ImageImageImageImageImage

Official Covid-19 Discussion Thread

Moderators: Morris_Shatford, 7 Footer, DG88, niQ, Duffman100, tsherkin, Reeko, lebron stopper, HiJiNX

User avatar
Kevin Willis
RealGM
Posts: 12,684
And1: 8,097
Joined: Apr 17, 2009
       

Re: Official Covid-19 Discussion Thread 

Post#381 » by Kevin Willis » Tue Apr 28, 2020 4:41 pm

tecumseh18 wrote:
Fairview4Life wrote:Yeah good call. Smallpox killed half a billion people in a hundred years, until we effectively eradicated it.

Vaccines are the greatest public health advancement in human history. The only competition is like the sewer system or something. But, you know, you watched a youtube video and think that it's other people who are the sheep.


Look at the updated NYC daath stats as of today . https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/doh/downloads/pdf/imm/covid-19-daily-data-summary-deaths-04272020-1.pdf

The obvious "vaccine" against this virus is metabolic health. Even real vaccines are much less effective when people are not metabolically healthy. Nutrition and weight loss are the short and long-term answers. Government's role here shouldn't be to hand out vaccine patents and further enrich Big Pharma, but to tax garbage food and subsidize real food for the poor. This debate is becoming front page news in the UK.

Read on Twitter
/photo/1

Vit. D deficiency also appears to be a major risk factor, which is why it's hitting non-whites in northern climes particularly hard.

[edit] Also, we need masks. Masks have to be mandatory for going outside - work/shopping - or to Raptor games. :pray:


This is my concern with the virus, if users that have built up antibodies can still have it come back then it will not be useful for the entire population until they find out which sub-group has it flaring up again. Not saying we don't need a vaccine, just wondering it's overall effectiveness.

In terms of nutrition, that of course is very important. That's why southern states are getting hit so hard because of their diets. However communities in the mediterranean are also getting hit pretty bad and they have the fabled mediterranean diet. In India and certain parts of China there are those saying eating certain foods would stop coronavirus but medical professionals are warning against that. Vitamin D boosts immune system, that's been proven so there is something there that a strong Vitamin D diet would be beneficial but not a cure-all.
When Chuck Norris was born the doc said "Congratulations, its a man"
User avatar
hankscorpioLA
RealGM
Posts: 10,528
And1: 10,007
Joined: Dec 15, 2011

Re: Official Covid-19 Discussion Thread 

Post#382 » by hankscorpioLA » Tue Apr 28, 2020 4:42 pm

refshateRaps wrote:
hankscorpioLA wrote:
M3tro wrote:
No, you're a sheep for blindly following the directives of our health "experts" and politicians. The same people who I've heard talk out of both sides of their mouth in the last 4 weeks; the same people who left the cupboard completely bare in regards to PPE for every Canadian; the same people who have a massacre on their hands in all of our LTC homes. And now you want me to support these people and their plan for forcing vaccinations and immunity passports? Baaaaaaaaa!!

Critical thinking is a very important life skill. Try it sometime.


Critical thinking requires an individual to be educated on a subject.

Doesn't seem to apply to the overwhelming majority of anti-vaxxers.




To state the 'overwhelming majority' of those questioning the blanket need or who is behind these vaccines are uneducated is not only false it is disrespectful. In the same light it is not reasonable for the other side to call the majority pro-vaxxers uneducated, blind sheep.

Trying to generalize the lowest form of the other side of the discussion or debate to be the norm as a tool to discredit and flex an egotistic muscle is weak.


I'm sorry...was I unclear?

Based on the overwhelming evidence in favor of vaccination, it is not possible to be both informed on the subject and against vaccination.

Anti-vaxxers have no more legitimate basis for their beliefs than do flat earthers or Holocaust deniers.
The absurd mystery of the strange forces of existence.
User avatar
hankscorpioLA
RealGM
Posts: 10,528
And1: 10,007
Joined: Dec 15, 2011

Re: Official Covid-19 Discussion Thread 

Post#383 » by hankscorpioLA » Tue Apr 28, 2020 4:52 pm

Kevin Willis wrote:
tecumseh18 wrote:
Fairview4Life wrote:Yeah good call. Smallpox killed half a billion people in a hundred years, until we effectively eradicated it.

Vaccines are the greatest public health advancement in human history. The only competition is like the sewer system or something. But, you know, you watched a youtube video and think that it's other people who are the sheep.


