Menu
Jump to content

What's with the ads?

MercyA

The CDC and singing in church

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, BeachGal said:

Okay, I've been thinking about what a choir or congregation could do in place of singing. How about humming? Weirdly enough, nitric oxide produced in your nasal passages will increase 15 to 20 fold simply by humming. Nitric oxide is a building block of nitroglycerin which relaxes blood vessels and in turn, increases blood and oxygen.

This explains how nitric oxide produced by humming can treat chronic rhinosinusitis, CRS, (and lessen cardiac arrhythmias!):

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0306987705006328

 

A short article about the importance of nitric oxide and  the health of heart and blood vessels. It doesn't mention humming but the above article does.

https://www.clevelandheartlab.com/blog/nurturing-nitric-oxide-heart-healthy-chemical-blood-vessels/
 

 

Covid is looking more like it's also targeting the lining of arteries and veins. Nitric oxide can help to counter the damage that the virus could cause if you catch it. Therefore, I think you all should be humming! 

That is fascinating!!! Thanks for sharing - going to dive into your links now. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our church governing body recently sent out a letter suggesting that congregations prepare for being closed to in-person large gatherings through the end of the year at least, and possibly well into 2021. I'm sad about the situation, but understand where they're coming from. We had been changing some of our practices starting in February--no more joining hands to sing--but this is tough. 

Share this post


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

Not my experience in the Old Rite. It's done much faster than receiving on the tongue in the New Rite. The priest isn't holding the Host in front of the communicant before placing it on the tongue; the communicant doesn't say "Amen" (or anything else); and (in my own experience) you instinctively hold your breath for that brief second that Father passes in front of you and places the Host on your tongue. If the communicant is "breathing all over the priest's hand," you're both doing it wrong.

But for the reason you mention, I wouldn't receive Communion at all right now in the New Rite.

I absolutely understand what you're saying, if Communion is being given in the traditional way, with people lined up and a priest moving from one to the next. 

But in the system that they seem to be proposing, each person is approaching one at a time.  Someone who is receiving on the tongue is going to need to remove their mask, or have their mask removed while they are within 6 feet of the priest.  I have trouble believing that the entire time, they're going to be holding their breath.  While they actually receive?  Sure, but there's also either a time when they're walking up, and a time when they're walking away, or there's a time when they're standing in the priests presence and removing and replacing the mask.  I would hazard a guess that at least some of the people would be breathing during that time.  

Maybe I'm picturing it wrong.  We haven't had public masses yet in our area, and I haven't watched a video from a place where they have it, but to me it seems as though a system where someone keeps their mask on when they are within 6 feet of the priest, is going to be safer, and that's going to prevent receiving on the tongue.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

I've been wondering why Communion in the hand is considered better in these COVID times. The thought of the recipient breathing on the priest's hands hadn't occurred to me. I think this poster hit the nail on the head. Now, I've never been trained in receiving in the Old Rite. I didn't attend an Old Rite Mass until an adult, and learned all on my own (observation, reading). But, now upon pondering this, I realize I do hold my breath. 

FWIW, I generally prefer to receive on the tongue, no matter the rite of the Mass. I will say that only rarely has a priest touched my tongue... Extraordinary Ministers of the Eucharist are a completely different story. When they realize what you want, it's like they freeze and then bungle it up. Oh well. It's a moot point now, as we are not currently attending Mass. 

One of the reasons is I want to observe a live Mass first, to see what's going on with singing. Singing might be my line, regardless of official edicts.

ETA: I certainly would be willing to receive in the hand to protect a priest. But the thought of that being a reason in our parish makes me smile, as our priest is young, really, really young. And yes, I know, age isn't the only risk factor. Elderly priests were mentioned though, which made me smile thinking of our priest.

But even if your priest is young and stays asymptomatic or gets mild symptoms and recovers well, he's putting everyone he ministers to at risk.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, CuriousMomof3 said:

But even if your priest is young and stays asymptomatic or gets mild symptoms and recovers well, he's putting everyone he ministers to at risk.  

Oh, I know. I just couldn't figure out why receiving by the mouth was so much worse. To me, hands are super germy. I don't want my consecrated Host to touch hands any more than necessary. It's going to end up in my mouth anyway, you know? I just hadn't thought about people breathing on the priest because...I don't!

Share this post


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

Oh, I know. I just couldn't figure out why receiving by the mouth was so much worse. To me, hands are super germy. I don't want my consecrated Host to touch hands any more than necessary. It's going to end up in my mouth anyway, you know? I just hadn't thought about people breathing on the priest because...I don't!

