The second dumb thing we have done in the pandemic

[ktgrok]

7 minutes ago, Arctic Mama said:

Sure. I thought about taking pictures in the cafeteria but that seemed rude. The group of unmasked surgeons laugh together under the PLEASE MASK sign was kind of hilarious though.

 

 

Lots more information like this from various virologists and doctors, alike.  You’re welcome 🙂

I don’t really care that all of us parents were trying harder with hand wipes and washing and masking than the hospital.  It would be nice if the policies they’re strongly asking us to comply with were ones they believed in or adhered to, themselves.

Yeah, I call BS. Either that dude is not a surgeon, or he's clueless as to how masks work. But random meme on the internet is hardly evidence of anything. I can make one that says big bird is patient zero, we need to stop watching sesame street or we will all catch this and die. It would be about as accurate. 

Masks prevent droplet spread. Also, viruses don't replicate in a mask. They just don't. They are not bacteria, they can't replicate themselves. And it is actually factually entirely possible to NOT mess with your mask while grocery shopping. And even if you do - so what? If my mask is to prevent me from spewing droplets of snot full of virus on your face while you check out my groceries, me touching the sides of the mask to move it down a bit from my eyes is not changing that. But again, even if it did magically do that, then people can just NOT TOUCH IT. If I absolutely have to, I can grab it by the ear loops and manuver it. Which are not being breathed on anymore than say, my hair or something, that someone might touch. 

that whole meme is ridiculous. (and seems to say that no one should bother even wearing a properly fitted N95, which means all healthcare workers are getting zero protection and are screwed)

[ktgrok]

7 minutes ago, Arctic Mama said:

See the image above too, for another take.  I could pull up five more like it with almost no difficulty. Masks do help with droplets of fluid, for spittle and such.  But anyone coughing or sneezing is already barred from being inside as is.

 

I’m being as overly careful as I can with the masks, but that’s for other people.  Not me.  For me avoiding areas of high contact and sterilizing hands and wheelchairs has proven a lot more effective over the last few years with avoiding the circulating illnesses we may encounter.  I noticed a marked difference with those behaviors.

I wouldn’t ever denigrate you or make fun of you out loud.  Nor would or should most people, as I think we each need to do our own thing and stop looking at what others are doing, as their level of risk or commensurate need for precaution might be very different.

but how do you predict, at entrance, who might cough 30 minutes later? That's not a thing you can do. Or sneeze, or whatever. You can't. heck, I'm known to choke on nothing, or my own saliva, and have a coughing fit randomly, or get a tickle in my nose and sneeze. I can't predict that. No one can. 

And yes, the masks are for other people, exactly! Which is why I can't stop looking at what others are doing, because what they are doing impacts MY safety. It impacts my risk assesment. When everyone was mostly masking at the store I felt I could go in. Right now, hearing that almost no one is masking anymore? Despite our cases at the same level, or in my county, rising? Yeah, that means I do not feel safe going if I can at all avoid it.So yeah, that's why I care what others are doing. Because it is impacting my risk. 

[TCB]

1 minute ago, Ktgrok said:

Yeah, I call BS. Either that dude is not a surgeon, or he's clueless as to how masks work. But random meme on the internet is hardly evidence of anything. I can make one that says big bird is patient zero, we need to stop watching sesame street or we will all catch this and die. It would be about as accurate. 

Masks prevent droplet spread. Also, viruses don't replicate in a mask. They just don't. They are not bacteria, they can't replicate themselves. And it is actually factually entirely possible to NOT mess with your mask while grocery shopping. And even if you do - so what? If my mask is to prevent me from spewing droplets of snot full of virus on your face while you check out my groceries, me touching the sides of the mask to move it down a bit from my eyes is not changing that. But again, even if it did magically do that, then people can just NOT TOUCH IT. If I absolutely have to, I can grab it by the ear loops and manuver it. Which are not being breathed on anymore than say, my hair or something, that someone might touch. 

that whole meme is ridiculous. (and seems to say that no one should bother even wearing a properly fitted N95, which means all healthcare workers are getting zero protection and are screwed)

I hear you. This all makes sense to me. Somehow we all end up talking past each other and obviously are not changing each other's mind. We will have to wait and see. I'm hopeful that at some point in the future we will have some solid evidence and not have to rely on our own and other's opinions, but for the time being that seems to be all we have.

[ktgrok]

Just now, Arctic Mama said:

Okay Katie, you can believe what you’d like 🙂

That is by no means an isolated view, even here on the grounds.  But you do you, and I’ll be nice and try to make you feel better in solidarity for the time being, all right?

Gotta go, traffic will pick up in a little bit and I’d rather avoid that.

But...it isn't about "belief". The evidence shows that it can help. Therefore, I mask. Has nothing to do with what anyone "believes". Nor is it a matter of popularity...it isn't a vote. 

Even if those believing it are doctors. I mean, hello, how many board posts do we have on here about doctors totally messing up, saying things that are patently wrong, out of date, etc? All the time! 

 

[Pawz4me]

27 minutes ago, Arctic Mama said:

Sure. I thought about taking pictures in the cafeteria but that seemed rude. The group of unmasked surgeons laugh together under the PLEASE MASK sign was kind of hilarious though.

 

 

Lots more information like this from various virologists and doctors, alike.  You’re welcome 🙂

I don’t really care that all of us parents were trying harder with hand wipes and washing and masking than the hospital.  It would be nice if the policies they’re strongly asking us to comply with were ones they believed in or adhered to, themselves.

Ummm . . . what?

We're supposed to believe an unverified Twitter account from someone claiming to be a doc? Just like that, no doubt or questions asked?

No thanks. I'm pretty darn sure none of us would accept that cite from one of our kids.

[TCB]

7 minutes ago, kand said:

I’ll ask one more time, because I have done so several times in several threads, and have yet to see an answer: For those who disagree that wearing a mask is helpful, do you want it to be helpful? In other words, would you be happy if we had overwhelming science come out to show that it absolutely reduces transmission? Would you be glad for us to find that out? 

I'm in the mask wearing camp and I do hope it works because it would be great to have something that worked. However, I would really like to know for as sure as it's possible to know, because if it doesn't really work then I don't want to have to bother. As for Drs and science - in my experience some of them are up on science and the latest studies etc., more so in their own field, but I think there are many who may have opinions about masks but don't know the hard figures etc. And honestly, does that dr up thread not bother to wear one when he's around covid patients? I'd be really surprised if not. Also, if he is working somewhere that has such a good supply of masks at the moment that he doesn't have to wear one for at least several days in a row I'd love to know where that is.

[Pawz4me]

1 minute ago, happysmileylady said:

If someone could tell me that Pattern X, or Pattern Y or Pattern Z, made with A or B fabric, would reduce the risk to others by a reasonable amount....I would be all about making a regular mask.

I just don't think that sort of information exists.  

They won't tell you a pattern or the reduction of risk to others, but Wake Forest Baptist (Wake Forest University/NC Baptist Hospitals) told us quite a few weeks ago what fabrics are best and their effectiveness compared to N95s and surgical masks.

 

Quote

In an effort to determine the protective qualities of homemade cloth masks, a team of doctors and scientists used rigorous testing, known as particulate filtration, to evaluate 13 different designs from approximately 400 masks made by community volunteers.

The goal was to find out which type of mask best removed particles 0.3 – 1.0 microns in diameter, the size of many viruses and bacteria, in comparison to standard surgical masks and N95 respirators.

“We saw the possibility that we could face a shortage of surgical masks in the hospital and wanted to investigate the possibility of using cloth masks as an alternative as long as they worked and provided good protection for our doctors, nurses and patients,” said Scott Segal, M.D., chair of anesthesiology at Wake Forest Baptist, who conceived of the idea.

Testing was done by the Manufacturing Development Center at the Wake Forest Institute for Regenerative Medicine, part of Wake Forest Baptist.

What the test team found was that the masks’ effectiveness varied widely. The best homemade masks achieved 79% filtration as compared to surgical masks (62% to 65%) and N95 masks (97%). But other homemade masks tested performed significantly worse, sometimes demonstrating as little as 1% filtration, Segal said.

The best-performing design was constructed of two layers of high-quality, heavyweight “quilter’s cotton” with a thread count of 180 or more, and those with especially tight weave and thicker thread such as batiks. A double-layer mask with a simple cotton outer layer and an inner layer of flannel also performed well, he said.

The inferior performers consisted of single-layer masks or double-layer designs of lower quality, lightweight cotton.

“As important as this information is for hospitals, it is also important for people who want to make masks for their own use,” Segal said. “We don’t want people to think that just any piece of cloth is good enough and have a false sense of security.”

Non-commercially produced masks are not currently in use at Wake Forest Baptist due to regulatory restrictions. However, Segal said, there is a group of community volunteers already making surgical masks based on design specifications indicated by the test with fabric provided by the hospital.

“We are so grateful to these wonderful people who are donating their skill and labor to help us do our work,” he said.

 

[Sneezyone]

8 minutes ago, Arctic Mama said:

Would it matter if I recorded the surgeons talking about this two tables over instead? I mean I can stealth investigative video it at my next appointment if it would change anyone’s mind, but this isn’t something that is being decided primarily in the mind at this point, so much as a systematic belief system about safety that is meant to make people feel like they are helping their neighbor and doing The Right Thing.  That evidence seems weaker in most scenarios at this point, with a few exceptions.  But meh.  Whatever. I have cute masks of varying types I’m wearing even when those around me aren’t and I don’t really care.

Actually, it’s the official, collective scientific opinion of MULTIPLE national governments that have seen positive results from universal masking versus random internet experts.

A lot of the people masking in stores near me are wearing surgical masks anyway. They’re readily available on Amazon from Chinese suppliers.

Edited May 27, 2020 by Sneezyone

[Pawz4me]

8 minutes ago, Arctic Mama said:

Would it matter if I recorded the surgeons talking about this two tables over instead? I mean I can stealth investigative video it at my next appointment if it would change anyone’s mind, but this isn’t something that is being decided primarily in the mind at this point, so much as a systematic belief system about safety that is meant to make people feel like they are helping their neighbor and doing The Right Thing.  That evidence seems weaker in most scenarios at this point, with a few exceptions.  But meh.  Whatever. I have cute masks of varying types I’m wearing even when those around me aren’t and I don’t really care.

I'm not impressed by self reported, anecdotal evidence (a sentiment that I hope would be shared by anyone with even a bit of critical thinking skills).

I too have medical contacts. I've yet to hear one of them express anything other than total, 100 percent support of mask wearing. Like DH's oncologist, his cousin who is a cardiac intensive care nurse at a very well known university hospital, and my rheumatologist. I could add several more. But I wouldn't expect anyone to take their opinion for it, even though each of them certainly has some degree of knowledge and expertise. There's no need to do so, given that we have quite a lot of solid, evidence based studies that support mask wearing.

[Sneezyone]

The choice to wear one comes down to individuals, sure, but efficacy? Not so much.

Edited May 27, 2020 by Sneezyone

[Bootsie]

17 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

Actually, it’s the official, collective scientific opinion of MULTIPLE national governments that have seen positive results from universal masking versus random internet experts.

