Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

621–630 of 1001 posts

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#621

Post by renewiltord »

kbenson wrote: post #567
donor20 wrote: post #548

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And you are the one not listening. In EVERY other country you can buy masks, and they were strongly encouraged, that prevented YOU from getting sick. South Koreas KF94 masks come to mind, very good coverage and fit (3 parts including one under chin). And despite the lies basically posted by you and plenty of others including health authorities (don't wear masks if you are "healthy", masks can't protect you from covid…

> I think health professionals lost a megaton of credibility in claiming masks don't help, to not wear masks, or that masks can only help reduce transmission not infection. Other countries went all out on masks - with great results. I think for the most part health professionals answered specific questions about specific types of situations or types of transmission, and the media runs with overly broad statements whe…

> I think for the most part health professionals answered specific questions about specific types of situations or types of transmission, and the media runs with overly broad statements when are then pushed/rejected by different parties.

The US Surgeon General https://twitter.com/Surgeon_General/status/12337257852839321...

> Seriously people- STOP BUYING MASKS! They are NOT effective in preventing general public from catching #Coronavirus, but if healthcare providers can’t get them to care for sick patients, it puts them and our communities at risk! http://bit.ly/37Ay6Cm

Highlighting

> They are NOT effective in preventing general public from catching #Coronavirus,

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#622

Post by drevil-v2 »

duderific wrote: post #594
cloakandswagger wrote: post #527

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As most authoritarian-collectivist movements go, the "Stay the fuck home" crowd took no time at all in destroying all goodwill towards their worldview. Had its tone been more educational and pleading instead of arrogant, shaming and outright threatening they could have avoided polarizing the conversation and creating a contrarian counter-movement that resists even sensible compromise.

Lives are at stake here, so the "Stay the fuck home" crowd, as you put it, has a right to express feelings that may be stronger than "educational and pleading."

I guess the over 1000 health professionals who said BLM protests are OK but everyone else "stay the fuck home" did not help make the case.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#623

Post by arxv33 »

johnwalkr wrote: post #543

Wow with these comments. You going to the gym is not saving the economy. Yes, we can't shut everything down but you'd think the article was about shutting down grocery stores or the stock market. And by not doing your part, your whole community could be stunted for 2 years. Also congratulations for not caring about a 1 in 200 chance of death (pretty high by the way) because you're healthy and passing on the risk to s…

I travelled all over Europe past two months and I must say Europe is quite laxed. And there cases haven’t really gone up. Pretty much every outdoor cafes in Europe were open with a few exceptions and I didn’t see much difference other than people wearing masks and social distancing between tables.

I think in US everything is polarized and politicized. To the point that wearing masks is somehow considered against freedom. I believe health officials have some blames to share. They still have not come clean for their initial mask guidelines that was blatantly wrong. I think health authorities will have long time to regain trusts in US.

I also feel we don’t quite understand the transmission mechanism fully yet. It’s airborne, at least we know that part but the clusters in nursing homes and indoor parties also indicate there is some mechanisms in play when indoor.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#624

Post by bsder »

Alupis wrote: post #472
ceejayoz wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> We are now on month 7 of being told to not socialize... "Keep your distance, wear a mask, and stick to small groups" is not the same as "do not socialize".

> "Keep your distance, wear a mask, and stick to small groups" is not the same as "do not socialize". Ok, but then we have people doing solo activities, all by themselves, minding their own business -- getting arrested by lunatics[1] because we said no beach allowed during Covid[2]! How do we reconcile that? [1] https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-04-03/paddle-b... [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MpsaSf…

> because we said no beach allowed during Covid

We said "No beach during Covid" because a bunch of lunatics flooded the open beaches.

And while the beach may not be a problem, those same lunatics flood the gas stations, Walmarts, etc. and DON'T WEAR MASKS.

In addition, California never really locked down. California has almost continuously had an R0 above 1.0. Mostly due to the lunatics in Southern California.

If you want to open the beaches and arrest anybody not local, fine. The problem with THAT is that you now have to patrol for it--which creates in-person contact.

So, we shut the beaches completely. Sorry you can't surf. Tell your population cohort to wear your masks and stay the hell out of parties and maybe California will get below R0 one day.

Or not. And this crap can continue until we get a vaccine.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#625

Post by _fat_santa »

duderific wrote: post #594
cloakandswagger wrote: post #527

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As most authoritarian-collectivist movements go, the "Stay the fuck home" crowd took no time at all in destroying all goodwill towards their worldview. Had its tone been more educational and pleading instead of arrogant, shaming and outright threatening they could have avoided polarizing the conversation and creating a contrarian counter-movement that resists even sensible compromise.

Lives are at stake here, so the "Stay the fuck home" crowd, as you put it, has a right to express feelings that may be stronger than "educational and pleading."