But would you really hold your breath the whole time you walked up from 6 feet away, received, and walked away? 

To me the whole issue is that you can't keep your mask on while you receive on the tongue, whereas in our diocese they are having people who receive in their hands walk 6 feet away before removing their mask to put the host in their mouth.  

Again, I'm only talking about this particular circumstance, not the situation pre-covid.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man, I know this is stressful for you all, but I am so jealous of people who get to take communion every week. I partake, like, 4 or 5 times a year. 😞 

  • Sad 2

Share this post


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

Man, I know this is stressful for you all, but I am so jealous of people who get to take communion every week. I partake, like, 4 or 5 times a year. 😞 

Unfortunately, I think it's going to be a long time before anyone in our family get to take communion in a church.  I think our diocese is doing a good job of opening cautiously, but I think the risk is still too high for us.  

One thing I would love to see, and haven't seen, is a plan for distribution of communion to the homebound.  My FIL, who lives with us, is an Extraordinary Minister, so I'm hoping we can find a way to make that work.  It would mean a lot to one of my kids, even though of course he is covered by the dispensation.  

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, CuriousMomof3 said:

Unfortunately, I think it's going to be a long time before anyone in our family get to take communion in a church.  I think our diocese is doing a good job of opening cautiously, but I think the risk is still too high for us.  

One thing I would love to see, and haven't seen, is a plan for distribution of communion to the homebound.  My FIL, who lives with us, is an Extraordinary Minister, so I'm hoping we can find a way to make that work.  It would mean a lot to one of my kids, even though of course he is covered by the dispensation.  

I know in our diocese, they haven't opened Communion to the homebound yet, except in cases of Viaticum. I am in your boat, though, in that I don't think we will be receiving in church anytime soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CuriousMomof3 said:

But would you really hold your breath the whole time you walked up from 6 feet away, received, and walked away? 

Well, exactly right. Again, one reason why I would refrain from communing in the New Rite. More reasons to have the priest be the one who goes from communicant to (spaced) communicant, rather than a line of people moving up to him. I pull down my mask immediately beforehand, and replace it as Father flits on to the next communicant. 

Maybe this could be one of those "mutual enrichment" things between the two Rites?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, MercyA said:

Man, I know this is stressful for you all, but I am so jealous of people who get to take communion every week. I partake, like, 4 or 5 times a year. 😞 

(((MercyA)))

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

I know in our diocese, they haven't opened Communion to the homebound yet, except in cases of Viaticum. I am in your boat, though, in that I don't think we will be receiving in church anytime soon.

And it's a difficult situation, because having our extraordinary ministers go from house to house, to see the most vulnerable people isn't the solution.

On the other hand, I will say that before covid our priest managed to come to our home the night before every planned hospital admission my son has had, and met us in the E.R. for every emergency admission, which was an enormous comfort to my son.  Not having that the last two times was very hard. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Violet Crown said:

Well, exactly right. Again, one reason why I would refrain from communing in the New Rite. More reasons to have the priest be the one who goes from communicant to (spaced) communicant, rather than a line of people moving up to him. I pull down my mask immediately beforehand, and replace it as Father flits on to the next communicant. 

Maybe this could be one of those "mutual enrichment" things between the two Rites?

I feel as though so much of this depends on the traffic pattern at the individual church.  

Have you been back to church since things shut down?  We aren't open yet here, although some churches on the other side of diocese are, so all this is speculation from me.  If you've been, I'd love to know how it worked.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, CuriousMomof3 said:

I feel as though so much of this depends on the traffic pattern at the individual church.  

Have you been back to church since things shut down?  We aren't open yet here, although some churches on the other side of diocese are, so all this is speculation from me.  If you've been, I'd love to know how it worked.  

I have, several times. It works like I described, except instead of communicants going forward to the rail, we're all spaced apart in alternating pews (one family per pew), and Father moves between the pews, so only he is "in motion."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Violet Crown said:

I have, several times. It works like I described, except instead of communicants going forward to the rail, we're all spaced apart in alternating pews (one family per pew), and Father moves between the pews, so only he is "in motion."

