off?
Question 3, despite all the actual science on the subject, why does the government and anti-smoking organizations still work to lump vaping in with cigarette smoking and discount the benefits of vaping for people trying to quit smoking?
The CDC should really stick with actual disease fighting, investigation, and prevention and not politicking. Domestic violence is NOT a disease. "Gun violence" is not a disease. They blew most/any credibility they may have once had with all the information they put out during the initial AIDs spread back in the 80s. They have only continued farther down this road since.
The single best thing you can do to avoid death from COVID19 is to not live in a nursing home.
Speaking of vague, what does Ann mean by “get the disease “? Asymptomatic shedder, symptomatic, or hospitalized?
Obesity is the key challenge morbidity. Sadly we live in a world where left-inspired morals rule our lives. These morals include allowing mass public rallies so long as they are politically correct and not reporting data that is germane such as obesity. The left mind is a failed moral playground.
Stop watching the news, Ann. It is making you and my wife crazy about Kung Flu.
What special precautions do you take for seasonal flu? (I ignore it and it ignores me)
Take the same ones for Kung Flu. It is about as dangerous.
John Henry
If they really wanted you to have some control over your own risks factors, they'd open up the gyms. Which they don't want to do, given the pressures that would create to open up other things. Since they've been clear that they are willing to outright lie to you to suit their needs (i.e., masks), there can't be any serious question that they will manipulate too.
I looked at the CDC report, and I see it only counted "severe obesity (body mass index ≥40 kg/m2)" as a condition. ??
Second sentence in CDC report:
"As of May 30, 2020, among COVID-19 cases, the most common underlying health conditions were
cardiovascular disease (32%),
diabetes (30%), and
chronic lung disease (18%).
Hospitalizations were six times higher and deaths 12 times higher among those with reported underlying conditions compared with those with none reported."
Later they mention a bunch more "conditions", in TABLE 2.
Ann Althouse said...I think the term "fat shaming" should be reserved for criticizing people who are mostly telling overweight people that they *look* bad.
There is no reason for the term "fat shaming" to exist at all. There is already a perfectly accurate and adequate term for people who just insult fat people. "Jerks."
"pre-diabetic"
Something to avoid, yes. I recall taking my Dad to see a circulation specialist and the joint was littered with quite obese people missing feet. All had diabetes. The ones that hadn't had amputations were in wheelchairs. I am motivated to avoid avoirdupois now.
"There is nothing from the CDC that I can trust" -Dr Laura Birx.
She nailed it. CDC data and recommendations, along with WHO, FDA and other agencies have been bullshit.
Colorado, NY, and last week Puerto Rico as well as other states probably, have reduced their KungFlu death counts by 25% or more.
PR also reduced its number of cases by about half.
There is LOTS AND LOTS of money in Kung Flu patients and even more in kung flu deaths. An extra $10m or so per sick patient, an extra $30m or so per dead patient. Why would we NOT expect the numbers to be dramatically overstated?
And don't get me started on Hydroxycloraquine. Here we have a drug that may (or may not) be a wonder drug for this. And in 3 months not a single legitimate study has been done to see if it works or not.
A number of studies have been done, but all have been designed to fail. For example, zinc seems to be the key, so the studies do NOT use zinc. Getting it at the very first symptoms seems to be a key, so the studies have been on people who are already sick enough to be hospitalized. Or this recent one from England in the Lancet where they just made up data on non-existent patients.
Meanwhile Fauci, who has spent most of his career working for govt, is a centimillionaire from all the patents he has a piece of. Most of them discovered in govt labs.
US has lockdowns and such and a reported 6,599 cases/mm pop with 358 deaths/mm pop.
Brazil, much more crowded than the US, much poorer sanitary conditions and no lockdown, has 6,599/mm cases and 358/mm deaths (Worldometer just now)
I am not sure if today the advice is to practice mask theater or not but nobody can seem to make up their minds. Gov Cuomo says the primary reason to wear masks is to look cool. I won't repeat my rant against masks. You all know how useless I think they are.
I am not looking forward to spending saturday on airplanes wearing a mask.
John Henry
“That would be extremely useful information!”
What comes of the mediaswine politicizing a Virus is that there is very little useful information. For example, what does a typical case in a healthy person look like, if there is a typical case? Is there a typical recovery time?
I’m sure that information is out there somewhere, but it really ought to have replaced “Cuomo is heroic” and “Trump is a goat” by now.
Half the US deaths were in nursing homes. Cuomo is not interested in that statistic.
"It's not shaming to inform them of the serious health risk."