Look at the updated NYC daath stats as of today . https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/doh/downloads/pdf/imm/covid-19-daily-data-summary-deaths-04272020-1.pdf

The obvious "vaccine" against this virus is metabolic health. Even real vaccines are much less effective when people are not metabolically healthy. Nutrition and weight loss are the short and long-term answers. Government's role here shouldn't be to hand out vaccine patents and further enrich Big Pharma, but to tax garbage food and subsidize real food for the poor. This debate is becoming front page news in the UK.

Read on Twitter
/photo/1

Vit. D deficiency also appears to be a major risk factor, which is why it's hitting non-whites in northern climes particularly hard.

[edit] Also, we need masks. Masks have to be mandatory for going outside - work/shopping - or to Raptor games. :pray:


This is my concern with the virus, if users that have built up antibodies can still have it come back then it will not be useful for the entire population until they find out which sub-group has it flaring up again. Not saying we don't need a vaccine, just wondering it's overall effectiveness.

In terms of nutrition, that of course is very important. That's why southern states are getting hit so hard because of their diets. However communities in the mediterranean are also getting hit pretty bad and they have the fabled mediterranean diet. In India and certain parts of China there are those saying eating certain foods would stop coronavirus but medical professionals are warning against that. Vitamin D boosts immune system, that's been proven so there is something there that a strong Vitamin D diet would be beneficial but not a cure-all.


Not sure what the great mystery is here. Generally speaking, people who eat a healthier diet have better overall health outcomes. It follows logically that they would have better outcomes from COVID-19.

It is also generally well understood that, broadly speaking, healthy eating correlates positively with income. Poorer people generally eat a less healthy diet because fatty foods cost less per calorie. You can tax it all you want, that isn't going to change.

So while this is all good advice, it's not really a viable basis for public health policy in the midst of a pandemic.
The absurd mystery of the strange forces of existence.
Ackshun
General Manager
Posts: 8,874
And1: 4,767
Joined: Jul 24, 2006

Re: Official Covid-19 Discussion Thread 

Post#384 » by Ackshun » Tue Apr 28, 2020 5:00 pm

hankscorpioLA wrote:
It is also generally well understood that, broadly speaking, healthy eating correlates positively with income. Poorer people generally eat a less healthy diet because fatty foods cost less per calorie. You can tax it all you want, that isn't going to change.


Wrong.

The UK implemented a sugar tax on their soda industry a few years back. It has been successful in lowering sales of sodas with high sugar content.

I tried a PEPSI ZERO or whatever it's called, and trust me, it's everywhere out there because of the cost effectiveness to the supply chain. It brought about innovation in the sector with the creation of thousands of low-sugar lines.

This isn't overnight, but it's one example of why a tax will, in the long-term, have a positive impact on diets.
User avatar
Kevin Willis
RealGM
Posts: 12,684
And1: 8,097
Joined: Apr 17, 2009
       

Re: Official Covid-19 Discussion Thread 

Post#385 » by Kevin Willis » Tue Apr 28, 2020 5:00 pm

SFour wrote:Dr. Theresa Tam...Canada's Chief Public Health Officer

The person that told us not to wear masks while every doctor/nurse and person in China was doing so....told us not to implement travel restrictions early on because the WHO didn't recommend travel bans, and lastly dismissed that travelers returning from virus hot zones should be self-isolated for 14 days.

oh and she also advised Canadians not to retreat to rural properties such as cottages....meanwhile Trudeau and his family were enjoying themselves up in their cottage.

what a joke....how the **** is she Canada's top doctor



Dr. Tam is not perfect, but she's not bad. Very few are Dr. Fauci who is a superstar in immunology. The problem is he has a government that doesn't listen to him fully. Very few countries have both working at peak levels, closest might be Taiwan.

Dr. Tam's issue is that she has strong faith in the WHO and acts on their recommendations. But if you're going to follow an organization, WHO seems credible so it's hard to blame her for doing that.

