Well if you’re running ultras then 22 flights won’t make you sweat. I did the Publix half in ATL 2 years ago and it was somewhat hilly. Blood mountain isn’t too far north of you. Ive done that twice. It’s a good ascent.
Nice, good job on the 1/2. I have only done a few road races, predominantly a trail guy. I can run forever in the woods and just get lost in thought and appreciation for the planet.
I just can't...... I got nothing...... Its sad and pathetic that there is no surprise in hearing an experienced dog breeder is now the inexperienced leader of the response to a national medical crisis. Sure why not, he's promised to praise the boss every chance he gets. Can we not just get this guy out of the WH for the good of the country and humanity?
The data is in — stop the panic and end the total isolation Makes a lot of sense. Uses Fact based numbers.
Good info and you could be right that he also ate better. Seeing results generally does that. But he swore he didn't. Would also throw in that you're not counting increased metabolism - you're body keeps burning at a higher rate after sustained exercise. And increasing muscle mass in legs in this case could also account for some increase in metabolism. That office in LA area was I think around 30th floor. May have been 40th floor. I only went there once in awhile so not sure on that. He did it around two to three times a day. 120 to 180 flights per work day if 30th floor.
Agree that we should use an informed approach and consider economic costs as well as human costs. We should also have testing, we should understand how the virus is mutating (particularly for more dangerous strains), and understand long term health impacts as well as death rates. I read one study that people were getting heart damage from the virus. True? What extent? Other impacts? Bottom line - take a well informed approach.
Agree with your points. We tested 311,000 people yesterday. That's good. We should've been testing that many daily since early March. But in most states we should be getting back to slowly opening things up in May.
Relying on one, non peer reviewed study that suffers from selection bias (Stanford) is not using fact based numbers. There's a good chance the Stanford study is severely flawed. We also have evidence of what happens if no precautions take place and the virus is allowed to propagate freely. Hint, there's good reason why the NY/NJ area has half the deaths. We need to be cautious. It's going to take years to fully recover the economy. Is opening up a few weeks earlier really worth risking potentially thousands of lives?
The optimism of starting to open everything up is nothing but a politician diversion to help prevent more violent social unrest directed at them. The thought that our society can function at six feet apart is comical, just not happening. The sheep are scared to death and the geniuses in DC better get to on to UBI like yesterday.
Whats ironic to me is the very entity we shut the economy down for (hospitals not being overwhelmed) are the ones that are being hit very hard economically by this. Our hospital has furloughed 400 employees. A friend of mine owns a medical billing company and every one of his 250 employees are having to take a 20% pay cut and layoffs are next. This is a good thing in terms of the virus but very bad for all those impacted.
We are losing about 5 million jobs a week. So yes I think we should be opening back up the states that aren't hot spots or aren't having big outbreaks. I'm not advocating for places like NJ/NY to open up shop. Also not saying Georgia should open everything up. But there should be a plan and about 30 states should be opening up on or around May 1. Massachusetts broke down the data of all who died in their state and found 97.5% had preexisting conditions and the average age of death was 81. Those are facts. Older people and people with underlying conditions need to stay sheltered.
Agree things need to open up but there needs to be backstops in place if there is no business. It was posted in another thread that by opening up businesses, those on unemployment will lose the 600 bucks from the fed. And if these businesses don't have business and can't keep people on payroll, you can't refile for that support and any new claim screws the business owner.