|
|
Post by jasmine on Jun 28, 2020 23:29:45 GMT
Obviously, as a precaution. And that’s fine. But there’s no need to make it required. Precaution for whom? Both for yourself and the people you are around with. |
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,112
|
Post by Odysseus on Jun 28, 2020 23:35:44 GMT
Both for yourself and the people you are around with.
Bzzzt.
Go to Jail. Do not collect $200.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lomelis on Jun 29, 2020 0:17:53 GMT
I'm curious if a mask or some sort of facial covering can prevent infected droplets from getting out wouldn't it also help prevent infected droplets from getting in?
|
|
|
|
Post by jasmine on Jun 29, 2020 0:27:25 GMT
I think this is very political from the lobbies side of things. If Trump mandated the wearing masks, the lobbies here would be screaming bloody hell.
|
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,112
|
Post by Odysseus on Jun 29, 2020 0:37:16 GMT
I'm curious if a mask or some sort of facial covering can prevent infected droplets from getting out wouldn't it also help prevent infected droplets from getting in? The public health pros and docs say it's different.
Probably because, I surmise, once a droplet is emitted from a mouth or nose, it's fairly large, and can be caught by a fabric or paper mask. Without a mask, it's ejected into the surrounding air, where it can become an aerosol with much smaller sizes, even individual virus particles, and these are not blocked by a fabric or plain paper mask.
Thus a face mask (non-N95) protects others, mostly, not the wearer, mostly. And even N95 masks may have a flapper valve that does not filter out exhaled droplets sufficiently. The flap closes on inhaling, so it still protects the wearer.
I think there are some N95 masks that address this shortcoming with a small fiber filter that fits into the exhale port. And it probably would not be difficult for the wearer to put some cotton in there to catch droplets.
|
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,112
|
Post by Odysseus on Jun 29, 2020 0:37:53 GMT
I think this is very political from the lobbies side of things. If Trump mandated the wearing masks, the lobbies here would be screaming bloody hell.
Probably not. You're just being contrary for the sake of being contrary.
|
|
|
|
Post by jasmine on Jun 29, 2020 0:48:11 GMT
I think this is very political from the lobbies side of things. If Trump mandated the wearing masks, the lobbies here would be screaming bloody hell.
Probably not. You're just being contrary for the sake of being contrary.
Nope. You would be screaming Trump is a tyrant and all sorts of things. |
|
|
|
Post by Lomelis on Jun 29, 2020 0:50:48 GMT
I'm curious if a mask or some sort of facial covering can prevent infected droplets from getting out wouldn't it also help prevent infected droplets from getting in? The public health pros and docs say it's different.
Probably because, I surmise, once a droplet is emitted from a mouth or nose, it's fairly large, and can be caught by a fabric or paper mask. Without a mask, it's ejected into the surrounding air, where it can become an aerosol with much smaller sizes, even individual virus particles, and these are not blocked by a fabric or plain paper mask.
Thus a face mask (non-N95) protects others, mostly, not the wearer, mostly. And even N95 masks may have a flapper valve that does not filter out exhaled droplets sufficiently. The flap closes on inhaling, so it still protects the wearer.
I think there are some N95 masks that address this shortcoming with a small fiber filter that fits into the exhale port. And it probably would not be difficult for the wearer to put some cotton in there to catch droplets.
A sneeze can emit large droplets that can stay intact for several feet. I would guess that the viral load is much more concentrated in a droplet prior to it dissipating hence the suggestion that while not 100% effective at preventing the virus from leaving the covering it does help prevent it from going a long distance. It seems that it could also help prevent, maybe not as much, on the receiving end as well. If someone sneezes without covering their face and those projectile virus loaded water droplets are heading for your face the cloth might prevent them from landing in your nose and mouth. It hits the covering so instead of getting a concentrated droplet of virus straight into your mouth it's a less dense aerosol. While maybe not a 100% it does seem like it would provide some sort of protection especially if someone is nearby and coughing and sneezing in your direction. |
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,112
|
Post by Odysseus on Jun 29, 2020 0:55:49 GMT
Probably not. You're just being contrary for the sake of being contrary.
Nope. You would be screaming Trump is a tyrant and all sorts of things. As usual, Jasmine is dead wrong. No big surprise there, she/he's wrong 95% of the time.
I'd praise Trump if he mandated wearing masks in public in order to flatten the curve for as long as the public health pros say it's necessary. But he won't even wear one in public himself.
However he's already shown himself to be a lying asshole proto-tyrant who needs to be kicked out of the White House.
|
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Jun 29, 2020 3:33:36 GMT
I'm always amazed when people say things like this. Or share things like this (constantly) on facebook.
