Skiing is back!

Smellytele · May 12, 2020

So to isolate all high risk people do we need to weigh everyone to say they are part of the obese group. More people are obese by standards than would like to omit.

Sent from my iPhone using AlpineZone

tumbler · May 12, 2020

Hawk said:
So I guess my perspective is different. I am sure those of you who feel you were unjustly cooped up have a different perspective because you do not know or seen much of the virus. This is where I come from so you understand why I cringe every time you guys say this is all bull shit. The fact is I know know 14 people that have come down with the virus. Not all close personal friends but people I have actually met at least once. 2 nurses, 7 older people, 1 EMT and 3 guys and 1 girl that are between 40 and 50. All are in my circles in the eastern part of MA. Of those people 5 have passed away. 3 were older between 60 and 80 but 2 were not. One was a nurse that was 45 years old and one was a guy that was 50. Both were avid outdoors people in extremely good health The guy was someone I mountain biked with and he was very strong. I say if those people can die then there is a chance I can die. That is enough to give me pause when doing anything outside my house. I find myself not trusting anybody. Not even my family. So the death rate in my little world is 35%. I am going to stay the fuck away from everybody for the foreseeable future. You can do what you want.

+1000. Most people have not had any direct impacts from this and buy that this is "just a flu" What worries me more is when another, more deadly one shows up and people say screw that, we so overreacted to the COVID-19.

I wish everything in this country didn't come down to political parties. It seems to matter more whether you are red or blue than the safety and well being of fellow Americans.

ss20 · May 12, 2020

Both "sides" have good points, hence I'm also one for letting those who want to go out go out and those who want to isolate, isolate. Staying inside and hunkering down is a really good idea for the next six months or so...this is nasty if you catch it and there definitely a chance you will die, slight, but a real chance. I can see that viewpoint. That said I'm one of those who if Killington (or a race track, or my favorite restaurant) said they were opening up tomorrow I'd be there even if the admission price was having to lick a communal doorknob.

BenedictGomez · May 12, 2020

Hawk said:
I am going to stay the fuck away from everybody for the foreseeable future. You can do what you want.

Sort of like a free country. Sounds good to me.

BenedictGomez · May 12, 2020

Smellytele said:
So to isolate all high risk people do we need to weigh everyone to say they are part of the obese group. More people are obese by standards than would like to omit.

Yes, but it's also important to note (since the media wont do anything for you that will lower the panic & fear factor) that the COVID19 "obese" people running into problems and dying from the virus do not tend to be the people who are "obese" by our absurdly low & outdated BMI standards which are currently used to codify "obese" people, but by the eye test of, "wow, that person really needs to lose weight", standard. Morbidly obese people and the like.

EPB · May 12, 2020

ss20 said:
...I'm also one for letting those who want to go out go out and those who want to isolate, isolate. Staying inside and hunkering down is a really good idea for the next six months or so...this is nasty if you catch it and there definitely a chance you will die, slight, but a real chance...

Agreed. If you're too much of a partisan to understand you are not at risk of dying from this thing unless you are old or have a pre-existing condition (obesity included), or both, be my guest and stay at home. No need to be a tyrant and advocate vast swaths of the country lose their livelihood to make you feel safer when you're just going to stay inside anyway.

And this coming from a ~30 year old who can probably last a good two years before running out of money if he got canned this afternoon (generously assuming rent wouldn't crater if things were actually that bad). I'll be more than okay if we stay locked down for several more months.

It's almost as though people never got the message about what "flattening the curve" meant. Despite the totally understandable hysterics down here in greater NYC, we never got close to using all the resources that were sent our way. We kept the spread under the magic line, so we did "flatten the curve" in the sense that we never rationed life saving medical treatment. The thing those that never took Calculus 2 (or never properly thought the curve flattening through) seem to miss is the area under the curve doesn't change. That means the same number of people get infected in either scenario. The whole issue was whether we would need to ration care and unnecessary deaths would happen as a result. The same number of people get infected under either scenario.

There are three things that really matter here:
1) Are we going to overwhelm the healthcare system?
2) Is a legitimate "game changing" therapeutic going to come to the market imminently? - and I mean by a more robust standard than the one used by #45.
3) Is a vaccine coming imminently?

