Are we locking down everybody just to avoid old people feeling targeted?

Armstronglivs wrote:

facts are facts wrote:

Same story here. All the old grumpy bastards are out and about as all their happy hour locations, movie theaters, and

Marijuana dispensaries are not open all day for them to clog up the city. And they are susceptible. Most are fat and need to eat less. This is good for them.

Maybe them running out of all that junk food will help our Diabetes epidemic. I work with old people and despise most of them??

If you're lucky, you, too, may one day become an old person. And then someone like who you are today will "despise you".

Armstronglivs:

Why would you be against ordering a lockdown for older people and those who have pre existing conditions?

Because it would discriminate against them? But they are the one who are at risk with their weakened immune defenses.

My thread title is about this. We are under the impression that if everything is shutting down it's because old people would not accept to be restricted when younger and stronger people are not. It's a bit of "everybody need to suffer and if I can't enjoy it nobody will".

Armstronglivs wrote:

Baba Yaga B wrote:

That's not true. Studies have shown that the majory of people infected barely felt it, like some little cough or minor fever.

Only 20% can develop harder symptoms and get really sick. And only 5% will need to be put in ICU.

Italy has released a statistic:

99% of people who died had other disease such as diabetes, high blood pressure and cardiovascular disease It's written here, and most have multiples pre existing conditions:

The "young" people the disease can affect are those who have diabetes.

So, if the disease was mainly killing young people and children, you would take the same view - why should we really care? Somehow, I think not.

If the virus was killing young people and children, then my opinion would be to lock down young people and children, and not old people.

I am for locking down the people who are in big danger, not the people who can fight off the infection.

I am Sam wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

The "dumb ass fearmonger" was the Governor of NY. But I guess you aren't really following events.

Not sure who the dum ass is, but there are a few.

Cuomo said 53% of hospitalisations

You and Fisky say ICU

Are all hospitalisations ICU, how many are just a check up.

Maybe there is something in the water. The number of Italians dying are overwhelming whereas in Aus, a very specific group of 7 have died out of 1350, youngest 77 (cruise ship passenger), 95, 90 and 84 yo in same nursing home

Apparently 2% are serious/critical, so that is about 27 people here

No. Armstronglivs misspoke and said ICU. If you look at my (fisky's) post, I said Cuomo said "hospitalizations."

I'm also wondering about the wide variation in severity. It seems to be severe in some people and only mildy symptomatic in others even when both people have no preexisting problems and are the same age cohort. This is happening too often to be random chance. There must be some other factor that either researchers haven't found or are not reporting.

Typically, viral infections are fought off by the immune system.

The quality of the immune system response do everything. If the infection is slowed down quickly, the specialized response kick off and then eliminate all the cells infected by the virus, stopping its replication.

That's how people recoved. The people who don't get sick at all have a immune system who reacts faster with the first cells producing interferons working faster and getting the situation under control before the specialized cells kick in.

If a person have the virus who can relicate and develop faster than the immune system can respond, even after specialized T cells are engaged, that's typically how it evolves toward a bad form of disease.

Not only the virus will damage more cells and organs, but the immune system will engage more and more and more, doing serious inflammations all over the body and lunges in this case in an attempt to fight the infection and send more cells to the battleground. It can lead to death.

And among all the factors that weaken the immune system are diabetes, obesity, high blood pressure, age and all.

Agreed. That's why I routinely take supplements to strengthen the immune system. As competitive runners, our immune systems are weakened for a period of time after every hard workout. That's a window for viral infections. A study, IIRC, found that 40%? of marathoners developed upper respiratory illness within two weeks of the race.

Here is data from Fauci stating that 40% of hospitalizations were ages 20-54. Link below... I wonder what's different between USA's youth and Chinese youth? My immediate thought is that, as a group, the USA is fat. I would like to see a fit or fat breakout of severity.

Fauci was responding to new data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which, after studying more than 4,000 cases in the U.S., showed that about 40 percent of those who were hospitalized for the virus as of March 16 were ages 20 to 54. Among the most critical cases, 12 percent of intensive care admissions were among those ages 20 to 44, while 36 percent were for those 45 to 64.

Physical activites is generally good for the immune system, but it also depends of the volume. If you are at 100+ miles per weeks, it would be maybe useful to go back at 50-70 for a period of times, since there are no marathon anyway for a several months.

What would be interesting is to know how many of these younger patients are obese and have diabete or high blood pressure, which are factors who cripples the immune system.