PSA: keep masking when flying!

[Not_a_Number]

Here's a good summary on the cardiovascular issues from Nature: 

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-02074-3

Worth reading. It includes all the big studies I know of, includes contradictory studies, and makes it clear that we don't have great Omicron data yet. 

Edited November 3, 2022 by Not_a_Number

[kokotg]

30 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

 

We all decide for ourselves when we stop taking most precautions. For us, Omicron seeming milder, the existence of drugs and vaccines, and the mental health issues I already talked about above meant that I became ready to resume something like normal life. I'm unlikely to mask indoors except in situations I know are high risk (like planes!) unless something changes either in the world or in my understanding. 

This is what's a little mysterious to me about this thread. You seem to be suggesting that people should mask on planes based on your personal experience of getting covid on a plane. But at this point MOST people have gotten covid, and we all know people who've gotten it in all kinds of settings, including people who avoided it for a long time and then gotten it. If I avoided being unmasked in every situation where someone I know personally got covid, it would look...very cautious. Which is fine, but doesn't seem to be what you're advocating. I mean, I do know a number of people who've gotten it on planes, but more people who've gotten it because a kid brought it home from unmasked school or indoor sports (which is supported by data that a higher percentage of kids than adults have had covid at this point and that numbers were much higher in schools without mask mandates back when some schools still had mask mandates). 

[KSera]

35 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

I would personally be pretty depressed if the long-term outcome of this is that people mask indoors all the time (not that it's looking like that anywhere I've been.) I like seeing people's faces and can't read facial expressions, nor hear what people are saying, anywhere near as well with a mask. And the kids like seeing their friends' faces, too. I think it's a natural human desire. 

 

Honestly,  much as I prefer seeing a person’s whole face rather than just eyes, I really dislike it when I hear this. I pretty much never use this phrase, but it comes across as very ablest.  The suggestion is that other people should risk their health because it’s better for you that way. I’m sure you don’t mean it that way, but that’s what it says to me. And I think many of us who are in the small minority still masking have felt that from others who seem really bummed out that we’re masking as if we should be willing to get sick for their benefit of seeing our face and hearing us more clearly. I have autistic kids, I have kids with speech disorders, I get those things, but to me it’s a step too far when not only are people no longer masking to protect the more vulnerable around them, but they also think those people should stop wearing a mask because they find it depressing. An increased risk of mental health conditions, including psychosis in young people are one of the longer-term effects of Covid, so it’s not a straightforward calculation that no longer masking is going to improve mental health.

28 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

Here's a good summary on the cardiovascular issues from Nature: 

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-022-02074-3

Worth reading. It includes all the big studies I know of, includes contradictory studies, and makes it clear that we don't have great Omicron data yet. 

That’s a good summary overall of where we are, or were as of August. That was published before the recent Cedar Sinai study.

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, kokotg said:

This is what's a little mysterious to me about this thread. You seem to be suggesting that people should mask on planes based on your personal experience of getting covid on a plane. But at this point MOST people have gotten covid, and we all know people who've gotten it in all kinds of settings, including people who avoided it for a long time and then gotten it. If I avoided being unmasked in every situation where someone I know personally got covid, it would look...very cautious. Which is fine, but doesn't seem to be what you're advocating. I mean, I do know a number of people who've gotten it on planes, but more people who've gotten it because a kid brought it home from unmasked school or indoor sports (which is supported by data that a higher percentage of kids than adults have had covid at this point and that numbers were much higher in schools without mask mandates back when some schools still had mask mandates). 

Frankly, I thought my meaning was pretty clear, but in case it helps, I'm happy to explain. 

What I'm saying is that planes seem to be high risk zones. I'm assuming that most of us would rather not get sick even if we're not being super cautious anymore? And even for those of us still masking, it makes sense to possibly upgrade our precautions for high risk areas. 

The amount of COVID I've seen come from planes is nowhere near commensurate with the amount of time people actually spend on planes. Practically, what I'm saying that planes would be a good place to increase protection, whatever your standard protections are. 

[Not_a_Number]

Just now, KSera said:

Honestly,  much as I prefer seeing a person’s whole face rather than just eyes, I really dislike it when I hear this. I pretty much never use this phrase, but it comes across as very ablest.  The suggestion is that other people should risk their health because it’s better for you that way. I’m sure you don’t mean it that way, but that’s what it says to me.

I personally really prefer seeing people's faces. I will not impose this on anyone. It just happens to be how I feel. I won't apologize for it. 