Nannies will happily address health risks when their true motivations are just to nanny.
Rehajm makes a valid point. You have two kinds of people who have died "of COVID-19" this Spring- those who wouldn't have died this year or next year but for the disease, and those who would have died anyway. We won't know the ratios, with any degree of certainty, of those two groups until sometime in 2022-2023 when we do retrospective analysis of total mortality since January 2020.
As of right now, it is likely that at least 10% of Americans have had COVID-19 between January 1st and today- that is 30-40 million people. Just on gross statistical analysis, 1% of that 10% would have died this year anyway- that is 300,000 people. If you want to drop that 10% to 5%, that is still 150,000 deaths without COVID-19 ever existing. It is all but certain that people certified of dying of COVID-19 didn't die from the disease, but from one or more of their other ailments, but the positive test for COVID overrules everything else. Of course, it is also certain that some actual deaths from COVID-19 are also missed because of the lack of a positive test.
As for the issue of obesity, it is pretty obvious that you have to be really, really unhealthily fat for COVID-19 to kill you. The problem with trying to interpret the "12 times" in regards to "severely obese" is that it is likely drawn from the population of those who died "from" COVID-19, which we also know are overwhelmingly elderly. I would say the guidelines is that a severely obese person is 12 times more likely die than someone who isn't obese, but that both people are the same age. Does that make sense now?
"But also, it would show us who should continue the more extreme form of social distancing and who should feel free to get out and about."
This is quibbling. You're saying someone wakes up one day and calculates their BMI at 39, and decides it's an acceptable risk, but a few days later, after a pizza night, suddenly their BMI is 41 and they decide to stay home?
If you're old, fat enough that it's a problem, have a respiratory or immune condition, or some combination of the three, know that you're at higher risk. Getting into the decimals and percentages muddies the waters too much. Same kinda "sciencey" thinking that has stupid blue state governors enacting 15-week, 8 point plans to reopen their states.
Or you could take up smoking and cut your risk of COVID while upping your risk of cancer. Your call.
Or find a friendly doc who can give you a 5-day script of HCQ, and buy some zinc at your local pharmacy, while getting plenty of Vitamin D in your diet. Then you're bulletproof unless you wait until you're on a ventilator to take any of that stuff.
"I think the issue should be what's most enlightening or useful."
When writing papers for publication, the criterion is "what are the statistically significant categories given the sample size I have?" They probably don't have enough data to make those finer distinctions with statistical rigor.
Many have questioned for in some cases good reason whether the people that allegedly died from the Covid-19 coronavirus actually did, either because they weren't infected, or they never had a serious Covid-19 condition ("serious Covid-19", I'm just making that phrase up, would mean that at some point they had trouble breathing), or they had another condition, which is equally credible as the cause of their death.
So if I were a researcher trying to find the correlations between these factors, I would discard all the people that died that were never tested for the virus, or for which there is no record that they were short of breath, or some equivalent medical marker of the means by which Covid-19 is believed to kill, or which had not just a comorbidity, but some other immediately life-threatening condition.
Those are the correlations that I would like to see. But as it is the data being discussed seems a bit too vague to draw much conclusion from.
I am morbidly obese, and just over 60 years old. I've lost weight before, and hope to do so again. COVID-19 is a strong motivator.
That said, I've been fat more than I've been not fat. Also, I am probably doomed from COVID-19, when I eventually catch it.
Informing fat people of their health risks is indeed not fat shaming. It is narcissistic moral preeening, usually, except when offered by loved ones or physicians. Don't let that stop you, though, perhaps your personal virtue signalling by telling fat people things they already know personally, physically, intimately, will be the straw that breaks the diet-camels back and gets the fat person on a better life path. And anyway, moral preening!
I sense that you're itching to tell us what you weigh, Althouse, as a humblebrag. Don't be shy, let it out.
And if after all of that, that is a more definite statistical study, where we are comparing people that we know they were infected but did not die, and we know a fair amount about their comorbidities, to people that were infected and did die and we also know a fair amount about their comorbidities, and if after all of that, if there was still a modest correlation between these other problems and death, then I would begin to wonder just who really is vulnerable to the virus.
It's not worth speculating unless we have actual good data, but if there were not a particularly strong correlation for these other things then that would hint to me that really it's a matter of differing genetics or whether one already has some kind of partial immunity that is what is driving who lives and dies.
Where are the big jumps in danger? Is it between obesity and severe obesity? Is it between diabetic and pre-diabetic?