I'm having trouble imagining this.  If I'm in the pew with my family, assuming we aren't in the front row, how does Father get to the people beyond the first person?  Is he walking down the space where the people in the empty pew would put their feet?  So, he's passing close behind the people in front's back?  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, CuriousMomof3 said:

I'm having trouble imagining this.  If I'm in the pew with my family, assuming we aren't in the front row, how does Father get to the people beyond the first person?  Is he walking down the space where the people in the empty pew would put their feet?  So, he's passing close behind the people in front's back?  

Wish I could draw a picture! 🙂 So we're in alternating pews. Everyone is kneeling, whether receiving or not. He passes from left to right in front of the first pew, pausing if someone is indicating that they're communing. He goes around the occupied pew and right to left through the unoccupied pew, communing those in pew three. And so on, to the back of the church. Since everyone kneels until he returns to the sanctuary, he's not particularly close to the backs of those he's just communed (and also they're facing away from him). So Father is reasonably away from us, except when actually communing us; and nobody is getting up to stand in line or pass each other to and from the altar rail. Which is quite nice, as I imagine having the whole congregation on their feet and walking back and forth, rather than all continuing to kneel quietly where they are, is more of a virus threat.

Did this make sense?

 

Edited by Violet Crown
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Wish I could draw a picture! 🙂 So we're in alternating pews. Everyone is kneeling, whether receiving or not. He passes from left to right in front of the first pew, pausing if someone is indicating that they're communing. He goes around the occupied pew and right to left through the unoccupied pew, communing those in pew three. And so on, to the back of the church. Since everyone kneels until he returns to the sanctuary, he's not particularly close to the backs of those he's just communed (and also they're facing away from him). So Father is reasonably away from us, except when actually communing us; and nobody is getting up to stand in line or pass each other to and from the altar rail. Which is quite nice, as I imagine having the whole congregation on their feet and walking back and forth, rather than all continuing to kneel quietly where they are, is more of a virus threat.

Did this make sense?

 

I can picture it now.  Thank you.  I can't really picture how it will happen in our church.  I hope they livestream some services.  Maybe I'll look and see if I can find a service from a church that is open on the other side of our diocese.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, CuriousMomof3 said:

I can picture it now.  Thank you.  I can't really picture how it will happen in our church.  I hope they livestream some services.  Maybe I'll look and see if I can find a service from a church that is open on the other side of our diocese.  

It's really hard, not being able to get to Mass, no matter how reasonable the reason. I hope yours opens up soon, with arrangements that keep everyone safe. 

Share this post


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

It's really hard, not being able to get to Mass, no matter how reasonable the reason. I hope yours opens up soon, with arrangements that keep everyone safe. 

Even if it opens, we won't be there. I'm just asking out of curiosity.  

Share this post


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

I saw this news today regarding a German study. 

https://slippedisc.com/2020/05/two-munich-scientists-pronounce-singing-to-be-covid-safe/

I am not advocating that this study means singing is safe. I just saw it and thought someone might want to look into it. 

It would be nice if this is true. Our church has been having in person meetings for a couple of weeks but with reduced numbers. This Sunday it sounds like they are going back to pretty much normal. Even the Sunday school group for retired/older adults is starting back in person. Usual childcare type things starting back. Their concession to the virus - there will be stickers available at the door that you can stick on your shirt saying if you are social distancing and don’t want to be hugged! I so hope that the church is somehow phenomenally lucky and doesn’t end up with any bad outcomes.

  • Confused 2
  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Skippy said:

I saw this news today regarding a German study. 

https://slippedisc.com/2020/05/two-munich-scientists-pronounce-singing-to-be-covid-safe/

I am not advocating that this study means singing is safe. I just saw it and thought someone might want to look into it. 

I hope this is true!  Now sitting back down to watch.......

@TCB If someone had told me six months ago I would think social distancing stickers might be something I would consider wearing I would not have believed it!

My safety conscious church is loosening to a level that worries me greatly.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, mumto2 said:

I hope this is true!  Now sitting back down to watch.......

@TCB If someone had told me six months ago I would think social distancing stickers might be something I would consider wearing I would not have believed it!

My safety conscious church is loosening to a level that worries me greatly.

 

Not sure how big the stickers are but I’ve been wondering how close people are going to have to get to be able to read the wearer’s preference!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone else thinking of the Sneetches?

Some will have stars upon thars...

I hope that everyone will defer to others in love, within church gatherings. That no one’s authentic faith will be ranked or called into question based on their level of comfort with church attendance. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


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

I saw this news today regarding a German study. 

https://slippedisc.com/2020/05/two-munich-scientists-pronounce-singing-to-be-covid-safe/

I am not advocating that this study means singing is safe. I just saw it and thought someone might want to look into it. 

 

This was linked in the comments as a counter. FYI. https://www.middleclassartist.com/post/nats-panel-of-experts-lays-out-sobering-future-for-singers-no-vaccine-no-safe-public-singing?fbclid=IwAR0O7WgGKVYvulFrkuARUlbOdcCFzFJoA8Ws2qW89Ftm7P7P_nuGpurdBGo&postId=5eb20e9e3309a500179c30ce

Share this post


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

I saw this news today regarding a German study. 

https://slippedisc.com/2020/05/two-munich-scientists-pronounce-singing-to-be-covid-safe/

I am not advocating that this study means singing is safe. I just saw it and thought someone might want to look into it. 

Yeah, I can't figure this out. I mean, we've SEEN video of droplets going farther. And more to the point, in a choir of 60 people, how would 45 catch it if the infected person only sprayed droplets 18 inches out? It just defies logic, and everything we've seen about how far droplets go so far. I mean, how on earth would this be spreading if the virus during singing goes less than 18 inches, and during speaking less than that? And that assumes no air movement as well I guess, from air conditioning,fans, etc? I mean, we have people on busses, in office buildings, restaurants, etc much farther away than 18 inches who are getting exposed. 

Seriously, how often do people have their faces less than 18 inches apart? And yet, how many have caught this? It makes no sense. I wish it did. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I asked, my Episcopal parish said no singing at the 7:45 service, some singing at the 10:15. Then the music director added this:

St. Michael's Episcopal Church, Orlando Katie: the 4 singers and I have been wearing, for the past two Sundays, a mask that I have modified to make singing possible. The main problem with singing is not the actual singing, as a mask will greatly mitigate any air droplets that might escape, the problem is when you breathe in. Taking a "singer's breath". i.e. a BIG one, you find the mask flattens itself against your mouth like an octopus! This, in and of itself, will probably prevent most folks from singing. However, if you do want to sing, I would suggest keeping the volume down, and experiment with breathing in with the mask you are wearing - see how strong you can do that before it collapses on to your mouth. Once you have found that out, I would say singing would be fine - keeping the volume down, therefore not expelling so much air - it would bring the activity in line with speaking - which we do every day wearing masks, to others who are wearing masks.

Share this post


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

Yeah, I can't figure this out. I mean, we've SEEN video of droplets going farther. And more to the point, in a choir of 60 people, how would 45 catch it if the infected person only sprayed droplets 18 inches out? It just defies logic, and everything we've seen about how far droplets go so far. I mean, how on earth would this be spreading if the virus during singing goes less than 18 inches, and during speaking less than that? And that assumes no air movement as well I guess, from air conditioning,fans, etc? I mean, we have people on busses, in office buildings, restaurants, etc much farther away than 18 inches who are getting exposed. 

Seriously, how often do people have their faces less than 18 inches apart? And yet, how many have caught this? It makes no sense. I wish it did. 

From lots of studies I've seen, just breathing and talking normally droplets go farther than 18 inches.  I'm taking that study with a boulder of salt.  It makes absolutely no sense based on every single other study I've seen.  The Oregon choir is a real-life example of how in real life it doesn't seem to work that way.  Unfortunately.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Ktgrok said:

When I asked, my Episcopal parish said no singing at the 7:45 service, some singing at the 10:15. Then the music director added this:

St. Michael's Episcopal Church, Orlando Katie: the 4 singers and I have been wearing, for the past two Sundays, a mask that I have modified to make singing possible. The main problem with singing is not the actual singing, as a mask will greatly mitigate any air droplets that might escape, the problem is when you breathe in. Taking a "singer's breath". i.e. a BIG one, you find the mask flattens itself against your mouth like an octopus! This, in and of itself, will probably prevent most folks from singing. However, if you do want to sing, I would suggest keeping the volume down, and experiment with breathing in with the mask you are wearing - see how strong you can do that before it collapses on to your mouth. Once you have found that out, I would say singing would be fine - keeping the volume down, therefore not expelling so much air - it would bring the activity in line with speaking - which we do every day wearing masks, to others who are wearing masks.

So if I am reading this right, the reply you got is based on not science, but singer personal experimentation?