A lot of the people masking in stores near me are wearing surgical masks anyway. They’re readily available on Amazon from Chinese suppliers.

What national governments have presented an official, collective scientific opinion?  I am not sure what that would mean in the US.  Is it an official opinion of someone at a governmental agency?  Is it a policy endorsed by a group of scientists?  Do all officials or scientists hold that same opinion?  Do the majority?  Is that majority 51% or99%?  

[EmseB]

2 hours ago, square_25 said:

I think the store discussion is a really excellent illustration of why everyone deciding on the risk for themselves is not a great idea. 

First of all, I think every single person on this thread is trying to do the best, safest thing for both themselves and everyone around them with respect to grocery shopping. For some of us, that seems to be getting food delivered. For some of us, that seems to be going to stores. 

You know what would really help here? A cohesive plan for how people are going to get groceries and a public health message about it. Then instead of "virtue signaling," we might actually be able to figure out the right thing. 

For example, one plan could involve only the vulnerable population getting their groceries delivered, as well as extreme care not to have sick people working (paid sick leave, testing, etc.) and mask rules for every store. That would actually make a lot of sense! That way, we would keep risks in grocery stores low, and we would also protect the vulnerable population. 

Another plan would be to ramp up deliveries so that the stores practically never have anyone but the delivery people in them. That would also probably reduce spread and would also make jobs for people (and it would make sense to pay these jobs well.) 

Either of these plans make sense! The thing that makes less sense is all of us making these decisions separately so there's no rhyme or reason to them. For all I know, I've been taking slots away from vulnerable people when I've been getting food delivered :-/. For all you know, you've had an asymptomatic case in a store and you spread it to a vulnerable older person while in there. There's no plan, which leads to chaos instead of reduced spread. And that's a problem. 

I was just thinking th exact opposite. 😂

I don't want a one-size fits all mandate or message from above because my needs and safety factors are vastly different from everyone else's and what someone needs or wants delivered, other people want or need to get for themselves. I don't think there is a right or even best way in this case.

[TCB]

19 minutes ago, happysmileylady said:

What I really want to know is how much is actually lowers risk to every one else when I am there at the grocery store.  That's really the only place I am going right now, and once the library fully opens we will be going there like once a week or once every other week.  

I am asymptomatic, meaning, I am not coughing, I am not sneezing.  I have no reason to believe I have been exposed.  As I mentioned, my county has a very low concentration of cases, and the nearby surrounding counties...even less.  

What I want to know is if wearing a homemade mask is going to provide enough risk mitigation to others to make it worthwhile to spend my time and fabric making my own, compared to someone in my situation with no mask.  How likely am I to infect someone wearing a particular type of mask (pattern and fabric), vs how likely am I to infect someone without anything.  I am already pretty unlikely to infect someone else....so how much less likely am I to infect someone with a homemade mask.  (again, actual medical masks, I am not interested in because I believe those should be reserved for those who have much greater risks like medical personnel.)

All those things are exactly what we need to know!

ETA - But I don't know if we will be able to get that information.

Edited May 27, 2020 by TCB

[Sneezyone]

49 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

What national governments have presented an official, collective scientific opinion?  I am not sure what that would mean in the US.  Is it an official opinion of someone at a governmental agency?  Is it a policy endorsed by a group of scientists?  Do all officials or scientists hold that same opinion?  Do the majority?  Is that majority 51% or99%?  

 

The U.S. For starters has recommended, OFFICIALLY, mask wearing where 6 ft of distance cannot be maintained regardless of what King Cheeto says. Let's start close to home. Beyond that, more than 50 countries have made it compulsory. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/04/countries-wearing-face-masks-compulsory-200423094510867.html Hmm...what do the countries that have made it compulsory have in common?

Edited May 27, 2020 by Sneezyone

[Bootsie]

10 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

 

The U.S. For starters has recommended, OFFICIALLY, mask wearing where 6 ft of distance cannot be maintained regardless of what King Cheeto says. Let's start close to home. Beyond that, more than 50 countries have made it compulsory. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/04/countries-wearing-face-masks-compulsory-200423094510867.html Hmm...what do the countries that have made it compulsory have in common?

These are the third and fourth sentences of the article you link:

There have been a number of conflicting opinions on whether face masks can prevent the new coronavirus from transmitting from one person to another. The World Health Organization (WHO) has recommended that healthy people do not need to wear a mask, but those who are feeling unwell and are coughing and sneezing, as well as caring for someone who is infected, should do so.

I happen to be in one of the fifty countries listed and it is not a requirement to cover your face when you leave home here.  So, I would be careful in drawing any conclusions from that list and the article.  

[Sneezyone]

2 minutes ago, Bootsie said:

These are the third and fourth sentences of the article you link:

There have been a number of conflicting opinions on whether face masks can prevent the new coronavirus from transmitting from one person to another. The World Health Organization (WHO) has recommended that healthy people do not need to wear a mask, but those who are feeling unwell and are coughing and sneezing, as well as caring for someone who is infected, should do so.

I happen to be in one of the fifty countries listed and it is not a requirement to cover your face when you leave home here.  So, I would be careful in drawing any conclusions from that list and the article.  

 

You asked which countries made it compulsory, a choice that reflects a national consensus. That does NOT mean unanimity. These countries also have significantly lower curves than the U.S. Is the information as reported inaccurate or have conditions loosened or changed?  Be specific.

[Bootsie]

3 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

 

You asked which countries made it compulsory, a choice that reflects a national consensus. That does NOT mean unanimity. These countries also have significantly lower curves than the U.S. Is the information as reported inaccurate or have conditions loosened or changed?  Be specific.