Well, there's also all sorts of problems with using BMI as a measure for when someone is categorized as obese. It's farily imprecise and not exactly scientific. Something like body fat percentage might be a bit more useful, but it turns out that determining that is a far more involved procedure.
In general though, the problem with getting more and more granular about who was more likely to die and why is that you'd have to include far more detail, which means collecting more patient data, which means running more tests, which means more time and money. And at the end of the day is all that investment of time and money going to be worth it? I mean, you would assume that such information would theoretically save more lives in terms of people being more aware that they're more at risk. But realistically speaking, if someone is just at some cutoff point where they're not considered obsese, or maybe they don't quite tick enough boxes for other risk factors or whatever, or maybe they do, but it's still on them to modify their behavoir.
There's also an element of good sense involved here. I mean at this point I think most people are fairly aware of what the general risk to them personally would be if they contracted Covid-19. And those that still fail to understand these risks, is more information actually going to encourage them to change their behavior?
I think the lack of clarity on this can't be an accident. I.e., the real answers would put the lockdowns away for good.
I'm also curious about the blood pressure factor. I (like many guys my age) have moderate high blood pressure that's well controlled with medication. Does that significantly increase my risk of dying (if I contract the virus)? I have no idea, and I feel that that's not an accident either.
The data shouldn't be all that hard to crunch.
I've been saying that we need a close break-down of the severely-ill/deceased categories from the beginning. That data has been frustratingly slow and often withheld due to "privacy concerns." As far as Althouse's vulnerability, I'd put it as super-low. The main driver of the mortality rate, as far as I can glean, is being among the frail elderly. Frail and elderly; not just over 65 or even 70. Data from PowerLine blog, which follows the Minnesota (which has been hit fairly hard) stats very closely, is most instructive. As of a few weeks ago, in the entire state, fewer than 10 people who were not seriously ill/compromised (i.e., morbidly obese) had died. When asked the age of the youngest, not-otherwise-in-a-high-risk category person who had died, the answer was "70." That's pretty damn useful and encouraging data.
Now, I need to get busy and lost weight again...congrats on your weight loss and exercise regime. I've been allowing the fact that I'm in a constant mildly anxious, bored, and somewhat depressed state (from Covid and now the collapse of America) to eat carbs again, with the predictable result of about a 20 lb. weight gain, which puts me on the cusp of the dreaded 30 BMI and also takes my blood sugar out of the almost-normal range that keeps the Type II at bay.
Blogger Mattman26 said...
I think the lack of clarity on this can't be an accident. ...
The data shouldn't be all that hard to crunch.
6/16/20, 9:45 AM
This is exactly right. You can be both very specific and very vague at the same time. In an era where we should have vasts amounts of information, it's astounding that it is so hard to find any kind of truth - even if it's "we don't know".
It's like an elaborate game of 'simon says...'.
Former NYT reporter Alex Berenson is doing tremendous work on the Covid questions; I'd encourage everyone to look into his articles and tweets. He's also started to write a book, which is being released in serial, pamphlet-type form in order to follow the developing story. Amazingly (or maybe not) his book was rejected without explanation by Amazon. Fortunately Elon Musk got interested and got in touch with Bezos and said, WTF Jeff?, and Bezos relented. I have the first installment where he talks about his initial terror at the virus, along with everyone else, and then his dive into the stats when he saw the incredibly high proportion of deaths occurring in the very elderly. Which made him ask, WTF Media and Authorities, why isn't this the major story?
Damn, why can't they do a NYT-style graphic, with sliding scale arrows for various risk factors?
This is something I posted at Worldometer. The study was as of May 14th based on New York City & state data.
Some key takeaways:
19.9% of the population of New York City had COVID-19 antibodies. With a population of 8,398,748 people in NYC, this percentage would indicate that 1,671,351 people had been infected with SARS-CoV-2 and had recovered as of May 1 in New York City. The number of confirmed cases reported as of May 1 by New York City was 166,883, more than 10 times less.
When analyzing the breakdown of deaths by age and condition, we can observe how, out of 15,230 confirmed deaths in New York City up to May 12, only 690 (4.5% of all deaths) occurred in patients under the age of 65 who did not have an underlying medical condition (or for which it is unknown whether they had or did not have an underlying condition).
Underlying illnesses include Diabetes, Lung Disease, Cancer, Immunodeficiency, Heart Disease, Hypertension, Asthma, Kidney Disease, GI/Liver Disease, and Obesity
So far there has been 1 death every 1,166 people under 65 years old (compared to 1 death every 358 people in the general population). And 89% of the times, the person who died had one or more underlying medical conditions.
