Jump to content

Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, Lostin76 said:

Oof, this Is a perfect example of why we are having this new spread. We just went over 3% here and people are freaking out. Our neighborhood is pretty good about masks and distancing. We have all got used to queuing up for the bakery, coffee shop, wine shop, etc. Stores only allow a certain number of people inside and woe to someone who tries to enter a Brooklyn establishment w/o a mask. They are just not having it here. 

I watched a tiny barista at our local coffee place just shut down this hulking guy who tried to order w/o a mask. She made him leave with his tail between his legs and people were cheering as he walked out cussing. 

With such good compliance in your area, why is positivity rising? 

Do you believe the virus spreads as an aerosol? Is that even possible?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 5.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Picture of Ayden celebrating his last day of Elementary school.  For those of you that have been around here long enough know that at 2 or 3 years old doctors were telling us that if Ayden survived he

Yesterday we were so.bleseed to celebrate the graduation of my oldest son from college.  He graduated in 3 years,  played baseball and graduated with honors. 3.75 GPA and starts Grad school to become

I am negative for covid. Thanks for the well wishes. Whatever I had kicked my butt worse than any flu I have ever had. But no covid!

Posted Images

3 minutes ago, Reacher said:

With such good compliance in your area, why is positivity rising? 

Do you believe the virus spreads as an aerosol? Is that even possible?

 

NYC is above 3%, our zip code is not. I’m not sure you understand just how big NYC is and how many separate neighborhoods there are. We also have these people called “tourists” who like to visit us and many of them don’t understand masks and social distancing. They claim to not be able to read the signs. 

Another reason, positivity is rising citywide b/c we recently allowed restaurants and bars to go to 25% capacity indoors and our schools have been open for roughly six weeks. 

As we who follow science understand - the virus spreads when you introduce more people to indoor environments with poor ventilation. And when they are maskless (eating and drinking) it’s even worse. Another factor is that our “outdoor dining” which is EVERYWHERE is not so outdoor anymore. Those beautiful outdoor open air dining tables have started adding plastic walls and ceilings to protect diners from the cold and wind in the last couple of weeks. They are now basically indoor dining now w/o ventilation. 

There are no easy answers. We want our restaurants and bars to survive, but this is clearly not going to work.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Leathernecks said:

I just looked again, and the 7 day positivity rate in my county is just over 20%.  If that barista ever needs a new job, send her this way.  Places here just don't care.

If Sit and Wonder gets closed down b/c of this, I will have her send her resume to you! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Lostin76 said:

NYC is above 3%, our zip code is not. I’m not sure you understand just how big NYC is and how many separate neighborhoods there are. We also have these people called “tourists” who like to visit us and many of them don’t understand masks and social distancing. They claim to not be able to read the signs. 

Another reason, positivity is rising citywide b/c we recently allowed restaurants and bars to go to 25% capacity indoors and our schools have been open for roughly six weeks. 

As we who follow science understand - the virus spreads when you introduce more people to indoor environments with poor ventilation. And when they are maskless (eating and drinking) it’s even worse. Another factor is that our “outdoor dining” which is EVERYWHERE is not so outdoor anymore. Those beautiful outdoor open air dining tables have started adding plastic walls and ceilings to protect diners from the cold and wind in the last couple of weeks. They are now basically indoor dining now w/o ventilation. 

There are no easy answers. We want our restaurants and bars to survive, but this is clearly not going to work.

Do you believe the virus spreads as an aerosol? Is that even possible?

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Reacher said:

I did read it and understand its no where near a highly scientific study. Doesn't mean that I don't give it some credence. I Actually told my father a few minutes ago to limit even more his trips to the store. Like masks, it can't hurt.

What else would you expect the head of the retail consortium to say?

My point was you saying that "supermarkets are the leading cause of spread" isn't at all what the article was saying.

That would be like saying, being in a car is the biggest spreader because 97% of people who tested positive have have been in a car in the last week.  More people go to supermarkets than most other public places, so more people have been at them in the last week.

I guess I could say that making out with 300 random people doesn't spread it at all because zero people reported doing that in the week before testing positive.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Leathernecks said:

My point was you saying that "supermarkets are the leading cause of spread" isn't at all what the article was saying.

That would be like saying, being in a car is the biggest spreader because 97% of people who tested positive have have been in a car in the last week.  More people go to supermarkets than most other public places, so more people have been at them in the last week.

I guess I could say that making out with 300 random people doesn't spread it at all because zero people reported doing that in the week before testing positive.