I do not recall asking what countries made it compulsory.  Even if a country does make something compulsory, that in no way reflects a national consensus. 

This title More than 50 countries require people to cover their faces when they leave home. is not correct.  Some of these countries have limited situations in which face coverings are required--not when people leave their homes.  Some of the countries that are listed have enacted these requirements this past week (one as recent as yesterday), so in those situations I do not think you can link any difference in outcome of cases to this requirement.  Also, I do not think all of those countries have significantly lower curves--look at Spain; France is reporting less cases per capita than the US but many more deaths per capita (and has less than half the testing per capita)

1 hour ago, square_25 said:

It’s recommended by the CDC in the US. I’m sure the US is not alone.

Still, I have never seen any data from them, just a recommendation.  How can there possibly be any legitimate data?  No one from certain circles accepts anything positive unless it comes from an randomized, etc, etc trial - how can that even be possible for masks???  You could test some individual mask, but it is hardly like everyone is wearing an n95 respirator...the masks I see in common use (they are required here inside public buildings) are a cotton pickin’ joke.  Most fit like a sloppy sweatshirt-gaps all around, the fabric isn’t designed to stop a virus even if it happens to fit well, people pull them down because no one can understand them speak, and they are constantly adjusting them or shoving them in a pocket or a purse to be reused later.  Don’t even get me started on bandanas and scarves.  There is no way on God’s green earth that they are doing any good IN PRACTICE even if (and that’s a big if) you could find some data that a homemade cotton or store bought nylon number does any good at all.  I wear my mask and pray that I am not causing myself more harm than any potential good.  
 

 

14 minutes ago, Sneezyone said:

 

You asked which countries made it compulsory, a choice that reflects a national consensus. That does NOT mean unanimity. These countries also have significantly lower curves than the U.S. Is the information as reported inaccurate or have conditions loosened or changed?  Be specific.

National consensus doesn’t equal data showing effectiveness -

[Sneezyone]

Just now, Mom2mthj said:

National consensus doesn’t equal data showing effectiveness -

 

Pretty sure my post already said that.

[Sneezyone]

Ultimately, just like in 1918, those countries that are successful will serve as models of what to do and those with 100K plus deaths will serve as examples of what not to do. Twas ever thus. Individuals are free to make other choices. It's necessarily hard to gather exacting data in the middle of an uncontrolled outbreak. I think the relative success of nations with more robust responses speaks for itself.

Edited May 27, 2020 by Sneezyone

50 minutes ago, happysmileylady said:

Sure, I have no problem helping other folks feel better about it.  Thats why I do it when I am at the store.  

I wear mine at the store because currently it is mandated In my state.  Making someone “feel better” if it is a false sense of security doesn’t help anyone in the long run.

[Sneezyone]

1 hour ago, Bootsie said:

I do not recall asking what countries made it compulsory.  Even if a country does make something compulsory, that in no way reflects a national consensus. 

This title More than 50 countries require people to cover their faces when they leave home. is not correct.  Some of these countries have limited situations in which face coverings are required--not when people leave their homes.  Some of the countries that are listed have enacted these requirements this past week (one as recent as yesterday), so in those situations I do not think you can link any difference in outcome of cases to this requirement.  Also, I do not think all of those countries have significantly lower curves--look at Spain; France is reporting less cases per capita than the US but many more deaths per capita (and has less than half the testing per capita)

 

This is really too soon to tell. If, out of 50 countries, you can point to FIVE as exemplars of less successful outcomes (but only in terms of deaths per capita), yeah, I'm OK with following their national leaders and NOT my own. The article was posted, literally, yesterday so I see no falsehoods indicated.

Edited May 27, 2020 by Sneezyone
clarification

[ktgrok]

4 hours ago, happysmileylady said:

For real.....I don't care if others look at whatever evidence is available and decide that masks are worthwhile.

I disagree with that conclusion.  I straight up don't have to agree.  And since it isn't required in my state.....I don't even have to do it anyway.  

SO, which would you prefer....that I wear a homemade mask that you believe protects the most vulnerable, to make you (general you) feel better ....or that I chose not to and walk around the grocery store without a mask (and without coughing or sneezing or talking to people) in order to not be pretending.

 

Um, wear the mask, because the limited data we DO have says that means you are less likely to spread it. 

4 hours ago, happysmileylady said:

If someone could tell me that Pattern X, or Pattern Y or Pattern Z, made with A or B fabric, would reduce the risk to others by a reasonable amount....I would be all about making a regular mask.

I just don't think that sort of information exists.  

Yes, it does. I linked some earlier.

3 hours ago, Arctic Mama said:

 I’m more interested in the fact that the staff at an extensive, renowned children’s hospital visibly do not buy into it and admit this is more of a ‘makes the parents feel better’ and ‘complies with policy’ move than that it helps much or at all.  It has been interesting to listen to their thoughts and see their actions, which are sometimes contrary to what they have said.

Don’t mistake me for someone who cares much at all, I was That Mom before this started, and I’ll be her after this blows over too. But not on masks, except where sterile protocol is enacted and we are suited up properly.  That’s a completely different animal though.

Well, given how many in the medical profession continued smoking LONG after it was known to be dangerous, yeah, even doctors do dumb stuff regarding their health. 

3 hours ago, Arctic Mama said:

Please keep wearing masks if they make you feel better and safer and more considerate and morally upright and show love of neighbor etc etc etc.  I am not stopping you, I will smile at you, and I will comply where required.  You do you, and don’t be a dick when they do them.  That’s really my only point I care about.  This moral judgment about people who don’t wear masks for various reasons isn’t better than the judgments about those who do, no matter how much you (general you) insist that it is.