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

When I asked, my Episcopal parish said no singing at the 7:45 service, some singing at the 10:15. Then the music director added this:

St. Michael's Episcopal Church, Orlando Katie: the 4 singers and I have been wearing, for the past two Sundays, a mask that I have modified to make singing possible. The main problem with singing is not the actual singing, as a mask will greatly mitigate any air droplets that might escape, the problem is when you breathe in. Taking a "singer's breath". i.e. a BIG one, you find the mask flattens itself against your mouth like an octopus! This, in and of itself, will probably prevent most folks from singing. However, if you do want to sing, I would suggest keeping the volume down, and experiment with breathing in with the mask you are wearing - see how strong you can do that before it collapses on to your mouth. Once you have found that out, I would say singing would be fine - keeping the volume down, therefore not expelling so much air - it would bring the activity in line with speaking - which we do every day wearing masks, to others who are wearing masks.

I want to see this singer's mask.  If it's true that they've found a way to modify a mask so that it works well for singers, that would be great!  

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

So if I am reading this right, the reply you got is based on not science, but singer personal experimentation?

It seems, although the pastor said that the music director has been researching this. I will not be going to the 10:15, for sure. 

(they do require EVERYONE to wear masks)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our church went back to live services today. We did not attend, but watched online. It looked to be well attended although there is far less capacity than usual and they did sing as much as normal. I looked at information for another local church that we attended many years ago. They were the last to shut down and have a much smaller, mostly elderly congregation. They've decided not to open until Fall and their bishop has forbidden singing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  This article from Church Times talks about the German study that was posted above as well as some other research.  It also gives more info about the infamous Washington Choir.

Quote

An investigation by the US Center for Disease Control and Prevention, however, established that Skagit Valley choir members were sitting six to ten inches from one another, and sharing snacks and stacking chairs together, and that 19 members with “probable symptoms” were never tested.

A statement that “emission of aerosols” was related to “loudness of vocalisation” was a footnote to one of its studies, which fed into an existing debate about whether the virus was transmissible through small, light aerosol particles as well as the heavier and larger droplets.

https://www.churchtimes.co.uk/articles/2020/5-june/news/uk/singing-might-not-be-so-great-a-risk-after-all?#.XtmKZmT5i8c.facebook

 

Once again - more research needs to be done instead of knee-jerk reactions.

Edited by PrincessMommy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, PrincessMommy said:

  This article from Church Times talks about the German study that was posted above as well as some other research.  It also gives more info about the infamous Washington Choir.

https://www.churchtimes.co.uk/articles/2020/5-june/news/uk/singing-might-not-be-so-great-a-risk-after-all?#.XtmKZmT5i8c.facebook

 

Once again - more research needs to be done instead of knee-jerk reactions.

 

I'm so confused about this. The article says that members with probable symptoms were not tested, but the CDC report says, "No choir member reported having had symptoms at the March 3 practice." and "the 19 choir members classified as having probable cases did not seek testing to confirm their illness."

Am I misreading the churchtimes article?? Because it sounded like they were saying people went to the practice with probable cases and that is not how the CDC report is reading. The CDC is reporting that 19 people did not get testing after the practice even though their symptoms may have indicated COVID.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6919e6.htm

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/3/2020 at 2:12 PM, Violet Crown said:

Well, exactly right. Again, one reason why I would refrain from communing in the New Rite. More reasons to have the priest be the one who goes from communicant to (spaced) communicant, rather than a line of people moving up to him. I pull down my mask immediately beforehand, and replace it as Father flits on to the next communicant. 

Maybe this could be one of those "mutual enrichment" things between the two Rites?

Another problem with the keep your mask on while receiving the Body of Christ in the hand is the very increased likelihood of dropping the Body of Christ on the ground while trying to remove a mask, not to mention the increased likelihood of someone with evil intentions of taking it with them instead of consuming it when no one is watching.  Also, when kneeling to receive on the tongue you are still and even if you don’t hold your breath you are no where even close to his face.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

 

I'm so confused about this. The article says that members with probable symptoms were not tested, but the CDC report says, "No choir member reported having had symptoms at the March 3 practice." and "the 19 choir members classified as having probable cases did not seek testing to confirm their illness."

Am I misreading the churchtimes article?? Because it sounded like they were saying people went to the practice with probable cases and that is not how the CDC report is reading. The CDC is reporting that 19 people did not get testing after the practice even though their symptoms may have indicated COVID.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/69/wr/mm6919e6.htm

I'm confused about what you're confused about 😄   Is this the portion you are referring to? :

Quote

Stories about the danger of transmitting the coronavirus through singing have proliferated since the widely reported outbreak of Covid-19 in Washington State, where 53 of the 61 members of the Skagit Valley Chorale fell ill after rehearsals on 3 and 10 March, immediately before lockdown measures. The incident was subsequently correlated with two other “super-spreader” events involving choirs in Amsterdam and Berlin (News, 29 May).

