Cyberpunkd
Member
Kids don’t need to be vaccinated to go to school. Adults do not need to be vaccinated to go to work (and unlike the US in France your employer cannot force you to get vaccinated).
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
Which countries with "low obesity rates" have been completely slammed by Covid? How do you define "low obesity rates" and "completely slammed?"
Obesity increasingly appears to be *the most* significant risk factor when it comes to hospitalization and death.
Cyberpunkd
Member
Ah yes, the ‘I don’t give a fuck about other people’ argument.
vpance
Member
Obesity and vitamin D levels are like 1 and 2 in terms of risk factors for hospitalization and death apart from age and other comorbidities. The fat cells secrete cytokines and are generally pro-inflammatory which amplify the problem.
Obesity and COVID-19: what makes obese host so vulnerable?
The disease (COVID-19) novel coronavirus pandemic has so far infected millions resulting in the death of over a million people as of Oct 2020. More than 90% of those infected with COVID-19 show mild or no symptoms but the rest of the infected ...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
A vast majority of people are insufficient in vitamin D levels too. Yes, even if you go out an hour or two a day in the sun. It's not enough to reach optimal levels so you have to supplement. Doubly so if you're not fair skinned and in the winter of course.
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
I was bored and got curious about SF Kosmo's claim that countries with low obesity rates have been slammed in this pandemic, so I actually looked it up.
Obesity data here: https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/obesity-rates-by-country
Covid data here: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
Here are the countries with 10% or lower obesity rates:
Arguably India got hit hard, but because of their absolutely massive population, the deaths per 1M population number is still very low compared to most of the world.
The entire world average is currently at 525.4 deaths per 1M population, and there are 86 countries with higher death rates than that. There are 107 countries with higher death rates than India.
And here are the countries with 25% or higher obesity rates (had to remove a couple that didn't have any data on Worldometers):
Generally some very different numbers. So, yeah... most of the countries with lower obesity rates have gotten off relatively lightly compared to countries with higher obesity rates.
Obesity data here: https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/obesity-rates-by-country
Covid data here: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
Here are the countries with 10% or lower obesity rates:
Arguably India got hit hard, but because of their absolutely massive population, the deaths per 1M population number is still very low compared to most of the world.
The entire world average is currently at 525.4 deaths per 1M population, and there are 86 countries with higher death rates than that. There are 107 countries with higher death rates than India.
And here are the countries with 25% or higher obesity rates (had to remove a couple that didn't have any data on Worldometers):
Generally some very different numbers. So, yeah... most of the countries with lower obesity rates have gotten off relatively lightly compared to countries with higher obesity rates.
Last edited by a moderator:
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
You should never be obligated to receive a vaccine or any other medical treatment "for the greater good."
Taxexemption
Member
Yes. No excuses. Personally, I don't think it should be legal to be over 50 pounds overweight. The police should arrest you on sight and detain you in a fat camp. Fat people are ugly to look at and cost a lot to our Healthcare system. Their mental health will be a lot better when they are no longer a fatty. You aren't doing fat people any favors by making excuses for them.
TheDreadBaron
Member
Woah, plot twist. Let go of the fat hate man, do you think fat people want to be fat? There's such a thing as a dysfunctional metabolism. There's also definitely people who are just lazy and don't care but there's a lot more to it than that. How bout nobody goes to camps?
Right, let's help people develop their responsibility and deal with their mental health issues, by enslaving them against their will and making choices for them. Because that's what freedom and personal responsibility is all about.
ManaByte
Gold Member
Taxexemption
Member
I used to be fat. I don't hate fat people, I just think there dysfunction should not be tolerated.
If you need me to pay for your health insurance or lifestyle then I get a say in how you live. If the government won't leave me alone with my medical choices why should I leave you alone with yours? Sending fat people to camps would save a lot more lives than anything we've done about the coronavirus.
SF Kosmo
Al Jazeera Special Reporter
Brazil has an obesity rate 50% lower than the global average and has been the hardest hit country in the world per capita.
And Italy has half the obesity rate of Brazil.
When you have to cut out the complete answers because you know your point would crumble, you're basically admitting defeat.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
Where are you getting this from?
Brazil has ~22% obesity rate. The world average of country obesity rates appears to be 17% ~ 19%. The rate of obesity in the entire world (not an average of country rates) was around 13%.
Furthermore, Brazil got hit extremely hard, but not the hardest. It's ranked 10 on Worldometers in terms of deaths per 1M population at 2,524, below the likes of Hungary, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, etc.
Anyway, of course there are going to be outliers. Look at New Zealand and Australia, with their 30% obesity rates. Because they completely locked down their countries, they avoided a ton of COVID deaths.
Still, the trend seems pretty clear to me.
TheDreadBaron
Member
Zefah did some significant stats work above, we can all point to outliers. What's the overall trend? It's not definitive per se, but as has been said there's lifestyle changes people can make to effect their risk factors.