Gotcha. Most likely place to spread?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Reacher said:

I'm not an anti masker and wear one religiously.

Honest question, if you wear one why do you always feel the need to post these random and controversial studies? I mean, you wouldn't wear one if you thought they didn't work, right? Or do you just feel societal pressure to wear one? 

I'm not saying you have agenda, but what's your purpose? To poke holes widely spread belief? An encouragement to question authority? To excuse the defiers? 

It can't be only to provide information, because you only seem to be providing information from one side, which I find bizarre because you heed the advice of the side you are questioning. 

45 minutes ago, Reacher said:

I Actually told my father a few minutes ago to limit even more his trips to the store. Like masks, it can't hurt.

And same thing here. if you worry about your father, why are you posting controversial declarations about limiting restrictions when you are encouraging him to restrict his behavior?

Hope i'm not sounding like a jerk, but it's confusing to me. You are sharing information that discourages people from following the very things you chose to practice.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Reacher said:

Gotcha. Most likely place to spread?

Can't really tell with the info provide. I would be interested in seeing what the numbers would be for the general population. If about 20% of the population has been to a grocery store in the last week, it would suggest little spread happening there.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, tdhoosier said:

Honest question, if you wear one why do you always feel the need to post these random and controversial studies? I mean, you wouldn't wear one if you thought they didn't work, right? Or do you just feel societal pressure to wear one? 

I'm not saying you have agenda, but what's your purpose? To poke holes widely spread belief? An encouragement to question authority? To excuse the defiers? 

It can't be only to provide information, because you only seem to be providing information from one side, which I find bizarre because you heed the advice of the side you are questioning. 

And same thing here. if you worry about your father, why are you posting controversial declarations about limiting restrictions when you are encouraging him to restrict his behavior?

Hope i'm not sounding like a jerk, but it's confusing to me. You are sharing information that discourages people from following the very things you chose to practice.

I have been interested in Covid from the beginning. I'm relatively healthy and, while now in my 50s, am not terribly worried about getting it myself.  I have the flexibility to work from home.  I wear the masks primarily because it is required in any of the places I go. I'm not going to be a rebel and not wear one. If it helps me, great. If others feel more comfortable or protected, great. 

I post info that I come across that I find interesting. Sometimes on the economic side as I come across that regularly. Other times pieces that I don't think others are likely to have seen and therefore might find valuable. I was going to post notice of the Pfizer vaccine but someone beat me to it. I find value in some of the studies out there that challenge the conventional wisdom. That is one way to learn. 

I do believe people should be responsible for themselves. Yes, there are stupid people out there that send their kids to school with the virus. I get it. I don't think state wide lockdowns that destroy lives and businesses are the answer, though. I think that the more people are educated, the better decisions they can make for themselves- and others. There is much to be learned about this. 

My father is 80+ in a high risk group. He should be taking precautions. A 8 year old going to school and 26 yr old athlete don't seem to have nearly that risk. I don't get the need to punish them. Or a business owner that is taking all reasonable precautions. 

I have asked repeatedly today whether Covid is transmitted via aerosols. I believe it is. So does Time magazine- https://time.com/5883081/covid-19-transmitted-aerosols/. If this is truly the case, it can travel 100 feet and get in through and around masks. This passes the common sense test to me as many people that get Covid say they do wear masks. The recent Marine and Danish studies showed people can get it while wearing a mask. How? Rather than saying masks are bad, I'd argue they are possibly of limited value and we should concentrate our efforts in other areas. Have people take vitamin D, invest in far-uvc light and other remedies to see if they help. People like to pretend that the WHO, CDC, Fauci and all these experts never said that masks were of limited help. They did and there are studies that support that. What changed? Where are the studies that prove non N95 masks stop covid? Other viruses? Aerosols?

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

If you followed the Kaufman recruiting thread, you likely know that my kids attend Silver Creek High School, which is the public high school in Sellersburg.  There is also a charter school in town called Rock Creek.  News came out today that a teacher at Rock Creek, 37 years old, just passed away from the virus, about a week after becoming symptomatic.    

  • Sad 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, mrflynn03 said:

What is the point of a 10pm to 5am curfew states are starting to impose?

Most places are closed and people are already home anyway. Some of this stuff is just stupid. 

