4 ms·

> It makes me wonder why we haven't been spending anything close to 1/5 as much time and effort on fighting opioid abuse as we have on covid. If you think opio

> It makes me wonder why we haven't been spending anything close to 1/5 as much time and effort on fighting opioid abuse as we have on covid. If you think opioid abuse is bad, wait until you know the amount of deaths from obesity or smoking. > More than 480,000 deaths annually (including deaths from secondhand smoke) https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/health_effects/tobacco_related_mortality/index.htm https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/heal... > Obesity is associated with nearly 1 in 5 US deaths, according to a study published online August 15 in the American Journal of Public Health. The new data suggest obesity's toll on Americans is more than 3 times previous estimates. https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/809516 https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/809516 All preventable causes of death that apparently we must be ok with! What's the lockdown equivalent? Is it "not caring" if I don't lock anyone above 200lbs in a room and starve them until they're a healthy weight?

notatoad 6y ago
The health care system is built with capacity to handle obesity and smoking related illnesses. It is not built with the capacity to handle covid on top of that. Additionally, a pandemic and the measures to stop it is a temporary situation. If we could end obesity, opiod abuse, or car crashes by making drastic societal changes that only lasted for a couple months, I'd argue that we should do that. The equivalent actions to stop other high-mortality trends would be permanent changes to society.
- gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
  > the measures to stop it is a temporary situation Lockdown advocates are arguing authoritarianism is how we get zero deaths. I don’t care to entertain authoritarianism on a “temporary basis.” The thing is, authoritarianism justifies itself with tons of utopian excuses like: Zero crime Zero poverty Zero hunger Zero obesity Zero sin
  - kiba 6y ago
    It is wrong to pretend that lockdown isn't effective. No man is an island with respect to communicable diseases. Instead, we decided that this health issue is an ideological struggle of authoritarianism versus liberty, or democrats versus conservative, instead of working together to solve this problem so that we can return to normalcy ASAP. It's pretty embarrassing that China had got the disease beaten, while we're still struggling with COVID-19.
    - gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
      > It is wrong to pretend that lockdown isn't effective. If they were effective, why do graphs show seasonality predominates? There's yet to be conclusive scientific evidence of the effectiveness of lockdowns. No where in the 2006 Bush plan does it even mention something akin to lockdown - there's mention of quarantine and isolation under police power but that's about it. Surely the medical community and govt would have written about something like that beforehand? > It's pretty embarrassing that China had got the disease beaten, while we're still struggling with COVID-19. Why are they spending billions as part of their campaign to control narratives through means of propaganda, etc.?
      - newacct583 6y ago
        > If they were effective, why do graphs show seasonality predominates? That doesn't follow. Growth prior to the initial lockdowns was expoenential with a doubling rate between 5-7 days. Had this been ineffective we'd have all been sick by now and maybe 50-100M people would be dead worldwide. Clearly "lockdown" (which is a loaded term people tend to use for anything from stay at home orders to simple mask requirements) worked. The question is how well and to what extent the regimes were followed, and by which populations.
        gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
        > Growth prior to the initial lockdowns was expoenential with a doubling rate between 5-7 days. Had this been ineffective we'd have all been sick by now and maybe 50-100M people would be dead worldwide. You know this isn't true because practically every local area that suffers an outbreak follows the same curve regardless of how they implement a strategy. It looks different at larger levels (town, city, state, country, globe) because it's the aggregation of multiple outbreaks.
- mrfusion 6y ago
  We had a year now to beef up our health care system. I guess it’s just easier to take away human rights?
  - paulryanrogers 6y ago
    Wait, are you suggesting that more infection of a novel virus (whose family is known for more fatality and lingering effects) is an acceptable trade-off for temporary freedom from masks and limits on gathering? Assuming that ones hostipals could handle the worst case scenarios.
    - Pet_Ant 6y ago
      There are people for whom liberty is an absolute and there is litterally nothing that justifies curtailing it. For a sizable population the entire moral supremacy of the United States is that it is a place that they feel uniquely safeguards it. I have no dog in this fight as I don’t live there, but I see it as a theme in enough comments and threads that I’m surprised some Americans seem so oblivious to the perspective of their fellow countrymen.
      - gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
        > it is a place that they feel uniquely safeguards it This isn't news, just read de Tocqueville. As an American I'm comforted by the idea that a significant part of my compatriots will resist any order by virtue of being ordered. Treat other people like humans with dignity that must be persuaded instead of commanded. That's the American ideal imo.
        a0-prw 6y ago
        That's not the way America treats other people around the world.
        gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
        Hence why they're referred to as ideals. No one lives up to them as a consequence of being human. That doesn't invalidate them.

