Coronavirus prep
Replies
-
Chef_Barbell wrote: »lynn_glenmont wrote: »I think it's a rule you have to have a valid ID to purchase alcohol here at least. Last year my husband went in with me to buy something in the liquor store and they asked him for ID...and all he had was an expired DL. So they asked him to leave. I really doubt that the employees love carding people but I also know from taking a class to get a liquor license it's really easy to lose it and it's not a risk that the owners are willing to take.
Yes, of course, but the poster who was carded wasn't the person buying the alcohol. If I'm in the process of buying something in a liquor store, and a friend who hasn't seen me for a while sees me through the big glass front window most of our local liquor stores have, and comes inside to say hi, does this mean I can't complete my transaction if my friend happens not to have their ID with them? It's just bizarre.
In some states, liquor is sold in stores where you have to be 21 to even be inside. And yes they are required to card you even if you look old.
Was down on Broadway St in Nashville on a Saturday last summer. They card EVERYONE going in the bars. Person in front of us was at least 70 and they carded him so I reached for my wallet.3 -
Redordeadhead wrote: »I had an interesting experience today. I was denied the possibility to make a purchase in a shop because I refused to take off my mask.
I entered a shop to join my husband, who was in the process of purchasing a bottle of whisky. We are both 15 years over the legal drinking age. In this country, the use of masks in public spaces is strongly recommended by the government and a shop can refuse entry to you if you do not wear one.
Well, in my case, the assistant rudely demanded that I remove my mask. When I said I would not, and pointed out the existence of a pandemic, she refused to continue the sale. I offered to her my ID, which clearly shows I'm over 30, but she would not even look at it and said I do not want to see your ID, you need to remove your mask. Needless to say, we left without buying anything.
I understand that liquor purchase laws differ everywhere.
I don't know where @Redordeadhead lives, but my assumption was that s/he would not have reported this experience, if it were typical there, and instead was just the way the ID laws for liquor purchases were enforced everywhere packaged liquor is sold in that jurisdiction.
If it's not a standard thing there, then it seems like it's an unacceptable thing to have happen, in the midst of a pandemic. (Clerks being rude, IMO, is an unacceptable thing everywhere, and I took that report at face value.)
If this is standard practice in that location, to require customers to remove their mask for an ID check regardless of age or when possibly appearing to be below a certain age, then the clerk was not being unreasonable (but may still have been unnecessarily rude).
It seems like a lot of the ensuing discussion has been about whether the clerk's behavior would've been appropriate in other locations that may have other rules . . . which doesn't seem all that relevant, to me.🤷♀️7 -
spiriteagle99 wrote: »At our grocery they card everyone buying beer and wine, regardless of apparent age. Selling alcohol in the grocery is new to PA so they are extra careful so they don't lose the right. DH is 81 and they still check his ID.
Here it's if you look over 40 (and since they sell -- and it's definitely not new here -- in grocery stores, as well as convenience stores, liquor stores, etc., they certainly don't card anyone but the buyer, as people obviously bring their kids to the grocery store). However, I've been one of the people responsible for carding people for a church Oktoberfest event in past years (not to go in, but to get a wrist band so you could buy beer or anything else alcoholic), and they were really careful -- probably a different standard for an event vs a retail establishment --and we had to card absolutely anyone, no matter what. So I was in the position of carding people in their 70s and refusing a wrist band if they didn't have ID. Most did, but a few didn't have it onhand, and found that they needed it hilarious. (Happily, it was all good-natured.)3 -
And just like that, NM is back to March and strict stay at home orders...nothing is open expect for essentials starting Monday. Essentials will also be limited to 25% of capacity or 75 persons, whichever is smaller. Everything else is closed starting Monday...restaurants (except for take out and curbside), gyms, salons, non essential retail, golf courses and other recreational facilities, etc...all closed starting Monday.
This is even more strict than the spring in that essentials didn't have the % or 75 persons rule...it was just a % of max capacity. Going to be long lines at Costco and the grocery store if only 75 people can be in at a time.11 -
spiriteagle99 wrote: »At our grocery they card everyone buying beer and wine, regardless of apparent age. Selling alcohol in the grocery is new to PA so they are extra careful so they don't lose the right. DH is 81 and they still check his ID.
Come to think of it, I have been carded in grocery stores in recent years, probably for alcohol purchases (although I very seldom buy alcohol in the grocery store, so I'm not sure), but definitely for some kind of OTC medications that are restricted -- antihistamines or something that can be used to make street drugs. And since even the kindest person in the world couldn't pretend to think I'm under 40, that's obviously a card-everybody policy.
But again, my objection isn't to a card-everybody policy. My objection is to an implementation of the policy that flies in the face of good public health practices (pull your mask down and then come within arm's length to hand me your ID) and to an application of the policy that ties a transaction to ID of a third-party not making the purchase.2 -
T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »My dd said she's been exposed at work and they all took tests; she's negative(praying it stays that way) but she said they were able to self-administer their Covid tests. Is that a thing; guess I didn't know? And I wonder how accurate it is vs. a pro doing it? She's going to take another test soon just for extra reassurance.
Plus wondering how well the mouth swabs work vs. the brain scraping. If mouth swabs are just as good, why aren't those typical administered instead?
Yes, some places let people swab themselves. By BIL did that at a CVS and tested negative while several others in his house and his mom's house (where he visits often) were positive. I question whether he self-swabbed deeply enough. But he has also has a couple tests where others did the swab and he has come back negative those times also.
He lives with a lot of people who are exposed often (a nurse and retail employees) and he is exposed often at work (meat packing plant, many factories have a constant stream of infections). How he hasn't been infected is surprising, as 3 others in his own household were positive plus risks at other places. He thinks he has a natural immunity. I think he has been lucky.
A scenario I have always considered for those "lucky" ones is, could he have had it asymptomatically back when testing was nil, and now he is no catching it due to current immunity. I know plenty of people who have wondered if they might have had COVID in those early months when tests were only allowed if you fit all the parameters (we know a new york young man that was never sicker in his life, but was denied a test because he was too "young". This was back in March during the NY peak). One of these people has asked for an antibody test, because his wife had it and she tested positive, and he had had similar almost asymptomatic systems the week before her. He was denied. I think the antibody testing is a very important component that is not being focused on as much as I would like. It may be that many more people have had this disease than we realize, and I think that accurate data is important in understanding COVID.
Where I live, anybody who donates blood gets the antibody test. It is free, of course. He might look into that.
Awesome!! We should all become blood donors.2 -
Just heard from a relative in Pennsylvania that they're starting to see toilet paper and paper towel shortages again. I thought the shelves in that aisle looked pretty well stocked here just a few days ago, but maybe I'll make another trip this weekend and see. I was thinking of buying a turkey now, after seeing the new sale prices, and maybe cooking it this weekend as part of a "progressive dinner party" approach to Thanksgiving (freeze the meat and stock and drippings to go with mashed potatoes, stuffing, and veggies I would make closer to T-day proper), but it's actually still a little warm to want to turn on the oven for hours.0
-
Had to run to Walgreens this afternoon and pick up something. Four young teens go in right before me, no masks, I took off up a different aisle. I could hear them chuckling then start fake coughing all up one aisle, down the next and out the door. I know kids will be kids but that kind of behavior, disrespect for such a dangerous illness, started somewhere.
13 -
baconslave wrote: »MikePfirrman wrote: »MikePfirrman wrote: »Pfizer just announced that their vaccine is testing at 90% effective. That would be fantastic.
Also, BTW, Pfizer did not partake in Operation Warp Speed because they didn't want to obligate themselves to what taking public funds would mean. They did this pretty much on their own without help. Just in case you hear certain parties/people taking claim that "they alone" solved Coronavirus, that would be 100% false.
In addition they will do the distribution themselves because they have suppliers already lined-up. They know how to do it, and I think that they don't trust the ability of the government to keep the vaccine as such low temperatures as it is needed.
Word of caution: Pfizer just run what is called an interim efficacy analysis. They are still continuing with the study since not all participants have completed the second shot and the f/up vigilance phase. The company still needs to do the interim safety analysis (due toward the end of November), before they can apply for an FDA expedite approval. If everything is good.
We got good news from the company but please people don't count your chickens until all the eggs have hatched. Disappointments are hard to swallow.
Right.
