Covid-19 Discussion

Well i agree that we should leave smokers alone despite its fatalities because its just some more authoritarian horseshit but i mean the old P forum literally had pages on how to bully gun owners that was well loved by a large assortment of some sadistic lunatics that you were mixed in with. It's all partisan BS.

Yeah my once a month drop ins are highly energy intensive.

What is morally wrong with bullying both gun owners and smokers?

Trolly however takes the moral high ground on bullying activity unless he bullies a group of people he personally dislikes.

Exactly, so any are you so convinced you're having some negative effect on my mental health?

You're not.

your source says being obese is 1.3x the risk, diabetic 1.3x the risk (multiplicative), and both conditions in the vast majority of cases are self inflicted by simply making horrible life choices.

and most other health conditions are at least somewhat correlated with lifestyle as well so having done a lot of bad **** for 50y clearly could have much more than doubled your COVID risk.

in a normal society, that is your problems and no one else would give a ****. in a normal society you pay the full cost of your healthcare, and no one ever has to change anything to accomodate your health.

but we life in collectivist , fascist societies

while obese, diabetic, people didn't right? people with cardiovascular comordibotiesnlinked to their lack of exercise their whole life because they like to watch tv on the couch? that's the takeaway?

we only go fascist against some behavior, even if some other behaviors have identical effects, but we excuse that because your voters are potato bags?

Not vaccinated ones, no. Hope that helped.

You would also note that not all comorbidities are caused by choices.

And getting vaccinated is a one step process that requires less than a minute, which is quite unlike the lifestyle change you are suggesting. It's difficult to read your ignorant bigoted bullcrap without feeling nauseous. Just thought you should know that.

Yes, and you appeared to have missed the point about how age turns those risk factors into rounding errors:

40-49 2.2x
50-64 4.3x
65-74 6.7x
75-84 8.5x
85+ 10.6x

man that isn't a rounding error lol.

it means a 53y old when obese and diabetic risks like a 75y old more or less (from American data).

keep in mind the first 4x is what makes it "not completely irrelevant from all pov", the base risk is non distinguishable from 0, there's at least in Italy not a single person under50 died in excess, which means "a lot less risky than the flu" for that age group (this was pre vaccine in 2020).

you start having a vaguely non 0 risk over 50 (maybe in the USA a tad sooner sure).

so x1.7 from that (which is higher actually as when obese and diabetic you will have other comorbidities more often as well) is exceptionally high as an amount, completely not a rounding error, *from your own data*

if you reweight risk factors starting at 50, you can understand that i mean, the only reason you seems to think obesity is a rounding error is that a 45 year old risks so little anyway, the fact that's 5x a 20y old or whatever it is exactly looks "big".

but just because the risk at 20 is utterly insignificant to begin with

The risk ratio for 75+ is 8.5x and 85+ is 10.6x - they represented the vast majority of deaths from COVID-19. Those RR's are 6.5x and 8x greater than the 1.3x lifestyle/health issue ratios you quoted, yet you persist with your narrative about being forced to stay home because of people in the latter group.

Like most narratives the one you're presenting is not supported by objective facts.

Again:

1) It's often 1.7x, not 1.3x. Why? because more than 80% of type 2 diabetics (by far the most common type) are overweight or obese in the USA. So it'x 1.3x obese x 1.3 diabetic. Type 2 diabete is a behavioral condition, if you eat and exercise and in general live properly, it's exceedingly rare.

Obesity causes type 2 diabete

https://newsroom.heart.org/news/obesity-...

2) Diabetic obese people almost always develop *other comorbidites as well*, because of that original , entirely behavioral in the vast majority of cases, condition. It's a very well known and studied cascade of health disasters basically, all started by bad (for health) behavior.

And each one of these additional comorbidities is , again, multiplicative of risk for covid. Obese people are at 20x (yes twenty times, 19.44 odds ratio) the risk of having hypertension as well.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/article....

You can quickly understand how the average obese has far far far greater multiplier than 1.3. The study you cited identifies obesity vs non obesity controlling for everything else, to get the increased risk for that specific condition.

But when a condition CAUSALLY determines a lot of other conditions that contribute to risk, that grotesquely minimizes the risk impact of obesity, correct?

//

As for why we got violently ordered to stay at home, in theory it isn't either about obese or otherwise unhealthy-because-of-lifestyle people, or because of old people. It was because of fascist politicians, given that the existence of people at risk from covid in the population doesn't in any way justify any freedom limitation to those not at risk to begin with, in non-fascist models of society.

In paternalist models, which can be non-fascist, you can find some justification for freedom limitations for the at-risk people. But there is never any justification to remove freedom of kids in order to improve the health of someone else if you aren't very very fascist, you never even think of doing something to a kid if it doesn't benefit the kid directly, obviously.

That said, how did the fascists convince the fascist-leaning but not extremist people, of the necessity of lockdowns? by grotesquely exaggerating the purported risks for the population at large. And how did they do that? by claiming young people were dying as well or spending weeks tortured in ICU and so on.

And how where they able to claim that? did they lie completly about relatively young people suffering a lot from covid? no, there was a kernel of truth. And what was that kernel of truth? that under 50 in *horrible health* were actually a tad at risk anyway. So you read "38 year old dies after a month in ICU", and only 1 newspaper among 30 tells you he was 180 kilos, and stuff like that.

