Jump to content

Menu

Wading through info that conflicts... COVID related..


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, square_25 said:

Was it incredibly unpopular? In what circles? I'm pretty sure TracyP and I were discussing this number like a month ago on the main thread, and I thought that was a bit low but within range of reasonable estimates. I don't think any serious epidemiologists thought that was a wild guess, ever. 

The point is that it should be possible to discuss that opinion civilly, whether you agree with it or not. And that you should be upfront about the data you're using to figure it out, so we can see if the thing that makes you disagree with people is simply the data (which we can hopefully figure out together) or our own biases. And if it's the data, getting the data right is helpful for everyone involved, even if at the end, you still don't agree. 

Oh yes, incredibly unpopular on the board.  Virtually every thread I participated in was all about like 1% to 3%.  

I agree that it *should* be possible to discuss those things civilly.  I try very hard to be pretty civil when I discuss these things.  But I absolutely feel like MANY people here feel like if someone has come to a different conclusion than they did, well that person must just not be educated enough, or maybe even that person is just being brainwashed by faux news......aka, only paying attention to right wing media nut cases.  

It very much feels that way to a very large number of posters here and I really hope that many people on this board are really listening to the fact that MANY people on this board, who have stated very similar sentiments over the last month or two....really feel like this.  They really feel that many fellow boardies here have the opinion that unless a person holds the popular opinion.....clearly the person with the unpopular opinion is an idiot who couldn't possibly be reasonable.  

  • Like 11
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 302
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

This is from their own article: "There is some evidence that surgical masks can be effective at reducing overall particle emission from patients who have multidrug-resistant tuberculosis,36 cysti

This.  So much this. I admit to feeling a little ragey inside when I see Joe Public in a badly-fitting or improperly worn n95.  Because I have to wear a surgical mask at the hospital for emergenc

I wanted to highlight all of what you said LOL.. But yes... so much.  It's not just masks it's all of it.  Pick a topic related to Covid and you'll find very polemic ideas. I also don't understan

Posted Images

5 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

There is a difference between, "I see that we don't know about masks effectiveness fully yet, but I'll wear one just in case it protects other people" and "I see that we don't know about masks effectiveness yet, so why bother". 

And then there's the in between.

"Based on what I have read, I don't think that they are as effective as we want from a public health standpoint, but since it's easy enough, I will go ahead and go along cause it's really not going to hurt anything."

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, wathe said:

This.  So much this.

I admit to feeling a little ragey inside when I see Joe Public in a badly-fitting or improperly worn n95.  Because I have to wear a surgical mask at the hospital for emergency dept shifts because we don't have enough n95's.  One surgical mask per shift.   The same surgical mask for my entire shift.  Even when caring for known COVID positive patients.  N95's are reserved for aerosol-generating procedures only.

I understand your frustration with lack of proper PPE but I know my DH had three n95 masks he had purchased from a home supply store last year in order to work in the crawl space under our home. The mold and mildew he was remediating after hurricane Florence left water in the crawl space worsened his asthma so he needed the masks. When the coronavirus quarantine began, he washed the masks so he could use them when getting groceries and doing food deliveries. There were no other masks available anywhere for purchase and with his asthma and RA, he is high risk should he become infected. 

All that to say, it is possible people had masks for other reasons prior to the outbreak and are using them now. 

 

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Corraleno said:

Thanks for that link, I hadn't seen that. It looks like they are paying existing mask manufacturers to increases production at existing plants. But if the numbers in that article are correct, they will only be increasing production by ~450 million masks per year, which doesn't come close to providing what we are projected to need just for healthcare workers (3.5+ billion), let alone other workers or the public. The problem with N95 masks is that, unlike ventilators, they are disposable, so we not only need to get manufacturing up to the level we need, we need to keep it there.

Although they are now disinfecting some of the for reuse. My state just received a special trailer system that will disinfect thousands of masks everyday. The state is making it available to all of the hospitals. I do think though that it will be quite some time before the general public again has easy access to n95 masks to protect themselves or at risk friends or family members. I know I would feel way more comfortable going out and visiting elderly relatives when things open up if we had a program like South Korea where everyone could buy two ;n95 masks per week at cost.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, square_25 said:

 

Well, to be fair, I think 1% and 0.5% are similar enough estimates. They are both, for example, in the "much worse than the flu" range. 

I don't tend to assume people aren't reasonable, but the main "unpopular opinion" I've seen on the board has been that we should open up for the sake of the economy, and I frankly hadn't heard particularly good theories about how that's going to work. As in, I literally don't see how that solves our problems and how it doesn't open us up to new ones. And I haven't found people super interested in engaging with me on the data. But I'm absolutely willing to discuss unpopular opinions, if people are evidence-based about it. I have plenty of unpopular opinions myself, as you may have seen if you've ever read my math threads... 

IN terms of 1% and .5%, well sure, we can agree to disagree on our opinions of how similar they are.

In terms of "open up for the economy."

As of this week, THIRTY MILLION people are out of work in the US.  Sometimes I wonder if a number that large is hard for people to grasp.  It's like 6 times the population of New Zealand.  It's like 3 times the population of Sweden and only half the size of the entire population of Italy.   And the longer people are not allowed to work, the higher than number climbs....and it will continue to climb after people are allowed to go back, just as the deaths will.  That number of people be supported on unemployment..............it's not sustainable.  Not for more than a few weeks...and we are already a few weeks in.  

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, square_25 said:

I'd say this is pretty much option a) in Katie's post. 