And it's very important to remember that they are saying they'll have enough vaccine for only 25 million people. The CDC has said that health care workers are first in line. Then the elderly. "Widespread" vaccine availability for everyone won't be until next year. Masking and distancing will remain our reality for the rest of this year and most of next. Even then everyone won't get the vaccine at once, many require 2 doses, and coverage of the populace won't be 100% b/c sadly many won't take any vaccine no matter what.
We should all go forward knowing this will be over, but we still have quite a way to go. That's what is.
Regardless of vaccine status, we are locked into this path right now crafted by consequences we've courted for 8 months. There will be suffering. Even if everyone started following guidelines right this moment, we would still have a rough month and a half ahead. A vaccine isn't a point-n-click solution either. And I hold out zero hopes that we'll get much better mask/distancing compliance at this point.
There is a light!!! But the tunnel is still long.
Sorry to be a downer, but like Mike said, we've had enough disappointment. Let's be real and not hurt ourselves more than the wounds we're already accruing here. I do hope at some point soon the leadership of this country, whomever that ends up being, will have this talk with the American people. IMO, we'd do better to frame this as a "war time" effort.
I think it's such a shame it wasn't framed as a "war on the virus" right from the beginning! Wrap the effort in the flag, appeal to everyone's patriotism. I think it would have been such a different trajectory. I doubt a new point of view in the new year can completely fix how people see the pandemic, but hopefully it will help.
And yeah, we all have to brace ourselves for the next 2 or 3 months
Even if there's not enough vaccine available for everyone, hopefully it will eventually mean there are less people around to catch the virus from.2 -
snowflake954 wrote: »Theoldguy1 wrote: »MikePfirrman wrote: »@ReenieHJ -- I hope your husband is OK.
We should start talking more about IF you get it. I'm reading about oxygen sensors being used and the level at which you should go to the hospital.
https://www.consumerreports.org/medical-symptoms/covid-19-pulse-oximeters-oxygen-levels-faq/
Amazon has sensors as low as $17. Any other insight from people that know more than I do about science?
This is an excerpt from a news article/interview with family about the youngest person to die of Covid in our county. She was 30 with no underlying conditions. I x'ed out names for privacy.
Looks like a meter could be a good investment. I ordered one this morning for us, our children and a couple relatives:
"The first sign that she had contracted COVID-19 was a loss of taste and smell. That started the Tuesday before she passed. She got tested Wednesday, which came back positive three days later.
“Over the weekend, she was showing more symptoms. Breathing was a little bit harder, but we just thought it was something that we kind of needed to work through. I mean, it's a part of being sick. It’s just kind of got to run its course. We still weren’t all that concerned,” xxxxx said.
Come Sunday, xxxxx said, they were starting to feel a little uneasy. They called a doctor who sent them off with some prescriptions. Still, no real red flags were raised.
“Monday morning, we bought an oximeter, which clips onto your finger and tells you your oxygen levels in your blood. They're supposed to be about 95% typically—anything less, you should talk to a doctor. Her’s were 60%,” xxxxx said. “That's the moment it hits you that this is bad. This is not something that you should be handling on her own at home.”
They called an ambulance. xxxxx followed his wife to the hospital. Xxxxx was admitted to the intensive care unit. Meanwhile, her husband had to leave her at the door, in accordance with safety protocols.
Xxxxx said they put Xxxxx on a mask to help her breathe, which she initially responded well to. But things started going downhill fast that evening. Doctors put her on a ventilator that didn’t seem to be working either.
“They tried everything they could think of and some surgeries that I'd never even heard before for trying to treat COVID,” xxxxx said. “She put up a really, really good fight. But she passed away that Tuesday morning.”
That was less than 24 hours after xxxx was admitted to the ICU"
We had a 21 yr old woman die of COVID three days ago, here in Italy--no pre-existing conditions.
Why are these people dying?? Here in my little corner of the world, they all recover fully. The last death was 29th April.1 -
T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »My dd said she's been exposed at work and they all took tests; she's negative(praying it stays that way) but she said they were able to self-administer their Covid tests. Is that a thing; guess I didn't know? And I wonder how accurate it is vs. a pro doing it? She's going to take another test soon just for extra reassurance.
