Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition • Hacker News Board

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#401

Post by krapp » Wed, Aug 19, 2020, 6:34 PM UTC

diebir wrote: post #352

I could never understand the point of a gym. Just a pair of running shoes. Some dumbbells. I picked up slacklining and bosu ball training during the lockdown. Why does one need a "gym" ??

What's the point of restaurants when people have stoves and microwaves in their homes? It's a service, it provides convenience.

Sure, I could buy several hundred thousand dollars' worth of free weights, machines and kettle bells, and a treadmill, and install a big tv over it and get satellite cable, and somehow fit all of that and a sauna and a swimming pool into my tiny apartment, and have to worry about moving it all every time I move, and about maintenance and everything else, or I could just walk into any Gold's Gym on the planet and have nothing but the workout be my problem.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#402

Post by ceejayoz » Wed, Aug 19, 2020, 6:34 PM UTC

polote wrote: post #360

ceejayoz wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Maybe because nobody successfully proved to these people (me included) that this sacrifice is useful. > people who are at risk of dying can protect themselves even around sick people (wearing a mask, staying at home, washing hands, ...) This makes it clear "nobody successfully proved" really means "I didn't bother to listen". The messaging on masks has long been "they reduce transmission by infected people", not "t…

The head of the strategy of Sweden, keep repeating that he is not sure masks are working, how you can be so sure that he is wrong, and decides that's others who are not listening ? Of course it is clear that if someone has covid and wear a mask, the probability to transmit covid will decrease (I was actually encourage people to wear a mask 6 months ago), but will it stop ? no. people can still transmit it by touching…

The head of Sweden's response is quoted as saying:

> "If we were to run into the same disease, knowing exactly what we know about it today, I think we would end up doing something in between what Sweden did and what the rest of the world has done."

https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/0...

He's on record saying mask requirements will be needed if cases started going back up:

https://www.thelocal.se/20200804/tegnell-if-we-see-problems-...

and Sweden wound up with de-facto lockdowns anyways, as many people did it on their own without government instruction. The end result: Same economic damage as the other Nordic countries, but substantially higher deaths.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/07/business/sweden-economy-c...

> no. people can still transmit it by touching you.

That's an argument for "don't touch people", not "don't wear masks".

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#403

Post by e12e » Wed, Aug 19, 2020, 6:34 PM UTC

readingnews wrote: post #211

There is a crossfit gym that I pass by every morning on the way to work. It is full, and never stopped during this pandemic. Even at 7AM, it is full of patrons. I would call the "proper authorities", but since there is a State Police car parked outside every morning, and he is in there working out, just like before the pandemic, I doubt calling anyone would do anything. Adding to the post, I read it earlier... it is…

> it is really strange that people feel they have to (...) get together (...)

> I find it amazing we can not see short term sacrifice for long term gain.

These are two related issues, but not the same.

Before we started (half) using the office again - I'd not see anyone outside of buying groceries. For approximately 3 months straight. It's not healthy, and I absolutely can see others having even more trouble with that than I did.

It is natural even introverts need to socialize.

That said, I'm surprised there seem to be less focus on organizing in smaller, regular groups. It's likely better for preventing spread if people met up in the same group of 5 to 10 people, rather than gathering indoors - especially as it now seems quite likely covid-19 is airborne.

So yes, some personal sacrifice should be expected - but I would be careful dismissing the need for people to see other people, in person.

We are social animals.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#404

Post by alistairSH » Wed, Aug 19, 2020, 6:35 PM UTC

nitrogen wrote: post #190

reaperducer wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The last couple months has done more damage than good to me. I'm that type of person who'll lose muscle quickly if stops working out for mote than 2 weeks. It's not about you. It's about everyone else. How can someone be so selfish and self-absorbed that they think their "muscle mass" is more important than the health of hundreds or thousands of other people? I know this question may violate some HN policy, but I can…

It's been a while since I've seen mention of actuarial analyses of the pandemic vs lockdowns. Could millions of people with muscle atrophy cause more economic harm?

How does a lockdown cause muscle atrophy?

If muscle mass or fitness is a concern, work out at home. Or outside. Ride a bike, go for a run, do some pushups. Pick up large rocks. Buy a squat rack or rowing machine. Go climb a mountain.