She advised to not go to cottage. Trudeau was under quarantine and went to cottage after it was over. I believe that's less dangerous than injecting yourself with bleach. Stick with how she's performing at her job which is not bad given the gravity of her position.
When Chuck Norris was born the doc said "Congratulations, its a man"
User avatar
Salted Meat
Starter
Posts: 2,489
And1: 1,572
Joined: Jun 27, 2007

Re: Official Covid-19 Discussion Thread 

Post#386 » by Salted Meat » Tue Apr 28, 2020 5:36 pm

Ackshun wrote:
hankscorpioLA wrote:
It is also generally well understood that, broadly speaking, healthy eating correlates positively with income. Poorer people generally eat a less healthy diet because fatty foods cost less per calorie. You can tax it all you want, that isn't going to change.


Wrong.

The UK implemented a sugar tax on their soda industry a few years back. It has been successful in lowering sales of sodas with high sugar content.

I tried a PEPSI ZERO or whatever it's called, and trust me, it's everywhere out there because of the cost effectiveness to the supply chain. It brought about innovation in the sector with the creation of thousands of low-sugar lines.

This isn't overnight, but it's one example of why a tax will, in the long-term, have a positive impact on diets.


Pepsi Zero still has aspartame though, which is not only a known carcinogen, but artificial sweeteners are actually shown to not only *not* increase weight loss, but actually contribute to weight gain and obesity.
Vaclac
Junior
Posts: 300
And1: 182
Joined: Mar 18, 2018

Re: Official Covid-19 Discussion Thread 

Post#387 » by Vaclac » Tue Apr 28, 2020 6:08 pm

omar36 wrote:
VintageVince wrote:
Raps in 4 wrote:Germany just made wearing masks in public mandatory as they start to re-open the economy. Remember when some folks (and our government) were saying masks were useless a few weeks ago because Asian doctors didn't know what they were talking about?



I think they very well knew it was good to wear masks, they intentionally told the public that it was not necessary because there was a shortage of masks, and they wanted the healthcare workers to get the masks first instead of Bob and Billy stock piling on masks and selling them on Kijiji.

I don't think our government is as stupid as we think.



yup and there was general worry that ppl would think masks = no need to distance. Masks/gloves are great but so is just not being around ppl if u dont have too.

makes sense to make it mandatory u know if we had enough masks for everyone but do we? my mom gets a few extra masks from the hospitals and thats what her and I use when we go out. outside that, i had a hard time finding them. gloves easier tho


I think this is clearly true - the more blunt word for intentionally telling the public what they knew not to be true would be lying. I'm not shocked that public officials would lie, but I am shocked by how accepting of it most people are. How contemptuous do you have to be of your fellow citizens to think it is best for leaders to make a habit of lying to all of us because they think it is in our best interest, rather than tell people the truth and advise them specifically about the concerns, such as saving medical grade masks for medical professionals? Heck, you could make an emergency order that gives a hefty fine for a non-healthcare worker using a medical grade mask - that would still be much better more honest policy.
Clearly an acceptance by people that leaders should lie to us all, in our best interest of course, will lead to an abuse of power. But even if you think politicians are 100% pure-hearted and genuinely trying to do what's best for us without any concerns for themselves whatsoever, it would still be wrong to passively accept them lying to us, because they are able to make better decisions if they receive feedback that is based on truth. You can't have a debate that produces better policy if politicians can just lie and have no one care about it.
Fairview4Life
RealGM
Posts: 70,292
And1: 34,109
Joined: Jul 25, 2005
     

Re: Official Covid-19 Discussion Thread 

Post#388 » by Fairview4Life » Tue Apr 28, 2020 6:08 pm

Let’s do this when it stops snowing.

Read on Twitter
9. Similarly, IF THOU HAST SPENT the entire offseason predicting that thy team will stink, thou shalt not gloat, nor even be happy, shouldst thou turn out to be correct. Realistic analysis is fine, but be a fan first, a smug smarty-pants second.
Vaclac
Junior
Posts: 300
And1: 182
Joined: Mar 18, 2018

Re: Official Covid-19 Discussion Thread 

Post#389 » by Vaclac » Tue Apr 28, 2020 6:36 pm

Fairview4Life wrote:Let’s do this when it stops snowing.

Read on Twitter


Cool idea, makes sense to try to do things outside as much as possible. Seems people here have resisted even closing a few streets to allow people to walk not on crowded sidewalks, so I don't hold out much hope, but would be great.
I do wonder logistically how this works... how do the restaurants get their deliveries? Do they take the tables in each night and have the deliveries scheduled for early morning?
tecumseh18
RealGM
Posts: 19,131
And1: 11,371
Joined: Feb 20, 2006
Location: Big green house
 

Re: Official Covid-19 Discussion Thread 

Post#390 » by tecumseh18 » Tue Apr 28, 2020 6:45 pm

Salted Meat wrote:
Ackshun wrote:
hankscorpioLA wrote:
It is also generally well understood that, broadly speaking, healthy eating correlates positively with income. Poorer people generally eat a less healthy diet because fatty foods cost less per calorie. You can tax it all you want, that isn't going to change.