Now, as someone who doesn’t really care except that I hope everyone keeps hand washing and doesn’t go into public when sick, I’m going to eat something so I don’t get even more hangry.

 

People make moral judgements all the time. I think smoking in public is also a moral issue, as it can cause harm to others. It is their personal choice, obviously, just like it is to not mask. But that doesn't mean it doesn't have effect on others. 

3 hours ago, Arctic Mama said:

 

The data is weak at best in the current set, or contraindicated depending on if the risk is more from facial touching or damp, moldy, particle laden air as opposed to possible open air spread of CV.  That’s about as far as I’ll take it, because I have actual real problems to spend mental energy on and my mask sewing is complete for the next decade 🙂

What data is there that there is any risk in wearing a mask to the store for say, an hour? What moldy particles is someone inhaling, if they wash their mask or sterilize it as they are supposed to? I mean, sure, I might wear gross dirty shoes and get athletes foot, but it doesn't mean wearing shoes in a store is risky. 

3 hours ago, happysmileylady said:

What I really want to know is how much is actually lowers risk to every one else when I am there at the grocery store.  That's really the only place I am going right now, and once the library fully opens we will be going there like once a week or once every other week.  

I am asymptomatic, meaning, I am not coughing, I am not sneezing.  I have no reason to believe I have been exposed.  As I mentioned, my county has a very low concentration of cases, and the nearby surrounding counties...even less.  

What I want to know is if wearing a homemade mask is going to provide enough risk mitigation to others to make it worthwhile to spend my time and fabric making my own, compared to someone in my situation with no mask.  How likely am I to infect someone wearing a particular type of mask (pattern and fabric), vs how likely am I to infect someone without anything.  I am already pretty unlikely to infect someone else....so how much less likely am I to infect someone with a homemade mask.  (again, actual medical masks, I am not interested in because I believe those should be reserved for those who have much greater risks like medical personnel.)

I linked an evidence review earlier today..one of those showed that masks reduced SARS transmission by nearly half. There is also the study about the hamster cages and masks. Or this, which is based on assumptions, but assumptions that experts feel are decent. https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/05/masks-covid-19-infections-would-plummet-new-study-says?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&utm_brand=vf&mbid=social_facebook&utm_social-type=owned&fbclid=IwAR06bKoBRQABxq-D7SqD5AHVGR8jVGE77cWzx5f1OMwKz0hkLT-_Nkcn0Gw

2 hours ago, Mom2mthj said:

Still, I have never seen any data from them, just a recommendation.  How can there possibly be any legitimate data?  No one from certain circles accepts anything positive unless it comes from an randomized, etc, etc trial - how can that even be possible for masks???  You could test some individual mask, but it is hardly like everyone is wearing an n95 respirator...the masks I see in common use (they are required here inside public buildings) are a cotton pickin’ joke.  Most fit like a sloppy sweatshirt-gaps all around, the fabric isn’t designed to stop a virus even if it happens to fit well, people pull them down because no one can understand them speak, and they are constantly adjusting them or shoving them in a pocket or a purse to be reused later.  Don’t even get me started on bandanas and scarves.  There is no way on God’s green earth that they are doing any good IN PRACTICE even if (and that’s a big if) you could find some data that a homemade cotton or store bought nylon number does any good at all.  I wear my mask and pray that I am not causing myself more harm than any potential good.  
 

 

1. the point is to protect others. 2. No one is saying wearing a mask without actually covering your mouth and nose is effective - they are not magic. Doing so is the equivalent of wearing a condom on your thumb instead of the relevant body part. People can be taught though. 3. What harm would you be causing yourself?

[Momto6inIN]

5 hours ago, square_25 said:

The other thing you do when you wear a mask is you normalize mask-wearing. Even if you believe you yourself are low risk (which I firmly believe about myself), you can help make sure people who are higher risk don't feel embarrassed about wearing a mask and feel comfortable doing so. 

I understand your point, or at least I think I do, that by "normalize" you mean "remove a stigma from". I agree that people should feel free to wear them without fear of repercussions or ridicule. And I'm willing to be wear mine in public as a temporary measure til we get a better handle on this thing.

But I have to say that I am not interested in living in a country where it is considered "normal" to wear a mask. Not being able to read a person's facial expression? Not being able to converse easily? Social interaction out in public being curtailed? Having my young kids/baby get so used to it that they're not shy around people in masks anymore? No thanks.

In other countries I understand the culture and practices and norms are different, and that's fine. No judgment. But that's not how I want to live as an American and have it be the "new normal".

[EmseB]

18 minutes ago, Momto6inIN said:

I understand your point, or at least I think I do, that by "normalize" you mean "remove a stigma from". I agree that people should feel free to wear them without fear of repercussions or ridicule. And I'm willing to be wear mine in public as a temporary measure til we get a better handle on this thing.

But I have to say that I am not interested in living in a country where it is considered "normal" to wear a mask. Not being able to read a person's facial expression? Not being able to converse easily? Social interaction out in public being curtailed? Having my young kids/baby get so used to it that they're not shy around people in masks anymore? No thanks.

In other countries I understand the culture and practices and norms are different, and that's fine. No judgment. But that's not how I want to live as an American and have it be the "new normal".

I kind of feel this. I took my baby for his 6 month check and he was so freaked out by no one having faces. I mean, I get it and I don't want them not wearing masks right now, but the ability to smile at a baby when they are scared...it just caught me off guard what a difference it made in our appointment with the tech, doctor, and at immunizations to have literally no one there, not even mom, being able to show their face to him. It was so sad.