 

I think here it is saying that only 53 members attended those choir practices.  

I didn't think the article was saying that people attended the practices being sick (or thinking they were sick with something).  I remember that one article I read a while ago stated that no one coughed or seemed sick at the choir practice.   The CT article is the first one I've read that references 2 different practices, so I don't know what's up with that. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, PrincessMommy said:

I'm confused about what you're confused about 😄   Is this the portion you are referring to? :

I didn't think the article was saying that people attended the practices being sick (or thinking they were sick with something).  I remember that one article I read a while ago stated that no one coughed or seemed sick at the choir practice.   The CT article is the first one I've read that references 2 different practices, so I don't know what's up with that. 

 

"An investigation by the US Center for Disease Control and Prevention, however, established that Skagit Valley choir members were sitting six to ten inches from one another, and sharing snacks and stacking chairs together, and that 19 members with “probable symptoms” were never tested."

This is the part I meant. It makes it sound like the probable symptoms occurred at the time of the practice (since all the other listed events did). That's why I was confused.

Share this post


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

"An investigation by the US Center for Disease Control and Prevention, however, established that Skagit Valley choir members were sitting six to ten inches from one another, and sharing snacks and stacking chairs together, and that 19 members with “probable symptoms” were never tested."

This is the part I meant. It makes it sound like the probable symptoms occurred at the time of the practice (since all the other listed events did). That's why I was confused.

I think it is poorly written and you're right and can be misunderstood.  The way I understood it is that at the practice the choir was not practicing any kind of distancing and they were doing other activities other than singing, such as sharing food (mostly likely from a common table as I have experienced in choir practices) and stacking chairs- which requires some lifting, etc.   Then later 19 members were considered part of some of the research as probably having covid -but were never actually tested.  

Of course,, you could be right too 🙂  But I do remember other articles stating that no one at practice appeared sick or coughed.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Welp. Our church has been singing communally for five weeks now, no cases in the body and no known asymptomatic spread among the members who are being tested regularly through work.

This was my first week back, though the kids other than Benjamin have been going for a month. It was so nice to be back and feel mostly normal. Seating was still distanced, doors propped open, bathrooms being monitored and cleaned throughout.

Edited by Arctic Mama
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Arctic Mama said:

Welp. Our church has been singing communally for five weeks now, no cases in the body and no known asymptomatic spread among the members who are being tested regularly through work.

This was my first week back, though the kids other than Benjamin have been going for a month. It was so nice to be back and feel mostly normal. Seating was still distanced, doors propped open, bathrooms being monitored and cleaned throughout.

This is really great!  All with masks or scattered mask wearing?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, mumto2 said:

This is really great!  All with masks or scattered mask wearing?

At this point maybe 1/3 wearing masks, it was closer to 100% a month ago, but people have been easing up since our area is still so low in infections.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Arctic Mama said:

Welp. Our church has been singing communally for five weeks now, no cases in the body and no known asymptomatic spread among the members who are being tested regularly through work.

This was my first week back, though the kids other than Benjamin have been going for a month. It was so nice to be back and feel mostly normal. Seating was still distanced, doors propped open, bathrooms being monitored and cleaned throughout.

Yay! That's great news - we are not yet back to in person services. Some churches have started, at 25% capacity, I think. So far so good but it's only the 2nd week. Our church has probably an average age close to 70, so I think we'll be staying virtual longer than most if I were to guess due to the fact that probably 80% of people there are senior citizens. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Arctic Mama said:

Welp. Our church has been singing communally for five weeks now, no cases in the body and no known asymptomatic spread among the members who are being tested regularly through work.

This was my first week back, though the kids other than Benjamin have been going for a month. It was so nice to be back and feel mostly normal. Seating was still distanced, doors propped open, bathrooms being monitored and cleaned throughout.

That is encouraging.  My sister's parish had their first services today.  She's in the midwest.   We're still in prep mode.    People are getting frustrated here in my county.  I heard there was a demonstration at a recent County Council meeting with our County executive.  This was before all the demonstrations too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First service back today.  Congregational singing happened - I was out-voted 🙂.  It was nice to be back but the six-foot distancing was being very loosely interpreted by some!  I saw my mil trying to politely back away from several people. 

Someone not from our family, unmasked and really in precarious health,  decided to sit right behind (no pew in-between) my row of teens.  I tried to direct her elsewhere but she declared that she wasn't afraid because she had Jesus.  That's a great sentiment but I told her that I did not want her to pick it up from my teens who are working and out and about.  She argued but someone else stepped in and got her off by herself.  I'm more concerned about us being the carriers since my 18yods is now working in an Amazon warehouse and my basketball players are beginning to get with friends for summer training.

It was nice to be back but awkward, too.  Lots of mask-wearing which surprised me.  I let our kids take theirs off before the sermon because we were in the front row then the pastor started speaking but forgot his microphone and started really loud preaching instead of getting the mic!  I was trying to figure out how to put mine back on without being obvious. 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mom2mthj said:

Another problem with the keep your mask on while receiving the Body of Christ in the hand is the very increased likelihood of dropping the Body of Christ on the ground while trying to remove a mask, not to mention the increased likelihood of someone with evil intentions of taking it with them instead of consuming it when no one is watching.  Also, when kneeling to receive on the tongue you are still and even if you don’t hold your breath you are no where even close to his face.

I mean, you pick it up with one hand to put in your mouth, mask or no mask. In this case the other hand, not holding it, is used to remove the mask. I think the risk is greater in walking a few feet and dropping, than the taking the mask off part, actually. (I know some just lift both hands to the mouth to partake, but that always seemed risky to me as far as dropping it down my cleavage or something!)

I think the kneeling thing is a good point! The episcopal church has the people kneel at the altar rail, like in the older Catholic Rites, but most receive in the hand. That might be the safest compromise. People spaced at the rail 6 feet apart, keep mask on as masked priest places the host in your hand, when he walks off and is 6 feet away you remove mask with one hand, consume host, replace mask, get up and walk away. 

1 hour ago, PrincessMommy said:

I think it is poorly written and you're right and can be misunderstood.  The way I understood it is that at the practice the choir was not practicing any kind of distancing and they were doing other activities other than singing, such as sharing food (mostly likely from a common table as I have experienced in choir practices) and stacking chairs- which requires some lifting, etc.   Then later 19 members were considered part of some of the research as probably having covid -but were never actually tested.  

Of course,, you could be right too 🙂  But I do remember other articles stating that no one at practice appeared sick or coughed.  

Also, even if they are all 10 inches apart, the idea was ONE of them was the spreader. He was not 10 inches away from all 45 people he infected, right? I mean, that isn't possible. Some of those people were quite far away. 

And the eating thing is still annoying me...."they" say that consuming food with the virus on it is safe. But that sharing food is not safe. Which again, makes very little sense. (and I posted in the other thread that some scientists have shown that it can infect/replicate in the intestinal cells, that many mild cases have ONLY GI symptoms, no respiratory symptoms and a lot more START with GI, then go to respiratory. And MERS can spread via consuming the virus, via the digestive tract. So....I think they REALLY need to look again to see if you can get this by consuming food with the virus on it.)

Also, we have reports of people in restaurants, etc that are farther apart than the 18 inches that german study mentions, who catch it from each other. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, JanOH said:

First service back today.  Congregational singing happened - I was out-voted 🙂.  It was nice to be back but the six-foot distancing was being very loosely interpreted by some!  I saw my mil trying to politely back away from several people. 

Someone not from our family, unmasked and really in precarious health,  decided to sit right behind (no pew in-between) my row of teens.  I tried to direct her elsewhere but she declared that she wasn't afraid because she had Jesus.  That's a great sentiment but I told her that I did not want her to pick it up from my teens who are working and out and about.  She argued but someone else stepped in and got her off by herself.  I'm more concerned about us being the carriers since my 18yods is now working in an Amazon warehouse and my basketball players are beginning to get with friends for summer training.

It was nice to be back but awkward, too.  Lots of mask-wearing which surprised me.  I let our kids take theirs off before the sermon because we were in the front row then the pastor started speaking but forgot his microphone and started really loud preaching instead of getting the mic!  I was trying to figure out how to put mine back on without being obvious. 

 

Ugh. Do people like this not wear seatbelts, because they have Jesus? Or not look both ways before crossing the street, because they have Jesus? Or keep a fire extinguisher in the house, because they have Jesus? 