Well the difference is in "in case it protects other people" vs " it's easy enough cause it won't hurt."  

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Donna said:

I understand your frustration with lack of proper PPE but I know my DH had three n95 masks he had purchased from a home supply store last year in order to work in the crawl space under our home. The mold and mildew he was remediating after hurricane Florence left water in the crawl space worsened his asthma so he needed the masks. When the coronavirus quarantine began, he washed the masks so he could use them when getting groceries and doing food deliveries. There were no other masks available anywhere for purchase and with his asthma and RA, he is high risk should he become infected. 

All that to say, it is possible people had masks for other reasons prior to the outbreak and are using them now. 

 

Same here. Plus my husband is a healthcare worker, so he knows the importance of a proper fit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, square_25 said:

 

I know. It's terrible. And I think everyone wants to reopen. But what are we going to do if we reopen and no one shows up anyway? What percentage of those currently unemployed are in industries that are going to be hit hard no matter what government does? What happens to all of them if there's healthcare overwhelm? 

These are real questions. I don't understand how reopening will work, honest to goodness I don't. It's not about whether this is terrible, because it obviously is. It's because, practically speaking, I don't see a solution. And if you want to convince me that there is one, then let's find some data we can agree on, and let's see if we can see eye-to-eye on any of it. Otherwise, there's nothing but slogans here. 

I am not even really about retail opening up (where the "no one shows up anyway" comes from right?)  

Manufacturing "opened up" in Ohio today.  My DH, works in a manufacturing plant....though he's not on the factory line, he's a design engineer.  He still can't go back to work, designing the airbags for the vehicles that people will be buying NEXT year, or the year after....until plants in other states also go back.  

My oldest is dating a guy who is an electrical engineer at Cummins.  He's working from home....but he's starting to hit a wall.  At some point, he needs to be on campus, testing things.  For engines that will be in production in like two years.

And in fact, my DD....she works for the state, doing GIS things that honestly....I can't begin to describe, for IDOT.  IDOT is paid for with Indiana gas tax.....which is a flat X cents on the gallon....but once the usage starts to dip, the funds will still dip and job loss can still happen.  Which impacts road construction and so one...years from from now....not to mention her own current job.  

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Pen said:

 

 

The differences you saw at different stores is interesting. I also was at two stores last time and saw close to 100% mask wearing among customers at one and probably only around 50% at the other.  

What people see others do will also probably make a difference. So if more people go to WM in masks probably more people yet will wear them.  If people with masks decide to give WM a miss then it will probably stay less mask wearing unless there’s a policy from on high — corporate or governmental. 

I have found similar differences in mask wearing from store to store, even in the same shopping strip. It’s interesting. I agree it’s probably self-fulfilling in many ways. I continue going back to the grocery stores with most people wearing masks, and I avoid the ones where they aren’t. I expect I’m not alone. 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, happysmileylady said:

I am not even really about retail opening up (where the "no one shows up anyway" comes from right?)  

Manufacturing "opened up" in Ohio today.  My DH, works in a manufacturing plant....though he's not on the factory line, he's a design engineer.  He still can't go back to work, designing the airbags for the vehicles that people will be buying NEXT year, or the year after....until plants in other states also go back.  

My oldest is dating a guy who is an electrical engineer at Cummins.  He's working from home....but he's starting to hit a wall.  At some point, he needs to be on campus, testing things.  For engines that will be in production in like two years.

And in fact, my DD....she works for the state, doing GIS things that honestly....I can't begin to describe, for IDOT.  IDOT is paid for with Indiana gas tax.....which is a flat X cents on the gallon....but once the usage starts to dip, the funds will still dip and job loss can still happen.  Which impacts road construction and so one...years from from now....not to mention her own current job.  

This is where the international thing kind of makes it hard because retail and manufacturing are still running here are far as I know.   Our version of social distancing is a lot milder than the US.  I also suspect that this confirms the theory that the weather/time of year plays a part because otherwise I don’t get why we seem to be better off for now.  (Also why I’m nervous about winter).   

The one thing I think that’s different is more test and trace capacity.  I think that will be the key for you guys as well.  If you can test and trace and isolate suspected cases and you can make sure you have PPE you should be able to open up.  That’s the idea of the lockdowns to get all that stuff in place.  It’s not meant to be a long term solution.  But it’s hard to know to what degree that has actually happened.  And if not why?

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and....the guy my oldest is dating.....he's in the US on an H1B.   Thankfully he still has a job.  But so many of his friends, of his same culture.....they have lost their jobs.  And that puts their legal status in jeopardy.  And they sure as heck aren't finding a new job on that H1B in this.  NOR....are they able to actually get back home legally.  They are in panic mode.  I don't even know those numbers.  These are people who are hear legally, have done everything right....and might very well find themselves suddenly illegal, because of nothing they did.   (and DD's BF could be one of them....he hasn't been laid off yet, but he's truly on the bubble.)

  • Sad 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, SKL said:

Honestly, before this virus took hold, it never would have occurred to me that singing in a choir could be dangerous.  I mean if that was common knowledge, there wouldn't be choirs, would there?  Ever seen a choir sing with their faces masked?

 

Close? Greek chorus (Wikipedia): 

. As the Greek theatres were so large, the chorus' actions had to be exaggerated and their voices clear so that everyone could see and hear them. To do this, they used techniques such as synchronization, echo, ripple, physical theatre and the use of masks to aid them

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

6 minutes ago, Danae said:


30 million is about 9% of the US population. During World War Two 11% of the US population served in the military and we found a way to pay them.