Wrong.

The UK implemented a sugar tax on their soda industry a few years back. It has been successful in lowering sales of sodas with high sugar content.

I tried a PEPSI ZERO or whatever it's called, and trust me, it's everywhere out there because of the cost effectiveness to the supply chain. It brought about innovation in the sector with the creation of thousands of low-sugar lines.

This isn't overnight, but it's one example of why a tax will, in the long-term, have a positive impact on diets.


Pepsi Zero still has aspartame though, which is not only a known carcinogen, but artificial sweeteners are actually shown to not only *not* increase weight loss, but actually contribute to weight gain and obesity.


:( :roll: :noway: :nonono: :banghead:

Rant below:

Spoiler:
Honestly, it's like I live on a different planet. One where people consciously choose to eat what evolution has designed for us to eat over a couple of million years. Call it Planet Paleo. And on this planet, we're not looking at over 50-75% of people becoming diabetic or pre-diabetic (HbA1C> 5.6) in the next few years and eventually overwhelming the health care system. And we don't die from the Covid-19 virus, or demand that society be shut down and millions thrown out of work because we might.

F your Pepsi! F your Pepsi Zero/Max! Food isn't a toy, it's something that is supposed to provide sustenance, ffs!


Anyways, hell yes, properly targeted taxes work. But as Dr. Malhotra (the author of the front page Daily Telegraph article quoted above) says, there should also be a subsidy for the poor to be able to afford real food. We already have this to some extent with the HST in Ontario, which is not imposed on unprocessed foods, but that can be made more robust Not sure if warning labels work, but the US trade negotiators (backed up by Big Sugar) sure tried to ban them during the NAFTA renegotiation.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/20/world/americas/nafta-food-labels-obesity.html
User avatar
ItsDanger
RealGM
Posts: 28,792
And1: 25,994
Joined: Nov 01, 2008

Re: Official Covid-19 Discussion Thread 

Post#391 » by ItsDanger » Tue Apr 28, 2020 6:52 pm

"I hope we don't get so many people infected that we actually have that herd immunity" Dr Tony (Vaccine or Bust) Fauci.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4866591/user-clip-dr-fauci-hoping-infected-actual-herd-immunity

Can some high IQ reporter please ask him what % he would consider as "background immunity"? Also, this guy has been there 30+ years and still doesn't have a solution for HIV, time for some new blood (after hyping it up). Wouldn't call him a superstar, if anything he's just another government lifer.
Organization can be defined as an organized body of people with a particular purpose. Not random.
Fairview4Life
RealGM
Posts: 70,292
And1: 34,109
Joined: Jul 25, 2005
     

Re: Official Covid-19 Discussion Thread 

Post#392 » by Fairview4Life » Tue Apr 28, 2020 7:25 pm

I mean...herd immunity means we’d need what, 80% (some estimates I’ve seen) of the population to have recovered from an infection? That means a whole lot of dead people. So not sure why it’s crazy to think “natural” herd immunity via infecting a huge swath of the population before a vaccine is produced, isn’t something to hope for.

We also have little idea what the current infection rate is or what reinfection rates are.
9. Similarly, IF THOU HAST SPENT the entire offseason predicting that thy team will stink, thou shalt not gloat, nor even be happy, shouldst thou turn out to be correct. Realistic analysis is fine, but be a fan first, a smug smarty-pants second.
User avatar
Badonkadonk
General Manager
Posts: 7,937
And1: 12,548
Joined: Jul 11, 2012

Re: Official Covid-19 Discussion Thread 

Post#393 » by Badonkadonk » Tue Apr 28, 2020 7:27 pm

ItsDanger wrote:"I hope we don't get so many people infected that we actually have that herd immunity" Dr Tony (Vaccine or Bust) Fauci.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4866591/user-clip-dr-fauci-hoping-infected-actual-herd-immunity

Can some high IQ reporter please ask him what % he would consider as "background immunity"? Also, this guy has been there 30+ years and still doesn't have a solution for HIV, time for some new blood (after hyping it up). Wouldn't call him a superstar, if anything he's just another government lifer.

