3 ms·

Read the remainder of that paragraph.

camgunz 6y ago
I'm just gonna skip a bunch of steps here, which may be unwise but whatever. Your argument is that if you're fit and healthy, you shouldn't have your behavior dictated by people who aren't. They've made poor choices, they're the ones who should bear the consequences. You further argue that the low per-capita positive tests indicates that COVID-19 doesn't deserve the response we've (so far) given it. Here's why you're wrong: - Fit, healthy people do die from COVID-19. They can also suffer long-term effects. - There are people with high vulnerability to COVID-19 through no fault of their own. They can have autoimmune disorders, or simply be old. You acknowledge this. However, you generally can't choose to transmit COVID-19 only to the obese and not the old (for example). - Further, you broadly can't choose to contract COVID-19 and not transmit it to others. It's possible to be asymptomatic and shedding for days. To be clear: you can have COVID-19, not know it, and infect dozens of others who can do the same. - Tests are a poor measure of the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic. They do lend themselves very well to manipulation and motivated reasoning, which I would guess is why people who are motivated to diminish the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic like using them. The only stat that matters is death count per capita.
- hnrodey 6y ago
  First, I appreciate the thought you put in to your response. Every possible demographic has experienced some type of negative outcome from COVID. Most people make a full recovery. Have the fit and healthy passed from COVID? Absolutely, albeit at a staggeringly lower rate than others. Personally, my wife and I made a decision back in the summer to get back to living our lives and accepting the consequence because we are a family of four healthy individuals. We workout several days per week. Our children are healthy. We don't eat like assholes. We are not licking doorknobs. We have stayed at home when we knowingly came in to contact with someone who tested positive. We respect others' decisions who have decided that stricter measures are right for their situation. On the site I acknowledge asymptomatic transmission of COVID. If I am worried about getting sick then I should be taking all possible precautions to minimize my risk including self isolation, etc. A large part of my personal motivation for starting this in the first place is because of the terrible way the media currently reports COVID which is almost exclusively through number of confirmed cases. I'd argue that stat means very little. It seems true to reason that the sick and unhealthy are the group who suffer the largest impact from COVID. Health is a choice (obviously there are exceptions). Millions of people die every year in the US from otherwise preventable causes like heart disease, lung disease and various forms of cancer. Therefore my thesis is that we are punishing the responsible people in the world to prioritize those who have willfully neglected their health for a significant portion of their life. It's really straightforward to not be significantly overweight and workout 2-3 days per week.
  - camgunz 6y ago
    Thanks! I think your viewpoint is one shared by lots of people for valid reasons, so hopefully I'm not coming across as too argumentative or whatever. But on the other hand stakes are high, so I don't want to sugarcoat anything either. > Have the fit and healthy passed from COVID? Absolutely, albeit at a staggeringly lower rate than others. The end of this argument is "the mortality rate for X people is/isn't worth response Y", e.g. "the mortality rate for fit people isn't worth lockdowns for everyone". This seems like a good analysis to engage in, but it isn't, because you can't pick who gets COVID-19. The rejoinder here is "it is worth lockdowns for everyone because fit people can still infect other groups with a much higher mortality rate with COVID-19." Another rejoinder would be "the current mortality rate is 1-2%, which means if we're all infected millions of people die." > On the site I acknowledge asymptomatic transmission of COVID. If I am worried about getting sick then I should be taking all possible precautions to minimize my risk including self isolation, etc. You are essentially saying you accept the risk of contracting COVID-19 and infecting others. I think that's the crucial point you're missing: infecting others. You may be in a position to make that choice for yourself, but many others aren't and can't avoid you. They could be essential workers, or dealing with a situation that forces them to take a risk. Many, many health workers or their family members have died because people like you infected them with COVID-19 after they got sick and sought care. Many of them quarantine themselves away from their families during outbreaks for exactly this reason. Please reconsider your stance here. > A large part of my personal motivation for starting this in the first place is because of the terrible way the media currently reports COVID which is almost exclusively through number of confirmed cases. I'd argue that stat means very little. But your chief data source, the New York Times, is already doing this. Their README [1] gives the exact same motivation you do. The difference is they don't highlight a stat that downplays the severity of the pandemic. Given this, I think your site is deeply misleading, and a prospective user would gain more valuable insight simply by loading the NYT's CSV into Google Sheets. > It's really straightforward to not be significantly overweight and workout 2-3 days per week. It may be for you, but many others struggle with weight for completely valid reasons (disability, mental illness, hormone disorders, metabolic and dietary disorders) and you can't distinguish them in the grocery store. I would also argue more broadly that we shouldn't value the lives of the overweight of obese less than others, no matter the cause. It's also worth saying that while you keep focusing on obesity as the chief comorbidity, in truth it's age, and no amount of personal responsibility can let you avoid that (the opposite, actually). --- I don't want to imply that I don't want to get back to life. Despite being misanthropic and super privileged, lockdowns and precautions haven't been wonderful for me--and it's been even worse for people I'm close to. But to be blunt, your position is selfish. I urge you to change your behavior. Many people and their loved ones are vulnerable to COVID-19 through no fault of their own, and you are putting them in danger. We should have vaccines in the next few months. It doesn't feel like that much to ask to try and stay in your home as much as possible, wear masks and socially distance when you can't, and wash your hands frequently until then. Compared to the potential consequences, I just can't see any justification for not doing so. [1]: https://github.com/nytimes/covid-19-data#methodology-and-definitions https://github.com/nytimes/covid-19-data#methodology-and-def...

