We're Headed Back to Church! Sorta.

[smac97]

Our stake in Provo is resuming church services beginning June 7, with each ward attending every other week.  We will only be having 45 minute Sacrament Meetings, with less than 100 people in attendance.

Thanks,

-Smac

[Tacenda]

My RS president and her counselor dropped off flowers to me, and a few others on my street and let me know our ward is going once a month for sacrament meeting only. I happened to mention that I thought a lot of people are enjoying home church so much. I had just read Wendy Nelson's post on FB showing a photo of Pres Nelson vacuuming, he loves that, and preparing for the Sacrament at home, and then them at the piano together. My RS president wasn't too happy that I mentioned how many people love church at home. She's new and I don't know her well, but she didn't seem pleased that I said that. But it's right there in front of us, if you read all of the comments to Wendy's post. It will be interesting to see how many want to go back. These comments are not from disbelieving members.

 

[Scott Lloyd]

3 hours ago, Ragerunner said:

What region or country is this in?

Salt Lake Valley, southern end. 

[alter idem]

My Stake presidency says they'll be meeting end of June to consider when to start church up again, and then, they'll consider starting in mid July, but will advise high risk to not return at that time.  They may also ask those who are able to have Sacrament in their homes to continue to do that, so others can attend meetings for the sacrament.

[Scott Lloyd]

25 minutes ago, alter idem said:

My Stake presidency says they'll be meeting end of June to consider when to start church up again, and then, they'll consider starting in mid July, but will advise high risk to not return at that time.  They may also ask those who are able to have Sacrament in their homes to continue to do that, so others can attend meetings for the sacrament.

That’s not a bad idea. I would gladly make that sacrifice. 

[The Nehor]

Restarting church on 16th is the plan. No more than 50. No singing, just piano music for prelude and sacrament hymn. Masks recommended. Masks required for Priesthood blessing and passing sacrament. Sacrament meeting can be broadcast. Still urge the most vulnerable not to attend and no pressure given to anyone who chooses not to attend out of safety concerns. Plan is one speaker after sacrament. 

Still working out details. My suggestion will be to only broadcast speaker and not sacrament. We also need to figure out how to structure so only 50 attend and how to rotate people. Do we put the elderly on the rotation or just encourage them to stay home? Do we invite and get RSVPs to get as many as possible if anyone refuses or just divide up the ward?

Opening is still tentative. New cases are plateaued in our county but are not falling. It could go either way over the next few weeks.

On a personal note I am grateful that my predictions were wrong about the expected speed of spread but I am curious as to why. It is possible it is more vulnerable to heat than projected from warmer nations. Possibly some climate difference in North America? That might explain why it is not slowing in Brazil. A lot of offices are still closed or minimally staffed so that may be limiting vectors for virus spread. The antibody test results so far even adjusted for false results do not seem high enough to be slowing the spread this much due to increasing immunity. Maybe I am too pessimistic. Whenever I see a silver lining I look for an incoming cloud. Then again the Spanish Flu abated in its first Spring and then came back with a vengeance in the Fall and the death and case toll were higher than the Spring. The recent protests are also likely to be transmission vectors but how much they aid in spread we will not know for another week or two.

[Scott Lloyd]

1 hour ago, The Nehor said:

Restarting church on 16th is the plan. No more than 50. No singing, just piano music for prelude and sacrament hymn. Masks recommended. Masks required for Priesthood blessing and passing sacrament. Sacrament meeting can be broadcast. Still urge the most vulnerable not to attend and no pressure given to anyone who chooses not to attend out of safety concerns. Plan is one speaker after sacrament. 

Still working out details. My suggestion will be to only broadcast speaker and not sacrament. We also need to figure out how to structure so only 50 attend and how to rotate people. Do we put the elderly on the rotation or just encourage them to stay home? Do we invite and get RSVPs to get as many as possible if anyone refuses or just divide up the ward?