The economic impact is going to be devastating. That’s not because of the lockdown, it’s because of the virus. There is no choice we can make that is going to save the economy as we knew it. Lifting restrictions is not going to save small business, it’s not going to save tourist locations, it’s not going to save theaters and sports organizations.  All it’s going to do is make it harder for people who are out of work to receive help and impossible for people losing their businesses to collect insurance. 
 

The US is one of the only countries in the world to come out of WW2 in a better economic state than it went into the war.  And a very large part of that is very much because HERE....we weren't affected like the rest of the world.  Pearl Harbor was hit and...............................yeah, that's about it.  9/11 was our generation's Pearl Harbor.  Everything else here pretty much carried on.   That's not how this is going down now.  So IMO.....your analogy doesn't really work.  

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, happysmileylady said:

Oh yes, incredibly unpopular on the board.  Virtually every thread I participated in was all about like 1% to 3%.  

 

I think at that time most people were talking about CFR, not IFR. 

1 hour ago, happysmileylady said:

And then there's the in between.

"Based on what I have read, I don't think that they are as effective as we want from a public health standpoint, but since it's easy enough, I will go ahead and go along cause it's really not going to hurt anything."

Which is totally fine, and no one is being mean about that, or thinking that is stupid or reckless. I put that in the same category as my first option. Maybe it helps, probably not much, but we don't know, so might as well. That is not what people are upset about. what they are upset about is "I don't think they are as effective as you do, so I'm not going to wear one unless you can prove to me with absolute certainty that they might help others. Until then, I won't bother". 

1 hour ago, Donna said:

I understand your frustration with lack of proper PPE but I know my DH had three n95 masks he had purchased from a home supply store last year in order to work in the crawl space under our home. The mold and mildew he was remediating after hurricane Florence left water in the crawl space worsened his asthma so he needed the masks. When the coronavirus quarantine began, he washed the masks so he could use them when getting groceries and doing food deliveries. There were no other masks available anywhere for purchase and with his asthma and RA, he is high risk should he become infected. 

All that to say, it is possible people had masks for other reasons prior to the outbreak and are using them now. 

 

Yeah, we have one that was from a two pack DH bought when doing drywall on our bathroom. 

1 hour ago, square_25 said:

I'd say this is pretty much option a) in Katie's post. 

yes

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, happysmileylady said:

Oh, and....the guy my oldest is dating.....he's in the US on an H1B.   Thankfully he still has a job.  But so many of his friends, of his same culture.....they have lost their jobs.  And that puts their legal status in jeopardy.  And they sure as heck aren't finding a new job on that H1B in this.  NOR....are they able to actually get back home legally.  They are in panic mode.  I don't even know those numbers.  These are people who are hear legally, have done everything right....and might very well find themselves suddenly illegal, because of nothing they did.   (and DD's BF could be one of them....he hasn't been laid off yet, but he's truly on the bubble.)

Do they have any kind of amnesty?  That’s what other countries seem to be doing, not on an official level but on a “call the authorities and we’ll figure it out level”.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, PrincessMommy said:

Honestly, my head is spinning.  It seems like we can find data and experts to support whatever we think about this pandemic. 

I'm downright frustrated and annoyed by the overload of information and the judgement that comes from those who disagree.... I'm hearing people say those that disagree with them are either selfish, uneducated Neanderthals or Fearmongerers who want to take away our civil liberties -(in the US and depending on the side they take).  It's like there's no middle ground and so much judging of "the other".  No one can politely disagree and give their own information.   Sorry ladies, I'm seeing it here too..  

Anyway, this came across my feed. 

Masks 4 All Not Based on Sound Data by two Drs. who specialize in respiratory issues (one specifically specializes in respiratory protection).  So, I feel like they are trustworthy.  But I also thought the Prof who produced the  Masks4All videos was trustworthy.  Ugh.  This is so frustrating. 

What says the hive??   How are you wading through the information and not allowing yourself to be caught in an echo chamber?  

 

You have a lot of replies and I have read none...but just wanted to say you expressed exactly what I am thinking and feeling. I share in your frustration and yes, I too have been accused of "peddling unfounded information." When basics change swiftly, it does leave your head spinning. I am having a little bit of wine tonight and I am taking a walk - wanna come along virtually?  :)

 

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ausmumof3 said:

Do they have any kind of amnesty?  That’s what other countries seem to be doing, not on an official level but on a “call the authorities and we’ll figure it out level”.

I don't think foreign nationals are really feeling a "we'll figure it out" kind of vibe in the states right now 😕

  • Sad 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that one of the reasons that the science seems so unsettled is that science often looks like this, but it doesn't usually play out in public.  Science journalism tends towards the awful, with headlines that dramatically overstate the results of a study.  The replication problem is real - sometimes we're not measuring what we think we're measuring - it's not just that the same drug given at different stages, doses, or combinations may have different results and the headlines all just scream Yay or Nay, but if the initial doctors use different diagnostic criteria, have patients with different genetics, etc, then they might see different effects but not have enough data to recognize what they're missing. 

But, even with no-rush regular research, scientists can become entrenched and inflexible in their conclusions.  I've read several articles where scientists are convinced that the mainstream is going down the wrong path in trying to cure a given disease but they can't get funding to investigate new ideas because 'that's not how the disease works', despite the commonly accepted idea leading nowhere.  I would have read it as sour grapes except that I've seen it happen - it's hard to get funding, or publish a paper, in an area that goes against conventional wisdom.  But, unless you're seeing paper reviews or sitting at conferences where the Q&A sessions can get a bit confrontational, it's easy to imagine that science is the openminded quest for truth that we teach kids about.  