 

Just now, KSera said:

And I think many of us who are in the small minority still masking have felt that from others who seem really bummed out that we’re masking as if we should be willing to get sick for their benefit of seeing our face and hearing us more clearly. I have autistic kids, I have kids with speech disorders, I get those things, but to me it’s a step too far when not only are people no longer masking to protect the more vulnerable around them, but they also think those people should stop wearing a mask because they find it depressing.

I'm not telling you what to do. My feelings are about me, not you. I know people who still mask and I respect (and often understand) the decision. If people are pressuring you in person, they are jerks.

 

Just now, KSera said:

An increased risk of mental health conditions, including psychosis in young people are one of the longer-term effects of Covid, so it’s not a straightforward calculation that no longer masking is going to improve mental health.

Cite, please. 

It substantially improved my kids' mental health at least in the short term. I can't speak to what happens later. I'm really hoping they don't develop additional issues from COVID. I'll be really bummed if they do. 

 

Just now, KSera said:

That’s a good summary overall of where we are, or were as of August. That was published before the recent Cedar Sinai study.

That study is really confusing. I highly recommend you actually look at the full text yourself. The numbers are strange. 

[kokotg]

10 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

Frankly, I thought my meaning was pretty clear, but in case it helps, I'm happy to explain. 

What I'm saying is that planes seem to be high risk zones. I'm assuming that most of us would rather not get sick even if we're not being super cautious anymore? And even for those of us still masking, it makes sense to possibly upgrade our precautions for high risk areas. 

The amount of COVID I've seen come from planes is nowhere near commensurate with the amount of time people actually spend on planes. Practically, what I'm saying that planes would be a good place to increase protection, whatever your standard protections are. 

I understand what you're saying, but unless I'm missing something, your evidence for planes being higher risk areas than, say, restaurants or concerts or museums is that you, personally got covid on a plane. My BIL got covid after avoiding it for 2 years eating at a restaurant. He'd flown on a plane a not long before that, but it was clear from the timing that he got it at a restaurant and not on the plane. My nephew got covid during his PE class, which was the only place he was unmasked at school. This was a few weeks after two cross country airplane trips in which he did not get covid. My kid got covid on a train a couple of weeks after not getting it on a transatlantic flight. So I could start threads saying, "hey--based on my family's experiences, gym class and restaurants and trains are more dangerous than planes, and everyone should mask there if they want to avoid covid." I certainly think that's it's EASIER to always mask on planes, given how infrequently most people fly, than to avoid restaurants or to mask at school every day....so...that's something to consider I guess. But I don't think the average person is at greater risk of catching covid on a plane than at school or from someone who goes to school every day.

Edited November 3, 2022 by kokotg

[KSera]

2 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

Cite, please

I can try and look for links later, but not now. If you are interested in the research, I expect you’ll find it very easy to find as it has been shown repeatedly to be the case. I have a family member who may be one of those. It is of course impossible to say on an individual basis which person‘s issues were caused by covid and which would have developed the problem anyway, but it can be shown quite clearly on a population basis to increase the chances. Risk of psychosis specifically is doubled in young people who have had Covid. 

[Not_a_Number]

Just now, kokotg said:

I understand what you're saying, but unless I'm missing something, your evidence for planes being higher risk areas than, say, restaurants or concerts or museums is that you, personally got covid on a plane.

It's a probability argument. Probably easiest done using the binomial distribution. Basically, given the distribution in activities I see, the chance of both us and our co-op friend catching COVID on a plane assuming that planes aren't riskier than other activities is vanishingly small. The p-value would be way under 5%. 

[Not_a_Number]

I also really dislike that this thread turned into yet another referendum on masking. Not every single thread needs to rehash that decision. This thread was supposed about the fact that I was surprised that planes caused so much COVID transmission. 

I masked and did very careful social distancing for almost 2 years. I'm hurt about how little goodwill that buys me. I would have really preferred it if people treated me as a thoughtful person that has done her best to make this decision.

[kokotg]

5 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

It's a probability argument. Probably easiest done using the binomial distribution. Basically, given the distribution in activities I see, the chance of both us and our co-op friend catching COVID on a plane assuming that planes aren't riskier than other activities is vanishingly small. The p-value would be way under 5%. 

But if there's an activity that's risky but not AS risky, but that people do way more often than flying (like, again, going to school unmasked) then the overall risk of getting covid is going to be higher for the people who have to do that activity every day. As you know, this is fairly personal for me, as someone who's married to a teacher who takes an immunosuppressive drug and will for the rest of his life. It's nice that people who don't have that kind of exposure on a daily basis can decide to mask on planes and nowhere else, but there are plenty of people who are in hotbeds of sickness every single day. 