I think it is to try and curb the partying crowd that would be out during that time. I spoke with someone a few weeks ago that said that the sit down and have dinner at a bar with family social distancing is done by 900. Its that late group that stops social distancing and its more of like normal times where as the early evening hours they can rally enforce social distancing. I think it make sense. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Billingsley99 said:

I think it is to try and curb the partying crowd that would be out during that time. I spoke with someone a few weeks ago that said that the sit down and have dinner at a bar with family social distancing is done by 900. Its that late group that stops social distancing and its more of like normal times where as the early evening hours they can rally enforce social distancing. I think it make sense. 

Didnt think about that. Who has the energy to be out that late anyway? I'm getting old I guess or just really like sleep. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, mrflynn03 said:

Didnt think about that. Who has the energy to be out that late anyway? I'm getting old I guess or just really like sleep. 

We are both those college kids and young adults are still hooking up and the bar owner I spoke with said late nights are not much different than in the past just smaller crowds but still everyone getting drunk and very close encounters.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Billingsley99 said:

We are both those college kids and young adults are still hooking up and the bar owner I spoke with said late nights are not much different than in the past just smaller crowds but still everyone getting drunk and very close encounters.

Hormones wins over health every time...

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Reacher said:

I have been interested in Covid from the beginning. I'm relatively healthy and, while now in my 50s, am not terribly worried about getting it myself.  I have the flexibility to work from home.  I wear the masks primarily because it is required in any of the places I go. I'm not going to be a rebel and not wear one. If it helps me, great. If others feel more comfortable or protected, great. 

I post info that I come across that I find interesting. Sometimes on the economic side as I come across that regularly. Other times pieces that I don't think others are likely to have seen and therefore might find valuable. I was going to post notice of the Pfizer vaccine but someone beat me to it. I find value in some of the studies out there that challenge the conventional wisdom. That is one way to learn. 

I do believe people should be responsible for themselves. Yes, there are stupid people out there that send their kids to school with the virus. I get it. I don't think state wide lockdowns that destroy lives and businesses are the answer, though. I think that the more people are educated, the better decisions they can make for themselves- and others. There is much to be learned about this. 

My father is 80+ in a high risk group. He should be taking precautions. A 8 year old going to school and 26 yr old athlete don't seem to have nearly that risk. I don't get the need to punish them. Or a business owner that is taking all reasonable precautions. 

I have asked repeatedly today whether Covid is transmitted via aerosols. I believe it is. So does Time magazine- https://time.com/5883081/covid-19-transmitted-aerosols/. If this is truly the case, it can travel 100 feet and get in through and around masks. This passes the common sense test to me as many people that get Covid say they do wear masks. The recent Marine and Danish studies showed people can get it while wearing a mask. How? Rather than saying masks are bad, I'd argue they are possibly of limited value and we should concentrate our efforts in other areas. Have people take vitamin D, invest in far-uvc light and other remedies to see if they help. People like to pretend that the WHO, CDC, Fauci and all these experts never said that masks were of limited help. They did and there are studies that support that. What changed? Where are the studies that prove non N95 masks stop covid? Other viruses? Aerosols?

Thanks for your reply. I get concerned of the high amount of people taking inclusive studies and information like it's fact. I really think this is the reason why we can't get behind one message. People can point to one study in the minority and say this is my reason for not following (fill in the blank) preventative measures. This happened to me this week with a friend who refuses to wear a mask. My wife has been told multiple times by her patients to be careful because masks cause hypercapnia. (while possible, it's extremely unlikely).  It leads me to believe in some cases people are just going to choose the 'studies' (or facebook memes in some cases....haha) that support crazy beliefs like: masks are a form of government control.

I want to be clear that I don't think you are doing this; it's obvious by the amount of links you post to try as best you can to educate yourself. It's strange. It's like our privileged access to information is a double edged sword these days. I guess this is where my frustration stems. Access to mass amounts of information is a great thing, but people can be unintentionally dangerous in how they are interpreting said information and have a hard time determining what's real, fake, out of context or inconclusive. I do also believe that people should be responsible for themselves. But I'm not sure what to believe when peoples' irresponsible behavior puts others health or well-being in danger. It's an internal debate I constantly have. 

In regards to aerosols vs. droplets, I don't know much on the matter. It seems to me that depending on what scientific field you are in that droplets are defined differently. And even if the virus is spread through aerosols; it doesn't mean that it's ONLY spread through aerosols. The author of that time magazine article you posted does not deny the virus is spread through droplets: he just doesn't know what that ratio is (aerosols vs. droplets).  And even he, who believes that the aerosol spread is greater than what is currently believed, stated in an MIT interview that he STILL recommends wearing masks. He even said it's a way to mitigate transmission. 