Moving back one row is NOT anymore difficult than looking both ways before you cross the street. I do NOT understand this logic! And i hear it a lot!

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

I mean, you pick it up with one hand to put in your mouth, mask or no mask. In this case the other hand, not holding it, is used to remove the mask. I think the risk is greater in walking a few feet and dropping, than the taking the mask off part, actually. (I know some just lift both hands to the mouth to partake, but that always seemed risky to me as far as dropping it down my cleavage or something!)

I think the kneeling thing is a good point! The episcopal church has the people kneel at the altar rail, like in the older Catholic Rites, but most receive in the hand. That might be the safest compromise. People spaced at the rail 6 feet apart, keep mask on as masked priest places the host in your hand, when he walks off and is 6 feet away you remove mask with one hand, consume host, replace mask, get up and walk away. 

Also, even if they are all 10 inches apart, the idea was ONE of them was the spreader. He was not 10 inches away from all 45 people he infected, right? I mean, that isn't possible. Some of those people were quite far away. 

And the eating thing is still annoying me...."they" say that consuming food with the virus on it is safe. But that sharing food is not safe. Which again, makes very little sense. (and I posted in the other thread that some scientists have shown that it can infect/replicate in the intestinal cells, that many mild cases have ONLY GI symptoms, no respiratory symptoms and a lot more START with GI, then go to respiratory. And MERS can spread via consuming the virus, via the digestive tract. So....I think they REALLY need to look again to see if you can get this by consuming food with the virus on it.)

Also, we have reports of people in restaurants, etc that are farther apart than the 18 inches that german study mentions, who catch it from each other. 

Don’t you think it would be way more widespread if you could catch it from food? I don’t know how it is where you are, but our drive thrus have stayed crazy busy throughout all of this and most local restaurants have done a lot of take out as well. I mentioned in another thread that a worker at my local Chick fil A tested positive but there was no spread that seemed to happen. And this Chick fil A is just as busy as any other. I just feel like with the amount of people that have continued to eat out we would be seeing much higher cases if food was a culprit.

That said, I don’t want to be near anyone singing in an enclosed space. So no church for us for a while yet. Ds did attend a protest last week and I’m keeping my fingers crossed nothing comes of it as most were masked.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, JanOH said:

First service back today.  Congregational singing happened - I was out-voted 🙂.  It was nice to be back but the six-foot distancing was being very loosely interpreted by some!  I saw my mil trying to politely back away from several people. 

Thanks for sharing! Today was supposed to be our first day back, but last night my 22-year-old daughter messaged me as we were finishing setting up out at church, and said she had a fever of 102! Well, our family members were 3 of the 5 people running the service..... We cancelled and will try again next week. It was quite a stunning blow after weeks of preparation and meetings, but we did know we needed to stay home! Times have changed for sure.

  • Sad 3

Share this post


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

Don’t you think it would be way more widespread if you could catch it from food? I don’t know how it is where you are, but our drive thrus have stayed crazy busy throughout all of this and most local restaurants have done a lot of take out as well. I mentioned in another thread that a worker at my local Chick fil A tested positive but there was no spread that seemed to happen. And this Chick fil A is just as busy as any other. I just feel like with the amount of people that have continued to eat out we would be seeing much higher cases if food was a culprit.

That said, I don’t want to be near anyone singing in an enclosed space. So no church for us for a while yet. Ds did attend a protest last week and I’m keeping my fingers crossed nothing comes of it as most were masked.

From what I'm reading, the cases that are just GI symptoms or start that way tend to be more mild, and because the symptoms are GI and not respiratory, those people end up not getting tested. So, good news is that if you get it from food you likely don't get that sick, but can still spread it. 

And at least in my state, we have a whole lot of cases where no one knows where they got it from. 

Edited by Ktgrok
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Ugh. Do people like this not wear seatbelts, because they have Jesus? Or not look both ways before crossing the street, because they have Jesus? Or keep a fire extinguisher in the house, because they have Jesus? 

 

The other day our pastor referred to "people who think it is a sin to wear a mask" and "people who think it is not loving to your neighbor not to wear one."  He didn't elaborate on the first statement (it was a video) and I didn't ask. I sort of wonder if that idea is coming from the "Jesus will protect me" philosophy. However, people don't go trying to have car accidents or running into fires because "Jesus will protect me." So I am really confused about where this idea comes from.  Why *would* someone consider it a sin to wear a mask? I guess that's another thread. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


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...