notatoad 6y ago

The health care system is built with capacity to handle obesity and smoking related illnesses. It is not built with the capacity to handle covid on top of that. Additionally, a pandemic and the measures to stop it is a temporary situation. If we could end obesity, opiod abuse, or car crashes by making drastic societal changes that only lasted for a couple months, I'd argue that we should do that. The equivalent actions to stop other high-mortality trends would be permanent changes to society.

gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
> the measures to stop it is a temporary situation Lockdown advocates are arguing authoritarianism is how we get zero deaths. I don’t care to entertain authoritarianism on a “temporary basis.” The thing is, authoritarianism justifies itself with tons of utopian excuses like: Zero crime Zero poverty Zero hunger Zero obesity Zero sin
- kiba 6y ago
  It is wrong to pretend that lockdown isn't effective. No man is an island with respect to communicable diseases. Instead, we decided that this health issue is an ideological struggle of authoritarianism versus liberty, or democrats versus conservative, instead of working together to solve this problem so that we can return to normalcy ASAP. It's pretty embarrassing that China had got the disease beaten, while we're still struggling with COVID-19.
  - gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
    > It is wrong to pretend that lockdown isn't effective. If they were effective, why do graphs show seasonality predominates? There's yet to be conclusive scientific evidence of the effectiveness of lockdowns. No where in the 2006 Bush plan does it even mention something akin to lockdown - there's mention of quarantine and isolation under police power but that's about it. Surely the medical community and govt would have written about something like that beforehand? > It's pretty embarrassing that China had got the disease beaten, while we're still struggling with COVID-19. Why are they spending billions as part of their campaign to control narratives through means of propaganda, etc.?
    - newacct583 6y ago
      > If they were effective, why do graphs show seasonality predominates? That doesn't follow. Growth prior to the initial lockdowns was expoenential with a doubling rate between 5-7 days. Had this been ineffective we'd have all been sick by now and maybe 50-100M people would be dead worldwide. Clearly "lockdown" (which is a loaded term people tend to use for anything from stay at home orders to simple mask requirements) worked. The question is how well and to what extent the regimes were followed, and by which populations.
      - gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
        > Growth prior to the initial lockdowns was expoenential with a doubling rate between 5-7 days. Had this been ineffective we'd have all been sick by now and maybe 50-100M people would be dead worldwide. You know this isn't true because practically every local area that suffers an outbreak follows the same curve regardless of how they implement a strategy. It looks different at larger levels (town, city, state, country, globe) because it's the aggregation of multiple outbreaks.
mrfusion 6y ago
We had a year now to beef up our health care system. I guess it’s just easier to take away human rights?
- paulryanrogers 6y ago
  Wait, are you suggesting that more infection of a novel virus (whose family is known for more fatality and lingering effects) is an acceptable trade-off for temporary freedom from masks and limits on gathering? Assuming that ones hostipals could handle the worst case scenarios.
  - Pet_Ant 6y ago
    There are people for whom liberty is an absolute and there is litterally nothing that justifies curtailing it. For a sizable population the entire moral supremacy of the United States is that it is a place that they feel uniquely safeguards it. I have no dog in this fight as I don’t live there, but I see it as a theme in enough comments and threads that I’m surprised some Americans seem so oblivious to the perspective of their fellow countrymen.
    - gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
      > it is a place that they feel uniquely safeguards it This isn't news, just read de Tocqueville. As an American I'm comforted by the idea that a significant part of my compatriots will resist any order by virtue of being ordered. Treat other people like humans with dignity that must be persuaded instead of commanded. That's the American ideal imo.
      - a0-prw 6y ago
        That's not the way America treats other people around the world.
        gnusty_gnurc 6y ago
        Hence why they're referred to as ideals. No one lives up to them as a consequence of being human. That doesn't invalidate them.