Kaiser Permanente: Inactivity Kills (n=48,440)

Login or register to post comments Last Post 0 reads   5 posts
  • Sat, Apr 17, 2021 - 01:26pm



    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Sep 03 2008

    Posts: 2365

    count placeholder14

    Kaiser Permanente: Inactivity Kills (n=48,440)

Seriously.  Inactivity kills.

The following is a study on how physical activity associated with COVID19 outcomes (n=48,440) from Kaiser Permanente’s patient population that tested positive for COVID19.


The adjusted odds of death from COVID-19 are displayed in figure 4. The odds of death were 2.49 times greater (95% CI 1.33 to 4.67) for patients who were consistently inactive compared with patients who were consistently meeting PA guidelines. Patients who were doing some activity had 1.88 times greater odds (95% CI 1.02 to 3.47) of death than those who were consistently meeting PA guidelines. Patients who were consistently inactive also had a greater risk of death (OR 1.32; 95% CI 1.09 to 1.60) than patients who were only doing some activity. Odds of death for consistently inactive patients was robust, and in most instances was higher than the odds of other COVID-19 risk factors.

The conclusion I particularly agree with:

This evidence that physical inactivity is a strong modifiable risk factor for severe COVID-19 contrasts with the limited efforts by US public health authorities to educate the population about the benefits of PA related to adverse COVID-19 outcomes or to systematically promote regular PA during the pandemic. We recommend that public health authorities inform all populations that short of vaccination and following public health safety guidelines such as social distancing and mask use, engaging in regular PA may be the single most important action individuals can take to prevent severe COVID-19 and its complications, including death. This message is especially important given the increased barriers to achieving regular PA during lockdowns and other pandemic restrictions. The results of the present study suggest a clear and actionable guideline for reducing the risk of severe COVID-19 outcomes.

“I know.  Let’s lock everyone down, and terrify them into staying at home to maximize inflammation from the added stress, so they order things from Amazon, and watch CNN’s fear porn dumped into their heads every single mother-loving day.  And let’s close those gyms down too, for good measure!”

The pair in command of the US Naval Station: Pearl Harbor on Dec 7th, 1941, were named Admiral Kimmel, and General Short.  Know what happened to them?



They were relieved of their commands.

We should do this same thing to the entire leadership of our national “health” organization who have failed the nation so horribly during this national emergency.  “Only” 2400 died at Pearl Harbor.  Hundreds of thousands of grandmothers died during this pandemic – needlessly.  The entire top echelon at NIH/CDC/FDA all need to go.  Preferably by yesterday.

In addition, we can also “reimagine” the NIH, the CDC, and the FDA.  I’m re-imagining that their budgets should shrink dramatically.  Say, by 50%.  I can guarantee that the new leaders that will replace the old, failed crew will pay much closer attention to the health of Normal Americans if we chop their agency’s budget in half.

  • Sat, Apr 17, 2021 - 04:08pm



    Status Gold Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 06 2015

    Posts: 488

    count placeholder8

    Reply To: Kaiser Permanente: Inactivity Kills (n=48,440)

Back in the 1930’s my uncle was a puny kid who suffered from asthma. The doctor’s orders? Get him outside and into the fresh air. They sent him to live with some relatives that owned a farm. Kid came back at the end of the summer completely cured.

He said they had him chopping wood, hoeing corn and stacking hay. Now how is it that Doctors knew this 90 years ago but they dont know this today?

While we’re on the subject, how is it that so many diseases were cured 80, 90, 100 years ago? And today with all the technology, instant access to data, state of the art million dollar labs, government grants….we havent seen one disease cured?

They say the average person has more computer power in his/her pocket than the entire world had when they put a man on the moon. Yet we have all this and they havent cured one major disease in nearly a century? They were curing diseases in basement laboratories, doing math with the abacus, in near poverty back then.

  • Sat, Apr 17, 2021 - 08:25pm



    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Sep 03 2008

    Posts: 2365

    count placeholder12

    ain’t no money


While we’re on the subject, how is it that so many diseases were cured 80, 90, 100 years ago? And today with all the technology, instant access to data, state of the art million dollar labs, government grants….we havent seen one disease cured?

I know, a rhetorical question.  I’ll answer it anyway.  For the NIH, there just ain’t no money in curing disease.  Unless you can put it into a pill and charge $80,000 for the pill.  Like they do for Hep C.

We’re the ore, and “they” (the Oligarch-designed NIH, the governmental arm of the sickcare cartel) are the mining company.  “Health” care (for chronic disease especially) is just an extraction operation.  The sicker we are, the more they make.

And given this, their overarching goal is to reduce agency wherever possible.

Note that Kaiser Permanente is an HMO that actually has facilities too, and it can benefit from reduced costs if its membership is healthier, and as such it has a vested interest in keeping its membership more-healthy-than-not.   I’m guessing that’s why they did the study.

Just looking at the conclusion, it sure seems like the researcher that wrote this paper was as annoyed as I am.

Other than advanced age and a history of organ transplant, physical inactivity was the strongest risk factor for severe COVID-19 outcomes

But – we were told – stay at home.  Hide in the basement.  Your only act of agency permitted: wash your hands 6-10 times per day, with a possible 36% risk reduction (p=0.04).


Moderate-frequency handwashing (6-10 times per day) predicted a lower personal risk of coronavirus infection (adjusted incidence rate ratio (aIRR) =0.64, p=0.04). There was no evidence for a dose-response effect of handwashing, with results for higher levels of hand hygiene (>10 times per day) not significant (aIRR =0.83, p=0.42).

This, while “activity” (i.e. walking for 30 min/day) would have resulted in a “vaccination-claimed” level of risk reduction.  As we know, “vaccination” doesn’t prevent infection, or transmission.  It just – allegedly – prevents severe disease.

Just like activity appears to do.

  • Sun, Apr 18, 2021 - 11:19am



    Status Member (Offline)

    Joined: Jul 17 2008

    Posts: 45

    count placeholder2



I do not know how you find all these studies, but I am grateful that you do.

We have had reports in the past that too much sitting is bad for us. I wonder if it is really the sitting or the inactivity or both equally. Another factor in there may be our failure to squat. In earlier times everyone did so at least a couple of times per day. Now, I wonder what percentage of the modern population could even go down and get back up without injury. Any data on that might be very interesting.

  • Sun, Apr 18, 2021 - 02:16pm



    Status Platinum Member (Offline)

    Joined: Apr 27 2010

    Posts: 2428

    count placeholder8

    Peak Trust: Give it to me straight, doc.

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)

Login or Register to post comments