-We seem to be approaching the point where 1 is kinda low risk. We're certainly better prepared to make sure this doesn't happen today given testing, better knowledge, and the fact that millions have already contracted the disease.
-2 and 3 are total unknowns, but unless you believe one or both are imminent, then staying home just kills more businesses/jobs and only delays the inevitable number of COVID cases and deaths. Flattening the curve does not mean eliminating the curve. The only people saved by flattening the curve are those who would have been denied care due to hospital space shortages (the way this point has been bastardized by the media is a high crime to those who appreciate the study and proper application statistics).
-There are massive health downsides to being afraid of going/unable to go to the hospital for elective procedures which don't always feel "elective" to those who are counting on them; mental health issues, alcohol/drug abuse are serious concerns to anyone with sympathy towards those with fragile mental health states or those who are at risk to be abused by impaired spouses/parents.

If I'm missing something, happy to consider more, but I frankly think this has been made partisan because outrage sells more ad space - not because a planned and sensible reopening isn't the obvious objective right choice.

p_levert · May 12, 2020

eastern powder baby said:
There are three things that really matter here:
1) Are we going to overwhelm the healthcare system?
2) Is a legitimate "game changing" therapeutic going to come to the market imminently? - and I mean by a more robust standard than the one used by #45.
3) Is a vaccine coming imminently?

-We seem to be approaching the point where 1 is kinda low risk. We're certainly better prepared to make sure this doesn't happen today given testing, better knowledge, and the fact that millions have already contracted the disease.
-2 and 3 are total unknowns, but unless you believe one or both are imminent, then staying home just kills more businesses/jobs and only delays the inevitable number of COVID cases and deaths. Flattening the curve does not mean eliminating the curve. The only people saved by flattening the curve are those who would have been denied care due to hospital space shortages (the way this point has been bastardized by the media is a high crime to those who appreciate the study and proper application statistics).
-There are massive health downsides to being afraid of going/unable to go to the hospital for elective procedures which don't always feel "elective" to those who are counting on them; mental health issues, alcohol/drug abuse are serious concerns to anyone with sympathy towards those with fragile mental health states or those who are at risk to be abused by impaired spouses/parents.

Nice post eastern powder baby. And I agree that we're probably not going to overwhelm the health care system. Actually, the current problem might be "what the f*ck are we going to do with all those ventilators".

Not sure about effective treatment. But I am optimistic about the vaccine. Fauci, who's quite a cautious guy, said today there's a good chance of a vaccine by "late fall/early winter". Coming from a cautious guy, I think this means something.

I don't think it's really a simple choice between "open now" and "stay locked down". It's possible to choose a middle ground where the opening is cautious with significant monitoring to check for infection rebound.

JimG. · May 12, 2020

Hawk said:
So I guess my perspective is different. I am sure those of you who feel you were unjustly cooped up have a different perspective because you do not know or seen much of the virus.

Please spare us the "you don't know the horrors of this because you have not experienced it" attitude.

My mother-in-law passed away from COVID-19 last Tuesday.

BenedictGomez · May 12, 2020

eastern powder baby said:
It's almost as though people never got the message about what "flattening the curve" meant. Despite the totally understandable hysterics down here in greater NYC, we never got close to using all the resources that were sent our way. We kept the spread under the magic line, so we did "flatten the curve" in the sense that we never rationed life saving medical treatment.

Senator Scott gave a fantastic little speech on this today in the Senate hearings, essentially suggesting that it would seem as if some are content on practically never reopening the country and/or acting as if all 50 states are New York City. He did so in a thoughtful, respectful, but pungent way.

p_levert said:
Fauci, who's quite a cautious guy, said today there's a good chance of a vaccine by "late fall/early winter".

Golly, that would be way less than 1 year to 1.5 years, wouldn't it.

BenedictGomez · May 12, 2020

JimG. said:
Please spare us the "you don't know the horrors of this because you have not experienced it" attitude.

My mother-in-law passed away from COVID-19 last Tuesday.