And, finally, it's hard to know when you're looking at correlation vs causation and know how to legitimately interpret statistics.  Like, if a rate goes from 0.5% to 1%, do you think of it as increasing by 0.5 or as doubling?  Both are true, but if you do something to get a more dramatic effect or you start with a bigger number, then the difference is huge...like, if somehow you started with 30% instead, would your effect take you to 30.5 or 60 or something else?  And, how do they model how differently we live?  A person in an apartment might be in close contact with more people getting out of their building than I would going to a department store - how do they model that?  My gut tells me that vitamin D is big in several different areas, but some studies show that supplementation doesn't always have results...so are we really looking at vitamin D levels, fresh air, some other sun-induced process, epigenetic change induced by moving more (ie not being a couch potato) or just people healthy enough to be able to go outside?  We discuss confounding factors in one of my classes and it always blows students' minds..like, how do we figure out anything once we study it in the complex system that people are?  

Sorry for the ramble - I don't usually comment on threads that have contentious potential, but complications in bio research is a fascinating topic for me, having spent almost a decade in university research labs before I started teaching.  My husband is an engineer and we often marvel at how different the processes are.  He describes it as putting known inputs together to get a result - the more work that is done, the faster or better the result, more or less.  Biology research always feels a bit like flailing around in the dark - like, you have an idea and a direction and often it works somewhat like you'd expect, but then you hit walls because there's a whole level of stuff that nobody knew existed (like how we thought that sequencing the human genome would lead to all sorts of medical cures, but it led to a whole lot of 'Wow-what do all of these regulatory sequences do?  And these non-coding RNAs...there sure are a lot of them...they can't all be junk').  It's always fascinating, unless you're in a hurry to cure something.  

Edited by ClemsonDana
  • Like 12
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Fifiruth said:

Our governor is going more by data and modeling. The mayor of the biggest city said that he “didn’t feel comfortable” with the governor’s plans, so he’s extending and strengthening the restrictions for the city. They are both democrats, not that that should matter, but it seems to be that it does.  Either way, I appreciate a gut feeling but not when science needs to prevail.

I have noticed that it doesn't matter who is a Dem or a Rep when it comes to the rules.  Both have politicians who aren't doing a good job and others who are doing a good job.

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Danae said:


30 million is about 9% of the US population. During World War Two 11% of the US population served in the military and we found a way to pay them.


 

Entire sectors though we're not shut down.  Instead more people that had not been in the workforce before the war started joined the work force and kept everything open and expanding.  

They didn't shut down factories when so many of the young men left, instead others took their places and many more women entered the work force.

  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Danae said:


30 million is about 9% of the US population. During World War Two 11% of the US population served in the military and we found a way to pay them.

The economic impact is going to be devastating. That’s not because of the lockdown, it’s because of the virus. There is no choice we can make that is going to save the economy as we knew it. Lifting restrictions is not going to save small business, it’s not going to save tourist locations, it’s not going to save theaters and sports organizations.  All it’s going to do is make it harder for people who are out of work to receive help and impossible for people losing their businesses to collect insurance. 
 

A private during WWII was paid approximately $700 per month equivalent to today's dollars.  I think the demographics of who was serving the military versus who is unemployed today would be greatly different.  People like dentists, who have school debt, expensive dental equipment to pay for, and a mortgage can't work.  So maintaining the unemployed today would be much more costly.  We were also coming out of a period of underutilized resources during the Great Depression, so you were utilizing resources that had not been fully utilized; now we have resources that were being utilized that are now not being used.  Even so, if you study economic history, you will find that costs involved in fighting WWII were not without severe economic consequences--which led to the 1951 Accord.  

I agree that the economic impact of this will be devastating.  I am curious of why you think it would be harder for people who are out of work to receive help if we are not under lockdown?  What type of insurance policies would a company have to have to be able to collect on the policy if a government mandated lockdown is in existence but not if the company must shut because of lack of business during a pandemic?   

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Ottakee said:

That is why it all gets confusing.

And coding deaths is harder.  My FIL was listed as pneumonia...which he had....but he also had lung cancer and end stage renal failure.  Those were really what was behind his death, but the pneumonia set in because of those 2 and was his "cause of death".

I recognize that things need to be sorted for data points, but I’m really conflicted about the whole thing.  I don’t have my grandmother’s cause of death or testing result right now. She was most definitely in poor health for a long while. There were several times that we really thought we were going to lose her over the years.
But, had she been hit by a car, murdered by a caregiver, taken by a CO leak, or cracked her head in a fall, no one would have attributed her death to her existing conditions, even though they were bound to get her eventually.

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, happysmileylady said:

Wow, that's interesting!  Maybe the police are thinking murder/suicide sort of thing that failed?  Huh.  

I don't think so.  It is extremely rare for women to initiate murder/suicide of this kind of nature,  Women tend to do murder/suicide with children.  Also, there are cases with a woman killing her husband then herself if the husband is unable to do the actual killing.  

Edited by TravelingChris
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, PrincessMommy said:

This happened on March 6th.    

I agree that all of our own personal stories are driving our feelings.  We can't divorce our own experiences from data.  I think what I find frustrating is the lack of empathy for "the other".   Also, I am personally seeing elitist attitudes in my metro DC area against those who are rural/working class.  I find it upsetting and disconcerting.  