[Not_a_Number]

Just now, kokotg said:

But if there's an activity that's risky but not AS risky, but that people do way more often than flying (like, again, going to school unmasked) then the overall risk of getting covid is going to be higher for the people who have to do that activity every day. As you know, this is fairly personal for me, as someone who's married to a teacher who takes an immunosuppressive drug and will for the rest of his life.

I do know. That sounds stressful for your family. 

 

Just now, kokotg said:

It's nice that people who don't have that kind of exposure on a daily basis can decide to mask on planes and nowhere else, but there are plenty of people who are in hotbeds of sickness every single day. 

You're right. Some people have easier situations than others. Some people will be able to get by with minimizing risk in only the riskiest situations and some won't. It's not fair. 

[Shoeless]

On 10/30/2022 at 9:37 PM, EKS said:

Ha! Me too!  It's the only indoor public place I go without a mask.  I hold my breath.

I held my breath, too! 🤣 

The first time I went in without a mask was because I dropped it in the wet parking lot.  🤢 I have since learned to keep a few extra masks in the glove box!

[Not_a_Number]

Honestly, I'm no longer finding the pile on upsetting, just tiresome. 

I don't pretend to make perfectly selfless decisions. Frankly, if I did, I'd be living in a box, having given all my money away. And I certainly wouldn't have homeschooled. My decision about masking is not a perfectly selfless decision, either. 

If anyone wants to discuss anything new about relative risks of various situations (including airplanes), I'm game. But I'm done with the "should we all mask?" digression. My personal opinion is that I'm not willing to do that in most situations anymore. You have the right to judge me about that, as we all have the right to our feelings. But I don't want to talk about it any longer. 

[kokotg]

9 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

Honestly, I'm no longer finding the pile on upsetting, just tiresome. 

I don't pretend to make perfectly selfless decisions. Frankly, if I did, I'd be living in a box, having given all my money away. And I certainly wouldn't have homeschooled. My decision about masking is not a perfectly selfless decision, either. 

If anyone wants to discuss anything new about relative risks of various situations (including airplanes), I'm game. But I'm done with the "should we all mask?" digression. My personal opinion is that I'm not willing to do that in most situations anymore. You have the right to judge me about that, as we all have the right to our feelings. But I don't want to talk about it any longer. 

It's not about living in a box, though. It's about having more than you need while other people don't have enough to stay alive. But I certainly have more than I need (I'm pretty sure all of us do, because we're sitting at computers typing these things). I just don't want to lose sight of the fact that every time I relax a little in my precautions, it makes things less safe for someone else who doesn't have the privileges I have.  But I still relax some things. I believe this is a major plot point about the nature of modern life in The Good Place. It was also a less well-handled plot point on an (less well-known) episode of Ed. Now I'm getting very obscure because I've stayed up too late. 

[Mom_to3]

I have found Eric Topol to be an amazing twitter resource who consistently links to medical research on covid, including long covid.

[Corraleno]

12 hours ago, Mrs Tiggywinkle Again said:

I think I am just curious if people plan to wear masks permanently now, because it’s obvious Covid isn’t going away ever and it evolves so quickly that people can get it multiple times a year.

I plan to continue masking for the foreseeable future, but I don't think it's likely to be permanent. I think at some point we will have an effective nasal spray or a nasal vaccine or just better vaccines or better treatments. But I don't consider masking to be burdensome at all, and a lot of the things that seem to bother other people (like not seeing faces) don't bother me. And a lot of places that other people really want to spend time in are not places I care about either. I hate crowds, so I've never enjoyed being indoors in crowded places and now I have even more reason to avoid them. I really couldn't care less about eating in restaurants, I really only ate out when I was traveling anyway (and now I'm not traveling). I'm a pretty good cook and the kinds of food I like to eat I can just as easily make myself for far less money; for me the only advantage of eating in a restaurant is that someone else cleans up, but that's barely worth the extra cost, and now the risk of catching a disease that could have lifelong consequences makes it not worth it all.  I do hope to be able to travel again at some point, and plane travel is one of the few places where I do think I may continue to mask permanently, because you can get so many other crazy bugs when traveling, especially internationally. 

[Ausmumof3]

4 hours ago, Mom_to3 said:

I have found Eric Topol to be an amazing twitter resource who consistently links to medical research on covid, including long covid.

Yes I agree. I like him for being on the cautious side without venturing into sensationalism or ad hominem attacks.

[I talk to the trees]

6 hours ago, Corraleno said:

I plan to continue masking for the foreseeable future, but I don't think it's likely to be permanent. I think at some point we will have an effective nasal spray or a nasal vaccine or just better vaccines or better treatments. But I don't consider masking to be burdensome at all, and a lot of the things that seem to bother other people (like not seeing faces) don't bother me. And a lot of places that other people really want to spend time in are not places I care about either. I hate crowds, so I've never enjoyed being indoors in crowded places and now I have even more reason to avoid them. I really couldn't care less about eating in restaurants, I really only ate out when I was traveling anyway (and now I'm not traveling). I'm a pretty good cook and the kinds of food I like to eat I can just as easily make myself for far less money; for me the only advantage of eating in a restaurant is that someone else cleans up, but that's barely worth the extra cost, and now the risk of catching a disease that could have lifelong consequences makes it not worth it all.  I do hope to be able to travel again at some point, and plane travel is one of the few places where I do think I may continue to mask permanently, because you can get so many other crazy bugs when traveling, especially internationally. 

This is where I am too.
For me, masks are not a burden at all. Rather, I feel blessed to have access to such a simple thing that can prevent the spread of a disease that has the potential to cause me, my family,  and others terrible harm.

I find it mind-boggling that the same humans who wept together as a nation for the horrible, senseless loss of life on 9/11 are perfectly happy to allow (approximately) the same number of people die every single week- just so they won’t have to face the inconvenience of wearing a face covering.

And before everyone piles on me, I’m not referring to children- or even adults- who have a genuine physical or psychological need to not mask. In fact, those individuals would (for me) fall into the category of people the rest of us should feel responsible for *protecting by masking ourselves*. 

I really wish that those who have decided that they are comfortable living their lives with  greater risk would stop trying to shame those of us who choose not to take that risk. I mean, I don’t own or ride a motorcycle because I perceive that to carry greater risks than driving a car. But I have yet to have a motorcycle owner approach me in a parking lot and say “You know, you don’t have to drive that thing!” 

[mommyoffive]

On 11/2/2022 at 9:33 AM, kokotg said:

But you can do all of those things except eating indoors in a good mask. I know you say you personally will not have your children mask and that you have your reasons, and that's fine, but that IS a way to do all those things and at least greatly reduce one's chance of getting covid. We've traveled a ton since covid started and gone to plenty of concerts and museums and haven't gotten covid. Some of that is luck, but a lot of it is that we wear good masks in crowded indoor spaces. (And those spaces would be a lot safer for kids like yours for whom masking is difficult for whatever reason if the people who could DID wear good masks, so I'm happy to). It's a false dichotomy to suggest that you either have to isolate forever or do nothing to reduce your chances of getting covid. We also do some things that carry risk that we can't mask for that we've decided are worth the risk given how long this has been going on and likely will continue to go on: my kids play wind instruments, we've eaten inside on occasion when numbers are lower, we do small family gatherings inside now...but when it's practical to mask, we mask, and I don't feel like my kids are missing out on much of anything (other than not growing up in the midst of a pandemic that they're likely to spend their adulthoods still dealing with the fallout from...but THAT I can't do anything about). 

Didn't one of your sons get covid in Budapest? 

[kokotg]

8 minutes ago, mommyoffive said:

Didn't one of your sons get covid in Budapest? 

Yes...I wasn't counting that because he wasn't traveling with our family and because he wasn't taking many precautions while he was there. He's 21, so he does his own thing at this point, and he's the only one in the immediate family who's had covid. No one has gotten covid while living in my household 😉. But with the other three kids (and that kid at times) we've done two 2 month long summer trips since covid started and numerous shorter trips.

[BronzeTurtle]

16 hours ago, KSera said:

Honestly,  much as I prefer seeing a person’s whole face rather than just eyes, I really dislike it when I hear this. I pretty much never use this phrase, but it comes across as very ablest.  The suggestion is that other people should risk their health because it’s better for you that way. I’m sure you don’t mean it that way, but that’s what it says to me.

The interesting thing is that I've heard it the other way. As in, it is ablist to assume that just becaue you don't find masking to be a problem that it follows everyone around you is able to understand you or deson't need to read your lips or process your facial expressions to understand social cues, etc. The assumption being that the mask is default and not a problem, but taking it off would be. 

Actually a lot of people have said that they don't mask much anymore but will do so when they see others masking or when asked. I wonder if it works the other way around. Like, "I have trouble with my hearing, would you mind taking your mask off?" or "My son needs to read lips, would you mind taking your mask off?" Of course if you regard this as a request to risk death or long term health issues for someone's ability to understand you then it seems like a very unreasonable request. But what do we do for example in places where kids need to see faces? which, for babies and such is pretty much all the time? The US seemed unique in requiring them on toddlers in any setting (I think NYC did but maybe I'm wrong) and it just seems very ablist to assume it wasn't a problem for any of them or that the request to not mask them or around them (or others, just an example there) was ablist in and of itself.

[PaxEtLux]

Thank you for this thread.  I've noticed this too, where I know of about five recent Covid cases from friends and relatives who have recently traveled via airplane.  Does that mean that flying means that you will, 100% certainly get Covid?  Of course not.  Does it mean that it's the only way you'll contract Covid?  Also no.  Am I, like most humans, absolutely terrible about statistics and risk analysis?  Yes.

But it does seem like from the anecdata that I've seen that there is something going on.  And maybe it isn't the airplanes -- could be waiting in the TSA line or on the jetbridge or taxis or  reduced immunity because of jetlag or ???

[Corraleno]

1 hour ago, BronzeTurtle said:

The interesting thing is that I've heard it the other way. As in, it is ablist to assume that just becaue you don't find masking to be a problem that it follows everyone around you is able to understand you or deson't need to read your lips or process your facial expressions to understand social cues, etc. The assumption being that the mask is default and not a problem, but taking it off would be. 

Actually a lot of people have said that they don't mask much anymore but will do so when they see others masking or when asked. I wonder if it works the other way around. Like, "I have trouble with my hearing, would you mind taking your mask off?" or "My son needs to read lips, would you mind taking your mask off?" Of course if you regard this as a request to risk death or long term health issues for someone's ability to understand you then it seems like a very unreasonable request. But what do we do for example in places where kids need to see faces? which, for babies and such is pretty much all the time? The US seemed unique in requiring them on toddlers in any setting (I think NYC did but maybe I'm wrong) and it just seems very ablist to assume it wasn't a problem for any of them or that the request to not mask them or around them (or others, just an example there) was ablist in and of itself.

I mask everywhere I go, 100% of the time, and I would have no problem whatsoever pulling my mask down temporarily if someone genuinely couldn't understand me or needed to read lips. I don't know anyone who wouldn't do that. Now, someone telling me I should take my mask off just because they want see my face? Nope, I'd actually prefer not to see theirs, so if they're unmasked I'm definitely not taking mine off. 

I've always thought the anti-mask argument about babies was pretty bogus — I assume most parents and siblings do not mask around a baby in their own home, so babies get to see plenty of expressions on the faces of their loved ones every day. And even for situations like toddlers in preschool, transparent masks could be made available to teachers. Until we know a lot more about the long-term effects of covid in children (like the increased rates of T1 diabetes, heart issues, and possibly other autoimmune issues), I think concern over babies and young children needing to see the facial expressions of strangers pales in comparison to the risk of developing life-long medical conditions.

Edited November 3, 2022 by Corraleno

[regentrude]

1 hour ago, BronzeTurtle said:

The interesting thing is that I've heard it the other way. As in, it is ablist to assume that just becaue you don't find masking to be a problem that it follows everyone around you is able to understand you or deson't need to read your lips or process your facial expressions to understand social cues, etc. The assumption being that the mask is default and not a problem, but taking it off would be. 

Actually a lot of people have said that they don't mask much anymore but will do so when they see others masking or when asked. I wonder if it works the other way around. Like, "I have trouble with my hearing, would you mind taking your mask off?" or "My son needs to read lips, would you mind taking your mask off?" Of course if you regard this as a request to risk death or long term health issues for someone's ability to understand you then it seems like a very unreasonable request.

This is indeed a very tricky issue, and it is not easy to weigh the needs of different persons. So much also depends on the circumstances. I was recently confronted with this situation.
I declined to unmask for teaching in a crowded lecture hall for the entire semester, because being in a poorly ventilated space with 140 students poses a high risk; we found an alternate way to accommodate the student's hearing impairment (I wear a mic, and she uses a transcription service that sends a real-time transcript to her tablet, and I also have fully captioned video of all my lectures).
OTOH, when I spoke with the student one-on-one, I did remove my mask, because talking to a single person for a few minutes is a much smaller risk than spending 30 hours unmasked in a room with 140 people.

 

Edited November 3, 2022 by regentrude

[kbutton]

Quote

Those Nerdy Girls

 

  · 

Q: What is the best way to wear a mask sometimes?

A: Masking sometimes is a form of harm reduction. Here are tips to help you rock the mask when it matters most. Keep a good mask handy and incorporate masking into common high risk activities. Mask in the company of people who also mask. Be ready to increase and decrease mask wearing as circumstances change.

Fewer people are wearing masks in public but masks are still really useful tools to decrease the risk of infection from COVID-19 and other viruses. It can be hard to decide when it is best to wear a mask…. or not. Those Nerdy Girls are here to guide you in how to mask sometimes - an act of harm reduction. Harm reduction strategies decrease the risk of human behaviors when it’s difficult or impossible to eliminate the risk completely.

Wear a good mask.

When you mask, use a high-filtration mask like a KN95 or N95. These types of masks are best at preventing viral transmission. Keep a stock of the ones you like. It’s time to retire your cloth masks unless you are wearing them on top of a high filtration mask.

Keep a mask handy.

Keep a mask in your bag, at home, in your car, at work, etc. for situations where you need it. For example, you planned to walk home but it’s raining so you are taking the crowded bus instead. Maybe you get a call at work from the person you had dinner with yesterday who just tested positive for COVID-19 and now you are a close contact. Be ready to act quickly when you need to by having a mask on hand.

Make situation specific habits

Our brains are not great at “maybe”. People are far more likely to be consistent in a habit when the rule is the same every time. You can apply this theory to mask wearing by determining the settings and activities when you will wear a mask and consistently practicing the behavior. For example, you might decide to always mask on public transportation or at the gym due to higher risks for exposure. By making the mask a habit in a specific situation, you are more likely to be successful at being consistent.

Demonstrate kindness

If you are in the company of someone who chooses to mask, especially close company, putting on your mask is a gesture of caring. There are many reasons people continue to mask. By wearing a mask , you decrease the risk of viral transmission AND support someone who may have things harder than you.

Normalize flexing up or down

It’s OK to increase and decrease mask wearing based on situational circumstances. This might include things like high community rates of illness, personal health, important events, and other reasons. When surges of infections occur, masking more often makes a whole lot of sense. If you or a close contact recently recovered from an illness but are returning to public settings, masking for a few days can add a layer of protection. If you are planning a big life event like a medical procedure or trip, masking ahead of time can decrease the risk of disruptions. It’s OK to increase and decrease your mask wearing. We need to embrace this behavior.

Masking always or never leaves out many useful options in between. By wearing a mask when it really matters, the risk of infection to you and others is decreased. Masks will continue to be important tools to decrease the disruption and illness caused by COVID-19 (and many other viruses). Use the tool.

#masking #ThoseNerdyGirls

Additional Resources

Atlantic article on the decrease in masking by Katherine Wu

https://www.theatlantic.com/.../americans-no.../671797/

Does my mask still work if no one else is wearing one by Those Nerdy Girls

https://dearpandemic.org/one-way-masking/

Beginner’s Guide to Harm Reduction Priniciples

https://www.healthline.com/.../substance-use/harm-reduction

This was shared on FB, but I can't figure out how to share a FB link that goes to the original post.

[Not_a_Number]

5 hours ago, PaxEtLux said:

Thank you for this thread.  I've noticed this too, where I know of about five recent Covid cases from friends and relatives who have recently traveled via airplane.  Does that mean that flying means that you will, 100% certainly get Covid?  Of course not.  Does it mean that it's the only way you'll contract Covid?  Also no.  Am I, like most humans, absolutely terrible about statistics and risk analysis?  Yes.

But it does seem like from the anecdata that I've seen that there is something going on.  And maybe it isn't the airplanes -- could be waiting in the TSA line or on the jetbridge or taxis or  reduced immunity because of jetlag or ???

I do wonder what it is! From @wathe's post, it does seem like the density of virus in the air is likely to be higher in the plane, especially when boarding, than elsewhere, though. It's quite possible it does suppress one's immune system, though. (Although we managed to avoid a time change! So we weren't jetlagged.) 

[Ausmumof3]

4 hours ago, Not_a_Number said:

I do wonder what it is! From @wathe's post, it does seem like the density of virus in the air is likely to be higher in the plane, especially when boarding, than elsewhere, though. It's quite possible it does suppress one's immune system, though. (Although we managed to avoid a time change! So we weren't jetlagged.) 

I think it’s mostly a density thing. Concentration of people. No external air flow. Interaction with people from different locations with possibly different variants. Even with filtration you’ve still got a tonne of people in a very small space. Even public transport is less crowded.

[Not_a_Number]

19 hours ago, Ausmumof3 said:

I think it’s mostly a density thing. Concentration of people. No external air flow. Interaction with people from different locations with possibly different variants. Even with filtration you’ve still got a tonne of people in a very small space. Even public transport is less crowded.