Do you think your opinion is so important to everyone that this means anything? "I was going to hold to my own views and opinions but then I realized .. Freon. The might Freon ... said I look like a fool in his eyes. Now I'm rethinking my whole worldview."
Or is it that you don't realize the people you're talking to have thought you were a fool for a very long time? Years. Decades even.
Queshank
Is this a game to you? Are you truly not able to see the seriousness of this situation?
125,000 deaths in the US. That SMALL number is due to social distancing and mask wearing. When states opened up, and people decided to forego these precautions, it resulted in increased daily numbers. Nationally.
You seem to look down on those who use education and science to view the world. And we are left with your ignorance, and the decisions you make as a result of that ignorance.
That is all I am pointing out. Your reaction to this accusation is just further confirmation of its veracity.
Freon
|
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Jun 29, 2020 3:42:41 GMT
Not that long ago "science" was saying that mask wearing by the general public should be avoided despite knowing all about asymptomatic spread and the ability of any type of facial covering to help prevent infected droplets from reaching others. What gives?
Defending science would be like defending the air you breathe. Science is simply understanding the world around you.
The opposite of science is choosing to stay ignorant. Is that what you are defending?
Freon
|
|
|
|
Post by Lomelis on Jun 29, 2020 4:59:07 GMT
Not that long ago "science" was saying that mask wearing by the general public should be avoided despite knowing all about asymptomatic spread and the ability of any type of facial covering to help prevent infected droplets from reaching others. What gives?
Defending science would be like defending the air you breathe. Science is simply understanding the world around you.
The opposite of science is choosing to stay ignorant. Is that what you are defending?
Freon
I'm saying that there was nothing wrong with the science at all. The problem came with people interpreting it poorly and jumping to conclusions and claiming that's what science was saying. Unfortunately that happened to be top scientists (politicians) representing large organizations who made themselves look like shit and backed themselves into a corner where they can't admit they were wrong. |
|
|
|
Post by Lomelis on Jun 29, 2020 5:02:52 GMT
I'm always amazed when people say things like this. Or share things like this (constantly) on facebook.
Do you think your opinion is so important to everyone that this means anything? "I was going to hold to my own views and opinions but then I realized .. Freon. The might Freon ... said I look like a fool in his eyes. Now I'm rethinking my whole worldview."
Or is it that you don't realize the people you're talking to have thought you were a fool for a very long time? Years. Decades even.
Queshank
Is this a game to you? Are you truly not able to see the seriousness of this situation?
125,000 deaths in the US. That SMALL number is due to social distancing and mask wearing. When states opened up, and people decided to forego these precautions, it resulted in increased daily numbers. Nationally.
You seem to look down on those who use education and science to view the world. And we are left with your ignorance, and the decisions you make as a result of that ignorance.
That is all I am pointing out. Your reaction to this accusation is just further confirmation of its veracity.
Freon
No. It's not. You've been fed a bunch of horseshit and are incapable of looking at the data reasonably and logically. Fear has taken hold and you can't think straight. Your fear has made us worse off than ever before. |
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,112
|
Post by Odysseus on Jun 29, 2020 7:16:18 GMT
Not that long ago "science" was saying that mask wearing by the general public should be avoided despite knowing all about asymptomatic spread and the ability of any type of facial covering to help prevent infected droplets from reaching others. What gives?
Defending science would be like defending the air you breathe. Science is simply understanding the world around you.
The opposite of science is choosing to stay ignorant. Is that what you are defending?
Freon
Don't mind Smelly. He not got a clue.
|
|
|
|
Post by rabbitreborn on Jun 29, 2020 8:28:55 GMT
I'm always amazed when people say things like this. Or share things like this (constantly) on facebook.
Do you think your opinion is so important to everyone that this means anything? "I was going to hold to my own views and opinions but then I realized .. Freon. The might Freon ... said I look like a fool in his eyes. Now I'm rethinking my whole worldview."
Or is it that you don't realize the people you're talking to have thought you were a fool for a very long time? Years. Decades even.
Queshank
Is this a game to you? Are you truly not able to see the seriousness of this situation?
125,000 deaths in the US. That SMALL number is due to social distancing and mask wearing. When states opened up, and people decided to forego these precautions, it resulted in increased daily numbers. Nationally.
You’re talking about deaths. 125,000. So what numbers started going up “when states opened up”? Deaths? Don’t talk about science anymore if you can’t read basic data. Deaths have not been increasing. They peaked in April. |
|
Odysseus
Legend
Trump = Disaster
Posts: 41,112
|
Post by Odysseus on Jun 29, 2020 10:11:50 GMT
Is this a game to you? Are you truly not able to see the seriousness of this situation?