Full quote for context, since this seems strategically clipped:

Q I’m following up Dr. Fauci’s comment earlier about what it’s like going to be coming back to normal and until there’s a vaccine that — there’ll be gradual steps towards restoring normalcy.

Under that — you know, short of a vaccine — does putting 80,000 people, fans, spectators in a sports stadium or 25,000 politicos in an arena for a political convention this summer make a lot of sense? Do those sorts of things require a vaccine to fully protect the American populace?

DR. FAUCI: No, I don’t think that you’re going to have to say that the country cannot get back to a real degree of normalcy until you absolutely have a safe and effective vaccine. It will be really evaluating the kinds of things.

And that’s the reason why — it was discussed up here — why it’s so important to have an antibody test so you know what the penetrance is in society. And then we have a situation where we don’t ever want to get to have to mitigate. We want to be able to contain. And by the time we have to face what’s going to happen with this going back to normality, we will have in place the capability of identifying, isolating, contact tracing so that it never gets out of hand.

Ultimately, the showstopper will be obviously a vaccine where you can vaccinate people and you won’t have it. There’s going to be another issue that’s going to be important and it has to do with somewhat of a comparison, for example, with influenza.

We go through multiple cycles of influenza. There’s always a degree of background immunity in the population. I mean, that will ultimately happen if we get a situation where we get back to normal.

Now, I hope we don’t have so many people infected that we actually have that herd immunity, but I think it would have to be different than it is right now.

So, again, remember, when you say “normalcy” — I mean, we could get back normally, economically and otherwise, without necessarily saying we’re going to forget about the virus. We have to pay attention to this because we’ve had a very bad experience with this virus.

Also, forum heroes questioning the credentials of people like Dr. Fauci is just hilarious. Sorry you think he should have done better vs. AIDS, but facts are facts and his standing in his own community is beyond reproach.

https://www.niaid.nih.gov/about/anthony-s-fauci-md-bio
Image
Ackshun
General Manager
Posts: 8,874
And1: 4,767
Joined: Jul 24, 2006

Re: Official Covid-19 Discussion Thread 

Post#394 » by Ackshun » Tue Apr 28, 2020 7:59 pm

Salted Meat wrote:
Ackshun wrote:
hankscorpioLA wrote:
It is also generally well understood that, broadly speaking, healthy eating correlates positively with income. Poorer people generally eat a less healthy diet because fatty foods cost less per calorie. You can tax it all you want, that isn't going to change.


Wrong.

The UK implemented a sugar tax on their soda industry a few years back. It has been successful in lowering sales of sodas with high sugar content.

I tried a PEPSI ZERO or whatever it's called, and trust me, it's everywhere out there because of the cost effectiveness to the supply chain. It brought about innovation in the sector with the creation of thousands of low-sugar lines.

This isn't overnight, but it's one example of why a tax will, in the long-term, have a positive impact on diets.


Pepsi Zero still has aspartame though, which is not only a known carcinogen, but artificial sweeteners are actually shown to not only *not* increase weight loss, but actually contribute to weight gain and obesity.


I agree with you, but that's not what the discussion was about.

The argument was, that a tax would have no impact on consumer behaviour.

They chose to use aspartame (and it tastes disgusting), but it still doesn't change the fact that the tax forced companies along the supply side to innovate. With further information and tactics, there is no reason to believe our dietary habits are static.
Cassius
RealGM
Posts: 16,161
And1: 4,428
Joined: Aug 19, 2005
Location: We won.
     

Re: Official Covid-19 Discussion Thread 

Post#395 » by Cassius » Tue Apr 28, 2020 8:06 pm

tecumseh18 wrote:
Salted Meat wrote:
Ackshun wrote:
Wrong.

The UK implemented a sugar tax on their soda industry a few years back. It has been successful in lowering sales of sodas with high sugar content.

I tried a PEPSI ZERO or whatever it's called, and trust me, it's everywhere out there because of the cost effectiveness to the supply chain. It brought about innovation in the sector with the creation of thousands of low-sugar lines.

This isn't overnight, but it's one example of why a tax will, in the long-term, have a positive impact on diets.


Pepsi Zero still has aspartame though, which is not only a known carcinogen, but artificial sweeteners are actually shown to not only *not* increase weight loss, but actually contribute to weight gain and obesity.