How do we know that? because with some delay italian national health institute reported on covid deaths in great detail. There was a morbid interest in the deaths of the under 50 (being so exceptionally rare compared to the rest), they actually checked each and every one of their clinical records for a while. And basically not one among them was in normal health. There were the super-rare ultra-immunodepressed for genetical or otherwise acquired conditions, and the obese with multiple additional comorbidites (often severe mental illness among other things).

SO WRAPPING IT UP

A) obesity and unhealthy lifestyles in general actually matter a lot more than the 1.3x you took , from your own sources, for the reason explained, in determined covid risk

B) Those individuals (and the very rare otherwise immunodepressed) dying or spending weeks intubated mattered disproportionately to concoct the narrative that "covid actually is very risky for everyone" so "we are on the same boat" so we can justify armed militaries in the streets stopping you from going out of home without a legal justification.

This even if it was *blatantly clear to any rational observer already in march 2020* after diamond princess and Bergamo that normal health under 50 people could simply consider covid as absolutely insignificant, to the "maybe i lost 1-2 days of life expectancy by it's arrival at most" level.

the obese and the otherwise unhealthy for behavioural reasons skewed under50 risk perception a tad, and that small amount gave cover to the fascists

From what I am reading, obesity tripled the risk of hospitalization from covid. https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/obesity...

Yes that's approx what you get by not controlling for comorbidities.

1.3x for obesity is only when you remove the effect of diabetes, hypertension and everything else.

For other confounding factors, that's the sensible way to assess risk.

But given obesity CAUSES most of the other comorbidities... you get 1.3x basically by looking only at the healthiest among obese people. Obese people who do not develop ANY additional comorbidity, are STILL at 1.3x increased risk. But almost all of them develop at least one other comorbidity, often more, because of obesity.

"Don't be a dick to smokers"

Here is you, Trolly actively rooting for people to die / dying because they don't think the way you do.

Not that I really care one way or another how much of a dick you are, not once have I ever whined to a mod about it in or ever made a comment on this forum about it. But quite funny using that as a moral high ground against me, meanwhile rooting for people to die.

LMFAO.

Obese people are in a constant state of inflammation, they also have weakened immune systems.

Correct.

Normalizing obesity is unfortunate.

Be careful Luciom, talking about obesity is a sensitive subject since adult Americans are like 40% obese and who knows which poster you are talking to fits the bill.

My obese friend lost 30 lbs in a month just going on a salad and nuts diet. It's like the easiest thing in the world to do if people had any discipline whatsoever.

btw unlike you wrt smoking, i am not suggesting or implying any state violence toward overeaters.

I am just pointing out the obscene , grotesque, incoherent take of the lockdown fascists, even inside their own wicked models where you can sacrifice individual freedoms for the "greater good of the fatherland health", they only pick and choose which freedoms depending on who they like to punish (thus proving the whole exercise is about a will to abuse people as the end, not the mean to an end)

You're wasting time on fractions. Here's the big picture you're missing:

75% deaths were 65+

Source: https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nvss/vsrr/covid...

I am not missing it (and in countries that actually locked down, it's even more skewed).

Try to read what I wrote, the low amount of not elders dying was enough, and countries would have never locked down if the masses weren't convinced normal health, normal age people were at significant risk too.

And they convinced of that because of the normal age obese (and otherwise unhealthy for behavioral reasons) people skewed under 50 mortality (which was negligible for normal health under 50 in Europe)

1) I am talking actual lockdowns, the USA locked down less than most others
2) in Europe the proportion of under50 who died as a % of total was even more skewed (lower)
3) Europeans have far lower obesity rates among the under 50 in particular
4) I am talking 2020 only, pre vaccines

Topic is you disagree with my take that the rare under50 who died in italy, who was almost always particularly weak for behavioral reasons, was the reason the state managed to convince people violent fascist lockdowns were appropriate for COVID.

It's fine you can disagree, you can claim that even with 99% of the deaths among the over65 (which is what would have been the case if everyone under65 had no behavioral health issues) Italy would have locked down everyone for 72 days anyway with militaries in the streets.

But I don't understand your other comments, it's like you are not reading what I am saying.

I am not missing any forest. I am saying the small amount of 3, packs a day, and/or obese, and/or "no fresh vegetables, coke everyday" and/or "drug abusers" under50 who died of COVID, are the reasons they managed to locked down everyone.

And you're basing this on what?

On the media coverage in Italy in late march and early April 2020.

Easter was early April (8th of April iirc) and there were talks to open up significantly after that (because the economic hecatombe of lockdowns was becoming clear), as other countries did (Norway, Denmark etc), governative media started pushing the "the youngs are dying too!!!!" fake narrative 24/7 for like 10 days.

And most media followed because there were monstrous sums being given to the media by the government at the time under the excuse of the necessity to buy spaces to inform the population about covid, so if you didn't follow the gvmnt line you would lose all those freebies.

If that's what you believe then why do you keep quoting obesity statistics and mortality from COVID-19 for those < 50, if the Italian government mortality for that age group was fabricated anyway?