Opening is still tentative. New cases are plateaued in our county but are not falling. It could go either way over the next few weeks.

On a personal note I am grateful that my predictions were wrong about the expected speed of spread but I am curious as to why. It is possible it is more vulnerable to heat than projected from warmer nations. Possibly some climate difference in North America? That might explain why it is not slowing in Brazil. A lot of offices are still closed or minimally staffed so that may be limiting vectors for virus spread. The antibody test results so far even adjusted for false results do not seem high enough to be slowing the spread this much due to increasing immunity. Maybe I am too pessimistic. Whenever I see a silver lining I look for an incoming cloud. Then again the Spanish Flu abated in its first Spring and then came back with a vengeance in the Fall and the death and case toll were higher than the Spring. The recent protests are also likely to be transmission vectors but how much they aid in spread we will not know for another week or two.

What’s this? Are you no longer certain that virtually everyone will get it?   As for reasons why, could it be that much of the predictive modeling was out of whack all along?

[The Nehor]

13 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

What’s this? Are you no longer certain that virtually everyone will get it?   As for reasons why, could it be that much of the predictive modeling was out of whack all along?

No, I was never certain. I still believe and am convinced 75%+ will eventually get it before herd immunity will stall it out but the spread has been slower than I expected and the models I trust more have suggested. I am just not sure why. If it were burning out (this is unlikely due to high contagiousness) then new cases should be slowly dropping and it would not make sense in general. A disease that burns out is very unlikely to become a global pandemic in the first place. We have not had enough exposure for herd immunity to be the cause unless it has saturated much more of the population than we expected AND our antibody tests are much more flawed than we thought.

Much of the predictive modeling was out of whack all along. Remember when we had 15 cases and many were saying this would come to nothing and be easily contained? Remember that yahoo some idiot put in front of a microphone only a few weeks ago saying deaths would fall to zero within a week? There have been no shortages of bad models everywhere and of every kind and no model is going to be perfect. When the data and a model that has been pretty accurate in the past start to not match the question is more "what changed?" rather than to toss it as fundamentally flawed. The virus still seems as contagious as ever. We have whole buildings of employees catching it. I am wondering if the Work from Home approach that is still ongoing in a lot of the country might have had a larger impact than the closure of retail spaces. A good close test for that will be when restaurants go to full occupancy.

To be clear I am not sad that I was wrong and I am not eager to be right. Even if it means I lose the steak dinner bet I have with a friend over who is closer to the final US death count. I can afford the food and do not want anyone to die so I get a free dinner. Ideally the virus dies off quickly. I just don't expect it. If it were getting better numbers would be falling but they are mostly staying at a plateau in the US with some states seeing rises, some seeing falls, and some hopping back and forth. Most studies show it is not the heat and humidity only seems to have a minor impact. I really hope it does not do the Spanish Flu resurgence in the Fall. Over 80% of the deaths in that pandemic hit after most thought it was over.

The increasing protests are another wild card infection vector. As I have said before I am a disaster voyeur and riots count so I have been watching streams and reports late for the last few nights. Not a lot of consistent social distancing there but I have been impressed at how many people are wearing masks. While most of the protesters, counter-protesters, law enforcement, and national guard are younger and generally in decent health some will still get it and some will still die and their families and associates may not be in a lower risk category.

We'll see.

[Tacenda]

3 hours ago, The Nehor said:

No, I was never certain. I still believe and am convinced 75%+ will eventually get it before herd immunity will stall it out but the spread has been slower than I expected and the models I trust more have suggested. I am just not sure why. If it were burning out (this is unlikely due to high contagiousness) then new cases should be slowly dropping and it would not make sense in general. A disease that burns out is very unlikely to become a global pandemic in the first place. We have not had enough exposure for herd immunity to be the cause unless it has saturated much more of the population than we expected AND our antibody tests are much more flawed than we thought.

Much of the predictive modeling was out of whack all along. Remember when we had 15 cases and many were saying this would come to nothing and be easily contained? Remember that yahoo some idiot put in front of a microphone only a few weeks ago saying deaths would fall to zero within a week? There have been no shortages of bad models everywhere and of every kind and no model is going to be perfect. When the data and a model that has been pretty accurate in the past start to not match the question is more "what changed?" rather than to toss it as fundamentally flawed. The virus still seems as contagious as ever. We have whole buildings of employees catching it. I am wondering if the Work from Home approach that is still ongoing in a lot of the country might have had a larger impact than the closure of retail spaces. A good close test for that will be when restaurants go to full occupancy.

To be clear I am not sad that I was wrong and I am not eager to be right. Even if it means I lose the steak dinner bet I have with a friend over who is closer to the final US death count. I can afford the food and do not want anyone to die so I get a free dinner. Ideally the virus dies off quickly. I just don't expect it. If it were getting better numbers would be falling but they are mostly staying at a plateau in the US with some states seeing rises, some seeing falls, and some hopping back and forth. Most studies show it is not the heat and humidity only seems to have a minor impact. I really hope it does not do the Spanish Flu resurgence in the Fall. Over 80% of the deaths in that pandemic hit after most thought it was over.

The increasing protests are another wild card infection vector. As I have said before I am a disaster voyeur and riots count so I have been watching streams and reports late for the last few nights. Not a lot of consistent social distancing there but I have been impressed at how many people are wearing masks. While most of the protesters, counter-protesters, law enforcement, and national guard are younger and generally in decent health some will still get it and some will still die and their families and associates may not be in a lower risk category.

We'll see.

To the bold, I'm so cynical, I thought the protesters were using masks so they can't be identified on film.  BTW, I watched on 60 minutes tonight how antibodies like plasma is looking promising on treating the virus, yay! Hopefully it will be the ticket. 

[Scott Lloyd]

32 minutes ago, Tacenda said:

To the bold, I'm so cynical, I thought the protesters were using masks so they can't be identified on film.  BTW, I watched on 60 minutes tonight how antibodies like plasma is looking promising on treating the virus, yay! Hopefully it will be the ticket. 

I think your cynicism is not entirely misplaced — especially if antifa thugs are among the protesters-turned-rioters. 

[Scott Lloyd]

16 hours ago, The Nehor said:

No, I was never certain. I still believe and am convinced 75%+ will eventually get it before herd immunity will stall it out but the spread has been slower than I expected and the models I trust more have suggested. I am just not sure why. If it were burning out (this is unlikely due to high contagiousness) then new cases should be slowly dropping and it would not make sense in general. A disease that burns out is very unlikely to become a global pandemic in the first place. We have not had enough exposure for herd immunity to be the cause unless it has saturated much more of the population than we expected AND our antibody tests are much more flawed than we thought.

Much of the predictive modeling was out of whack all along. Remember when we had 15 cases and many were saying this would come to nothing and be easily contained? Remember that yahoo some idiot put in front of a microphone only a few weeks ago saying deaths would fall to zero within a week? There have been no shortages of bad models everywhere and of every kind and no model is going to be perfect. When the data and a model that has been pretty accurate in the past start to not match the question is more "what changed?" rather than to toss it as fundamentally flawed. The virus still seems as contagious as ever. We have whole buildings of employees catching it. I am wondering if the Work from Home approach that is still ongoing in a lot of the country might have had a larger impact than the closure of retail spaces. A good close test for that will be when restaurants go to full occupancy.

To be clear I am not sad that I was wrong and I am not eager to be right. Even if it means I lose the steak dinner bet I have with a friend over who is closer to the final US death count. I can afford the food and do not want anyone to die so I get a free dinner. Ideally the virus dies off quickly. I just don't expect it. If it were getting better numbers would be falling but they are mostly staying at a plateau in the US with some states seeing rises, some seeing falls, and some hopping back and forth. Most studies show it is not the heat and humidity only seems to have a minor impact. I really hope it does not do the Spanish Flu resurgence in the Fall. Over 80% of the deaths in that pandemic hit after most thought it was over.

The increasing protests are another wild card infection vector. As I have said before I am a disaster voyeur and riots count so I have been watching streams and reports late for the last few nights. Not a lot of consistent social distancing there but I have been impressed at how many people are wearing masks. While most of the protesters, counter-protesters, law enforcement, and national guard are younger and generally in decent health some will still get it and some will still die and their families and associates may not be in a lower risk category.

We'll see.

Hmm. I remember you being more adamant about everybody catching it. But if you now want to revise it to a less outlandish prognostication, I won’t fuss over that. 
 

But 75-plus percent rate of contraction in the population still strikes me as high. Notwithstanding months of uproar, to date I don’t have even one personal acquaintance I know of who has contracted the virus. A 75-plus rate would mean that out of a group of me and three acquaintances, at least three of us will have contracted the virus before we’re done with it, according to your projection. 

Edited June 1, 2020 by Scott Lloyd

[Calm]

19 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

But 75-plus percent rate of contraction in the population still strikes me as high. Notwithstanding months of uproar, to date I don’t even one personal acquaintance I know of who has contracted the virus. A 75-plus rate would mean that out of a group of me and four acquaintances, at least three of us will have contracted the virus before we’re done with it, according to your projection. 

This appears to assume totally random encountering and all exposure to occur in the early months, ignoring the clustering and that we aren't even to the 6 month point here in the US.

Your "before we're done with it" recognizes the qualification Nehor put on it, so what does the fact it doesn't match your experience now really have to do with the ending projection?

Would you say "too bad that missionary never got to baptize anyone on his mission" six months into it?

Edited June 1, 2020 by Calm

[Scott Lloyd]

22 minutes ago, Calm said:

This assumes totally random encountering and all exposure to occur in the early months, ignoring the clustering and that we aren't even to the 6 month point here in the US.  Nehor's projection was for after the pandemic, the total would be....not percentages during.

I take it, then, that you no longer hold to the universal contraction rate. 

[Calm]

19 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I take it, then, that you no longer hold to the universal contraction rate. 

Since my position has always been based on what I believe the best science has to offer at that moment, I am holding on to the same position I have always held...let the research be given its chance to be thorough and tested for reliability even if we have to make judgement calls on best info available at the moment. 
 

I need to see my wording when I was discussing contraction rate to see if I would alter that. Was I talking infected or exposed?  I doubt I meant universal infected since I have always assumed it’s likely some might have a natural immunity at the very least. 

Edited June 1, 2020 by Calm

[Scott Lloyd]

8 hours ago, Calm said:

Since my position has always been based on what I believe the best science has to offer at that moment, I am holding on to the same position I have always held...let the research be given its chance to be thorough and tested for reliability even if we have to make judgement calls on best info available at the moment. 
 

I need to see my wording when I was discussing contraction rate to see if I would alter that. Was I talking infected or exposed?  I doubt I meant universal infected since I have always assumed it’s likely some might have a natural immunity at the very least. 

I don’t know how to find that now, and I’m disinclined to spend much time and effort looking. I just remember you and Nehor being pretty much of one mind on the matter. Maybe I misperceived. 

Edited June 1, 2020 by Scott Lloyd

[Calm]

I believe iirc I pointed out the reasoning for near universal exposure over time if there was never a vaccine or currently unknown but hoped for natural limiting factors (such warmer temperatures).  If I suggested universal infection was a given, that would have been sloppy communicating because there is way too much unknown about how this virus acts plus unless one can demonstrate there is no natural immunity (in the sense of something besides infection with covid itself prevents infection...perhaps antibodies from another disease, perhaps a highly evolved genetically manipulated immune system  ) and I am not sure how to do that, there is always the possibility that someone exposed won’t get infected. 
 

We need a ton more testing and a full season (whatever that happens to be for covid) and likely a couple of more to see if it rebounds like the Spanish flu, mutates quickly, etc. to be able to be relatively certain about its behaviour. 
 

Since I been having to repeat this point at least once a week, sometimes more irl, I know it has been my consistent position since the beginning.  But I undoubtedly have engaged in speculation such as “let us assume the virus acts in this way, what happens then is....”.  I suppose that might be confused for a position. 
 

I find Nehor and pogi’s reasoning and science sources consistently sound, so my view probably parallels theirs the most with the caveat I think we need more time to repeat testing of theories so if (and I can’t think of anything at this point where this has happened, but my memory is crap so might have) they come out solid on something I am probably more iffy, they also provide the most detail imo so there may be others who have expressed much the same but they don’t stand out for me at this time.

I also believe that estimated infections rates are high enough that if there is an obvious presence of the virus in your community, at this point it is wisdom to act as if universal infection is likely and take action to shield those who have compromised immune systems or appear particularly susceptible.  Especially since it appears you are most contagious two days before showing symptoms so waiting until symptoms show up to act is too late. 

Timing appears to be crucial:

https://www.ctvnews.ca/health/coronavirus/new-study-suggests-wearing-a-face-mask-at-home-could-help-limit-spread-of-covid-19-1.4959360

Quote

Results of the study, published in the BMJ Global Journal on Thursday, concluded that wearing a face mask inside the home was 79 per cent effective in preventing transmission of COVID-19 between an infected person and other family members, but only before symptoms of the virus were present. It also found that the use of a face mask after symptoms of the coronavirus were present did little to provide additional protection

This may not be feasibly possible...both wearing a mask and the modified social distancing, etc that goes along with it.  The masks were surgical so we don’t know what impact a lesser quality would have and there can be issue of CO2 buildup in N95 masks which leads to its own set of problems along with masks on young children is a no no.

But the point of me posting the study is the data that suggests waiting until one knows the infection is present is too late to prevent spread of the infection. So prevention needs to be set up and acted on in anticipation of probable infection. 

Edited June 1, 2020 by Calm

[The Nehor]

14 hours ago, Tacenda said:

To the bold, I'm so cynical, I thought the protesters were using masks so they can't be identified on film.  BTW, I watched on 60 minutes tonight how antibodies like plasma is looking promising on treating the virus, yay! Hopefully it will be the ticket. 

Both are true. Plasma treatments are showing efficacy in early tests. Hopefully it will be proved effective enough to be used generally in severe cases.

13 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I think your cynicism is not entirely misplaced — especially if antifa thugs are among the protesters-turned-rioters. 

Edited June 1, 2020 by The Nehor

[pogi]

I am very pleased with the way our Stake is handling the return to Church.  Each ward will meet only once/month (my ward starts June 28) and will be split into 2 different sessions to reduce numbers, and if necessary they will open up a third session based upon how many people sign up for each session.  45 minute sacrament meeting.  Hymns will be instrumental with no singing (very happy to see that!).  

[Meadowchik]

1 minute ago, pogi said:

I am very pleased with the way our Stake is handling the return to Church.  Each ward will meet only once/month (my ward starts June 28) and will be split into 2 different sessions to reduce numbers, and if necessary they will open up a third session based upon how many people sign up for each session.  45 minute sacrament meeting.  Hymns will be instrumental with no singing (very happy to see that!).  

That is good to hear. How is the partaking of the sacrament handled?

 

[The Nehor]

13 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

Hmm. I remember you being more adamant about everybody catching it. But if you now want to revise it to a less outlandish prognostication, I won’t fuss over that. 

"I won't fuss over you no longer beating your wife." - A fussy person

I also have not changed my prognostication. I just think it will take longer absent a vaccine showing up beforehand. Why are you so desperately flailing to have something to gloat over?

13 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

But 75-plus percent rate of contraction in the population still strikes me as high. Notwithstanding months of uproar, to date I don’t have even one personal acquaintance I know of who has contracted the virus. A 75-plus rate would mean that out of a group of me and three acquaintances, at least three of us will have contracted the virus before we’re done with it, according to your projection. 

Which ignores two things:

1) In the end the pockets who do not get it are more likely to be within social and family groups

and

2) I think you have a vastly flawed understanding of the timeline for "done with it". I suspect it will be akin to someone in the USA in February of 1942 commenting that this world war is not that bad because no one they know personally has died yet.

I will try not to bring this up later to gloat if you or someone you know catches it.

Edited June 1, 2020 by The Nehor

[pogi]

On 5/30/2020 at 11:40 PM, The Nehor said:

 Do we put the elderly on the rotation or just encourage them to stay home?

I'm pretty sure the Church has already discouraged anyone over 65 from attending, along with any other vulnerable population. 

On 5/30/2020 at 11:40 PM, The Nehor said:

On a personal note I am grateful that my predictions were wrong about the expected speed of spread but I am curious as to why. It is possible it is more vulnerable to heat than projected from warmer nations. Possibly some climate difference in North America? That might explain why it is not slowing in Brazil. 

My guess is that it follows seasonal transmission patterns like the flu and many other bugs.  Flu can be transmitted throughout the year but risk is highest in the Northern Hemisphere from October through March.  The Southern Hemisphere is reverse of that with highest transmission in April through September.  It might not follow that time-line exactly, but something similar to that wouldn't surprise me.  That might explain the slowing transmission in Northern Hemisphere regions, with increases in Southern Hemisphere regions like Brazil.  It might follow similar seasonal transmission with the flu.  If we truly are in low transmission season in the Northern Hemisphere, then we have serious reason to be concerned, because the numbers are not dropping as much as flu would, and that could mean potentially devastating numbers in the fall.

Edited June 1, 2020 by pogi

[The Nehor]

5 minutes ago, pogi said:

I'm pretty sure the Church has already discouraged anyone over 65 from attending, along with any other vulnerable population. 

My guess is that it follows seasonal transmission patterns like the flu and many other bugs.  Flu can be transmitted throughout the year but risk is highest in the Northern Hemisphere from October through March.  The Southern Hemisphere is reverse of that with highest transmission in April through September.  That might explain the slowing transmission in Northern Hemisphere regions with increases in Southern Hemisphere.  It might follow similar seasonal transmission with the flu.  If we truly are in low transmission season in the Northern Hemisphere, then we have serious reason to be concerned, because the numbers are not dropping as much as flu would and that could mean potentially devastating numbers in the fall. 

Yeah, our ward is doing a survey asking those who are under the age (we have not decided what it is) if they want to come and how many are coming and then we will work out a rotation.

That is a possibility. The issue with that is it does not seem to match the transmission rates in some other nations. It is possible that it is correct and there are other factors. It would not surprise me if you are right but I hope you are not. That means, absent some gamechanger like a vaccine or an unexpected freefall in new cases, we can expect a huge spike in cases in four months and we see the medical system overloaded.

Edited June 1, 2020 by The Nehor

[pogi]

14 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

That is good to hear. How is the partaking of the sacrament handled?

 

It says "that sacrament will be administered, individually, by holders of the priesthood (as available at each session), and we will be training young men in the coming weeks on the guidelines provided to us by the Church.  The guidelines include handwashing, face coverings, social distancing, sanitizing the trays before and after use, limiting capacity in water trays and bread trays to avoid cross contamination, and instructions on ushering."

It doesn't outline how they are going to pass it to each person "individually".  I assume that means they will not be passing it down the pews.  I guess I'll be finding out soon as I work with the deacons. 

[Scott Lloyd]

55 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

 

What? Are you an antifa apologist?

[The Nehor]

4 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

What? Are you an antifa apologist?

Reported.

I'm also a leprechaun apologist which is an equally real thing.

Edited June 1, 2020 by The Nehor