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

771–780 of 1001 posts

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#771

Post by harambae »

p1necone wrote: post #745
Khaine wrote: post #735

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but how many of those people would have died from the normal flu? I know this is a morbid topic, but it gets to a fundamental truth. How valuable is a human life? Is it worth significantly damaging the future of the young through economic depression and increased social isolation and mental illness to extend the life old old people by a year, 5 years? There is no easy solution. We can hibernate as much of the n…

Why are you so certain that hundreds of thousands of deaths are not going to seriously affect the economy either?

Not to be heartless, but because most of the deaths are in the 80+ range.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#772

Post by p1necone »

2muchcoffeeman wrote: post #759
Khaine wrote: post #735

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, but how many of those people would have died from the normal flu? I know this is a morbid topic, but it gets to a fundamental truth. How valuable is a human life? Is it worth significantly damaging the future of the young through economic depression and increased social isolation and mental illness to extend the life old old people by a year, 5 years? There is no easy solution. We can hibernate as much of the n…

> Sure, but how many of those people would have died from the normal flu? I’ve been comparing flu stats for Australia. 2019 a BAD flu season was over 400 deaths. A NORMAL season is roughly 150 deaths. I think 146 in 2018. 2020 has 36 deaths. Melbourne deaths peaked at 25 for a single day. The current outbreak in VIC totally blows past the flu death rate for the entire country. Total COVID deaths in Australia (450) al…

This far in I don't think I can believe that people that are still clamoring to compare covid to regular seasonal flus are arguing in good faith. Sharing data with them isn't going to do much, although I guess it might stop some others from believing bullshit.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#773

Post by showdeadtest »

throw_away_321 wrote: post #757
helaoban wrote: post #636

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Spoken like somebody with no skin in the game. Go preach this nonsense to small business owners that have had their livelihoods taken from them and see how long you can keep your head above the parapet. > Support temporary benefits to your fellow citizens. What benefits? Support how? Prayers? Support that small business in your community with your wallet. > Also congratulations for not caring about a 1 in 200 chance…

go for a run. you don't have to go to a gym. there are plenty of ways to exercise outside and if you choose not to do them during a pandemic and instead choose to put the lives of others at risk so you can be inside a building, you're a jerk

Our approach isn’t working for people. No amount of scolding is going to change that.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#774

Post by Karrot_Kream »

muffinman26 wrote: post #303
moftz wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Masks aren't 100% effective so being in close contact with someone for such a long time (a haircut for women can take much longer than a typical trim for men) carries a high risk of transmission from an asymptomatic carrier.

I find this to be one of the funniest supposed differences between genders. I'm trans male, so I've gotten both female and male haircuts. Female haircuts generally took much less time. Put the hair in a ponytail, one snip, tidy up a little. Even a buzz cut takes a little bit longer. It's also much easier to cut long hair yourself than short hair, and people with long hair can go much longer between hair cuts. It took…

Thanks for voicing this! I've been cutting hair as a hobby for years (it's funny, I got questioned a lot why I felt it was worth cutting my own hair and suddenly with the onset of the pandemic a lot of friends of mine are much more interested in the hobby), and the number of folks that think female haircuts are more involved/difficult is astounding. Unless long hair is very overgrown and needs to be relayered, it's generally really simple to trim it. Men's haircuts are short enough that small mistakes are glaringly obvious, and the haircuts need regular maintenance. My partner had some trepidation when I first cut her hair, but since then she's recommended me to her friends (well, pre-pandemic at least). She did short hair for a while and found the constant maintenance to be a huge pain.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#775

Post by ft250 »

amiga_500 wrote: post #496
odnorazovyj wrote: post #312

Anyone dedicated enough to be still going to the gym is going to be healthy enough that they will have no problem with the coronavirus. The obese, diabetic etc will take any excuse to skip gym.

Went to the gym 3 times a week, cycled 25k every weekday, ran on the weekends. Now I can only walk, after covid, which I got in early March. I'm hoping to try jogging again at some stage, after CT scans on my lungs, but I think it's a bit of a pipe dream. After 5 months the daily nausea has stopped. No prior conditions. Early 40s. edit: can't think of another site on the internet you'd get downvoted for the above, HN…

[flagged]

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#776

Post by dragosmocrii »

spanhandler wrote: post #430
dragosmocrii wrote: post #349

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am neutral towards your comment, but I feel you're judging me for my beliefs and opinions, even though you don't know where I come from and what's important for me.

There are several decent ways to keep oneself in good shape for a few months while gyms are closed. Insisting this is a big, important problem for you while also (apparently) not taking advantage of those options means the way you're presenting yourself in your comment doesn't look so great, to put it mildly.

I am taking advantage of the other options, and I am in good shape (well, lean and slender xD). But I can't really replace the gym and the swimming pool with the other options.

Also, I am not concerned how others perceive my beliefs because I know what works for me, so to each their own.

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#777

Post by DoingIsLearning »

helaoban wrote: post #701
rocha wrote: post #683

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Also congratulations for not caring about a 1 in 200 chance of death. >> Where's the data to back up any close to an assertion like this? Latest IFR estimates are between 0.5% and 1.0% (1 in 200 to 1 in 100). https://www.who.int/news-room/commentaries/detail/estimating...

An almost meaningless number when not controlled for age, ethnicity, general health etc. I don't understand how this number can be reasonably used to say anything about basically anything. From the document you site: > Many such serological surveys are currently being > undertaken worldwide [10], and some have thus far > suggested substantial under-ascertainment of cases, with estimates of IFR converging at approxima…

I absolutely agree with your general argument about the context of _average_ mortality rate.

However another aspect that is still very nebulious at this point is post-infection sequelae.

Some of the patients who survived SARS-1 infection (in the SARS 2002-2004 outbreak) had lung scaring, loss of VO2 max, and other pulmonary related disfunction, more than 10 years after infection. [0]

We have seen a lot of pre-print articles discussing SARS-COV2 lung damage, heart and blood vessel damage, peripheral nerve damage, etc.

So if we want to be factual and give people a chance of making an informed decision, then we should also take this aspect in consideration.

At this point, we simply don't know enough about who will be affected and how severely but if take what we learned from SARS-COV1, than it is iresponsible not to disclose that life long injury or damage with _varying_ degrees of intensity across potentially multiple systems is very likely for _some_ of the survivors of SARS-COV2.

My point is an informed decision of not following health authority guidelines (which, at this point of social isolation, I do not judge), should not be reduced to something binomial like survival/death, it's just not that simple (as with most things in life).

[0] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7130167/

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#778

Post by notassigned »

p1necone wrote: post #761

The people denying the pandemic (or calling it a "plandemic"), or refusing to wear masks because muh freedoms, or protesting lockdowns are going to be laughed at in history classes for decades. You are unbelievably ignorant, selfish and arrogant. You are the reason this stuff needs to be enforced in the first place, because too many people completely lack empathy and critical thinking ability.

What do you think about Sweden, then? They seem to be done with this with no lockdown and a small amount of death (accounting for old people who would have died this year anyway, statistically)

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#779

Post by p1necone »

notassigned wrote: post #778
p1necone wrote: post #761

The people denying the pandemic (or calling it a "plandemic"), or refusing to wear masks because muh freedoms, or protesting lockdowns are going to be laughed at in history classes for decades. You are unbelievably ignorant, selfish and arrogant. You are the reason this stuff needs to be enforced in the first place, because too many people completely lack empathy and critical thinking ability.

What do you think about Sweden, then? They seem to be done with this with no lockdown and a small amount of death (accounting for old people who would have died this year anyway, statistically)

They've done significantly worse than other countries in the same region of the world that did have lockdowns.

What do you think you're accomplishing by posting easily debunked misinformation?

Re: Secret gyms and the economics of prohibition

#780

Post by cloakandswagger »

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."

You might feel the stakes are higher than other people, just like there are people who probably elevate issues like, say, gun control to a similar level of urgency. That's the whole basis for discourse in a society.

If it was truly that urgent I would hope the "stay home" crowd could act pragmatically by taking a more receptive tone. That's belied by a truly frightening undertone of violence that I see simmering underneath the messaging, e.g. "Can't we just throw all the anti-maskers in prison?"

Post reply on HN