:( :roll: :noway: :nonono: :banghead:

Rant below:

Spoiler:
Honestly, it's like I live on a different planet. One where people consciously choose to eat what evolution has designed for us to eat over a couple of million years. Call it Planet Paleo. And on this planet, we're not looking at over 50-75% of people becoming diabetic or pre-diabetic (HbA1C> 5.6) in the next few years and eventually overwhelming the health care system. And we don't die from the Covid-19 virus, or demand that society be shut down and millions thrown out of work because we might.

F your Pepsi! F your Pepsi Zero/Max! Food isn't a toy, it's something that is supposed to provide sustenance, ffs!


Anyways, hell yes, properly targeted taxes work. But as Dr. Malhotra (the author of the front page Daily Telegraph article quoted above) says, there should also be a subsidy for the poor to be able to afford real food. We already have this to some extent with the HST in Ontario, which is not imposed on unprocessed foods, but that can be made more robust Not sure if warning labels work, but the US trade negotiators (backed up by Big Sugar) sure tried to ban them during the NAFTA renegotiation.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/20/world/americas/nafta-food-labels-obesity.html


Can I ask if you've ever spent significant time living in the US? I've lived in three cities in the midwest, spent about a year in Northern California, a few in Tennessee and a few months in Houston. Food deserts are real, and largely make it impossible to make wise long-term nutrition choices. When the closest thing to a grocery store near your home is a Family Dollar, where it's $1 for a 4L (yes, you read that right) bottle of Cola, vs $4 for a gallon of milk... the choices become obvious and self-damaging. Even if you have food stamps, if money is tight, you're not spending 4X on a beverage that will spoil. That's just one anecdotal reason for a vitamin D deficiency, that only tells 1% of the story for why brown and black people are dying at higher frequency than others.

There are structural problems focused on the poor of America that put certain people in worse positions than others. COVID-19 is exacerbating all of them. Udonis Haslem wrote a great piece on the Player's Tribune that paints a part of the picture of the Miami community.

When we talk about a virus that exacerbates respiratory issues, then knowing that poor, (predominantly black and brown) communities consume more air pollution despite the fact that they contribute less of it, changes the conversation a bit more.

And this isn't a "blame whitey" thing, Fairview didn't say anything about racism. That said, Occam's Razor can be longer than one letter.
I_Like_Dirt wrote:The whole comparison to Kevin McHale is ridiculously close, imo... And that's without more hilarious aspects of the comparison, e.g. if Wally Sczerbiak were 7 feet tall with the slower reflexes that came with the additional height, he'd be Bargnani.
User avatar
Westside Gunn
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,727
And1: 6,655
Joined: Jul 03, 2016
       

Re: Official Covid-19 Discussion Thread 

Post#396 » by Westside Gunn » Tue Apr 28, 2020 8:26 pm

Salted Meat wrote:
Ackshun wrote:
hankscorpioLA wrote:
It is also generally well understood that, broadly speaking, healthy eating correlates positively with income. Poorer people generally eat a less healthy diet because fatty foods cost less per calorie. You can tax it all you want, that isn't going to change.


Wrong.

The UK implemented a sugar tax on their soda industry a few years back. It has been successful in lowering sales of sodas with high sugar content.

I tried a PEPSI ZERO or whatever it's called, and trust me, it's everywhere out there because of the cost effectiveness to the supply chain. It brought about innovation in the sector with the creation of thousands of low-sugar lines.

This isn't overnight, but it's one example of why a tax will, in the long-term, have a positive impact on diets.


Pepsi Zero still has aspartame though, which is not only a known carcinogen, but artificial sweeteners are actually shown to not only *not* increase weight loss, but actually contribute to weight gain and obesity.


What about the life coke stuff that uses sativa or stevia or something
Google "Hind Rajab"
Total Killed by Israel = 50,000+
Israel kills a child every 45 minutes and ban aid workers from bringing in baby formula :crazy:
Total being starved by Israel = 500,000 -1,000,000

Speak up
User avatar
hankscorpioLA
RealGM
Posts: 10,528
And1: 10,007
Joined: Dec 15, 2011

Re: Official Covid-19 Discussion Thread 

Post#397 » by hankscorpioLA » Tue Apr 28, 2020 8:49 pm

Ackshun wrote:
hankscorpioLA wrote:
It is also generally well understood that, broadly speaking, healthy eating correlates positively with income. Poorer people generally eat a less healthy diet because fatty foods cost less per calorie. You can tax it all you want, that isn't going to change.