And to reach herd immunity for COVID-19 and effectively end the epidemic, approximately two thirds (67%) of the population would need to be infected. As of May 1, New York City is at 20%, based on the antibody study findings.
Therefore, the crude mortality rate has the potential to more than triple from our current estimate, reaching close to 1,000 deaths per 100,000 population (1% CMR), and close to 300 per 100,000 (0.3% CMR) in the population under 65 years old, with 89% of these deaths (267 out of 300) occurring in people with a known underlying medical condition (including obesity).
Coronavirus (COVID-19) Mortality Rate
Informing fat people of their health risks is indeed not fat shaming.
serious question
is it 'slut shaming' to point out; that promiscuous people, that frequently have their sexual relations while drinking... are MUCH more likely to
get STDs
get pregnant
get Aids
get raped
get killed
???
i'm just asking, on account of because that's what the statistics show
lot's of people (here! there! everywhere!) have said that
It's OKAY to infringe on people's civil liberties on account of the Covid virus
[you're Not Just Endangering Yourself! You're Endangering OTHER PEOPLE TOO!!]
but, if a guy (or girl) likes to be barebacked, and likes to have LOTS of partners
we don't do a 'lockdown' on them... Do we?
Nonapod asks: I mean at this point I think most people are fairly aware of what the general risk to them personally would be if they contracted Covid-19. And those that still fail to understand these risks, is more information actually going to encourage them to change their behavior?}}}
Yes. Like so many people, I am in several "ish" categories. As a result I have been moderately careful so far but not fanatical. I am overweight but not yet at 30 BMI. I have asthma but it's so well-controlled I don't even think about it or take meds every day--but when I get a cold I get persistent bronchitis every time. I have Type II diabetes but it's well-controlled with Metformin and so far as I know, no actual bodily functions have been affected. I am in my early 60s.
Now, if I were to find out that asthma like mine--as opposed to those who have had serious attacks in past--is still a significant risk factor, that would cause me great pause. If I were to find out that even those who are moderately overweight are at significant greater risk, ditto.
My hunch, based on gleaned data, is that only morbid obesity is significant, and that only those diabetics whose disease has seriously compromised their health, are actually at high risk. But I don't want to have to guess at these things.
"I am not sure if today the advice is to practice mask theater or not but nobody can seem to make up their minds."
It's reached the stage when I'm not routinely carrying a mask, so when I go in the store I have to root around for a dirty one among the trash on the floor of my car.
It's not about how fat you are but what kind of fat you have. if you have high levels of abdominal fat and fatty liver disease you're much more likely to be vulnerable to the oxidative stress resulting from the cytokine storm of covid-19.
Dr. Lustig (he's the sugar is a poison doctor) of UCSF has a number of really good talks on this where he shows how people of normal body weight have high levels of abdominal fat and fatty liver which you cannot really see externally and they are either diabetic or pre-diabetic or have some form of heart disease and are obviously more susceptible to cancer and other diseases associated with inflammation.
1. How many times more likely is person over 60 to have a co-morbidity.
2. The influenza death numbers are tremendously exaggerated by including non-influenza related pneumonia deaths in the number reported as P&I deaths, and make a poor point of comparison. (you can see this if you look at the morbidity tables on the CDC website.)
If I'm not mistaken, obesity complicates upper respiratory conditions of all kinds -- especially if the weight is carried in the abdomen and chest, causing resistance to breathing when a patient is lying on their backs.
BMI is a particularly misused statistic. It was meant as a herd measure, not as an individual statistic, it's too simplistic for the latter. The fact that the compounding BMI factor for the Kung Flu is >= 40 is probably a reflection of the fact that actual mathematics doesn't respond well to ideological zeal. If you check the history of BMI you will find the weight zealots have pushed normal down to suit their preferences, regardless of the data. So much so that the current "normal range" has a higher premature death rate than the "overweight" range.
Usual BS. Every disease has a mortality rate. However low there is never a zero risk. Obviously the more comorbidities, the greater the chance of dying. All else the same, the older you are, the higher the risk. We can minimize our risk by taking measures to the extent we can and we should. However those measures will not stop us from aging and dying. As for fat shaming, why only fat people? Why not stigmatize people who engage in risky behaviors that also increase the mortality rates?
The five most obese states (number of Covid-19 deaths per million people):
West Virginia (49)
Mississippi (301)
Arkansas (60)
Louisiana (650)
Kentucky (113)
The five least obese states / districts (number of Covid-19 deaths per million people):
Colorado (279)
Washington DC (730)
Hawaii (12)
New Jersey (1439)
Massachusetts (1109)
I figure the CDC made its report confusing but complete, perhaps, for the same reason(s) that gov't education entities make their (lack of) progress reports confusing: they want to hide the fact that they're hiding something.