Hawk frequently delves into these little self-righteous "I am a better person than you" speeches on myriad subjects. This time it bit him in the ass. Sorry for you & your wife's loss. I have had 3 family members (2 mine, 1 my wife's) come down with COVID19, one hospitalized for a week & is thank god now fine. You can have the opinion that America's COVID19 reaction is now overdone while still having people you love affected by the virus.

p_levert · May 12, 2020

BenedictGomez said:
Quote Originally Posted by p_levert View Post
Fauci, who's quite a cautious guy, said today there's a good chance of a vaccine by "late fall/early winter".

Golly, that would be way less than 1 year to 1.5 years, wouldn't it.

I make a point of not responding to BenedictGomez because he's a consistently rude guy. He's the only person I exclude, because everyone else is fine by me, whether I agree with them or not.

When did I ever say 1 year to 1.5 years for a vaccine? I never said that.

EPB · May 12, 2020

BenedictGomez said:
Senator Scott gave a fantastic little speech on this today in the Senate hearings, essentially suggesting that it would seem as if some are content on practically never reopening the country and/or acting as if all 50 states are New York City. He did so in a thoughtful, respectful, but pungent way.

Yeah this a local pandemic in NYC area on a level the rest of the country will hopefully never see.

As an anecdote, I was talking to my brother who still lives in NH a couple weeks ago. He was talking about how in Littleton, NH, the cops/firefighters did one of those little drive up, turn on the lights/sirens and wave at the hospital worker salutes like you've probably seen on TV in NYC. For those that don't know, Littleton is about halfway between Burke and Cannon on I-93 on the NH/VT border. Apparently, there was also a pretty strong chance there wasn't a single COVID patient in the hospital at the time of the salute given how few people had the disease in that part of the state and the fact that COVID patients were more likely to be sent to Dartmouth anyway.

EPB · May 12, 2020

p_levert said:
I make a point of not responding to BenedictGomez because he's a consistently rude guy. He's the only person I exclude, because everyone else is fine by me, whether I agree with them or not.

When did I ever say 1 year to 1.5 years for a vaccine? I never said that.

I have no idea if you did and am happy to take your word for it. I hope we get one ASAP, too.

If I had to guess, he's probably referring to characters like Brian Stelter who called Trump an idiot for suggesting a vaccine in 2020 was possible. I even read in one of Fbrissette's local papers in Canada (La Presse - to practice my French), and even they had an article suggesting Trump "pretends" a vaccine is possible this year. Why reporters who likely aren't capable of handicapping those odds one way or another think they need to take such a strong stance on the issue was odd to me, but oh well.

That said, you seem to be trying to sift through what Fauci and team is saying which is the best approach I've been able to come up with.

p_levert · May 12, 2020

eastern powder baby said:
If I had to guess, he's probably referring to characters like Brian Stelter who called Trump an idiot for suggesting a vaccine in 2020 was possible. I even read in one of Fbrissette's local papers in Canada (La Presse - to practice my French), and even they had an article suggesting Trump "pretends" a vaccine is possible this year. Why reporters who likely aren't capable of handicapping those odds one way or another think they need to take such a strong stance on the issue was odd to me, but oh well.

That said, you seem to be trying to sift through what Fauci and team is saying which is the best approach I've been able to come up with.

The quality of debate goes down fast when people stereotype each other and assume that a person is a "lib" or "trump supporter" or whatever. We're all individuals, regardless of who we voted for in the last election.

BenedictGomez · May 12, 2020

p_levert said:
I make a point of not responding to BenedictGomez because he's a consistently rude guy. He's the only person I exclude

Oh, gimme a break. Then rather than being passive aggressive, whiny, and temperamental, use the "ignore" feature. Too rude?

eastern powder baby said:
there was also a pretty strong chance there wasn't a single COVID patient in the hospital at the time of the salute given

There are plenty of non-affected regions in America.

Today Senator Collins talked about how dental offices in Maine are or were all shut down for so long that people with simple cavities now need root canals, people who needed simple root canals are now getting teeth pulled, and worse.