Plus wondering how well the mouth swabs work vs. the brain scraping. If mouth swabs are just as good, why aren't those typical administered instead?
Yes, some places let people swab themselves. By BIL did that at a CVS and tested negative while several others in his house and his mom's house (where he visits often) were positive. I question whether he self-swabbed deeply enough. But he has also has a couple tests where others did the swab and he has come back negative those times also.
He lives with a lot of people who are exposed often (a nurse and retail employees) and he is exposed often at work (meat packing plant, many factories have a constant stream of infections). How he hasn't been infected is surprising, as 3 others in his own household were positive plus risks at other places. He thinks he has a natural immunity. I think he has been lucky.
A scenario I have always considered for those "lucky" ones is, could he have had it asymptomatically back when testing was nil, and now he is no catching it due to current immunity. I know plenty of people who have wondered if they might have had COVID in those early months when tests were only allowed if you fit all the parameters (we know a new york young man that was never sicker in his life, but was denied a test because he was too "young". This was back in March during the NY peak). One of these people has asked for an antibody test, because his wife had it and she tested positive, and he had had similar almost asymptomatic systems the week before her. He was denied. I think the antibody testing is a very important component that is not being focused on as much as I would like. It may be that many more people have had this disease than we realize, and I think that accurate data is important in understanding COVID.
Where I live, anybody who donates blood gets the antibody test. It is free, of course. He might look into that.
Awesome!! We should all become blood donors.
Yes. They are looking for the antibodies in donated blood because I think they are giving those antibodies to patients who are experiencing more serious cases of Covid. Donating blood can save a life with or without antibodies, though.
Interestingly enough, I was banned for life from donating until April 2020. For decades, the FDA banned those of us who had taken beef insulin for life because they were concerned about vCJD (aka "mad cow disease"). Finally in April, they removed that ban after nobody had ever become an angry cow after receiving a blood transfusion anywhere. I donated once in July and was eligible again in Sept., but haven't found another blood collection that fits my schedule and location yet.3 -
baconslave wrote: »MikePfirrman wrote: »MikePfirrman wrote: »Pfizer just announced that their vaccine is testing at 90% effective. That would be fantastic.
Also, BTW, Pfizer did not partake in Operation Warp Speed because they didn't want to obligate themselves to what taking public funds would mean. They did this pretty much on their own without help. Just in case you hear certain parties/people taking claim that "they alone" solved Coronavirus, that would be 100% false.
In addition they will do the distribution themselves because they have suppliers already lined-up. They know how to do it, and I think that they don't trust the ability of the government to keep the vaccine as such low temperatures as it is needed.
Word of caution: Pfizer just run what is called an interim efficacy analysis. They are still continuing with the study since not all participants have completed the second shot and the f/up vigilance phase. The company still needs to do the interim safety analysis (due toward the end of November), before they can apply for an FDA expedite approval. If everything is good.
We got good news from the company but please people don't count your chickens until all the eggs have hatched. Disappointments are hard to swallow.
Right.
And it's very important to remember that they are saying they'll have enough vaccine for only 25 million people. The CDC has said that health care workers are first in line. Then the elderly. "Widespread" vaccine availability for everyone won't be until next year. Masking and distancing will remain our reality for the rest of this year and most of next. Even then everyone won't get the vaccine at once, many require 2 doses, and coverage of the populace won't be 100% b/c sadly many won't take any vaccine no matter what.
We should all go forward knowing this will be over, but we still have quite a way to go. That's what is.
Regardless of vaccine status, we are locked into this path right now crafted by consequences we've courted for 8 months. There will be suffering. Even if everyone started following guidelines right this moment, we would still have a rough month and a half ahead. A vaccine isn't a point-n-click solution either. And I hold out zero hopes that we'll get much better mask/distancing compliance at this point.
There is a light!!! But the tunnel is still long.
Sorry to be a downer, but like Mike said, we've had enough disappointment. Let's be real and not hurt ourselves more than the wounds we're already accruing here. I do hope at some point soon the leadership of this country, whomever that ends up being, will have this talk with the American people. IMO, we'd do better to frame this as a "war time" effort.