I don't know that the variants matter much, but yes, it does seem like it's the lack of ventilation and the density of people. 

As I said, I really should have known. I knew we often caught things on planes, but I somehow got duped by the airline industry's PR. I understand why they want to make it seem like flying it safe, since the future of the industry is at stake, but I just feel dumb 😕 . 

At least it makes me feel pretty rational about not taking an airplane last year in the middle of the Omicron wave on the busiest day of the air! We would have masked back then, but still. (I hadn't yet decided that I was willing to take my chances with Omicron back then.) 

[Shoeless]

22 hours ago, Ausmumof3 said:

I think it’s mostly a density thing. Concentration of people. No external air flow. Interaction with people from different locations with possibly different variants. Even with filtration you’ve still got a tonne of people in a very small space. Even public transport is less crowded.

And one is probably on public transport for only a (relatively) short time, not hours and hours like on a plane. 

[Not_a_Number]

10 hours ago, MissLemon said:

And one is probably on public transport for only a (relatively) short time, not hours and hours like on a plane. 

Well, I don't know... I'm on public transit for LESS time than on a plane, but not that much less? I've absolutely spent an hour on public transit before. Not at rush hour, true. But definitely in full subway cars. 

[KSera]

6 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

Well, I don't know... I'm on public transit for LESS time than on a plane, but not that much less? I've absolutely spent an hour on public transit before. Not at rush hour, true. But definitely in full subway cars. 

It sounds like you’ve been lucky then. Public transit is another area shown to have high CO2 levels:

“We recently measured the CO2 levels of various locations on a typical day in New York City. CO2 levels varied by location and density of people, ranging from 458 ppm in outdoor spaces to 2366 ppm on a very crowded subway. ”

Carbon Dioxide Levels May Predict Covid Risk In Your Immediate Surroundings

[Not_a_Number]

3 minutes ago, KSera said:

It sounds like you’ve been lucky then. Public transit is another area shown to have high CO2 levels:

“We recently measured the CO2 levels of various locations on a typical day in New York City. CO2 levels varied by location and density of people, ranging from 458 ppm in outdoor spaces to 2366 ppm on a very crowded subway. ”

Carbon Dioxide Levels May Predict Covid Risk In Your Immediate Surroundings

I haven't been on a subway that crowded. It does look like the levels are better on more normal trains from their chart. 

[Not_a_Number]

8 minutes ago, KSera said:

It sounds like you’ve been lucky then. Public transit is another area shown to have high CO2 levels:

“We recently measured the CO2 levels of various locations on a typical day in New York City. CO2 levels varied by location and density of people, ranging from 458 ppm in outdoor spaces to 2366 ppm on a very crowded subway. ”

Carbon Dioxide Levels May Predict Covid Risk In Your Immediate Surroundings

That's interesting, though. I wonder how buses are? Any data for that? 

[KSera]

Just now, Not_a_Number said:

That's interesting, though. I wonder how buses are? Any data for that? 

I‘m sure people have taken readings. I haven’t been on a bus since the pandemic started, so haven’t been able to take a reading. Even our car with just two people in it builds up CO2. Opening the windows confounds things in a car because CO2 readings elevate from combustion engines nearby. We have to be away from other cars for us to get a relevant reading with windows down (our car is electric, so not contributing CO2).

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, KSera said:

I‘m sure people have taken readings. I haven’t been on a bus since the pandemic started, so haven’t been able to take a reading. Even our car with just two people in it builds up CO2. Opening the windows confounds things in a car because CO2 readings elevate from combustion engines nearby. We have to be away from other cars for us to get a relevant reading with windows down (our car is electric, so not contributing CO2).

A car is a much smaller space, though. I should look for bus readings. 

[KSera]

 

 

 

 

[Not_a_Number]

5 minutes ago, KSera said:

 

 

 

 

Thanks. 

Some of those aren't applicable to city bus use. Those stop and have doors open. 

The last 2 seem more useful than the first. 

[Not_a_Number]

I wonder if there really is a serious threshold effect. How long does one have to be surrounded by what density of virus to get sick? Obviously, we've all come in contact with COVID at some point. 

[KSera]

1 minute ago, Not_a_Number said:

Thanks. 

Some of those aren't applicable to city bus use. Those stop and have doors open. 

The last 2 seem more useful than the first. 

The whole last thread is a good read. He’s an aerosol scientist. 

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, KSera said:

The whole last thread is a good read. He’s an aerosol scientist. 

I'll take a look, thanks. 

[wathe]

My kid's school bus peaked at 1583ppm the first week of school.

About 20 kids on a full sized bus - so not at all crowded.

37 min ride, 9 stops, windows cracked. 

I haven't measure d again since the weather has turned colder.  I think I will check again now that the weather's colder and the windows are likely closed.  I think it will be significantly worse.

[KSera]

1 hour ago, Not_a_Number said:

Thanks. 

Some of those aren't applicable to city bus use. Those stop and have doors open. 

The last 2 seem more useful than the first. 

This is relevant to that situation:

 

 

 

 

[Not_a_Number]

3 minutes ago, KSera said:

This is relevant to that situation:

 

 

 

 

I find measurements much more useful that assertions. I’m taking them under advisement.

[KSera]

13 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

I find measurements much more useful that assertions. I’m taking them under advisement.

Yeah. His assertions are based on his measurements. He’s worked on the studies and taken the measurements. The graphs show that the levels drop down when the doors are opened and then quickly build up again during the time they’re closed and then drop again, etc. There are people who have been looking at and measuring this stuff for a long time now, and others of us who have been following along with interest.

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, KSera said:

Yeah. His assertions are based on his measurements. He’s worked on the studies and taken the measurements. The graphs show that the levels drop down when the doors are opened and then quickly build up again during the time they’re closed and then drop again, etc. There are people who have been looking at and measuring this stuff for a long time now, and others of us who have been following along with interest.

🤷‍♀️ I don’t have anything to add. I don’t care about assertions, only measurements.

[KSera]

2 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

🤷‍♀️ I don’t have anything to add. I don’t care about assertions, only measurements.

Okay, that doesn’t make a lot of sense to me when the assertions are saying what the measurement said, but in any case, you have no expertise in this area at all so why would you find your conclusions based on the measurements to be more valid than theirs? From this thread, it sounds like it’s a brand new idea to you to even know that ventilation is this important in avoiding Covid and that CO2 measurements can be used as a proxy for exhaled air and thus Covid. You can go look up their actual studies if you need to see the data, I just don’t know how the raw data helps you when this is all brand new information for you. Also not sure why you would not believe that that’s the way CO2 build up works. Makes  sense to anyone who’s been taking readings and paying attention.

 

[Not_a_Number]

1 minute ago, KSera said:

Okay, that doesn’t make a lot of sense to me when the assertions are saying what the measurement said, but in any case, you have no expertise in this area at all so why would you find your conclusions based on the measurements to be more valid than theirs? From this thread, it sounds like it’s a brand new idea to you to even know that ventilation is this important in avoiding Covid and that CO2 measurements can be used as a proxy for exhaled air and thus Covid. You can go look up their actual studies if you need to see the data, I just don’t know how the raw data helps you when this is all brand new information for you. Also not sure why you would not believe that that’s the way CO2 build up works. Makes  sense to anyone who’s been taking readings and paying attention.

We don't need to go into WHY. I've explained why hundreds of times and it doesn't seem to have made an impression. Feel free to think I'm deluded to trust myself. But as it happens, I care about measurements, not assertions. 

[wathe]

3 minutes ago, Not_a_Number said:

🤷‍♀️ I don’t have anything to add. I don’t care about assertions, only measurements.

I haven't taking CO2 measurements on any public transit other than planes and taxis ( and a coach bus and a school bus).   None of them were very good, for the record.

There are some public transit data posted on the Raven app.

Portable CO2 monitors are quite accessible though, even some libraries are loaning them now - those are measurements you could take yourself if you really wanted to.  Vitalight is inexpensive, and mine is quite accurate after manual calibration (+/- 30 ppm of my Aranet)

 

[Not_a_Number]

3 minutes ago, KSera said:

Also not sure why you would not believe that that’s the way CO2 build up works.

Nope, I didn't say that. I'm sure his graph says about what he reports. But I care much more about the graph than his statement that "it's not enough." 

[Not_a_Number]

Just now, wathe said:

Portable CO2 monitors are quite accessible though, even some libraries are loaning them now - those are measurements you could take yourself if you really wanted to.  Vitalight is inexpensive, and mine is quite accurate after manual calibration (+/- 30 ppm of my Aranet)

Yes, thank you very very much for posting the ones you use upthread. I've been pondering whether I want to get one or not. Honestly, I haven't decided where we we want to go with our COVID strategies now that we've had it. On the one hand, I've been enjoying not worrying about it. On the other hand... well, I just haven't thought about it much. 

I need to talk all his over with DH, too. Decisions, decisions. 

I really, really appreciate knowing the numbers. Thank you so much for that other thread and the pointers to the data.