There are real, serious consequences to shutting down entire swaths of the country which simply do not need to be shut down. I was reading yesterday how "expected deaths" in population sets are jumping higher than what is likely explainable simply from COVID19, and one hypothesis is that with hundreds of millions of people not able to seek routine and/or preventative medical care, things that would have been potentially life-saving are not being caught (e.g. I think you need an EKG, Mr. Jones - and instead Mr. Jones dies 6 weeks later from a heart attack).

EPB · May 12, 2020

p_levert said:
The quality of debate goes down fast when people stereotype each other and assume that a person is a "lib" or "trump supporter" or whatever. We're all individuals, regardless of who we voted for in the last election.

Agreed. One can be solutions-oriented or political at times like this. I'm certainly more of a pragmatist than a partisan.

Hawk · May 12, 2020

eastern powder baby said:
Agreed. If you're too much of a partisan to understand you are not at risk of dying from this thing unless you are old or have a pre-existing condition (obesity included), or both, be my guest and stay at home. No need to be a tyrant and advocate vast swaths of the country lose their livelihood to make you feel safer when you're just going to stay inside anyway.

And this coming from a ~30 year old who can probably last a good two years before running out of money if he got canned this afternoon (generously assuming rent wouldn't crater if things were actually that bad). I'll be more than okay if we stay locked down for several more months.

It's almost as though people never got the message about what "flattening the curve" meant. Despite the totally understandable hysterics down here in greater NYC, we never got close to using all the resources that were sent our way. We kept the spread under the magic line, so we did "flatten the curve" in the sense that we never rationed life saving medical treatment. The thing those that never took Calculus 2 (or never properly thought the curve flattening through) seem to miss is the area under the curve doesn't change. That means the same number of people get infected in either scenario. The whole issue was whether we would need to ration care and unnecessary deaths would happen as a result. The same number of people get infected under either scenario.

There are three things that really matter here:
1) Are we going to overwhelm the healthcare system?
2) Is a legitimate "game changing" therapeutic going to come to the market imminently? - and I mean by a more robust standard than the one used by #45.
3) Is a vaccine coming imminently?

-We seem to be approaching the point where 1 is kinda low risk. We're certainly better prepared to make sure this doesn't happen today given testing, better knowledge, and the fact that millions have already contracted the disease.
-2 and 3 are total unknowns, but unless you believe one or both are imminent, then staying home just kills more businesses/jobs and only delays the inevitable number of COVID cases and deaths. Flattening the curve does not mean eliminating the curve. The only people saved by flattening the curve are those who would have been denied care due to hospital space shortages (the way this point has been bastardized by the media is a high crime to those who appreciate the study and proper application statistics).
-There are massive health downsides to being afraid of going/unable to go to the hospital for elective procedures which don't always feel "elective" to those who are counting on them; mental health issues, alcohol/drug abuse are serious concerns to anyone with sympathy towards those with fragile mental health states or those who are at risk to be abused by impaired spouses/parents.

If I'm missing something, happy to consider more, but I frankly think this has been made partisan because outrage sells more ad space - not because a planned and sensible reopening isn't the obvious objective right choice.

So what about the guy i knew that died and was in great shape with no preexisting conditions? he made it to the hospital, got care, declined and then checked out. I bet he was in better shape than you. So you are in total denial that you could possibly have a bad reaction to this? You make is sound like you are immune. That is my problem. Sadly, eventually someone on here is going to pay. I have no idea who but it will happen. I bet next fall when this comes back and 10 fold.

EPB · May 12, 2020

BenedictGomez said:
There are real, serious consequences to shutting down entire swaths of the country which simply do not need to be shut down. I was reading yesterday how "expected deaths" in population sets are jumping higher than what is likely explainable simply from COVID19, and one hypothesis is that with hundreds of millions of people not able to seek routine and/or preventative medical care, things that would have been potentially life-saving are not being caught (e.g. I think you need an EKG, Mr. Jones - and instead Mr. Jones dies 6 weeks later from a heart attack).

It's pretty sad that it is somehow considered "partisan" to point this out. I really want to elaborate further, but not trying to keep this above the fray.