I also agree that solutions will (should?) be different depending on where you are located.  That's why I would prefer it to be done state by state (even county by county) because America has such a diverse population density and need.  

 

It really bugs me when I hear such attitudes or see them in action.  My intolerance for this attitude has been growing over the years but came into full blown despisal of this rank elitism during the 2016 election.  In fact, several years later, someone made a nasty remark about those "Trump" rural, ignorant, etc voters in a Sunday School class and I spoke up and said that such attitudes was exactly what tipped my hand in voting last Presidential election (it really didn't matter how I voted here since we were an uncontested state). As a highly educated couple, we just cannot tolerate dismissals and worse of the rural/working/serving class and also the urban poor too.   Just no.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, TravelingChris said:

It really bugs me when I hear such attitudes or see them in action.  My intolerance for this attitude has been growing over the years but came into full blown despisal of this rank elitism during the 2016 election.  In fact, several years later, someone made a nasty remark about those "Trump" rural, ignorant, etc voters in a Sunday School class and I spoke up and said that such attitudes was exactly what tipped my hand in voting last Presidential election (it really didn't matter how I voted here since we were an uncontested state). As a highly educated couple, we just cannot tolerate dismissals and worse of the rural/working/serving class and also the urban poor too.   Just no.

Those attitudes bother me as well.  The working class is the back bone of America.   Look around, other than doctors and nurses, almost all other essential workers are working class people....nurses aides, grocery store workers, farmers, truck drivers, warehouse workers, delivery people, food service workers, many teachers and teachers aides, etc.  

I am listening to the audio book Becoming by Michelle Obama right now.  She came from a black, south side Chicago, blue color family.  Her parents are the type of people that are the bacon me of America.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, happysmileylady said:

And, bringing it right back to the topic of the thread....conflicting and confusing information...

I haven't seen anything claiming that the mere act of breathing through the nose is going to produce enough of anything to actually infect someone.  Talking, singing, sure, there's some evidence of that.  But just breathing?   

There is evidence out there.  Specifically the Vo, Italy study where they tested everyone and figured out all contacts.  That is a small city in northern Italy- the hot spot in the country,  Anyway, the study determined that a) asymptomatic people do spread it just as much as symptomatic-----asymptomatic people are not coughing or sneezing--- they are just breathing.  They also determined that your chances of getting Covid increase based on how many or how often the contacts are.  Which makes sense because if it is in the air and you walk by in a store where a person who has Covid just walked by- you have less chance of getting it than if you live or work closely with that same Covid person.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Plum said:

<snip>

Hospital workers have to get fit tested for the PPE. It's not one size fits all. Those of us making masks ourselves have discovered this first-hand. I posted what they do for that fit-testing on the big thread. It's a lengthy process to ensure there is a good seal. It's also why I don't think the general public (excluding vulnerable demos) really needs to be buying up N95. The chances they will buy one that magically fits them well enough to seal is slim. Realistically, the chances that they will wear it properly the entire time they are out and about, talking to friends and workers is slim. True respirators are uncomfortable, oppressively hot, claustrophobic, and difficult to breathe in.

<snip>

 

12 hours ago, wathe said:

This.  So much this.

I admit to feeling a little ragey inside when I see Joe Public in a badly-fitting or improperly worn n95.  Because I have to wear a surgical mask at the hospital for emergency dept shifts because we don't have enough n95's.  One surgical mask per shift.   The same surgical mask for my entire shift.  Even when caring for known COVID positive patients.  N95's are reserved for aerosol-generating procedures only.

Same here, wathe. Except on my end I have two N95s — without being fit tested...ever — that I have to alternate using each shift. One obviously doesn’t fit me. I had to use that one last shift when I intubated someone. I’ll use it again in two shifts. I’m assured that even though I had to perform an AGP, the mask will be fine because there weren’t any obvious contaminants on it. Meanwhile, it’ll sit in a brown paper sack inside a cardboard box which I labeled Schrödinger.

My boss finally consented to having us fit tested after our DICO pointed out that maybe he should rethink the liability involved if one of the medics suffers a horrible morbidity or even death due to this virus.

The fit testing will happen in two weeks. 

Edited by brehon
  • Sad 10
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Donna said:

I understand your frustration with lack of proper PPE but I know my DH had three n95 masks he had purchased from a home supply store last year in order to work in the crawl space under our home. The mold and mildew he was remediating after hurricane Florence left water in the crawl space worsened his asthma so he needed the masks. When the coronavirus quarantine began, he washed the masks so he could use them when getting groceries and doing food deliveries. There were no other masks available anywhere for purchase and with his asthma and RA, he is high risk should he become infected. 

All that to say, it is possible people had masks for other reasons prior to the outbreak and are using them now. 

 

This was me too.  I bought three masks a few years ago because of my asthma and traveling to an area with wildfires.  One got used up and thrown away,.  One I am sharing currently with my dh.  One we gave to our dd, who is also very high risk.    They had all been used by me previously for asthma at least once.  They were not okay to donate. 

But that is one of the issues.  Not only do health care workers need N95 but so many high risk people, and also all the people doing work that requires filtration like painting, mold removal, sand blasting, etc, etc, etc.  Because it is isn't only N95 masks people can't get but also respirator masks too.