But that's precisely the problem. While you may think this way, someone else may not. So when you try to convince that person from an assumption that they agree with you on the importance of the premise, you fall flat.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#626

Post by Ensorceled »

mehrdadn wrote: post #598
johnwalkr wrote: post #543

Wow with these comments. You going to the gym is not saving the economy. Yes, we can't shut everything down but you'd think the article was about shutting down grocery stores or the stock market. And by not doing your part, your whole community could be stunted for 2 years. Also congratulations for not caring about a 1 in 200 chance of death (pretty high by the way) because you're healthy and passing on the risk to s…

> 1 in 200 chance of death (pretty high by the way) The fatality rate of a car crash is also about 0.5% [1], but that doesn't prevent us from driving. That means there's a piece of the puzzle missing here, right? Note that I'm not concluding this means we should go to gyms (or whatever). I'm just pointing out your analysis is missing an important factor, making it faulty/unconvincing. Edit: Changed the statistic sour…

> though if you're disputing the specific numbers, you're missing my point

I'll bite ... what is your point? Approximately 30000 people die a year in car accidents a year in the US, COVID has killed 170K in six months. What's the missing piece you are trying to bring to the table?

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#627

Post by perlbeatdong »

johnwalkr wrote: post #543

Wow with these comments. You going to the gym is not saving the economy. Yes, we can't shut everything down but you'd think the article was about shutting down grocery stores or the stock market. And by not doing your part, your whole community could be stunted for 2 years. Also congratulations for not caring about a 1 in 200 chance of death (pretty high by the way) because you're healthy and passing on the risk to s…

You are claiming that parents and teachers have a 10% chance of death? Sorry, but this is not true according to every statistic so far. parents of a child living at home are not old. Teachers (people in the workforce) are not old. You're off by a factor of about 100. Stop spreading propaganda.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#628

Post by asdff »

zackmorris wrote: post #76
dfxm12 wrote: post #6

I don't get it. Unless you're training for a very specific purpose (like an MMA fight or football season), why do you need specific indoor gym equipment? Shelter in place orders are largely lifted, so you can workout outside: run, do pull ups on a tree branch, ride a bike, lift a heavy stone, do an outdoor yoga class, etc. Hell, you only need maybe a 6' x 6' area for a perfectly effective body weight routine, even in…

I've lost 2+ inches on my arms, chest and legs after 20 years of working out fairly consistently. I was the strongest I had ever been just before COVID-19 hit. I'm not super-depressed about it quite yet, because the gym had become a bit of a crutch for avoiding dealing with problems in my life. But after so many months off, I'm reaching the point where the lost gains might not be recoverable. I have to decide sometim…

Maybe read up on cable training if you want an alternative to pumping iron:

https://yoga-horizons.com/pdfs/Fatmans-Guide-to-Cable-Traini...

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#629

Post by mehrdadn »

diabeetusman wrote: post #604
mehrdadn wrote: post #598

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1 in 200 chance of death (pretty high by the way) The fatality rate of a car crash is also about 0.5% [1], but that doesn't prevent us from driving. That means there's a piece of the puzzle missing here, right? Note that I'm not concluding this means we should go to gyms (or whatever). I'm just pointing out your analysis is missing an important factor, making it faulty/unconvincing. Edit: Changed the statistic sour…

That's over your entire lifetime, not a few weeks after getting infected. You don't have a 1% chance of dying in a car accident every time you drive.

You're right, but unfortunately it's beside my point. (I took "chances of dying in a car crash" to mean it was the fatality rate of a car crash, which was wrong.) I was trying to find the chances of dying given you have a car crash, not the chances of being in a car crash and dying. (Which I guess leads to the spoiler: this was the distinction I was trying to make. That you can't just draw a conclusion from only looking at the former, which is what that 1% figure is. You need to look at the chances of getting the disease as well.) I updated the quoted source.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#630

Post by syshum »

ImaCake wrote: post #611
mehrdadn wrote: post #598

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1 in 200 chance of death (pretty high by the way) The fatality rate of a car crash is also about 0.5% [1], but that doesn't prevent us from driving. That means there's a piece of the puzzle missing here, right? Note that I'm not concluding this means we should go to gyms (or whatever). I'm just pointing out your analysis is missing an important factor, making it faulty/unconvincing. Edit: Changed the statistic sour…

>The chances of dying in a car crash are 1%, but that doesn't prevent us from driving. I don't think that statistic is even close to right. I know exactly zero people who have died in a car crash. Many of them are quite old. The Australian statistics suggest that the odds of anyone in Australia dying of a car crash are 0.0000478 per person per year. This is considerably smaller than your statistic and so I am going t…

I take your anecdote, and raise my own as I have had several family members die in a car crash, and zero die of Covid soo....

Your anecdote is not more valid than mine.

>>The Australian statistics

it seems Australian drive about 30% fewer miles per year on average;

in the US the risk of death in Auto Accident is 1 in 106, or .95% which I think is close enough to 1% to give the Grand Parent a little slack

Post reply on HN