[Terabith]

One layer of high thread count cotton combined with two layers of silk filters out greater than 90% of particles larger than 300 nanometers.  https://www.forbes.com/sites/allisongasparini/2020/04/27/how-effective-are-cloth-face-masks-anyway-here-are-the-fabrics-which-filter-out-airborne-particles-best/#253f659c33ce

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7185834/

https://www.nytimes.com/article/coronavirus-homemade-mask-material-DIY-face-mask-ppe.html

I'm trying to convince my mother in law, who is the person who can sew, that it really would be better to make masks out of something other than gauze.  

[GoodGrief]

33 minutes ago, EmseB said:

I kind of feel this. I took my baby for his 6 month check and he was so freaked out by no one having faces. I mean, I get it and I don't want them not wearing masks right now, but the ability to smile at a baby when they are scared...it just caught me off guard what a difference it made in our appointment with the tech, doctor, and at immunizations to have literally no one there, not even mom, being able to show their face to him. It was so sad.

It’s a difficult situation for deaf/HOH who rely on lip reading too

[ktgrok]

54 minutes ago, Momto6inIN said:

I understand your point, or at least I think I do, that by "normalize" you mean "remove a stigma from". I agree that people should feel free to wear them without fear of repercussions or ridicule. And I'm willing to be wear mine in public as a temporary measure til we get a better handle on this thing.

But I have to say that I am not interested in living in a country where it is considered "normal" to wear a mask. Not being able to read a person's facial expression? Not being able to converse easily? Social interaction out in public being curtailed? Having my young kids/baby get so used to it that they're not shy around people in masks anymore? No thanks.

In other countries I understand the culture and practices and norms are different, and that's fine. No judgment. But that's not how I want to live as an American and have it be the "new normal".

I hate the idea myself...in large part because I have hearing issues and rely on reading lips a lot. But I'd rather have masking be the new normal than have my kids grow up without me, or have them live in a place where people are dying in huge numbers, etc. 

[Ausmumof3]

1 hour ago, square_25 said:

So, apparently an elderly man in our building died of COVID :-/. That makes me feel 

a) sad

and 

b) anxious, because we had the virus in the building and we had no idea. 

The man's neighbor told DH in the elevator (we've been using the elevator, because we're on the 8th floor, and bringing up groceries that far up is a huge pain), which is also not great, because who knows whether this man also got exposed. Cue DH and me imagining symptoms in the next few days :-(. 

Sigh. I'm tired of this pandemic. Anyone else? 

That sounds stressful. 

[Bootsie]

10 hours ago, square_25 said:

Yeah, I see their curves. They are far steeper on the way down than ours, but that says very little about masks and a lot about the effectiveness of stricter shutdowns. 

We'll see how well masks work in Western settings as places reopen. Currently, our best mask data (other than actual localized studies of which masks allow particles to pass through and which don't) is from Asia. And we do know that HCWs have lower rates of antibodies in NY than the general population, which to me is suggestive, although of course they are wearing actual surgical masks and N95s and not random stuff. But of course, we'll see. 

What curves are you looking at to see the steepness on the way down?  New cases?  Active cases?  

I am not sure what conclusions you can draw by a steeper downward curve on new cases, which seems to be highly correlated to the steepness on the way up.  Flattening the curve models suggested both a less steep initial curve but also a less steep curve after the peak.   

[Ausmumof3]

1 hour ago, Bootsie said:

What curves are you looking at to see the steepness on the way down?  New cases?  Active cases?  

I am not sure what conclusions you can draw by a steeper downward curve on new cases, which seems to be highly correlated to the steepness on the way up.  Flattening the curve models suggested both a less steep initial curve but also a less steep curve after the peak.   

Mostly the curves are asymmetric from what I’ve seen

[Bootsie]

33 minutes ago, square_25 said:

New cases, yes. 

It’s totally obvious that quarantining people in a stricter way will result in a quicker decrease in the number of cases. That’s pretty much the null hypothesis.... you’d have to find strong evidence that it ISN’T true, since it makes so much sense. And no, it doesn’t look all that related to the steepness on the way up. 

Yes, a stricter quarantine should lead to a quicker decrease in cases.  The steepness on the way down can't really be compared across countries, because it must be at least somewhat correlated to the steepness on the way up--especially if you are looking at the absolute number of cases.  If in theory, you could decrease new cases to zero with a 14-day complete lockdown,  a curve of new cases in a country that had 5000 cases on Day 1 of the lockdown and 0 cases on Day 14 would look a lot steeper than a country that had only 100 cases on Day 1 of the lockdown and 0 cases on Day 14.  

Looking by country is problematic because the amount of lockdown can vary in different areas of the country.  In Italy, more extreme lockdown measures occurred sooner in Northern Italy.  In Austria, some towns were under isolation, some were under quarantine, and others were under looser stay-at-home orders.  

[Bootsie]

59 minutes ago, Ausmumof3 said:

Mostly the curves are asymmetric from what I’ve seen

Which makes logical sense.  Most of the early models seemed to assume a symmetrical curve which did not seem reasonable.  If you have an R0 on the upside of 2 you will have to lower R0 to .5 on the downside; if R0 on the upside is 3, you will have to lower R0 all the way down to .33 to have a symmetrical curve.  .  

[vonfirmath]

1 hour ago, square_25 said:

Anyone post this yet? 

https://science.sciencemag.org/content/early/2020/05/27/science.abc6197

Looks like 6 feet may, in fact, not be enough, and may be based on outdated science.

If viral load does accumulate in the air, that would be a problem :-/. I wonder what that would mean for nursing homes, which have been hit so hard... 