I think it's such a shame it wasn't framed as a "war on the virus" right from the beginning! Wrap the effort in the flag, appeal to everyone's patriotism. I think it would have been such a different trajectory. I doubt a new point of view in the new year can completely fix how people see the pandemic, but hopefully it will help.
And yeah, we all have to brace ourselves for the next 2 or 3 months
Even if there's not enough vaccine available for everyone, hopefully it will eventually mean there are less people around to catch the virus from.
Hopefully it will not be the good caring careful ones gone though.2 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »Chef_Barbell wrote: »Chef_Barbell wrote: »NY just ordered all gyms and restaurants closed at 10pm on Friday. No more take out liquor. I'm having a sad.
So update on that... the governor meant a 10 o clock curfew on gyms and restaurants. Makes no sense since most gyms already close by that time and restaurants have to close by midnight.
Our state numbers are up to 2.9% positive. Arbitrary rules make no sense to me.
Does he not realise the virus is active 24 hours a day? Unbelievable. Also if they stop take out liquor some that are desperate will start smashing there way into the shops to get some.
1) I expect the behavior of people still in bars and restaurants from 10 p.m. to midnight is different from people during the hours that dinner is normally served. Those people are much more likely to be there just to drink, which loosens inhibitions, and likely loosens compliance with protocols like wearing your mask when you aren't actually eating or drinking, and staying at your own table rather than going around the room trying to chat up good-looking strangers. (I've occasionally had to try to find someplace for dinner at nine-ish when traveling for business, and pretty much any sit-down place that is open at that hour isn't serving meals anymore.)
2) the alcohol restriction is just for restaurants with liquor licenses on carryout and delivery orders after 10 p.m. You can get food delivered, but you can't get alcohol delivered from a restaurant after 10 p.m. It's nothing to do with "shops" that sell alcohol, so no need for people to start smashing their way in.
1) I was thinking of gyms mostly but of course I get what you are saying about bars etc...
2) Good to hear about the alcohol. We never have been able to get alcohol delivered from restaurants until recently so to me I carry out to me means a different thing. We don't use those terms here usually. Also supermarkets don't sell alcohol over here. We have to go into what is called a "bottle shop" to buy wine etc.. they only sell alcohol there other than a few little snacks like nuts.
Interesting how every country is different. Our supermarkets sell everything. But during the lockdown earlier this year, anywhere that was allowed to open was NOT allowed to sell any alcohol. One guy told me, a store owner sneaked him a bottle quietly so he could drink at home.0 -
Had to run to Walgreens this afternoon and pick up something. Four young teens go in right before me, no masks, I took off up a different aisle. I could hear them chuckling then start fake coughing all up one aisle, down the next and out the door. I know kids will be kids but that kind of behavior, disrespect for such a dangerous illness, started somewhere.
Ugh. Yes, it started somewhere and it hasn't ended anywhere. Nobody knows if these teenagers are asymptomatic, pre-symptomatic, or pauci-symptomatic. This is not a game...2 -
lynn_glenmont wrote: »Chef_Barbell wrote: »Chef_Barbell wrote: »NY just ordered all gyms and restaurants closed at 10pm on Friday. No more take out liquor. I'm having a sad.
So update on that... the governor meant a 10 o clock curfew on gyms and restaurants. Makes no sense since most gyms already close by that time and restaurants have to close by midnight.
Our state numbers are up to 2.9% positive. Arbitrary rules make no sense to me.
Does he not realise the virus is active 24 hours a day? Unbelievable. Also if they stop take out liquor some that are desperate will start smashing there way into the shops to get some.
1) I expect the behavior of people still in bars and restaurants from 10 p.m. to midnight is different from people during the hours that dinner is normally served. Those people are much more likely to be there just to drink, which loosens inhibitions, and likely loosens compliance with protocols like wearing your mask when you aren't actually eating or drinking, and staying at your own table rather than going around the room trying to chat up good-looking strangers. (I've occasionally had to try to find someplace for dinner at nine-ish when traveling for business, and pretty much any sit-down place that is open at that hour isn't serving meals anymore.)
2) the alcohol restriction is just for restaurants with liquor licenses on carryout and delivery orders after 10 p.m. You can get food delivered, but you can't get alcohol delivered from a restaurant after 10 p.m. It's nothing to do with "shops" that sell alcohol, so no need for people to start smashing their way in.