Here's one from GB that's not confusing, it even has a table of relative health risks (Hazard Ratios) based on various health characteristics...
"Table 2. Hazard Ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for in-hospital COVID-19 death"
I think it really depends on the specific numbers. Suppose normal weight people have a 0.5% chance of dying, overweight people have a 5% chance of dying, obese people have a 25% chance of dying, and morbidly obese people have a 50% chance of dying. And suppose the breakdown is 45:25:20:10. (All numbers made up).
Then by my calculation, the fatality rate for Normal+Overweight+Obese = 7.2% vs a fatality rate of 50% for the morbidly obese, or a ratio of 1:6.9. If we group Obese+Morbidly Obese together, however, then the fatality rate for Normal+Overweight = 2.1%, vs a fatality rate for Obese+Morbidly Obese = 33.3%, or a ratio of 1:15.8. In other words the ratio gets more extreme as we add obese people in.
But it's easy to hypothesise other figures that would lead to the ratio moving in the opposite direction, e.g. if we suppose merely obese people have a fatality rate of 10% rather than 25%. Frankly, the ratios are kind of meaningless standing alone. The absolute fatality rates for each cohort are more important.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/03/covid-19-surgisphere-who-world-health-organization-hydroxychloroquine
"This is exactly right. You can be both very specific and very vague at the same time."
The media will tell you what it wants you to know. This tells you more about the media than about the actual story.
RigelDog (10:00 a.m.), we're in about the same boat. Want to meet at Dairy Queen to discuss?
I have seen some states identify their deaths honestly to the effect of "died while covid-19 positive", which while honest tells you how useless the numbers are. That is the standard used most places. For instance, here in NV we are currently having few die with Covid anymore. Most days will end with zero deaths from Covid, becuase they died of something else, but a few days, or even weeks later their death changes to Covid when the test results come back. They died of something, but were also positive. Of course thousands more are living just fine while positive, but we don't assume they are alive becuase of it.
This is a new and dangerous development in our culture, where open dishonesty is accepted and even demanded by many. It seem almost like a cultural neurosis. Lies are more respected and protected than the truth. The truth is always under assault by some lie trying to dethrone it from our collective conscience. The lies have less trouble staying there one established.
The last two days have produced the lowest number of Covid identified deaths in the US since mid-March, even with testing far more prevalent than before. How many of those deaths were not actually Covid caused? Is anybody actually dying from Covid anymore, even with the complete breakdown of social distancing that has occurred over the last month? If we had accurate information, is it even in the top 50 causes of death. Can we be sure it's more lethal than a pair of roller skates? No. We cannot be sure. Great job, bureaucrats and "experts". You totally botched an easy, but very important question.
"it would show us who should continue the more extreme form of social distancing and who should feel free to get out and about."
Well, yes. Of course, that has been pretty clear from the outset. The early Italian data are no different than what we are seeing now. WuFlu targets some groups, not others, hence targeted steps suffice. But "experts" have been hiding the ball as best they can: they wanted to stir panic and justify lockdowns, in consort with prog politicians. We are all in this together, if we only save one life.
But also, it would show us who should continue the more extreme form of social distancing and who should feel free to get out and about.
Looking to the experts for permission. Good luck. More important than who is likely to die, which seems obviously older and in bad physical condition, is the extreme contagion question. That question will be answered within a month. Politicians and experts already have talking points and speeches prepared. Massive infections, due to opening up to soon. Nothing spectacular, lockdown solved the problem. As mentioned by other here yesterday, NYC tracers told not to ask newly infected if they attended a protest.
Half the US deaths were in nursing homes. Cuomo is not interested in that statistic.
Planned Parenthood does not have em-pathetic appeal as do other PP protocols. Planned Pathogen is in wide demand with near-universal support.
>>it would show us who should continue the more extreme form of social distancing and who should feel free to get out and about.
We already know the answer to this one, Ann.
Protesters and looters: Free
Everybody else: Not free
I think too much emphasis is being put on deaths. This has been a terrible malady for many even when not fatal. I am a man in his early sixties who is overweight but not obese. I am not worried about dying but i sure as hell do not want to catch it. And then there is the fact that I live with a 90 year old with COPD. The media was clear from the outset that it would be fatal for him if he got it from me.
I entered Trump's lottery to win a free trip to the acceptance speech, but if i win i am investing in a hazmat suit. Do they come in hot pink?