Access to a gym is absolutely not required to maintain fitness.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#405

Post by seemack » Wed, Aug 19, 2020, 6:35 PM UTC

hammock wrote: post #305

btilly wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Risk of transmission goes up indoors, with heavy breathing, and being exposed for longer than 10 minutes. People who exercise, are going to breathe heavily. People on equipment or in a class stay longer than 10 minutes. And gyms are indoors and often not well-ventilated. The result is that gyms are an excellent space for spreading COVID-19. And measures that reduce the spread for things like walking around a store ar…

Curious, is there a documented case of community spread through a gym that you can point to? Here is some evidence in the NY Times that counters your argument: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/25/health/coronavirus-gyms-f...

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/calgary-fitness-ride-...

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#406

Post by tomc1985 » Wed, Aug 19, 2020, 6:35 PM UTC

polote wrote: post #368

wiradikusuma wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But you know that you can be a carrier and infect less healthy people right?

Then lets lockdown and force people who are less healthy to take all the steps to protect themselves, and leave alone the healty ones ?

So... segregation?

Something tells me that won't really fly

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#407

Post by horns4lyfe » Wed, Aug 19, 2020, 6:35 PM UTC

cowpig wrote: post #375

andrelayer wrote: post #332

I think a lot of people in this discussion are pitting the argument at people prioritizing their individual choices over the collective health of the community. I think that is a very singular framing from one side. A lot of people I know just believe that the virus itself is not as deadly as the reaction warrants. The infectious mortality rate of Covid is at best twice that of the normal flu, which isn't nothing and…

> It's pretty rational for someone to understand that and make personal choices... No, it's not; it's arrogant. All of the epidemiologists and experts seem to think otherwise. What do you know that they don't? So far 172,000 people have died in the US due to Coronavirus, directly[1]. The actual number of people who have died, if you factor in the effect of the virus on infrastructure and missed diagnoses is about dou…

This is a gross mischaracterizatuon of the posters argument. They are claiming that, based on the information they provided, the people they’re referring to are making a rational choice. Working off of different information is a different matter. They also never claimed that covid is comparable to lightning, just that if you’re under 30 you’re more likely to be struck by lightning than die of covid (I cant speak to the statistical truth of this, but that’s beside the point).

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#408

Post by bazzert » Wed, Aug 19, 2020, 6:35 PM UTC

ceejayoz wrote: post #306

at-fates-hands wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering most states have been in full on shelter in place lock down mode, there aren't many places people can socialize anyways. All of the normal places where you see people socialize have bee closed or went out business. Restaurants, bars, night clubs, sporting events, live music (festivals and stadiums) and many, many others. It would be one thing to conform to what your saying, but its become hard if not impo…

Parks? Backyards? A walk around the neighborhood? Outdoor dining? If you can't socialize outside a bar, that's on you.

the media have consistently demonized people at beaches and parks. Lightfoot fenced off the beaches in Chicago, Newsom did the same in CA. It's ridiculous; and its why people are skeptical of their intentions.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#409

Post by zelly » Wed, Aug 19, 2020, 6:35 PM UTC

Virtually all the people who died of covid were fat[1]. If the military forced everyone to exercise (and diet, but that's harder to mandate than exercising) it would have been much more effective than forcing everyone to wear masks. (Masks are still good though.) Most of us are going to get covid even if we stay inside all day (I got it twice) so this should be a wake-up call to be prepared to survive it. Or don't, stay overweight and choke on your own blood if you want--that's "freedom".

[1] https://www.worldobesity.org/news/obesity-and-covid-19-polic...

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#410

Post by sushshshsh » Wed, Aug 19, 2020, 6:37 PM UTC

baddox wrote: post #276

sushshshsh wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Totally illegal underground makeshift hair place" I'm confused, if the participants wear a mask, will the virus be transmitted or not?

That's roughly equivalent to asking "if someone drives drunk, will they kill someone else or not?" Many times, they won't hurt anyone, but I hope it's not controversial that driving drunk is still extremely dangerous.

Today I learned that getting a haircut with a mask on is equivalent to driving drunk, but protesting or going to a grocery store with a mask on is not.