Last edited:
In an interconnected society, all individual choices have potential costs for others, not just those that lead people to become obese. It would be better if people acted more rationally, less tribalistically. It would be better if people evaluated correctly the long term economic costs of their actions and inactions, and weren't biased towards short term rewards. If we could compel people to exercise, to limit their drinking, to not smoke, and to invest their money sensibly, we could get much better value for money out of our collective investment in public services. If you have a right to decide how someone should live from the mere fact that their lifestyle affects the value of your tax contributions, then in principle all these things could be justified.
Presumably, at some point, we have to ask if we value something more than simply lives that are run "efficiently" with no element of real free will involved. Can we enslave someone simply to make what we see as better decisions for them?
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
As a reformed fatty myself, I totally agree that getting in shape will dramatically improve people's mental health, but I can't agree with criminalizing obesity or really putting anyone in camps against their will. Whether or not medical costs should be socialized is a separate debate...
TheDreadBaron
Member
From some of the responses here, the answer seems to be "If you're doing something I really don't like" which is disappointing
FullMetalx117
Member
Based on what logic, the one of a plebeian in the dark ages? Need to think about the advancement of the human species of which vaccines are essential. If the goal is for humanity to dominate the universe, human population must grow, not go backwards
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
No. At least figure out the technology to go and inhabit other planets first.
FullMetalx117
Member
Vaccines are a technology that ensures survival of the human species, I’d argue that’s a step that needs to be taken before we find technology to inhabit other planets. Also a growing population incentivizes us to eventually find other planets to inhabit since Earth will get too crowded at some point
Last edited:
Shai-Tan
Banned
I didn't have any health problems before COVID and that didnt stop me from having long CoVID symptoms like heart palpitations, racing heart after sitting up a year later. And it's completely unknown if that will affect long term mortality. It's not a good decision, even on individual level.
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
Rejoice! I hear they're working on monthly booster shots to help treat Long COVID!
TheDreadBaron
Member
What the heck? Why should it be the goal to dominate the universe? Wouldn't it be more sustainable for the goal to be live in harmony with the universe? We can expand to other planets surely, but who ever said the goal was to dominate the universe? That's some supervillain shit.
FullMetalx117
Member
That’s just biology and goal of all life - to grow. Cells, bacteria, cockroaches, humanity
TheDreadBaron
Member
Nature lives in harmony. If one species dominates it self destructs for it has no more resources and must expand outward to claim more or die. You're pro expanding indefinitely and consuming the universe? Dude, what comic book did you crawl out of?
Sorry for the derail, nothing to see here
Last edited:
FullMetalx117
Member
It’s not a comic book, it’s a biology textbook. You can dominate but also live in harmony, it’s not one or the other. Yes when we expand we need to do it on a sustainable level.
Also it’s not a derail - people are making the argument one is not “obligated” to get a vaccine. Sure you can believe that on an individual level, it’s all about individualism these days. But there is also an overarching global scale people need to think about, the human species level people are choosing to ignore because it doesn’t affect their short time frame. Think big and maybe you’ll understand why one may actually be obligated.
Last edited:
Cyberpunkd
Member
Of course you should, that’s what living in a society is about. Plus nobody is forcing you to take the vaccine. You have a choice.
Taxexemption
Member
If the government can get involved enough in my life to make me get a vaccine then my full time job is to redirect the power of the federal government to like minded individuals so we can enforce our vision on humanity.
If I will not be left alone I will not leave you alone. You will thrive and live a great and healthy life, or else.
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
Sorry, that's what I meant by obligated. Encouraged to get it? Sure, fine. Anything above that is a problem in my view, though.
Pol Pot
Banned
Sounds pretty activist
BouncyFrag
Member
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
Last edited by a moderator:
D
Deleted member 17706
Unconfirmed Member
Last edited by a moderator:
vpance
Member
Last edited:
vpance
Member
Another data analysis and critique of CDC's recommendations on vaccinating adolescents.
https://www.wired.com/story/the-cdc-owes-parents-better-messaging-on-the-vaccine-for-kids/
https://www.wired.com/story/the-cdc-owes-parents-better-messaging-on-the-vaccine-for-kids/
Last edited:
Rat Rage
Member
It's not. The good is an objective entity in human nature (like I stated in my definition). Therefore, the good will is also objective. The good will is something that needs to be present in a human (phychopaths don't have it, sociopaths had it, but mostly lost it) and can be trained like a muscle to become even more pronounced.
DeepBreath87
Banned
Look man, your definition is just that. Your definition. If you or anyone tried to implement your definition of “good will” there would immediately be people from all directions disagreeing with you. So you would then have to choose between cramming down your “good will” on people who disagree or allowing them to make their own choices. Of course if you define your will as “good” then those who oppose you would necessarily be “evil”, and so you’d be just like every other maniac in history who justified cramming down their shit onto others.
And no, everyone who didn’t go along would not be a psychopath or a sociopath. They would be a person who disagreed what what you call “good will”, because pretending that your subjective definition is an objective definition does not make it so. The metrics you cited may be objective (although I’d say yours really are not), whether they actually constitute “good will” is entirely an open question with no objective answer.
To bring it back to this debate, vaccines are good. But it is good force people to take medicine who don’t want to take that medicine? What happens when a few inevitably die, which while rare, has happened. Do you have blood on your hands because you forced them to get the shots they didn’t want?
Last edited: