ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 3067 of 3903
« First < 2067256729673017305730633064306530663067 30683069307030713077311731673567 > Last »
Nzoner's Game Room>***NON-POLITICAL COVID-19 Discussion Thread***
JakeF 10:28 PM 02-26-2020
A couple of reminders...

Originally Posted by Bwana:
Once again, don't come in this thread with some kind of political agenda, or you will be shown the door. If you want to go that route, there is a thread about this in DC.
Originally Posted by Dartgod:
People, there is a lot of good information in this thread, let's try to keep the petty bickering to a minimum.

We all have varying opinions about the impact of this, the numbers, etc. We will all never agree with each other. But we can all keep it civil.

Thanks!

Click here for the original OP:

Spoiler!

[Reply]
petegz28 07:18 AM 11-03-2020
Originally Posted by Monticore:
Isn’t coconut oil high in saturated fats “bad” fat and can raise your ldl.

And wouldn’t high cholesterol make you more at risk to covid?
That's one argument. The other is that since they are a MCT they are not bad.

Originally Posted by :
Coconut oil is a tropical oil derived from the dried nut of the coconut palm tree. Its nutritional components include the following:

It contains nearly 13.5 grams of total fat (11.2 grams of which are saturated fat) per tablespoon.
It also contains about 0.8 grams of monounsaturated fat and about 3.5 grams of polyunsaturated fat, which are both considered “healthy” fats.
It doesn’t contain cholesterol.
It’s high in vitamin E and polyphenols.
According to the Mayo Clinic, the oil from fresh coconuts contains a high proportion of medium chain fatty acids. These don’t seem to be stored in fat tissue as easily as are long chain fatty acids.

Experts say that coconut oil’s lauric acid, which is a healthy type of saturated fatty acid, is quickly burned up by the body for energy rather than stored. That’s why some people think of coconut oil as a potential weight loss tool.

All types of fat have the same number of calories. It’s only the difference in the fatty acid makeup that makes each fat distinct from the others.
https://www.healthline.com/health/hi...il#coconut-oil
[Reply]
Monticore 07:42 AM 11-03-2020
I would stick with the non fad options in most situations when it comes to health choices , that is just me though. Olive oil canola oil , even butter .
[Reply]
dirk digler 07:43 AM 11-03-2020
This research group started this seroprevalence study almost from the beginning in NYC. The link is here https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2912-6

This tweet is from one of the author's if it is tldr

Our NYC serosurvey paper is now out in Nature:
1) if extrapolated to the NYC population we found>1.7 million infected and IFR at 0.97
2) earlier introduction of the virus into city than officially detected
3) seroprevalence AND titers are stable so far https://t.co/XK3TWVveXf

— Florian Krammer (@florian_krammer) November 3, 2020

[Reply]
MahomesMagic 07:50 AM 11-03-2020
Originally Posted by dirk digler:
This research group started this seroprevalence study almost from the beginning in NYC. The link is here https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2912-6

This tweet is from one of the author's if it is tldr


Yeah, if we look for it we can create a sky high IFR from extrapolation from a small area. The idea that the IFR is close to 1% looks laughable at this point.

This is still the failed Imperial College model that said 90,000 would be dead in Sweden.
[Reply]
petegz28 07:52 AM 11-03-2020
Originally Posted by Monticore:
I would stick with the non fad options in most situations when it comes to health choices , that is just me though. Olive oil canola oil , even butter .
I don't think the overall health benefits of coconut oil are fad by any means. It has been pushed as a health benefit for a long time.
[Reply]
MahomesMagic 07:55 AM 11-03-2020
Originally Posted by petegz28:
I don't think the overall health benefits of coconut oil are fad by any means. It has been pushed as a health benefit for a long time.
I would choose coconut oil over canola oil. One is natural and the other is highly processed.
[Reply]
Donger 08:07 AM 11-03-2020
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic:
This is still the failed Imperial College model that said 90,000 would be dead in Sweden.
They never made that prediction.
[Reply]
dirk digler 08:16 AM 11-03-2020
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic:
Yeah, if we look for it we can create a sky high IFR from extrapolation from a small area. The idea that the IFR is close to 1% looks laughable at this point.

This is still the failed Imperial College model that said 90,000 would be dead in Sweden.
Their data lines up with other studies for NYC. NYC is unique case that doesn't apply to any other US cities that I can think of.
[Reply]
Monticore 09:01 AM 11-03-2020
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic:
I would choose coconut oil over canola oil. One is natural and the other is highly processed.
i will stick with olive oil when cooking , and using coconut oil to fight COVID seems like a fad to me.

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutriti...s/coconut-oil/
[Reply]
O.city 09:10 AM 11-03-2020
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic:
Yeah, if we look for it we can create a sky high IFR from extrapolation from a small area. The idea that the IFR is close to 1% looks laughable at this point.

This is still the failed Imperial College model that said 90,000 would be dead in Sweden.
They did the blood work. Literally.

Now, as we know, IFR is age stratified and NY is a unique case, but they're probably correct here.

IFR isn't going to be the same everywhere or in every situation.
[Reply]
MahomesMagic 09:14 AM 11-03-2020
Originally Posted by Donger:
They never made that prediction.
The Imperial College model used a .9 IFR and assumption of 80 percent infection of population. Using those basic assumptions you arrive at 90,000 dead.

Sorry, your defense of Neil Ferguson is weak.
[Reply]
MahomesMagic 09:17 AM 11-03-2020
Originally Posted by O.city:
They did the blood work. Literally.

Now, as we know, IFR is age stratified and NY is a unique case, but they're probably correct here.

IFR isn't going to be the same everywhere or in every situation.
That was my point. Who cares about IFR in a one small area? The question is what is the best estimate of ifr globally and at a national level.

The Covid Doomsday people I see on Twitter are still stuck on failed models from 8 months ago.
[Reply]
O.city 09:19 AM 11-03-2020
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic:
That was my point. Who cares about IFR in a one small area? The question is what is the best estimate of ifr globally and at a national level.

The Covid Doomsday people I see on Twitter are still stuck on failed models from 8 months ago.
Because it shows what can happen with overshot and no precautions in place and when hospital capacity is stretched or when nursing homes get hit.

Nursing homes are getting swamped here in Mo and with as much community spread as we have, I don't think you can do much to protect them.
[Reply]
Monticore 09:23 AM 11-03-2020
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic:
That was my point. Who cares about IFR in a one small area? The question is what is the best estimate of ifr globally and at a national level.

The Covid Doomsday people I see on Twitter are still stuck on failed models from 8 months ago.
can't just ignoring it either., it happened it could happen elsewhere.
[Reply]
Donger 09:23 AM 11-03-2020
Originally Posted by MahomesMagic:
The Imperial College model used a .9 IFR and assumption of 80 percent infection of population. Using those basic assumptions you arrive at 90,000 dead.

Sorry, your defense of Neil Ferguson is weak.

THREAD: You may have seen false claims that Imperial COVID-19 "modelling envisaged Sweden paying a heavy price for its rejection of lockdown, with 40,000 Covid deaths by 1 May and almost 100,000 by June". Our researchers made no such prediction

— Imperial College (@imperialcollege) May 6, 2020

[Reply]
Page 3067 of 3903
« First < 2067256729673017305730633064306530663067 30683069307030713077311731673567 > Last »
Up