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

A private during WWII was paid approximately $700 per month equivalent to today's dollars.  I think the demographics of who was serving the military versus who is unemployed today would be greatly different.  People like dentists, who have school debt, expensive dental equipment to pay for, and a mortgage can't work.  So maintaining the unemployed today would be much more costly.  We were also coming out of a period of underutilized resources during the Great Depression, so you were utilizing resources that had not been fully utilized; now we have resources that were being utilized that are now not being used.  Even so, if you study economic history, you will find that costs involved in fighting WWII were not without severe economic consequences--which led to the 1951 Accord.  

I agree that the economic impact of this will be devastating.  I am curious of why you think it would be harder for people who are out of work to receive help if we are not under lockdown?  What type of insurance policies would a company have to have to be able to collect on the policy if a government mandated lockdown is in existence but not if the company must shut because of lack of business during a pandemic?   

I can give you one example here that’s not insurance related with the Grand Prix.  They delayed till people were literally queuing at the gates before it was finally shut down.  Apparently legally if they are shut down by government order there’s no Legal requirement to refund ticket payments but if they shut it down themselves they legally had to. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

I can give you one example here that’s not insurance related with the Grand Prix.  They delayed till people were literally queuing at the gates before it was finally shut down.  Apparently legally if they are shut down by government order there’s no Legal requirement to refund ticket payments but if they shut it down themselves they legally had to. 

This seems to vary from place to place and industry to industry.  If the US government will not allow an airline to fly a route, for example, the airline must offer  a refund on the ticket. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, square_25 said:

 

I think this refers more to people who technically can go to work, but are afraid to. If I were living with an elderly relative, I would think twice about working in a restaurant in a state which doesn't have robust testing right now, but if the state had reopened, I'd be pretty much out of luck -- my unemployment would be my own fault. 

This would depend upon how the unemployment situation was classified in the first place.  If my employer laid-off or terminated workers (rather than furloughed me), I could remain unemployed even though the restaurant opened back up.  I have no idea how many people have been furloughed rather than laid-off in the US.  Personally, everyone I know who has been impacted has been laid-off rather than furloughed.  

Even with government lock-downs, we have people who leave with an elderly relative who are going to work.  Given that few employers are going to reopen and have as many employees as before, I have a difficult time believing that there would be so may people who have employers who furloughed them, the employer calls them back to work, and the employee is in a situation like living with an elderly relative that makes the risk of returning to work extremely high to base policy decisions off of those cases.  As we have seen, the federal govt has already stepped in and expanded unemployment benefits beyond what is usually allowed.  Measures could be taken to protect those who are in situations where their employers call them back and they are unable to return.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, happysmileylady said:

Oh yes, incredibly unpopular on the board.  Virtually every thread I participated in was all about like 1% to 3%.  

I agree that it *should* be possible to discuss those things civilly.  I try very hard to be pretty civil when I discuss these things.  But I absolutely feel like MANY people here feel like if someone has come to a different conclusion than they did, well that person must just not be educated enough, or maybe even that person is just being brainwashed by faux news......aka, only paying attention to right wing media nut cases.  

It very much feels that way to a very large number of posters here and I really hope that many people on this board are really listening to the fact that MANY people on this board, who have stated very similar sentiments over the last month or two....really feel like this.  They really feel that many fellow boardies here have the opinion that unless a person holds the popular opinion.....clearly the person with the unpopular opinion is an idiot who couldn't possibly be reasonable.  

raising my hand!

 

1 hour ago, TravelingChris said:

It really bugs me when I hear such attitudes or see them in action.  My intolerance for this attitude has been growing over the years but came into full blown despisal of this rank elitism during the 2016 election.  In fact, several years later, someone made a nasty remark about those "Trump" rural, ignorant, etc voters in a Sunday School class and I spoke up and said that such attitudes was exactly what tipped my hand in voting last Presidential election (it really didn't matter how I voted here since we were an uncontested state). As a highly educated couple, we just cannot tolerate dismissals and worse of the rural/working/serving class and also the urban poor too.   Just no.

Yes, exactly.  I think that is what bugs me so much about the conversations surrounding the virus. Having grown up in a working class family, who lived inside the Beltway, it really does bristle.  My daughter's boyfriend made an abhorrent comment about "flyover people" in relation to "The Tiger King" and  I was just floored.  I wished I'd thought better on my feet.  

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Pen said:

 

Close? Greek chorus (Wikipedia): 

. As the Greek theatres were so large, the chorus' actions had to be exaggerated and their voices clear so that everyone could see and hear them. To do this, they used techniques such as synchronization, echo, ripple, physical theatre and the use of masks to aid them

The mask were used to tell the story - not to aid in sound projection.  So there's the "Angry" mask or the "Sad" mask to let the audience know where the story-line was.  Plus, the mouth part was open - so the choir (which didn't sing BTW - it spoke) could talk in unison. 

I kind of wonder about the choir outbreak.  It seems like an outlier.   Have there been other choirs who had similar outbreaks? There are choirs all over the country (mine included) who were meeting up until early/mid March.  I can only speak anecdotally, but in our parish  we have a 30-40 person choir and gather 3-5 people closely around each choir stand.  We're not sitting next to each other holding our own book. And we participate in a common cup for the Eucharist - about 120-150 persons.  No one in my parish has gotten sick from Covid.  No one has even suspected Covid (except those of us who wondered, "Allergies or Covid??").    Like I said, it's anecdotal and no news organization is going to report that we didn't have covid, because it won't sell.  Fear sells.   