6 feet has never been the "you are totally safe beyond this distance" level. It's been a reasonable compromise that minimizes chances. Not eliminates it.

 

[cabercro]

On 5/26/2020 at 9:38 PM, Sneezyone said:

 

I reached the same conclusion. I have had better luck shopping in the early morning hours tho. There are fewer inconsiderate people on the roads and in the stores. The aisles are quiet and the people are masked...properly.

 

We've seen the same thing in our small town, too. My husband went to Walmart early in the morning last week and even overheard one masked senior man say to another masked senior couple "I appreciate what you're doing" as they crossed paths in the parking lot. 😍

[TCB]

My area is pretty much business as usual and there is a pretty low percentage wearing masks. My family and I are being careful so in some ways are probably low risk to others, however I do work in a hospital, with covid patients when they are there, so from that point of view I may be higher risk to others. I would like to participate more in supporting the economy. but honestly I just don't go anywhere or buy anything unless I absolutely need to because so many are not taking any precautions at all. 

An example of this was the ice cream shop. My dds and I wanted to go get  ice cream so went to the store, and I was going to go in by myself with a mask on. When I got to the door the place was completely packed, no one wearing a mask, including the person serving the ice cream.  I decided to wait outside the door so that maybe, as people came out, it would be less crowded and I could go in and order. As I stood just outside the door a number of people came up and just went past me and crowded in the small room. I left because it seemed there was no way of buying anything without waiting cooped up inside the small room, and it is tiny. 

I just wonder if there are other people like me, who are just not participating in the economy as much as we could be because it is not really possible in a sensible way. Could it make economical sense to do things carefully so that we would, or does enticing the more cautious to participate not make enough difference in terms of numbers? Wondering what others think about this.

[cintinative]

6 minutes ago, TCB said:

 

An example of this was the ice cream shop. My dds and I wanted to go get  ice cream so went to the store, and I was going to go in by myself with a mask on. When I got to the door the place was completely packed, no one wearing a mask, including the person serving the ice cream.  I decided to wait outside the door so that maybe, as people came out, it would be less crowded and I could go in and order. As I stood just outside the door a number of people came up and just went past me and crowded in the small room. I left because it seemed there was no way of buying anything without waiting cooped up inside the small room, and it is tiny. 

 

In this scenario, I would have left also. It's unfortunate, because I am sure the owner could use the business, but I would not feel that I was being wise to enter that space.  I am not sure what our local ice cream shop is doing now, but it used to be (four weeks ago) that you would order via their app, and they walked it out to your car.  I am hoping that if it was crowded like this that they would make people space out and try to take orders from people in the line itself to move things along. I'm so sorry. I am sure your kids were disappointed.

[TCB]

12 minutes ago, cintinative said:

 

In this scenario, I would have left also. It's unfortunate, because I am sure the owner could use the business, but I would not feel that I was being wise to enter that space.  I am not sure what our local ice cream shop is doing now, but it used to be (four weeks ago) that you would order via their app, and they walked it out to your car.  I am hoping that if it was crowded like this that they would make people space out and try to take orders from people in the line itself to move things along. I'm so sorry. I am sure your kids were disappointed.

I'm glad your local place is taking some precautions. Fortunately my dds are older so they were fine. It just makes me wonder if overall economically businesses are losing out a fair amount because of things like that. I don't foresee anything changing here unless there is a further outbreak and people decide to become more cautious. Unfortunately our area is now a byword internationally for throwing caution to the wind after pictures were released showing large, crowded parties over the holiday weekend. Judging from the little social media I can bear to look at, there are a large amount of the local population who seem to be proud of this accomplishment!

Edited May 28, 2020 by TCB

[Pen]

27 minutes ago, TCB said:

My area is pretty much business as usual and there is a pretty low percentage wearing masks. My family and I are being careful so in some ways are probably low risk to others, however I do work in a hospital, with covid patients when they are there, so from that point of view I may be higher risk to others. I would like to participate more in supporting the economy. but honestly I just don't go anywhere or buy anything unless I absolutely need to because so many are not taking any precautions at all. 

An example of this was the ice cream shop. My dds and I wanted to go get  ice cream so went to the store, and I was going to go in by myself with a mask on. When I got to the door the place was completely packed, no one wearing a mask, including the person serving the ice cream.  I decided to wait outside the door so that maybe, as people came out, it would be less crowded and I could go in and order. As I stood just outside the door a number of people came up and just went past me and crowded in the small room. I left because it seemed there was no way of buying anything without waiting cooped up inside the small room, and it is tiny. 

I just wonder if there are other people like me, who are just not participating in the economy as much as we could be because it is not really possible in a sensible way. Could it make economical sense to do things carefully so that we would, or does enticing the more cautious to participate not make enough difference in terms of numbers? Wondering what others think about this.

 

I think that’s a good point!

People being more cautious would make a big difference to me. 

I have only ventured out once into city since county went into phase 1 opening.  

 

[TCB]

1 minute ago, square_25 said:

Oh, I'm sorry :-(. What state are you in, if you don't mind me asking? 

Missouri

[ktgrok]

40 minutes ago, TCB said:

 

I just wonder if there are other people like me, who are just not participating in the economy as much as we could be because it is not really possible in a sensible way. Could it make economical sense to do things carefully so that we would, or does enticing the more cautious to participate not make enough difference in terms of numbers? Wondering what others think about this.

It would to me. And I'd love to take my kids to say, the plant nursery, or to look at sod with me, but I don't trust others to mask or social distance, and I can't put the responsibility of staying far enough apart on a kid, so exposing more people versus one person is a bad idea. 

