patrick.net

Just checked the link out and have been checking that source for a while now. My neighbor is freaking out over her perfectly healthy kids getting this and dying. 3 kids died and they all had issues. This whole thing is a joke and is freaking people out for no reason. Most of these kids or younger people were most certainly doomed with or without the virus. Not saying they should die, but what are ya gonna do?

Oh wait, I know the answer, shut down the country.

WookieMan says

Not saying they should die, but what are ya gonna do?

She and her family should shelter in place. Just as folks with serious comorbidities should.

Frauduchi!

Throw his cheating lying corrupt ass in prison. Make him spend his last 4 or 5 years in prison. Feed him crap so he develops serious health problems in prison. Nothing is too good for this bastard.

Interesting that it kills almost 3x as many men as women. Where is the outcry about misandrogeny? I have been hearing at work how POCs are dying faster than whites (privilege?) Apparently male lives do not matter as much as female lives.

georgeliberte says

Interesting that it kills almost 3x as many men as women.

I think most men live more recklessly. Especially on the eating front. There are land whales I see from both sexes, but males anecdotally dominate that world. I also have buddies that fucking eat fast food constantly that have high metabolisms and stay thin. But that shit is still being digested and going through your blood stream. Being overweight is bad, but what we put in our bodies is still important even if you don't turn into a tanker.

Life is weird. I know smokers that live to 80-90 that go down smoking until the last breath and die of natural causes. Yet people that never smoked have lung cancer at age 30. Enjoy life, unfortunately it's a bit difficult now because of a harsher "flu" type virus.

Preliminary reports are that smokers and nicotine users are immune to the wuhan flu...ironically....

Dholliday126 says

Preliminary reports are that smokers and nicotine users are immune to the wuhan flu...ironically....

Smoking prevents quite a few diseases, but don't expect that to be publicized.

Smoking prevents quite a few diseases, but don't expect that to be publicized.

Which diseases are those? Reminds me of when my dad told me that doctors in the 1950s actually told their patients to smoke "Kools."

Nicotine seems to offer protection against Alzheimer's for one - and yes, it was adjusted for age (IE it's not because smokers die of heart disease/lung cancer years before they get Alzheimer's, this was taken into account)

Parkinson's for another.

https://www.tampabay.com/news/health/study-finds-nicotine-safe-helps-in-alzheimers-parkinsons/2175396/

And ironically, smoking seems to coat the lungs protectively and Covid-19 has a hard time penetrating it.

I want to agree with you OP, but what about this: https://www.boston.com/news/coronavirus/2020/04/24/covid-19-strokes

ForcedTQ says

I want to agree with you OP, but what about this: https://www.boston.com/news/coronavirus/2020/04/24/covid-19-strokes

Certainly worth investigating, but also strokes increase with flu. Check it out. Maybe an overactive immune response, but will launch a million studies so good for PhD's.

willywonka says

ForcedTQ says

I want to agree with you OP, but what about this: https://www.boston.com/news/coronavirus/2020/04/24/covid-19-strokes

Certainly worth investigating, but also strokes increase with flu. Check it out. Maybe an overactive immune response, but will launch a million studies so good for PhD's.

True true. Most likely overactive immune response just like the lung issues in acute Covid 19 cases.

It’s very interesting to investigate the specific connection between these extreme responses and the specific SARS-CoV-2.

When Covid-19 first started, the 'anecdotal' word was that smokers were having higher fatality outcomes, not lower. So what has changed?

Profitable addictive substance purveyors lobby and pay big bucks relentlessly for data mining to indicate that addictive substances have even a skosh of positive health effects and have done so through the ages, whether it be alcohol, nicotine, narcotics, speed etc. etc. Many addictive substances CAN have known therapeutic use aka narcotics for pain control, cocaine as topical anesthetic, etc.

Data mining does not indicate original research. Data mining takes for granted the underlying 'truth' of whatever data sources it utilizes and massages them. The most trivial positive correlations are then treated as 'scientific proof' and can make big bucks for the 'researchers' involved. They also don't require much work because original research is laborious, tedious, and meaningful data yields can be slight compared to the enormous time, effort and resources involved. Data mining is a kind of cheap trick by comparison.

Nicotine may very well have some vague protective action in a very small percentage of the population in some way, but 99.9 percent of the time, smoking is a wholesale destructive addiction, period. Users WANT to believe the health claims because they are stuck anyway. Pushers provide them with any dim mythology users want to keep them using.

Ceffer says

When Covid-19 first started, the 'anecdotal' word was that smokers were having higher fatality outcomes, not lower. So what has changed?

Profitable addictive substance purveyors lobby and pay big bucks relentlessly for data mining to indicate that addictive substances have even a skosh of positive health effects and have done so through the ages, whether it be alcohol, nicotine, narcotics, speed etc. etc. Many addictive substances CAN have known therapeutic use aka narcotics for pain control, cocaine as topical anesthetic, etc.

Data mining does not indicate original research. Data mining takes for granted the underlying 'truth' of whatever data sources it utilizes and massages them. The most trivial positive correlations are then treated as 'scientific proof' and can make big bucks for the 'researchers' involved. They also don't require much work because original research is laborious, tedious, and meaningful data yields can be slight compared to the enormous time...

There's decent evidence that nicotine compounds such as Nad help. So with smokers it may be that "young" smokers who have established a decent nicotine baseline could have a small edge but long time smokers probably fare much worse than their non smoking counterparts.

NoCoupForYou says

Nicotine seems to offer protection against Alzheimer's for one

If one wants the benefits of a nicotine-like substance, there's the daffodil extract, Galantamine, which can give the neuroprotection w/o having to be a smoker. And a lot of ppl use this, as a way of kicking the habit as well.

Rin says

NoCoupForYou says

Nicotine seems to offer protection against Alzheimer's for one

If one wants the benefits of a nicotine-like substance, there's the daffodil extract, Galantamine, which can give the neuroprotection w/o having to be a smoker. And a lot of ppl use this, as a way of kicking the habit as well.

NMN or NAD work as well.

ThreeBays says

If you have hypertension or obesity, you're more likely to die.

Hypertension Prevalence


Obesity Prevalence

9 blue states plus Puerto Rico. Are you attempting to show that both Dems and Republicans can be in bad health?

I agree that health is THE determining factor in covid cases.

ThreeBays says

If you have hypertension or obesity, you're more likely to die.

So why does NYS have 1/2 the countries cases and deaths roughly? Your maps prove the opposite of what you're saying...

ThreeBays says

Infection prevalence.

Density. I think we're getting closer here. It's a work in progress.

ThreeBays says

LOL, this must be the 10th time you've said the same wrong thing.

Your take is it has nothing to do with density? That's rich.... Our largest city has the most cases and deaths PER CAPITA. Density of the location matters with this virus and the demographics. Usually both working together. Prove me wrong.

ThreeBays says

It doesn't mean the rest of the country is somehow immune - it's just spreading slower to other places especially with the lockdowns.

It's like you want to agree with me, but won't do it. What the hell are lockdowns??? Social distancing? It's a reduction of density. Less people being around each other. In some places this just happens naturally because in the suburbs it's all houses sitting on 1/4 acre lots, so by default you don't really get close even during normal times. And during this time, even social distancing, you're in a 40 story building with maybe 600 other people. Touching the elevator, front door and other doors, etc. I'm not mixing things up, the density is what caused the high per capita rate. Why do you think the hardest hit states all have big cities with tons of high rises?

And yes, rural and suburban areas are getting it, but much less because of natural "social distance" aka density. No they're not immune and I've never made that claim. I guess the question for you is, why isn't Florida given the older population that their own governor just made fun of, not seeing a surge in deaths? How about Phoenix with all its huge Del Webb 55+ type communities? All these places are prime areas, demographically with the data we have. Sick underlying condition, etc. We know their age and where they live. We know the age this is affecting the most. AZ and FL should be blood baths right now. They're not. The biggest difference between NYC and these places is density.

I don't know. You're entitled to your opinion and maybe I'm wrong. I think I've laid out a pretty compelling case though. So here's the real question. If this is as dangerous and scary as you make it out to be, personal preferences aside, where is the safer place to be? City or suburb or rural?