marno21 wrote: » Has any country used obesity as an underlying condition? From a limited amount of cases I have looked at, including obesity as an underlying condition would help to understand some of the most unfortunate deaths among younger demographics. There seems to be evidence so far that obesity has a negative impact on an infected patient's outcome. I hope that it's not political correctness that's stopping this from being reported more widespread. Of course, I could be wrong.
Att vara en hest wrote: » A few days ago I saw mentions of obese people being a risk group, but I'm not sure if the change was made to include it as an "underlying condition"... Should be though.
timsey tiger wrote: » I think it has been reported, well it must have been, because I was aware of it and so are you. My question for you is, what would be the public interest in widely reporting this? It is not like, if you are morbidly obese, that you have time to get back to a normal range bmi. I suppose we could victim blame over weight people who die of covid-19, but would that really be a good thing.
glasso wrote: » Deaths per million population today compare as 156 for Sweden and 139 for Ireland. Not exactly significantly different. I do have the feeling that if Ireland had pursued the same strategy as Sweden that it would have ended up in disaster here though. Although where does Ireland go from here? No real signs of any plan.
Jurgen Klopp wrote: » Like it or not, unless a current drug is found to significantly help symptoms, eventually every nation is going to have adopt the Swedish approach in general, maybe with some tweaks, for instance maybe here we keep pubs closed There will come a point where the money is going to run out, both welfare and medically Imagine to have done all this so far to be so financially crippled that the HSE ends up in a worse state than if we'd be overrun. Medicine rationing, broken ventilators not being replaced, broken down ambulances being left in the carparks due to no funds to repair etc
glasso wrote: » much higher number of idiots per million population in Ireland compared to Sweden though! pubs would definitely have to stay shut
Breezin wrote: » So it's the idiots who have us under house arrest?
glasso wrote: » in a round-about way that is probably part of the reason yes
Jurgen Klopp wrote: » Or you could not take an offended position straight away and realize it's good advice to anyone of any age especially the younger ones if you're massively obese you need to consider yourself high risk. No point not mentioning it and then have some one of 28 who has no diagnosed conditions but who is massively overweight thinking they've as little risk as everyone else in their age group
silverharp wrote: » I doubt they will phrase it like everyone back to work except fat people but if there is a check list of factors you would have to have BMI over X% as one of them
robinbird wrote: » It could well turn out in time that the whole lockdown, social distancing thing was pointless or indeed may have been the worst approach. And that the countries that didn't lockdown will fare best in the long run. With the proviso of course that nursing homes and the vulnerable such as those in their eighties or fat should have been isolated. .
robinbird wrote: » It could well turn out in time that the whole lockdown, social distancing thing was pointless or indeed may have been the worst approach.
Kermit.de.frog wrote: » How is limiting transmission pointless? It's perfectly obvious you contain if you cut off paths of transmission.
Bit cynical wrote: » Our approach needs to be sustainable until effective antivirals or vaccines become available, but we may run out of money before that. By running out of money I mean our ability to fund services will end.
Kermit.de.frog wrote: » I don't believe the state is at risk of running out of money, we have certain capacity and ability to borrow for the forseeable future at low or negative interest rates. That does not concern me. What does concern me is that if restrictions are lifted around the world we will see death on an unimaginable scale. This scenario is damaging to every economy anyway because people get and act scared and won't spend nor will they congregate. So it's not really even a choice in terms of economic damage, that happens regardless. This is the situation the world has been put in. There are no good answers, we are looking for the least worst.
Kermit.de.frog wrote: » Well Spain and Italy are trying to pull a stroke under the cover of crisis that I find disgraceful personally. They are responsible for their economic positions before this. If they don't have fiscal space that is no one else's fault. They want to get the Germans in particular to pay for past incompetence. They'll never do that, ever. I don't blame them. I understand their position on it. That may effect us by proxy, it may not.
Bit cynical wrote: » I hope you're correct in our capacity to fund the country up until such time as a vaccine or at least antivirals become available. However some countries in the Eurozone have already objected to "Corona Bonds" being issued and these same countries may well object to the ECB printing press at some stage as it devalues the currency. If that happens and Ireland is forced on to the open market then our ability to borrow may not last very long. I think Spain are loosening some of their restrictions for this reason.
thebaz wrote: » an overview of the Swedish policy from one of ther main advisors and Professor :-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfN2JWifLCY He reckons about 50% have it already , and mortality rate will be .01%
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w7.vanillicon.com/v2/75771797d68b15f0c5c6e631c7bb7ced.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/bc8c60b40d617ee953d0955850979f43.svg)