DanTheMan,
You misspelled "shock troops" because that is what the "protestors and looters" are.
They are pro-fascists.
The "experts" failures to communicate useful information has been shocking. The incompetence has even exceeded the corruption (which has been huge).
When we get around to doing a post-mortem on all the massive failures in all this add this one to the long list.
I'm still waiting for the 11 million dead because they didn't sanitize their shoes.
Howard said: It's not about how fat you are but what kind of fat you have. if you have high levels of abdominal fat and fatty liver disease you're much more likely to be vulnerable to the oxidative stress resulting from the cytokine storm of covid-19.}}}
If that's the case, I'm in a higher risk category than I thought. I'm extremely well-informed about the problems with carb/sugar intake, metabolic syndrome, fatty liver, abdominal fat, high blood glucose, high triglycerides, high cholesterol, inflammation big old disease-causing mess. So as of last December, my weight (and abdominal fat) was down to almost normal as a result of lower-carb eating and exercise. The holidays put on a few, and then just as I was revving up for the traditional February Get Off the Carbs and On the Treadmill program, Covid hit. Shit.
Blogger Morkoth4682 said...
Surgisphere is another Theranos with fake data,. It was a scam but seemed not to last as long as Elizabeth Holmes. She was prettier
Mattman26 said to me: RigelDog (10:00 a.m.), we're in about the same boat. Want to meet at Dairy Queen to discuss? }}}
Ahhh, Dairy Queen....a blessing and a curse. I don't have a huge sweet-tooth, I'm more vulnerable to pasta/pizza, but I freakin' love Dairy Queen. My favorite is a special request Blizzard with strawberries, banana, and a moderate amount of chopped peanuts.
gilbar asks: but, if a guy (or girl) likes to be barebacked, and likes to have LOTS of partners
we don't do a 'lockdown' on them... Do we? }}
Good point; on point. On a tangent: why does our society continue to pretend that sex can be made "safe" as long as we use the Magic Condom? Better with than without, admittedly, but imagine romancing a potential partner who whispers in your ear that they have active syphilis or HIV--are you going to still be good to go just as long as a condom is used?
“I have seen some states identify their deaths honestly to the effect of "died while covid-19 positive", which while honest tells you how useless the numbers are”
So, should George Floyd’s death be classified as COVVID-19, resulting from police brutality, or something else?
It's not shaming to inform them of the serious health risk. I was very motivated to lose weight when I saw my glucose number go over the line into the "pre-diabetic" range, and I was able to lose 20 pounds with that motivation.
Take off your clothes, Ann! It's not shaming if your doctor informs you. For some passive-aggressive Karen type to couch her disgusting fatbody remarks in a guise of health concern is hazardous as it sounds. As if she can gauge your blood glucose levels by eye.
Seems like middle aged and younger women for the most part aredeathly afraid of catching the deadly covid, certain it will lead to their deaths. Reality is, most people who catch it will live. I turned 65 2 days ago. I'm taking metformin to avoid getting diabetes- it runs in the family. It's doing a good job of keeping my A1C level down.
I'm not worried about dying if I catch it. I'm also not worried about catching it. If I do I do, if I don't I don't. Why aren't I worried? My Vitamin D last checked is 40 ng/ml. I've slightly increased my D intake since then. I practice nasal irrigation daily. Reduces viral load of all kinds, as well as keeping me from being bothered with allergies. I highly recommend it. I've also started gargling every night with warm water and xylitol- which has anti-viral and anti-bacterial properties. The major pathway for the dreaded covid appears to be down the back of the throat into the lungs. Again- reduce the viral load- giving your immune system time to deal with it.
There aren't any medicines that can "cure" it. HCQ, the new steroid study, zinc, whatever- all are simply assists to your immune system. So what you should do to minimize your chance of dying from is not worry about whether you're exposed to it- even with masks and distancing you probably already have been- it's to reduce viral load and keep your immune system primed and ready.
Here's one from GB that's not confusing ...
Link
Two things:
1) Severe obesity usually shows up with diabetes and heart problems. In other words, obesity doesn't help CV-19 kill you, its simply there when other diseases like diabetes lung problems, and Heart disease help CV-19 kill you.
2) Many people with severe obesity have lung problems (more true with men) because all the fat around their stomach and upper torso actually RESTRICTS their breathing and causes impaired lung function. It changes their metobolism and leads to loss of lung capacity.
So, should George Floyd’s death be classified as COVVID-19, resulting from police brutality, or something else?
Drug over dose and hypertensive heart disease.
A preview of the trial of Chauvin.
Assuming Ellison doesn't lynch him, of course.
So....sick people who get sicker are more likely to get sick and die from accumulated sicknesses.
Who knew!!!
The illness of Covid-19 does not scare me at all. I know at least 7 people who have had it, and I've had contact with all them when they were positive. Some pretty close contact with a couple. I don't know anybody who died of it, or anybody who knows anybody who did. One friend who had it was nearly 70 and had just gotten over pneumonia a month before catching Covid. He had zero symptoms while having Covid. The pneumonia was pretty bad, but his Covid was 2 weeks of nothing. Not even a cough. Some people were put in the ICU with very mild symptoms. I don't know the justification for that, but it seems suspicious to me, and possibly financially motivated. How much of that has happened? You get a lot of money for the hospital in ICU, and with a Covid positive test, you can justify it without question.
"Seems like middle aged and younger women for the most part aredeathly afraid of catching the deadly covid, certain it will lead to their deaths"
My sister, 65, just told me that she's obtained 1,000 more gloves. I didn't have any ideas about how to respond to hearing that.
The opening of a very interesting article in today's WSJ:
Six months into the coronavirus crisis, there’s a growing consensus about a central question: How do people become infected?
It’s not common to contract Covid-19 from a contaminated surface, scientists say. And fleeting encounters with people outdoors are unlikely to spread the coronavirus.
Instead, the major culprit is close-up, person-to-person interactions for extended periods. Crowded events, poorly ventilated areas and places where people are talking loudly—or singing, in one famous case—maximize the risk.
These emerging findings are helping businesses and governments devise reopening strategies to protect public health while getting economies going again. That includes tactics like installing plexiglass barriers, requiring people to wear masks in stores and other venues, using good ventilation systems and keeping windows open when possible.
Two recent large studies showed that wide-scale lockdowns—stay-at-home orders, bans on large gatherings and business closures—prevented millions of infections and deaths around the world. Now, with more knowledge in hand, cities and states can deploy targeted interventions to keep the virus from taking off again, scientists and public health experts said.
That means better protections for nursing-home residents and multigenerational families living in crowded conditions, they said. It also means stressing physical distancing and masks, and reducing the number of gatherings in enclosed spaces.
Yes, the risk to a non-obese, no underlying-condition person from 'Rona is LESS than the seasonal flu.
I'm not going to show my work. I'm tired of idiots in this country who cannot do math.
Also herd immunity is not 67% or whatever with this virus, just as it's not 67% with a new variety of the flu.
This is not small pox nor is it measles.
It is clear from NYC, cruise ships and other contained areas that the maximum infected percentage tops out around 20-25%. Note that when NYC hit 20%, new cases dropped like a rock.
The rest of people are innately immune for whatever reason.
Are there fat Chinese? How about Italians where it hit so hard.
Gospace---how do you do the nasal irrigation? I've got a lot of the pressurized saline canisters that I purchased last year after getting sinus surgery, as part of the recovery protocol. Would they help?
RigelDog: Penn Jillette lost 100-pounds in three months or so. His book Presto explains how. He recently did Joe Rogan. He ate nothing but potatoes and was losing more than a pound per day.
Skinny is the new Black. Good luck.
DavidUW- I'm tired of idiots in this country who cannot do math.
It ain't just this country, IYKWIM.
Readering @ 5:17- yes, interesting notes. I'm very curious whether the lockdowns "prevented" infections and deaths, or just delayed them. I live in OR where the impact of the Coronivirus has been minimal (~3% infection rate of those tested and a little over 3% have died). We have seen an increase in new cases over the last 5 to 7 days, but no significant increase in either hospitalizations or deaths. Are we getting better at treating those infected?
Lockdowns only delayed them.
We can see this in California.
Here's the deal. The maximum infectable percentage for this virus is around 25%. family studies in China show a maximum of 27% transmitted amongst people who live together/in proximity.
This percentage is adjusted downward for lower household size and lower population density (and mass transit use).
Lockdowns don't matter. Density and household size do. Logically this should make sense, and indeed has been the case for every major plague except for the most infectious of agents (measles and small pox, but maybe they would have if they didn't infect 95% of the non-resistant population).
But no one can reason a priori anymore and I'm utterly disgusted by it. This mass panic is quite possibly the largest display of mass stupidity since Europe deciding to commit mass suicide by revving up WWI over a bumble**** country like Serbia.
RigelDog said...
Gospace---how do you do the nasal irrigation? I've got a lot of the pressurized saline canisters that I purchased last year after getting sinus surgery, as part of the recovery protocol. Would they help?
I don't know about the pressurized saline canisters. Never seen them.
Through the Amazon portal to help support Ann you can buy h2ofloss. It comes with all the necessary attachments. Relatively inexpensive. With daily use last me about 2 years. Mixture- 1 tsp salt, 1/2 tsp baking soda to about a pint of warm water. Doesn't need to be exact. I also use a tsp of xylitol, makes it a little more soothing and the antiviral properties. Without the salt and baking soda it will hurt. Or burn. When doing it you tilt your held a little bit forward and it flows up one side and down the other.
And I recently purchased a Navage. I bought 2- I keep one at work. Very convenient. I mix the xylitol with warm water (xylitol isn't included in their pods) and pour it in to the line. It pumps the solution in one side and suctions it out the other. They have videos. It's faster and less sloppy.
I've never used a Neti pot- and to be honest, I wouldn't recommend bothering with one. There's a whole bunch of different products available. I can tell you that since I started it over a decade ago I have't used antihistamines at all. I used to need them just to barely breathe at some times of year, and there was always the "rebound effect" when they wore off. I also haven't suffered from colds or flu. I've had a few colds- I just increase to twice or 3X a day. And symptoms are gone within 3 days.
DavidUW said... [hush][hide comment]
Also herd immunity is not 67% or whatever with this virus, just as it's not 67% with a new variety of the flu.
This is not small pox nor is it measles.
It is clear from NYC, cruise ships and other contained areas that the maximum infected percentage tops out around 20-25%. Note that when NYC hit 20%, new cases dropped like a rock.
The rest of people are innately immune for whatever reason.
Real world info. Meanwhile, expert, scientists alarmists and politicians are working on "proof" that they saved the world in order to head off low volume of new infections after massive world wide shoulder to shoulder breathe in your face protests. Readering helpfully provides a sample of spin to come.
Naturally, should extraordinary infections occur, the experts already have facts, figures and studies to prove it was not due to protests they encouraged, but rather to hairdressers, bars, restaurants, barbershops and Trump.
Obesity and diabetes pre-dispose to a lot of things. The thing is people can do something about those conditions, but lately we seem to be trying to stop any intervention on behalf of the obese so we don't hurt their feelings. News flash - mortality and disease do not care about the feelings of unhealthy people.
Vitamin D is my go to defense while on the losing weight path. My doctor has been having me take large doses for years because he wants the blood reading to be in the 80-100 ng/mL range, although I have not yet been able to get it there. Doing this has markedly decreased the duration and severity of winter colds (of which I had 3 mild ones this year, and I assume one of them was Covid).
Most of the data we're getting on Covid is being conveyed by the scientifically illiterate, especially the media. The number of positive tests is a meaningless statistic. The key numbers in terms of how things are going are number of hospitalizations and number of deaths per 100,000. As long as those continue on a downward trend, things are getting better. The reality when looking at the daily graphs of deaths is that Covid probably peaked somewhere around late March to early April depending on region and has been declining since.
One thing that is noticeable is that the curves of daily deaths are not symmetric - the right side of the curve is a gentler slope than the left side, suggesting that the curve was flattened, but which raises the question of whether it's wise to keep flattening it, since the ultimate effect now is to delay the end. Remember, the original theory was that the same number would ultimately be infected, the main difference was how fast those infections would come and whether they would overwhelm the healthcare system.
Readering,
"I think too much emphasis is being put on deaths"
People like to cite that figure because it's probably the hardest to game, though it is still subject to the -with vs -from issue.
"Two recent large studies showed that wide-scale lockdowns—-stay-at-home orders, bans on large gatherings and business closures—-prevented millions of infections and deaths around the world."
They showed no such thing (but such a claim in the WSJ does show how worthless even the WSJ has become.) How could a retrospective study, which by its nature does not have even the slightest hint of a control group, possibly show that? DavidUW's comment is apropos here ("But no one can reason a priori anymore") though you could even leave out "a priori" and still have it be applicable.
And here is the simple reason why the CDC doesn't count lesser forms of obesity as a definite factor: most older people are fat. And yet, these lesser forms, which I'm sure you find aesthetically offensive, did not have a higher rate of death compared respiratory ailments, heart conditions and diabetes.
A thin man with a heart condition...a third more likely to die.
A thin woman with diabetes, 50%.
BUT...all those conditions are associated with lesser forms of obesity.
This sounds like another case of wanting to use Covid fear to run one's own hobby horse.
Madam Althouse. You are a twig. Worry about yourself instead of riding that hobby horse.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा