gurn

I’ve worn N95’s doing dirty construction work and I would stop going to church if it were required to wear one there. I’ve known my 2 ply cloth mask isn’t very effective, but at least I’m willing to wear it. I’m vaccinated and socially distance, but realize it is likely just a matter of time before I catch Covid. I suspect an all or nothing approach to masks wouldn’t be received well by many.

Fauci Mar 8th 60 minutes “There’s no reason to be walking around with a mask. When you’re in the middle of an outbreak, wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better and it might even block a droplet, but it’s not providing the perfect protection that people think that it is. And, often, there are unintended consequences — people keep fiddling with the mask and they keep touching their face.” While not exactly using the words "they don't work" it seems that it could be interpreted that way.

I was referring to the nurse Carla Twitter post of The Nehor. I missed the quote button. I couldn’t find a legitimate source for the story.

Since this didn’t come from a credible news source, we don’t know if the patient even exists.

Thank you for your reply.

Pogi, Please address why this study said masks are ineffective against the flu. I don't see how they can be effective against COVID then. "In pooled analysis, we found no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks" Nonpharmaceutical Measures for Pandemic Influenza in Nonhealthcare Settings—Personal Protective and Environmental Measures - Volume 26, Number 5—May 2020 - Emerging Infectious Diseases journal - CDC

If masks are ineffective against the flu, why are they effective against COVID? Nonpharmaceutical Measures for Pandemic Influenza in Nonhealthcare Settings—Personal Protective and Environmental Measures - Volume 26, Number 5—May 2020 - Emerging Infectious Diseases journal - CDC "In pooled analysis, we found no significant reduction in influenza transmission with the use of face masks"

I received the email as well. I'm fine with following the "wise and thoughtful recommendations" of government leaders like Rand Paul. I'm glad the 1st Presidency endorsed him. 😀

https://www.google.com/amp/s/time.com/5846383/coronavirus-small-landlords/%3famp=true I just skimmed some of this article, but it seemed to address the issue and the problem for landlords.

Are they going to give a child a new N95 mask each day? I thought you could only use these a few times and sterilize with UV light after each day. Even then they are only good for a few days. At least a cloth masked can be washed after each use.

Call me cynical, but I think Mitt’s position was more personal than principled.

I'm no lawyer, but it looks like it might be illegal with civil and criminal penalties. https://www.fec.gov/updates/contributions-in-the-name-of-another-are-strictly-prohibited/

I'm not a subscriber, but I must not have used my one free article or something. I'll copy some text below, but it's kind of a disservice to complicated situation. Your Coronavirus Test Is Positive. Maybe It Shouldn’t Be. The usual diagnostic tests may simply be too sensitive and too slow to contain the spread of the virus. The standard tests are diagnosing huge numbers of people who may be carrying relatively insignificant amounts of the virus. Most of these people are not likely to be contagious, and identifying them may contribute to bottlenecks that prevent those who are contagious from being found in time. But researchers say the solution is not to test less, or to skip testing people without symptoms, as recently suggested by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Most tests set the limit at 40, a few at 37. This means that you are positive for the coronavirus if the test process required up to 40 cycles, or 37, to detect the virus. Tests with thresholds so high may detect not just live virus but also genetic fragments, leftovers from infection that pose no particular risk — akin to finding a hair in a room long after a person has left, Dr. Mina said. Any test with a cycle threshold above 35 is too sensitive, agreed Juliet Morrison, a virologist at the University of California, Riverside. “I’m shocked that people would think that 40 could represent a positive,” she said. Instead, new data underscore the need for more widespread use of rapid tests, even if they are less sensitive. “We’ve been using one type of data for everything, and that is just plus or minus — that’s all,” Dr. Mina said. “We’re using that for clinical diagnostics, for public health, for policy decision-making.” But yes-no isn’t good enough, he added. It’s the amount of virus that should dictate the infected patient’s next steps. “It’s really irresponsible, I think, to forgo the recognition that this is a quantitative issue,” Dr. Mina said. Highly sensitive PCR tests seemed like the best option for tracking the coronavirus at the start of the pandemic. But for the outbreaks raging now, he said, what’s needed are coronavirus tests that are fast, cheap and abundant enough to frequently test everyone who needs it — even if the tests are less sensitive. “It might not catch every last one of the transmitting people, but it sure will catch the most transmissible people, including the superspreaders,” Dr. Mina said. “That alone would drive epidemics practically to zero.”

I found this article interesting and informative in discussing the benefits and problems with using the PCR test. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/29/health/coronavirus-testing.html

It's been the politicization of this virus from the beginning that has been a disservice to the nation and your comments about trump just serve to further that politicization. Let's just stick to the little we know about beating this virus and we'll be better off.