125,000 deaths in the US. That SMALL number is due to social distancing and mask wearing. When states opened up, and people decided to forego these precautions, it resulted in increased daily numbers. Nationally.
You’re talking about deaths. 125,000. So what numbers started going up “when states opened up”? Deaths? Don’t talk about science anymore if you can’t read basic data. Deaths have not been increasing. They peaked in April. Patience, little jack rabbit.
They will.
You see, this is how it goes: more people get infected. More people infect other people. The more people infected, the more people come down with serious symptoms. Then the more people move into ICU's, which all too often with Covid-19 means they never get out of the ICU's alive.
Patience, little jack rabbit.
Trump's mismanagement will bring you the death you are looking for.
|
|
|
|
Post by rabbitreborn on Jun 29, 2020 10:36:13 GMT
You’re talking about deaths. 125,000. So what numbers started going up “when states opened up”? Deaths? Don’t talk about science anymore if you can’t read basic data. Deaths have not been increasing. They peaked in April. Patience, little jack rabbit.
They will.
You see, this is how it goes: more people get infected. More people infect other people. The more people infected, the more people come down with serious symptoms. Then the more people move into ICU's, which all too often with Covid-19 means they never get out of the ICU's alive.
Patience, little jack rabbit.
Trump's mismanagement will bring you the death you are looking for.
“Patience”, he said, licking his lips at the prospect. “There will be so many deaths. Trust me. I know.” |
|
|
|
Post by MojoJojo on Jun 29, 2020 13:19:27 GMT
Here's the "second wave" everyone's been speculating. The spread has renewed, hospitalizations are going up, even LIBERATED! states are questioning their haste. The next big trend will be deaths.
Locking down business is no longer on the agenda. We're at the point now where any lockdowns will be targeted and not wholesale. Bars and clubs, restaurants and other high density, shared-air commercial environments.
Sending the kids back to school this Fall will trigger the third wave.
|
|
|
|
Post by freonbale on Jun 29, 2020 13:21:33 GMT
No. It's not. You've been fed a bunch of horseshit and are incapable of looking at the data reasonably and logically. Fear has taken hold and you can't think straight. Your fear has made us worse off than ever before. Fear? That is a baseless claim that YOU have been fed. Considering my age and demographics, I likely have already contracted COVID-19, or if I did contract it, would likely have little difficulty in defeating it. So my mask wearing has ZERO to do with my own safety. I wear a mask because I am a likely vector, a carrier of a disease that is highly virulent to certain demographics of a society I share with others. If there is even a tiny chance of my preventing harm to others by wearing a mask, I will wear it happily. You, on the other hand, seem to care only about your personal situation, and not about your fellow citizens. If that is not indicative of a larger problem, I can think of nothing that is. Freon |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 29, 2020 14:16:18 GMT
Sending the kids back to school this Fall will trigger the third wave.
Speaking of sending kids back to school this fall, what does the American Academy of Pediatrics .... you know ... "experts" ... have to say about keeping kids out of school?
Aside from the fact that keeping the kids out of school is doing more harm ....
Man I wish the pro lockdown crowd would start paying attention to "the science," don't you? How long have we known kids were fine from this? Was it January or February we knew that? I forget.
With the above principles in mind, the AAP strongly advocates that all policy considerations for the coming school year should start with a goal of having students physically present in school. The importance of inperson learning is well-documented, and there is already evidence of the negative impacts on children because of school closures in the spring of 2020. Lengthy time away from school and associated interruption of supportive services often results in social isolation, making it difficult for schools to identify and address important learning deficits as well as child and adolescent physical or sexual abuse, substance use, depression, and suicidal ideation. This, in turn, places children and adolescents at considerable risk of morbidity and, in some cases, mortality. Beyond the educational impact and social impact of school closures, there has been substantial impact on food security and physical activity for children and families.
Policy makers must also consider the mounting evidence regarding COVID-19 in children and adolescents, including the role they may play in transmission of the infection. SARS-CoV-2 appears to behave differently in children and adolescents than other common respiratory viruses, such as influenza, on which much of the current guidance regarding school closures is based. Although children and adolescents play a major role in amplifying influenza outbreaks, to date, this does not appear to be the case with SARS-CoV-2. Although many questions remain, the preponderance of evidence indicates that children and adolescents are less likely to be symptomatic and less likely to have severe disease resulting from SARS-CoV-2 infection. In addition, children may be less likely to become infected and to spread infection. Policies to mitigate the spread of COVID-19 within schools must be balanced with the known harms to children, adolescents, families, and the community by keeping children at home.
Queshank
|
|