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, square_25 said:

 

Right, I agree, it's a big problem. But what is your plan? How do we reopen things in a way that actually brings everything back as opposed to making it worse? Which things will be just as impacted if we reopen now? What is your estimate of a chance of a second wave? Does that affect things? 

I understand the economic pain here. What I don't understand is how this is supposed to work. And I'd really prefer to talk about the nitty-gritty of this, as opposed to talk about the many bad things about the economy staying closed, which I think we already agree on. 

I think before we can come up with a plan, the states need to come up with a stated goal.  I am still confused about what the goal is moving forward in my state.  Is policy being set in order to prevent people from catching Covid19 with the hope that a vaccine will be available within the 12-18 month timeframe, or is the policy being set geared towards recognizing that people will get infected, but working to ensure that our hospital systems don't get overwhelmed resulting in not being able  to treat those who are sick?  In my opinion, the economic plan will be vastly different depending on the goal.  

My state is beginning to open up.  During yesterday's press conference, our governor was asked what benchmarks he would use to determine whether we need to tighten restrictions again.  He was unable to answer the question.  I found his lack of an answer disturbing.    I would like to see infectious disease experts guiding my state's public policy through this pandemic, not a director of health who thinks that viruses can multiply on countertops.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, mms said:

Yes, they’ve expanded testing to anyone, even without symptoms, introduced antibody tests and the county health departments have always and will continue to trace contacts. And we have ppe and sanitizer being manufactured in state Though probably could use more ppe like everyone

There’s modelling (from Boston I think) today showing that effective contact tracing and isolating of all known contacts plus some social distancing measures (no mass public gatherings was one) should mean you can reopen without overwhelming health systems.  So it sounds like you are in track.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mms said:

Oh I know we are. And we have been for at least two weeks. That is why I said our governor has moved too slow. It has caused people to lose trust and start violating the bans. And should we need to close down again I think there will be less compliance.  Which is disconcerting at the very least.

One thing the pm expressed here today was that businesses are saying as much as they want to open they really don’t want a seesaw of constant opening and closing because it’s more expensive and worse for business than waiting slightly longer and staying open.  Maybe that’s why?  
we are having some changes from Monday.  Most likely bigger numbers for funerals and possibly tourism to regional areas.  Playgrounds have opened already.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, square_25 said:

 

The question is, how much COVID do you actually have going through the population? Are you in a high outbreak state? 

I live in the DMV.  We have parishioners in live in DC, Maryland, and VA. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, square_25 said:

Whoa. Do you really have a director of health who thinks that viruses can multiply on countertops?? 

 

Unfortunately, yes.  She is in way over her head.  

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PrincessMommy said:

The mask were used to tell the story - not to aid in sound projection.  So there's the "Angry" mask or the "Sad" mask to let the audience know where the story-line was.  Plus, the mouth part was open - so the choir (which didn't sing BTW - it spoke) could talk in unison. 

I kind of wonder about the choir outbreak.  It seems like an outlier.   Have there been other choirs who had similar outbreaks? There are choirs all over the country (mine included) who were meeting up until early/mid March.  I can only speak anecdotally, but in our parish  we have a 30-40 person choir and gather 3-5 people closely around each choir stand.  We're not sitting next to each other holding our own book. And we participate in a common cup for the Eucharist - about 120-150 persons.  No one in my parish has gotten sick from Covid.  No one has even suspected Covid (except those of us who wondered, "Allergies or Covid??").    Like I said, it's anecdotal and no news organization is going to report that we didn't have covid, because it won't sell.  Fear sells.   

 

If no one in a group has CV19, no one will catch it.  If no one has it, it doesn’t matter whether you sing together or French kiss together, afaik.  You can’t catch it unless the virus is present. 

 

I think when the Washington choir got the outbreak, many other far west coast choirs where community spread was strongly suspected took note and stopped meeting and practicing .  (If they had not stopped already.)

(I was in a music group locally but stopped going in I think January. Very early, anyway. ) 

Edited by Pen
  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mms said:

I’m thinking about potential shut downs in the fall not immediately. If our state starts see sawing (even if it is necessary) now  the demonstrations in Michigan will seem mild in comparison to what our populace is likely to do.

Yeah I think that’s a real risk with areas that have locked down too hard to early.  I also think here if we get hit in winter there will not be the public appetite to do this again without a serious problem.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mms said:

What I am seeing here is that many people who went in to this crisis with full cooperation and good will are now falling prey to the narrative that this was all overblown and that the shut downs were over reactions. These are otherwise reasonable thoughtful people.

 

Unfortunately that was predictable from the start.  If it got slowed down quite a few people would believe that meant it wasn’t a problem.  I think the average intelligence is average. Half of people are below that.  And a number of people above lack good science education—including most journalists who mostly weren’t stem oriented .  One cannot use mob mentality to guide policy. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, mms said:

What I am seeing here is that many people who went in to this crisis with full cooperation and good will are now falling prey to the narrative that this was all overblown and that the shut downs were over reactions. These are otherwise reasonable thoughtful people.

I also think there in another category who went into the crisis with full cooperation and good will with the understanding that the measures were put in place to flatten the curve so the hospitals were not overwhelmed.  Once hospitals began furloughing nurses and cutting salaries due to empty hospital beds - evidence that the shut-down succeeded, there was frustration when things didn't begin to open back up because it appeared that the objective they had agreed with had changed.