Wrong.

The UK implemented a sugar tax on their soda industry a few years back. It has been successful in lowering sales of sodas with high sugar content.

I tried a PEPSI ZERO or whatever it's called, and trust me, it's everywhere out there because of the cost effectiveness to the supply chain. It brought about innovation in the sector with the creation of thousands of low-sugar lines.

This isn't overnight, but it's one example of why a tax will, in the long-term, have a positive impact on diets.


A reduction in the sale of high sugar soda is not the desired outcome. The desired outcome is a reduction in obesity rates. If the tax causes people to shift from one form of unhealthy eating to another, it's impact is likely negligible.

And it misses the point.

Right now I can drive up to McDonalds here in California and get 2 McChickens for $3. Those two McChickens have about 700 calories combined.

Can you find me a healthy substitute for 700 calories that costs $3? I don't think you can. That is the problem. That is why healthy eating correlates to income. The poorer you are, the more likely you are to not have a healthy diet because healthy diets cost more.
The absurd mystery of the strange forces of existence.
Ackshun
General Manager
Posts: 8,874
And1: 4,767
Joined: Jul 24, 2006

Re: Official Covid-19 Discussion Thread 

Post#398 » by Ackshun » Tue Apr 28, 2020 9:37 pm

hankscorpioLA wrote:
Ackshun wrote:
hankscorpioLA wrote:
It is also generally well understood that, broadly speaking, healthy eating correlates positively with income. Poorer people generally eat a less healthy diet because fatty foods cost less per calorie. You can tax it all you want, that isn't going to change.


Wrong.

The UK implemented a sugar tax on their soda industry a few years back. It has been successful in lowering sales of sodas with high sugar content.

I tried a PEPSI ZERO or whatever it's called, and trust me, it's everywhere out there because of the cost effectiveness to the supply chain. It brought about innovation in the sector with the creation of thousands of low-sugar lines.

This isn't overnight, but it's one example of why a tax will, in the long-term, have a positive impact on diets.


A reduction in the sale of high sugar soda is not the desired outcome. The desired outcome is a reduction in obesity rates. If the tax causes people to shift from one form of unhealthy eating to another, it's impact is likely negligible.

And it misses the point.

Right now I can drive up to McDonalds here in California and get 2 McChickens for $3. Those two McChickens have about 700 calories combined.

Can you find me a healthy substitute for 700 calories that costs $3? I don't think you can. That is the problem. That is why healthy eating correlates to income. The poorer you are, the more likely you are to not have a healthy diet because healthy diets cost more.


Again, I'm just saying that it's possible to shift consumer habits when adding a tax.

In a sense, you're arguing against yourself. Yes, people in poor financial shape will get more bang for their buck, which is usually unhealthy. That is not a revelation. But if you add a tax or raise the price of the **** food, it changes the dynamic.

The point is, that it is possible. It's not currently happening in North America, but again, the point is that it is possible !!

The argument was never about $3 healthy meals being available
User avatar
Kevin Willis
RealGM
Posts: 12,684
And1: 8,097
Joined: Apr 17, 2009
       

Re: Official Covid-19 Discussion Thread 

Post#399 » by Kevin Willis » Tue Apr 28, 2020 9:50 pm

ItsDanger wrote:"I hope we don't get so many people infected that we actually have that herd immunity" Dr Tony (Vaccine or Bust) Fauci.

https://www.c-span.org/video/?c4866591/user-clip-dr-fauci-hoping-infected-actual-herd-immunity

Can some high IQ reporter please ask him what % he would consider as "background immunity"? Also, this guy has been there 30+ years and still doesn't have a solution for HIV, time for some new blood (after hyping it up). Wouldn't call him a superstar, if anything he's just another government lifer.