I don't pretend like Fauci or the CDC never said masks were of limited help. The point is that they changed their tune when presented with better evidence, which is what they SHOULD do. If this weren't the case we'd still believe the Earth is flat. And we can't overlook the fact, as I believe the surgeon general admitted (and which I think was a bad decision that lead to some of the confusion surrounding this issue): masks were downplayed so they could secure enough for the medical professionals before the public created a shortage on them. White lie, bad outcome, big mistake. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, tdhoosier said:

 

I don't pretend like Fauci or the CDC never said masks were of limited help. The point is that they changed their tune when presented with better evidence, which is what they SHOULD do. If this weren't the case we'd still believe the Earth is flat. And we can't overlook the fact, as I believe the surgeon general admitted (and which I think was a bad decision that lead to some of the confusion surrounding this issue): masks were downplayed so they could secure enough for the medical professionals before the public created a shortage on them. White lie, bad outcome, big mistake. 

 

This last paragraph is really important. Science advances as new data is received. What was known and said in March SHOULD be different than what it known and said now. The CDC definitely stumbled at the beginning of this by not recommending masks, but I do know that they and medical professionals were worried about having enough masks for medical staff. At one point our docs were reusing one N95 mask for a week - insane! 

Edited by Lostin76
Link to post
Share on other sites

"New evidence suggests that just 17% of those infected with COVID-19 will experience no symptoms, according to Nature, citing a meta-analysis of 13 studies published last month which involved 21,708 people. What's more, asymptomatic individuals are 42% less likely to transmit the virus than those with symptoms."

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-03141-3?utm_source=Nature+Briefing&utm_campaign=dfed4a7f39-briefing-dy-20201119&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_c9dfd39373-dfed4a7f39-45171750

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, tdhoosier said:

Access to mass amounts of information is a great thing, but people can be unintentionally dangerous in how they are interpreting said information and have a hard time determining what's real, fake, out of context or inconclusive.

This is the part that sounds a lot like, "just let us tell you the truth, all that other stuff if what we don't want you to kno... I mean it's fake".

The problem is trust of information without bias, and that was lost, totally irrefutably lost, long long ago.  

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Joe_Hoopsier said:

This is the part that sounds a lot like, "just let us tell you the truth, all that other stuff if what we don't want you to kno... I mean it's fake".

Now you get it!!!!

......just kidding. 

1 hour ago, Joe_Hoopsier said:

The problem is trust of information without bias, and that was lost, totally irrefutably lost, long long ago.  

That was exactly my point. I said "[people] have a hard time determining what's real, fake, out of context or inconclusive." 

AKA they don't know if the info they receive is biased or a result biased dissemination. I'm not saying it's one side or another...it's both. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, tdhoosier said:

 "a program that could turn the tables on the virus in weeks, as we are now seeing in Slovakia—where massive screening has, in two weeks, completely turned the epidemic around."

Did they even read the article they cited

"An initial 3-day pilot testing scheme in four regions in the north of the country that have become infection hotspots began on Oct 23, 2020, ahead of mass testing of the rest of the population on the two weekends of Oct 30–Nov 1, and Nov 6–8. But questions remain about the effectiveness and safety of an operation that was only announced 2 weeks before it was due to begin, with some infectious disease experts warning that the plan could put people's health at risk and undermine public trust in measures to contain the virus's spread."

And if you read the rest of the article, it's not really leading to any conclusions just yet...and certainly "not completely turned the epidemic around."

I'm also very skeptical of this...

"if we act today, could allow us to see our loved ones, go back to school and work, and travel—all before Christmas."

@tdhoosier I'm not trying to crap on the article, it's got some good info, but the minute I read...

"There is no question that if 1,000 Americans were dying each day in a war, we would act swiftly and decisively. Yet, we are not. This should not be about politics—it is about human beings—and we should be acting like it.

So far, the U.S. government has put most of our eggs in the vaccine basket"

Which kinda contradicts itself right off the bat.

First, you really can't equate war and a virus. Again, man against man is one thing...man against Mother Nature is something quite different. How WOULD we stop 1,000 deaths a day due to war? Surrender? Armistice? What "swift and decisive" action would we employ? Nukes? Very poor analogy...

It IS all hands on deck at this point though...if we can figure out the logistics, and get people on board, it might be a huge success...But at this point, where SHOULD we be putting "all of our eggs?" Getting the vaccine out, or deploying rapid antigen tests? I know the answer is "we can do both" but do you really think so effectively and efficiently?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...