I'm just gonna skip a bunch of steps here, which may be unwise but whatever. Your argument is that if you're fit and healthy, you shouldn't have your behavior dictated by people who aren't. They've made poor choices, they're the ones who should bear the consequences. You further argue that the low per-capita positive tests indicates that COVID-19 doesn't deserve the response we've (so far) given it. Here's why you're wrong: - Fit, healthy people do die from COVID-19. They can also suffer long-term effects. - There are people with high vulnerability to COVID-19 through no fault of their own. They can have autoimmune disorders, or simply be old. You acknowledge this. However, you generally can't choose to transmit COVID-19 only to the obese and not the old (for example). - Further, you broadly can't choose to contract COVID-19 and not transmit it to others. It's possible to be asymptomatic and shedding for days. To be clear: you can have COVID-19, not know it, and infect dozens of others who can do the same. - Tests are a poor measure of the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic. They do lend themselves very well to manipulation and motivated reasoning, which I would guess is why people who are motivated to diminish the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic like using them. The only stat that matters is death count per capita.

hnrodey 6y ago
First, I appreciate the thought you put in to your response. Every possible demographic has experienced some type of negative outcome from COVID. Most people make a full recovery. Have the fit and healthy passed from COVID? Absolutely, albeit at a staggeringly lower rate than others. Personally, my wife and I made a decision back in the summer to get back to living our lives and accepting the consequence because we are a family of four healthy individuals. We workout several days per week. Our children are healthy. We don't eat like assholes. We are not licking doorknobs. We have stayed at home when we knowingly came in to contact with someone who tested positive. We respect others' decisions who have decided that stricter measures are right for their situation. On the site I acknowledge asymptomatic transmission of COVID. If I am worried about getting sick then I should be taking all possible precautions to minimize my risk including self isolation, etc. A large part of my personal motivation for starting this in the first place is because of the terrible way the media currently reports COVID which is almost exclusively through number of confirmed cases. I'd argue that stat means very little. It seems true to reason that the sick and unhealthy are the group who suffer the largest impact from COVID. Health is a choice (obviously there are exceptions). Millions of people die every year in the US from otherwise preventable causes like heart disease, lung disease and various forms of cancer. Therefore my thesis is that we are punishing the responsible people in the world to prioritize those who have willfully neglected their health for a significant portion of their life. It's really straightforward to not be significantly overweight and workout 2-3 days per week.
- camgunz 6y ago
  Thanks! I think your viewpoint is one shared by lots of people for valid reasons, so hopefully I'm not coming across as too argumentative or whatever. But on the other hand stakes are high, so I don't want to sugarcoat anything either. > Have the fit and healthy passed from COVID? Absolutely, albeit at a staggeringly lower rate than others. The end of this argument is "the mortality rate for X people is/isn't worth response Y", e.g. "the mortality rate for fit people isn't worth lockdowns for everyone". This seems like a good analysis to engage in, but it isn't, because you can't pick who gets COVID-19. The rejoinder here is "it is worth lockdowns for everyone because fit people can still infect other groups with a much higher mortality rate with COVID-19." Another rejoinder would be "the current mortality rate is 1-2%, which means if we're all infected millions of people die." > On the site I acknowledge asymptomatic transmission of COVID. If I am worried about getting sick then I should be taking all possible precautions to minimize my risk including self isolation, etc. You are essentially saying you accept the risk of contracting COVID-19 and infecting others. I think that's the crucial point you're missing: infecting others. You may be in a position to make that choice for yourself, but many others aren't and can't avoid you. They could be essential workers, or dealing with a situation that forces them to take a risk. Many, many health workers or their family members have died because people like you infected them with COVID-19 after they got sick and sought care. Many of them quarantine themselves away from their families during outbreaks for exactly this reason. Please reconsider your stance here. > A large part of my personal motivation for starting this in the first place is because of the terrible way the media currently reports COVID which is almost exclusively through number of confirmed cases. I'd argue that stat means very little. But your chief data source, the New York Times, is already doing this. Their README [1] gives the exact same motivation you do. The difference is they don't highlight a stat that downplays the severity of the pandemic. Given this, I think your site is deeply misleading, and a prospective user would gain more valuable insight simply by loading the NYT's CSV into Google Sheets. > It's really straightforward to not be significantly overweight and workout 2-3 days per week. It may be for you, but many others struggle with weight for completely valid reasons (disability, mental illness, hormone disorders, metabolic and dietary disorders) and you can't distinguish them in the grocery store. I would also argue more broadly that we shouldn't value the lives of the overweight of obese less than others, no matter the cause. It's also worth saying that while you keep focusing on obesity as the chief comorbidity, in truth it's age, and no amount of personal responsibility can let you avoid that (the opposite, actually). --- I don't want to imply that I don't want to get back to life. Despite being misanthropic and super privileged, lockdowns and precautions haven't been wonderful for me--and it's been even worse for people I'm close to. But to be blunt, your position is selfish. I urge you to change your behavior. Many people and their loved ones are vulnerable to COVID-19 through no fault of their own, and you are putting them in danger. We should have vaccines in the next few months. It doesn't feel like that much to ask to try and stay in your home as much as possible, wear masks and socially distance when you can't, and wash your hands frequently until then. Compared to the potential consequences, I just can't see any justification for not doing so. [1]: https://github.com/nytimes/covid-19-data#methodology-and-definitions https://github.com/nytimes/covid-19-data#methodology-and-def...