I read some of his work, he's a pioneer and key in the development of many immunologies. Just finished listening to an audiobook on immunology and he had his hand on so many things, the book wasn't even about him but he kept coming up. You can call him whatever you want - government lifer, hack, loser, whatever - but in the field he's extreme well-respected and he's saved millions of lives. He helped figure out how HIV works when nobody knew. How the virus tricks the immune system to stand down. He's also had a hand in auto-immunities. Why no cure for HIV then? Viruses evolve, one reason why SARS doesn't have a cure. He is without question the Lebron James in his field.
When Chuck Norris was born the doc said "Congratulations, its a man"
tecumseh18
RealGM
Posts: 19,131
And1: 11,371
Joined: Feb 20, 2006
Location: Big green house
 

Re: Official Covid-19 Discussion Thread 

Post#400 » by tecumseh18 » Tue Apr 28, 2020 10:11 pm

Cassius wrote:Can I ask if you've ever spent significant time living in the US?


Well I've been to a TraderJoe's in Nashville. But sure, I'm not disagreeing that the entire attitude and economics around food choices. availability and inventives has to change. No medical system is designed to handle what's to come. Anyway, the southern states aren't what interest me so much here. Plenty of sunlight there. As much as we want to see those red-necked red staters punished for their accumulated sins, this isn't going to be the time.

Cassius wrote:When we talk about a virus that exacerbates respiratory issues, then knowing that poor, (predominantly black and brown) communities consume more air pollution despite the fact that they contribute less of it, changes the conversation a bit more.


Air pollution is a thing. When Atlanta was largely shut down to traffic during the Olympics there in 1996, asthma cases dramatically declined. Here in Toronto, all the rich people live downtown and the poor live in the suburbs, so I have to stretch my imagination to imagine what the opposite would be like. My image of downtown is basically Manhattan and decent parts of Brooklyn. Anyway, maybe.

Cassius wrote:And this isn't a "blame whitey" thing, Fairview didn't say anything about racism.


:lol: Maybe not, but that would be the first time he didn't. i may have pre-empted him.

Cassius wrote:That said, Occam's Razor can be longer than one letter.


But that "single letter" - or the deficiency thereof - is a way easier, more immediately solvable problem than anything else you've raised. The Pareto principle states (in this context) that 80% of a problem can be solved by 20% of your range of solutions. In other words, don't prioritize trying to solve 20% of a problem.

Anyway, let's start with the principle that no one knows. No-one has all the numbers. The numbers lie. Different jurisdictions record deaths differently. Different countries have different demographics. Italians can be darker or lighter skinned, but then the darker skinned may move to the industrialized north - where there's more pollution and less sun - for work. Different cultures give sanctuary to their old in different ways. There are advantages and disadvantages of having three generations living under one roof, in terms of disease transmission. And btw, let me ask you this - have you ever been in a public/subsidized eldercare facility? If so, do you believe such places reflect our society's supposed care for the aged? It drives me crazy that people say we have to crash the economy in order to "save old people", when we treat old people like garbage most of the time.

But back to the point, any studies I dig up can easily be rebutted on the basis of their sample size or methodology. Replication of results has been a huge problem in science for the past few years, and this is only exacerbated by the current panic. But we at least have enough information to form a working hypothesis, and strike out in a Pareto-guided direction.

According to these latest TILDA findings, there are major discrepancies in mortality rates related to vitamin D levels at different latitudes worldwide. Countries in the southern hemisphere, such as Australia, are recording relatively low COVID-related mortality, which the TILDA researchers state can no longer feasibly be related to the later appearance and spread of the virus.

They have pointed to the high prevalence of vitamin D deficiency in northern hemisphere countries, and the possible role of the vitamin in suppressing severe inflammatory responses seen in patients seriously ill with COVID-19.

The researchers explained that vitamin D deficiency correlates with poor sunlight exposure, increasing age, high blood pressure, diabetes, obesity and ethnicity. These are all features associated with an increased risk of severe COVID-19.

Currently, all countries that lie below a latitude of 35 degrees north have relatively low mortality from COVID-19. However, people in countries that lie 35 degrees north and above receive insufficient sunlight for adequate vitamin D levels in winter and spring. These include Italy and Spain, which have low population levels of vitamin D.

The researchers pointed out that mortality rates from COVID-19 are higher at these latitudes, with the exception of Nordic countries, where vitamin D supplementation is widespread and deficiency is much less common.

As a result of their findings, the researchers are recommending that all nursing home residents in Ireland take Vitamin D.

"Public Health England, the Scottish and Welsh governments have issued recommendations for supplements for all adults from March to October, and supplementation all year round for adults living in care homes or nursing homes, who are required to wear clothes that cover most of the skin when outdoors, or who have dark skin.

Return to Toronto Raptors