  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, square_25 said:

 

I can absolutely see why, because we wound up shutting many things down with insufficient information. The lack of information from February meant that some states shut down way too late (NY and some of the Northeast, who were taken totally unawares by the fact that the virus "snuck in" from Europe), and some states shut down without need (much of the middle of the country), when they could have probably done containment instead. 

When you go in blind, though, you have very limited options. 

 

Wisconsin and Illinois had early known cases. It may have been that they and other middle of country areas would have been more like NY and NJ had that been ignored.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, square_25 said:

 

The problem is that the "flatten the curve" graphic makes no sense in states which have less than a percent infected, which is probably quite a lot of states. You're simply not in a situation of exponential growth that needs to be curtailed. Rather, you're in a situation where you need to be doing containment. The fact that the hospitals weren't overwhelmed yet tells you precisely nothing about whether they will be in the future. What will help with that is instituting measures now. 

The problem, though, is that flattening the curve was the reason given for the measures.  

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, square_25 said:

 

Well, I know. And for all we knew, the virus was all over and it was a reasonable approach. As it turns out, it wasn't. 

The curve did get flattened in places with serious outbreaks. It wasn't all a myth. 

I haven't seen anyone state that it was a myth.  But, in many places, the hospitals are far from being overwhelmed, and the shelter in place no longer seems necessary.

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, alewife said:

I also think there in another category who went into the crisis with full cooperation and good will with the understanding that the measures were put in place to flatten the curve so the hospitals were not overwhelmed.  Once hospitals began furloughing nurses and cutting salaries due to empty hospital beds - evidence that the shut-down succeeded, there was frustration when things didn't begin to open back up because it appeared that the objective they had agreed with had changed.

 

Yes. I think that is true.  

And at the same time, I also think that a lot of the unhappiness is being fomented.   Some accidentally,  some very much deliberately. 

Michigan has more cases and deaths per population than any of the 3 far west states that first realized there was a problem, including  415 deaths per 1M population compared to California’s 58 deaths per population.    It is  just a bit behind the North East / New England states and Louisiana for large number of cases and deaths per population.   And yet it Michigan is in the news for protests like operation gridlock and people shooting a guard trying to uphold the mask wearing rule.

 I don’t believe that is due to furloughed hospital staff.  

Even if so, That is certainly not a good way to deal with a grievance about furloughed hospital staff.  

 

The places that are actually keeping low numbers of cases are opening up from what I have seen.  A lot started opening in California already.  Washington state is moving into its opening. 

The middle of country states that aren’t having troubles seem to be in opening process or never closed in first place. 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, mms said:

In our area several rural hospitals have closed permanently and even the city hospitals were never even close to full capacity. It was clear weeks ago that the curve had been flattened, that there was indeed enough ppe and that we would not follow in New York’s footsteps. At the very least elective medical procedures should have been allowed much sooner. Three weeks ago people did not want “full opening of everything right now” and would have cooperated with a slow opening, now they look at the surrounding states that had more cases than us with less restrictions and a prudential, slow, reopening is very unpopular.

 

What is now keeping your rural area from reopening? 

And how many cases of CV19 do you know your area has?

And can any of your rural hospitals get federal or state help to stay open? 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, alewife said:

I haven't seen anyone state that it was a myth.  But, in many places, the hospitals are far from being overwhelmed, and the shelter in place no longer seems necessary.

Our state never was over whelmed but they definitely don’t have enough PPE which people have seemed to stop caring about I guess.
 

I know the head of a local ER hasn’t been able to be in the same house with her kids since this started due to her youngest being high risk and the lack of adequate protection for her at work. Now our state is opening back up but still not enough PPE. I fear we’re going to lose a lot of good medical professionals because we’re not doing near enough to protect them and I don’t think they’ll put up with it for too much longer. 

  • Sad 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, mms said:

The governor has put us on a phased plan per cdc guidelines that started with elective procedures opening up last week. I don’t think he is doing it wrong per se but that phase should have started three weeks ago from the numbers I’ve seen. At the very least there should have been allowances for differences between rural and urban, there were several counties with no cases at all but same restrictions and this has just about destroyed their already weak economies.

Amongst people I talk to (all social classes and levels of education) the feelings now are that it is too late for phased opening just do it like Georgia. That sort of mindset makes me worry about what will happen the next time we face similar issues.

 

No idea about aid.

 

You may have said already, but if you don’t mind saying, what state are you?

Some states are allowing individual areas or cities or counties to open at different speeds. Have you called or written your elected officials offices and health authority representatives and asked for that? 

 

This article is about Hawaii, which has a lot of controversy about opening right now:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/20/hawaii-coronavirus-covid-19-tourists

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, mms said:

Not when the center of the outbreak of your state is hundreds of miles away from the areas that have no cases. State parks are still closed for camping, hotels are closed through lack of business, I doubt there would have ever been a great influx from the big city. Our governor did crack down on the New Yorkers who were trying to temporarily settle here though 😉

Hundreds of miles can mean nothing.  Or this never would have spread at all.  People move, people visit friends/relatives, go to parks or hiking or fishing or other recreation.  People out in the rural areas go to more populated areas to work and come back home at night.  This is why 'stay at home' works  - much, much more effective in these low-case areas would be rigorous testing and contact tracing, but most states don't have adequate measures for either of those in place, so they had to go with the blunt instrument.  When all you've got is a hammer...

The western, more rural area of our state was looking pretty darn good compared to the eastern populated area.  But one of the worst outbreaks we have was in a nursing facility out there - who knows how it got in.  Hundreds infected, 71 dead so far.

Edited by Matryoshka
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...