[ktgrok]

8 minutes ago, Seasider too said:

Any places I’ve gone (like plant nursery, grocery store), I’ve gone solo. 

Yeah, my kids haven't left the house in I think 3 months almost? 

[Tenaj]

Comparing my grocery shopping this morning with the same stores as last week, I'll say that people in my area think the threat is over and they are just going to go back to normal.  Last week, same time, same stores, I'd say 90% of the people I encountered were masked.  This morning, maybe 50% and that may be over-estimating.  I literally also had to back away from other customers who were invading my personal space and even employees.  It's like everyone decided that the Memorial Day holiday had magically made Covid-19 disappear.  I may have to go back to my online ordering routine.  I so enjoyed actually going to a store last week but last week I felt like everyone was being very careful - not this week.  

Our county cases have doubled in the past few weeks.  Those numbers aren't large but we are rural so I've just been watching the local trends.  One plant in the area had a breakout which changed our numbers.  It seems people aren't paying attention any more though.  The next few weeks will be interesting to watch.  Hopefully, the virus is in small enough numbers that we won't continue to see increasing numbers.  I'm a bit nervous this week because my 18yods starting work at our local Amazon Warehouse where there have been employees test positive but he needed a summer job.  He's being careful and showering after his shifts but if the numbers keep increasing our family is going to be more exposed than we were before 😞

[Momto6inIN]

14 minutes ago, kand said:

I don’t feel at all the same about not wanting my toddler to stop being shy around people with masks.  Mine doesn’t go out in public right now, but has seen all of us on with our masks and has tried hers on, and we had a long distance outdoor visit with grandparents with everyone masked, and she was not phased in the least. That’s a good thing in my eyes, not bad.  Not just because this is likely to be our temporary new normal, but in general I don’t want my kids to feel shy of someone simply due to anything about their looks being different. It’s desirable to me that they not bat an eyelash at someone with a disability, a different style of dress, a facial difference, or whatever.

I do keep hearing an undercurrent of “it isn’t American” from people who disagree with mask wearing, which makes it sound like more of a knee jerk visceral reaction to something they perceive as being “other” and specifically with being Asian and not wanting the US to feel like an Asian country. 

I don't want my kids to be shy around people because they look different either. But I think it is entirely normal for kids (and adults for that matter) to be wary of people whose facial expressions you can't see and/or read accurately and who they can't have a normal social interaction with because of the difficulties of communication that the masks impose. And I would hate for my kids to have to adapt and think of that type of non-interaction as "normal" when it's not and shouldn't be.

It's not racially motivated and it's not "other-ing" people to want to be able to genuinely communicate with people in public. Other cultures are more reserved than Americans when it comes to that type of thing, and that's fine. But it is at least somewhat uniquely American to be friendly and interactive with strangers in public and I don't want us to lose that. I feel the loss already myself when I'm out and about in my mask, and I am much less likely to initiate friendly conversations in public, even from a good social distance. Other people are less likely too, from what I have experienced. It contributes to the sense of isolation I feel and it's not a good place to be mental-health wise, for me or for my kids.

It's about the communication aspect of it, not the looks of it.

[GoodGrief]

39 minutes ago, kand said:

 

Have you seen the masks with the clear windows? I’ve often thought it would be great if those were widely available to everyone, because It’s so nice to be able to see someone’s smile, even if you don’t need to read lips. 

 

I’ve seen them online, not in use in the community. I can’t imagine that wearing plastic on the face for any length of time is comfortable/healthy, though I guess I’d have to see them in person. 

[Guest]

Does anyone know if face shields would provide a similar level of protection to a cloth mask? I know medical personnel use shields plus N95 masks for close procedures. I'm thinking a clear shield might be a better choice for teaching young children, because they could see my facial expressions and mouth movements. And it wouldn't get damp, etc, the way a cloth mask does, and could be wiped down vs needing to be machine washed/dried. 

[TCB]

23 minutes ago, dmmetler said:

Does anyone know if face shields would provide a similar level of protection to a cloth mask? I know medical personnel use shields plus N95 masks for close procedures. I'm thinking a clear shield might be a better choice for teaching young children, because they could see my facial expressions and mouth movements. And it wouldn't get damp, etc, the way a cloth mask does, and could be wiped down vs needing to be machine washed/dried. 

The face shields that HCWs wear are to protect them from eye splashes etc and they also keep the N95 from getting as soiled. Wearing a shield alone would do very little to protect the wearer from others because of the air circulating around it. I don't know to what extent it would protect others from the wearer but it seems like it would stop larger particles from travelling.

[Skippy]

On 5/27/2020 at 12:23 PM, TCB said:

If you have good solid evidence that you base your opinion on please link it because I have been searching and searching for that kind of thing!

There is some recent research evaluating effectiveness of surgical and cotton masks in filtering SARS–CoV-2 specifically. I found it in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-1342

"In conclusion, both surgical and cotton masks seem to be ineffective in preventing the dissemination of SARS–CoV-2 from the coughs of patients with COVID-19 to the environment and external mask surface."

[Sneezyone]

10 minutes ago, Skippy said:

There is some recent research evaluating effectiveness of surgical and cotton masks in filtering SARS–CoV-2 specifically. I found it in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-1342

"In conclusion, both surgical and cotton masks seem to be ineffective in preventing the dissemination of SARS–CoV-2 from the coughs of patients with COVID-19 to the environment and external mask surface."

 

KEEP READING. 

"We do not know whether masks shorten the travel distance of droplets during coughing. Further study is needed to recommend whether face masks decrease transmission of virus from asymptomatic individuals or those with suspected COVID-19 who are not coughing."