1) I was thinking of gyms mostly but of course I get what you are saying about bars etc...
2) Good to hear about the alcohol. We never have been able to get alcohol delivered from restaurants until recently so to me I carry out to me means a different thing. We don't use those terms here usually. Also supermarkets don't sell alcohol over here. We have to go into what is called a "bottle shop" to buy wine etc.. they only sell alcohol there other than a few little snacks like nuts.
Interesting how every country is different. Our supermarkets sell everything. But during the lockdown earlier this year, anywhere that was allowed to open was NOT allowed to sell any alcohol. One guy told me, a store owner sneaked him a bottle quietly so he could drink at home.
I'm not sure how to think about it. I guess if people just want a couple of glasses in their home with their partner then it's fine. It's only if they want to start up a big party that it becomes a problem. That was nice of the store owner
0 -
T1DCarnivoreRunner wrote: »Had to run to Walgreens this afternoon and pick up something. Four young teens go in right before me, no masks, I took off up a different aisle. I could hear them chuckling then start fake coughing all up one aisle, down the next and out the door. I know kids will be kids but that kind of behavior, disrespect for such a dangerous illness, started somewhere.
Ugh. Yes, it started somewhere and it hasn't ended anywhere. Nobody knows if these teenagers are asymptomatic, pre-symptomatic, or pauci-symptomatic. This is not a game...
I agree. So sorry you had to go through that Rennie, must have made you very uncomfortable. Guess they don't know better. They will if they get it and if they are acting like this then it's likely they will get it. You cannot muck around with this.2 -
cwolfman13 wrote: »WTH I was all set to get back to helping my sister on Monday when dh's test came back(assuming it came out negative). Now instead of 2-3 days, they told him it'll be 5-7 days.
And I agree Diatonic, either allergy or teething germs used to run amok through out my daycare.
We'd all catch them
That's a bummer. I feel for you. The first time my daughter tested was after a confirmed exposure this summer, and her results took 14 & 16 days (tested twice 2 days apart, as 2 negs were recommended before normal contact back then). The exposure was 5 days prior to her first test, so both results came after her quarantine was over. Totally useless. And because it was useless, a waste of testing resources. Also a wasted effort was her 2 weeks of isolation and 3 other family members' 2 week quarantine. Really, a modicum, of project management could make the whole testing situation so much more useful.
In NM, it is the results from private testing that are taking the longest. If you get tested at a DOH site results are typically within 2-3 days. The downside is that the drive through testing lines are a longer wait than going to a private site.
I was sick a couple of weeks ago...I didn't really know at first, but I went to the office and I popped on the thermometer coming in. They manually took it four more times because I told them I felt completely fine and kept popping so they sent me home and I had to get tested. I didn't really start feeling bad until later that day...it was pretty minor but somewhat consistent with people I've known who've had mild symptoms.
I ended up testing negative, but after a couple of days I still hadn't been texted or emailed my results and couldn't find them online. I let a couple more days pass and after 5 days I found a number for the DOH specifically for COVID related questions. I called, and they had my results and had them for a few days already, but they are so backlogged with testing that even when they get the results they can't get them out fast enough to people. He advised me to tell anyone I know that is awaiting results to call if they haven't received them in 3 days because they are most likely in, just not disseminated.
Not sure how it works elsewhere, but that's what's going on in NM.
Here the test results can be available in 4 hours, but notification generally would be the next day.0 -
The last three times i tried to donate blood I was rejected because I was slightly anemic. I gave up. Since then the anemia has gotten worse so I am not even going to try.3
-
spiriteagle99 wrote: »The last three times i tried to donate blood I was rejected because I was slightly anemic. I gave up. Since then the anemia has gotten worse so I am not even going to try.
So sorry to hear that. Do you know why you are? Are you eating enough red meat or maybe you are vegetarian? Hopefully not bleeding a lot. I'd never be anemic. DH likes his red meat too much so I get enough. Yes best you don't donate blood but it's so nice you tried. Last time I tried I wasn't allowed either and wouldn't be allowed right now till I have some test results on my heart back. I am sure I'm fine.3
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.3K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 387 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.4K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 901 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.2K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions