|
Post by Aufan on Aug 10, 2020 22:41:02 GMT
AuFan, Those infrared demonstrations of air born droplets traveling among people (with and without masks) is pretty convincing to me. So most of us are listening and not contending consensus science. So please don't leave. Bevo is the only one contending. He might be the guy that you alluded to earlier citing a source ( from Fox News or similar ) with evidence that the Earth is flat . Talk some Auburn football too.
Doesn't look like there will be much football to talk about this year.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Aug 11, 2020 1:25:30 GMT
Oh, I feel MUCH safer now. On NBC Evening News, Lester Holt read something saying, "there can be NO DOUBT that masks are effective and are saving many lives".... as if.
And then, they proceeded to air a study aimed at seeing what kinds of masks are best. In it, they showed that masks with exhale valves (I see many of them) are completely useless, and bandana-type cloth mask actually produce MORE small-sized respiratory droplets.. ie: they are WORSE than nothing.
And, we wonder why studies of generalized masking don't show any significant benefit?
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Aug 11, 2020 13:11:17 GMT
The thought of executing a double blind study on masks did make me laugh. Placebo masks I guess? It actually is a little funny, I must admit. Maybe, they would get better results doing a wide-spread test among the blind? They might get better adherence, since blind people won't be able to see how silly and frightened people look wearing masks? You know, when you think about it, it's not all that surprising that mask wearing doesn't have a huge impact in the global population. I mean, the primary benefit is to keep virus-shedding infected people from spreading the disease. At any given time, how many people in this general public is this? 1% 2%? By default, the masks are doing virtually no good for 95-98% of the people wearing them. And, when to do infected people actually shed virus? It's not certain I suppose, but most studies now show it's a few days before symptom on-set (with a max shedding 2-3 days prior) to 10 days after initial on-set. If MOST people stay home, or at least wear their mask during and after symptoms, then probably 80% of the spreading opportunity is contained. That would be enough to slow the spread. Anything above that is easily lost "in the noise" of data collection. I think, what is needed in the way of policy is a little common sense. Rather than having a wide-spread, mandated policy of wearing any kind of masks everywhere, we should require them in areas where more than 50 people (to be calibrated locally depending on local incidence rates) will be congregated together, in-doors. We shouldn't allow people to wear ANY kind of mask. In fact, they shouldn't be allowed to wear their own mask. (Who knows how many times they've already worn it?) The business, or group that is holding the gathering should be required to hand out medical-type blue masks as people enter, and collect (for disposal) when they leave. And, we should stress again to everyone the importance of STAYING HOME anytime you have symptoms such as a fever, chill, or cough, etc. We'd get >80% of the benefit for <20% of the efforts. And, compliance would likely be higher. I think that would work better than the crap I heard yesterday, when some Mayor was saying they were going to start charging people who aren't wearing a mask with "Attempted Murder". That's just absurd. But, it's indicative of the unreasonable level of fear we've created in this crisis.
|
|
|
Post by Aufan on Aug 11, 2020 19:39:27 GMT
A very reasonable approach, Bevo. I think dismissing masks entirely is a mistake, and as you say, not all masks are made equal.
Most recommendations I hear are to stay home, but if you must go into public near others, wear a mask. There are plenty of resources as to which masks work best and how to use them. Better leadership would have been key during all of this. Complete dismissal of the threat wasn’t a good starting point.
People are ignoring even the advice we know stops the spread, stay at home (though we can’t be certain this works, as we are relying on the mechanism of spread rather than a double blind study of staying at home), so it’s not like we really had a chance.
The armchair scientists and doctors are the most frustrating. Sure the experts can and will be wrong sometimes, but I believe we should rely on those experts to guide us through such an unknown time like this. The fact that such a simple request is being protested makes me sad for those people and the country as a whole.
Who knows, maybe looking back, we’ll say the experts got it all wrong and we shouldn’t have worn masks. But for now I’ll rely on them, rather than playing armchair pandemic expert at my desk googling scientific studies, or worse, believing Jimmy-Joe down the street that says this virus is a hoax designed to help implement communism in America.
|
|
|
Post by Hero on Aug 11, 2020 20:35:29 GMT
The thought of executing a double blind study on masks did make me laugh. Placebo masks I guess? And, we should stress again to everyone the importance of STAYING HOME anytime you have symptoms such as a fever, chill, or cough, etc. We'd get >80% of the benefit for <20% of the efforts. And, compliance would likely be higher. I think that would work better than the crap I heard yesterday, when some Mayor was saying they were going to start charging people who aren't wearing a mask with "Attempted Murder". That's just absurd. But, it's indicative of the unreasonable level of fear we've created in this crisis. I do think reasonable precautions are pretty easy to follow and seem to make us all feel better in a trying time. Times like these call for Common Sense but I am afraid that is where our plan will struggle.