EPB · May 12, 2020

Hawk said:
So what about the guy i knew that died and was in great shape with no preexisting conditions? he made it to the hospital, got care, declined and then checked out. I bet he was in better shape than you. So you are in total denial that you could possibly have a bad reaction to this? You make is sound like you are immune. That is my problem. Sadly, eventually someone on here is going to pay. I have no idea who but it will happen. I bet next fall when this comes back and 10 fold.

Hawk, first I want to say that you have my sincere condolences that you lost friends/loved ones, but this is an emotional rant and not an objective look at the facts. You mentioned your personal experience "death rate" is 35%. Mine is 0%. The problem is, objectively, the death rate is under 1%. Who you know that had it vs. who I know is irrelevant when we're talking about the totality of the disease.

Am I in denial? I certainly don't think so, but you decide. I will say you seemed to have grossly oversimplified my position on the matter.

As a healthy ~30 year old, I had a better chance getting killed in a car accident on the way to work in the year leading up to the shutdown than I do from COVID-19 before a vaccine comes out.

The latest death rate numbers I've heard floated around are in the 1/1,500 to 1/5,000 range for my cohort. That includes the obese, asthmatics, smokers, vapers, etc. Fortunately, I don't knowingly check off any of the "risk factors" which means my chances should be considerably lower than 1/1,500-1/5,000.

Is there a chance that I do have some unknown/dormant condition that would make me susceptible to the disease? Sure. I hate to speculate, but if I were a betting man, I would suspect your friend probably had an un-diagnosed reason why they were succumbed when they otherwise seemed so healthy. Our doctors are great, but not perfect.

If you have a problem with my analysis of the situation, go ahead and poke holes in it. More than happy to hear something new. But I do talk with my parents, who are both retired physicians, on this quite frequently. My opinion certainly leans on their professional ones and not oneoff anecdotal evidence.

Hawk · May 12, 2020

eastern powder baby said:
Hawk, first I want to say that you have my sincere condolences that you lost friends/loved ones, but this is an emotional rant and not an objective look at the facts. You mentioned your personal experience "death rate" is 35%. Mine is 0%. The problem is, objectively, the death rate is under 1%. Who you know that had it vs. who I know is irrelevant when we're talking about the totality of the disease.

Am I in denial? I certainly don't think so, but you decide. I will say you seemed to have grossly oversimplified my position on the matter.

As a healthy ~30 year old, I had a better chance getting killed in a car accident on the way to work in the year leading up to the shutdown than I do from COVID-19 before a vaccine comes out.

The latest death rate numbers I've heard floated around are in the 1/1,500 to 1/5,000 range for my cohort. That includes the obese, asthmatics, smokers, vapers, etc. Fortunately, I don't knowingly check off any of the "risk factors" which means my chances should be considerably lower than 1/1,500-1/5,000.

Is there a chance that I do have some unknown/dormant condition that would make me susceptible to the disease? Sure. I hate to speculate, but if I were a betting man, I would suspect your friend probably had an un-diagnosed reason why they were succumbed when they otherwise seemed so healthy. Our doctors are great, but not perfect.

If you have a problem with my analysis of the situation, go ahead and poke holes in it. More than happy to hear something new. But I do talk with my parents, who are both retired physicians, on this quite frequently. My opinion certainly leans on their professional ones and not oneoff anecdotal evidence.

Your right. I am sorry I did simplify greatly on what were saying. You have provided data and numbers that are all very thought out. You have made a hypothesis, supported it with fact and came up with a reasoned conclusion. But, for me on this particular situation it is simple. If there is a chance I could either die or infect the ones I love that is enough of a reason. I've seen what can happen. I could not live with the prospect of killing someone I love because I was either reckless or thought I was low risk or what ever. killing myself skiing or biking or doing dangerous shit is my choice. It is just me. This thing kills others and shitty part is you just don't know. I hope you live safe and clean for a long time and proove me wrong but I really feel the odds are changing, even as we speak. This coming fall and winter will define everything as we go forward. We will see.

Skiing is back!

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Active member

Moderator

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Active member

Active member

Active member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Active member

Active member

Well-known member

Similar threads