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Aug 11, 2020 20:42:14 GMT
Complete dismissal of the threat wasn’t a good starting point. "...we shouldn’t have worn masks. " I'm not sure who you think completely dismissed the threat? As a nation, we took unprecedented, extraordinary measures to basically shut down our entire system of commerce. We took these actions at pretty much the same time frame, in terms of observed impact, as other countries. You don't do things like that when you're completely dismissing the threat. As for the future, I don't think we'll ever say we "shouldn't have worn masks". It's not really a matter of them ever being particularly harmful. It's more a matter of them not providing any real benefit. We might should have been smarter (Still should be) about how we use them. Americans (at least, many of them) are not sheep who jump over a fence when told. They like to know why. And, see some real information that shows jumping was worth it. I think that's a good quality that is worth protecting, even it it limits how quickly we can respond to this kind of threat. Meanwhile, I'll keep trying to figure out a way to do a "blind" study? It might be possible at Texas A&M!
|
|
|
Post by Aufan on Aug 11, 2020 22:07:23 GMT
The threat was dismissed early on. Trump said we had it locked down. But then he was criticized as being xenophobic for banning travel from China. Fauci said the risk was minuscule. CNN compared it to the flu. Trump had used rhetoric like ‘hoax’ but not directed at the virus, but that phrasing has stuck with some.
There are dozens of examples, not picking a side or placing blame. I think it is fair to say was dismissed early on. That alone made getting everyone on board with precautions very difficult.
|
|
|
Post by EvilVodka on Aug 11, 2020 22:28:58 GMT
The threat was dismissed early on. Trump said we had it locked down. But then he was criticized as being xenophobic for banning travel from China. Fauci said the risk was minuscule. CNN compared it to the flu. Trump had used rhetoric like ‘hoax’ but not directed at the virus, but that phrasing has stuck with some. There are dozens of examples, not picking a side or placing blame. I think it is fair to say was dismissed early on. That alone made getting everyone on board with precautions very difficult. What is the threat level of COVID? Define threat.
Texas has a 1.76 % fatality rate.
How dangerous is COVID? That cannot accurately be answered now, because mainstream media has completely politicized it
There is no science behind it anymore
The truth about this virus is irredeemable
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Aug 11, 2020 22:31:30 GMT
The threat was dismissed early on. Trump said we had it locked down. But then he was criticized as being xenophobic for banning travel from China. Fauci said the risk was minuscule. CNN compared it to the flu. Trump had used rhetoric like ‘hoax’ but not directed at the virus, but that phrasing has stuck with some. There are dozens of examples, not picking a side or placing blame. I think it is fair to say was dismissed early on. That alone made getting everyone on board with precautions very difficult. That’s a fair summary. But, I would point out: as late as Feb, the WHO was saying they couldn’t confirm human-to- human spread. I think the early reactions were partly because people believed China. That was a huge mistake. Once the truth started becoming apparent in Europe, the responses picked up.
|
|
|
Post by Aufan on Aug 11, 2020 22:59:22 GMT
The threat was dismissed early on. Trump said we had it locked down. But then he was criticized as being xenophobic for banning travel from China. Fauci said the risk was minuscule. CNN compared it to the flu. Trump had used rhetoric like ‘hoax’ but not directed at the virus, but that phrasing has stuck with some. There are dozens of examples, not picking a side or placing blame. I think it is fair to say was dismissed early on. That alone made getting everyone on board with precautions very difficult. What is the threat level of COVID? Define threat.
Texas has a 1.76 % fatality rate.
How dangerous is COVID? That cannot accurately be answered now, because mainstream media has completely politicized it
There is no science behind it anymore
The truth about this virus is irredeemable
That is a great question. I don’t really know. Surely you agree that it is a threat? I for one would not volunteer to catch a new virus, even if it was guaranteed not to kill me. We don’t even know the long term effects, if any, of contracting this virus.
|
|
|
Post by Aufan on Aug 12, 2020 0:56:38 GMT
The threat was dismissed early on. Trump said we had it locked down. But then he was criticized as being xenophobic for banning travel from China. Fauci said the risk was minuscule. CNN compared it to the flu. Trump had used rhetoric like ‘hoax’ but not directed at the virus, but that phrasing has stuck with some. There are dozens of examples, not picking a side or placing blame. I think it is fair to say was dismissed early on. That alone made getting everyone on board with precautions very difficult. What is the threat level of COVID? Define threat.
Texas has a 1.76 % fatality rate.
How dangerous is COVID? That cannot accurately be answered now, because mainstream media has completely politicized it
There is no science behind it anymore
The truth about this virus is irredeemable
I will ponder with you about the role of main stream media, especially the cable news. I don't have cable, and can't fathom why anyone would keep a subscription when sports were cancelled/postponed back in the spring. I can't speak specifically aside from some clips I've seen, but I would imagine the coverage is a bunch of hot garbage.
Maybe when the dinosaurs who consume their news through cable TV die off, cable news will die off with it.
|
|
|
Post by EvilVodka on Aug 12, 2020 1:24:24 GMT
What is the threat level of COVID? Define threat.
Texas has a 1.76 % fatality rate.
How dangerous is COVID? That cannot accurately be answered now, because mainstream media has completely politicized it
There is no science behind it anymore
The truth about this virus is irredeemable
That is a great question. I don’t really know. Surely you agree that it is a threat? I for one would not volunteer to catch a new virus, even if it was guaranteed not to kill me. We don’t even know the long term effects, if any, of contracting this virus. I think the risk is completely overblown. My wife and I may have had it in February coworkers at my wife's job have gotten it and are fine now, back at work the focus should be on high-risk groups, not the entire population. Masks and social distancing are garbage shutting down the economy was completely assinine I also recognize the possibility that the virus may just have to work its way through the population China should also be condemned for crimes against humanity
|
|
|
Post by EvilVodka on Aug 12, 2020 1:27:31 GMT
What is the threat level of COVID? Define threat.
Texas has a 1.76 % fatality rate.
How dangerous is COVID? That cannot accurately be answered now, because mainstream media has completely politicized it
There is no science behind it anymore
The truth about this virus is irredeemable
I will ponder with you about the role of main stream media, especially the cable news. I don't have cable, and can't fathom why anyone would keep a subscription when sports were cancelled/postponed back in the spring. I can't speak specifically aside from some clips I've seen, but I would imagine the coverage is a bunch of hot garbage.
Maybe when the dinosaurs who consume their news through cable TV die off, cable news will die off with it.
Mainstream media is the driving force behind the feartopia. The way the virus is being handled and perceived is through the most biased information sources
|
|
|
Post by Aufan on Aug 12, 2020 1:40:31 GMT
That is a great question. I don’t really know. Surely you agree that it is a threat? I for one would not volunteer to catch a new virus, even if it was guaranteed not to kill me. We don’t even know the long term effects, if any, of contracting this virus. I think the risk is completely overblown. My wife and I may have had it in February coworkers at my wife's job have gotten it and are fine now, back at work the focus should be on high-risk groups, not the entire population. Masks and social distancing are garbage shutting down the economy was completely assinine I also recognize the possibility that the virus may just have to work its way through the population China should also be condemned for crimes against humanity Crimes against humanity? For such a non-threatening virus? I mean your wife's coworkers were fine, so why such harsh treatment of China?
|
|
|
Post by bluehen on Aug 12, 2020 13:55:44 GMT
AuFan, Those infrared demonstrations of air born droplets traveling among people (with and without masks) is pretty convincing to me. So most of us are listening and not contending consensus science. So please don't leave. Bevo is the only one contending. He might be the guy that you alluded to earlier citing a source ( from Fox News or similar ) with evidence that the Earth is flat . Talk some Auburn football too.
Doesn't look like there will be much football to talk about this year.
CF history can be fun...but I'll miss your "playing against air" and " the SEC national championship game" quips. ....or Auburn's terrific running back , James Brooks, who was eligible to play 4 years yet was discovered to be illiterate at a later child support court case...good stuff like that
|
|