Will Divisions Regarding Masks Impact Activity?

[Tacenda]

I wish this could work: https://www.instashieldusa.com/?fbclid=IwAR3J_-_bNcjwkpA7aCCttN_dO21aZD16mOMi_PvnLf77vQQ7I_M8p7dgkg4

[Calm]

Re T-Shirt’s post....

I wonder how many of these youth and young adults are living at home with Mom and Dad for free, out of work even. 
 

Trading off one summer for your own health and the health of those around you...they can’t do it. I certainly hope these are the exceptions, otherwise big issues when they are the ones who are supposed to be in charge. 

Edited July 20, 2020 by Calm

[california boy]

3 hours ago, T-Shirt said:

I live in a very blue state who's governor has made masks in public mandatory.  We are also experiencing spikes.  The spikes here are likely due to things like this: (watch the video)

'I'm young, I'm reckless:' Large gatherings of young people contributing to COVID-19 spike

 

If you believe masks indeed cut down on the risk of exposure to Covid 19, then why would you resist wearing one?  I just don't get it.

[T-Shirt]

3 hours ago, california boy said:

If you believe masks indeed cut down on the risk of exposure to Covid 19, then why would you resist wearing one?  I just don't get it.

Is that directed at me or the the people in the video?  I have very clearly stated that I wear a mask and believe everyone should.  But, I understand those who believe that mandates are a government overreach.  It probably is.  But I still think they should wear one.

[T-Shirt]

On 7/18/2020 at 11:30 AM, Tacenda said:

Don't know if I'm crossing the line here, but thought it interesting.

If mods want me to take it down, hopefully they tell me soon before I'm unable to edit.

The problem with this is that you can isolate statistics and use them just about any way you want.  Are you also aware of the following statistics:

The top five states in mortality rate are:

1- Connecticut - 9.2%

2- New Jersey - 8.9%

3- New York - 8%

4- Michigan - 7.8%

5- Massachusetts - 7.4%

Florida ranks 42nd at 1.4%

Incidentally, Utah ranks dead last at 0.7%

The top five states in 14 day growth rate are:

1- Montana

2- North Dakota

3- Rhode Island

4 -Kentucky

5- Maryland

Florida ranks 28th

If you look at all the statistics in detail, you will find a good mix of Red and Blue States that have good (a relative term) and bad stats.  It is not the fault of a political party or the President or any group of governors.  All are trying the best they can with something that is relatively unknown and about which we are constantly learning new things.  Some things, from both Blue and Red, work and some things don't, we learn from each other.  I am, frankly tired of, and disgusted by the political mudslinging and finger pointing.  It is time for Americans and particularly politicians and the media, to stop the nonsense and step up and be responsible.  We aren't lemmings who can only do what we are told by government.  I think it is possible to protect the economy and protect the vulnerable and beat this virus all at the same time, if we stop being stupid and work together.

P.S. The stats I posted above can also be misleading if they aren't looked at in full context and studied.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 21, 2020 by T-Shirt

[california boy]

14 hours ago, T-Shirt said:

Is that directed at me or the the people in the video?  I have very clearly stated that I wear a mask and believe everyone should.  But, I understand those who believe that mandates are a government overreach.  It probably is.  But I still think they should wear one.

If wearing masks is a public health issue, why is requiring masks a government overreach?  The government has literally hundreds if not thousands of laws and rules that are put in place for the health and safety of it's citizens.  This is not a new idea. Are citizens justified in not following any health and safety laws if they don't agree with them?  Why is this different?

[Ahab]

21 hours ago, Tacenda said:

I wish this could work: https://www.instashieldusa.com/?fbclid=IwAR3J_-_bNcjwkpA7aCCttN_dO21aZD16mOMi_PvnLf77vQQ7I_M8p7dgkg4

Yeah the whole suit thing gets a little awkward sometimes, and it is fairly expensive.

[Tacenda]

8 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Yeah the whole suit thing gets a little awkward sometimes, and it is fairly expensive.

Hahahaha!!

Maybe pool noodles work as well, lol!

[Daniel2]

Loved seeing this from my Alma Mater....  Some great stuff here:

BYU research analysis shows masks still most effective in fighting spread of COVID-19

By Sean Walker, KSL.com | Updated - Jul. 20, 2020 at 10:04 p.m. | Posted - Jul. 20, 2020 at 5:34 p.m.

---

10PM: BYU research analysis shows masks still most effective in fighting spread of COVID-19

Matt Rascon, KSL TV

PROVO — After countless hours buried in research not necessarily related to their specialty, a group of researchers from Brigham Young University feel like they have made sense for the wearing masks or cloth face coverings to halt the spread of COVID-19.

Ben Abbott, an assistant professor of environmental science at BYU, was one of four researchers at the university who pored through 130 scientific papers about the costs, benefits and disadvantages of mask-wearing in response to the global pandemic.

If the group — which also includes Mitchell Greenhalgh and Isaac St. Clair from environmental science, and Jonas Bush from genetics, genomics and biotechnology — doesn’t sound like one that might typically deliver a cost-benefit analysis of mask-wearing, it’s because it isn’t.

"My research team and I basically suspended our other efforts and worked night and day," Abbott told KSL NewsRadio on Monday afternoon, adding that the group responded to several inquiries on Facebook and in the Utah County community by digging into previously published scientific papers, devoid of political arguments.

 

The research analysis wasn't driven by the university or a department, or even a need for political discourse. Just pure scientific inquisition, Abbott said.

“Our whole purpose for making this report was to bring the pure science,” Abbott told KSL TV. “We’re able to now say with a high level of confidence: ‘masks protect people from COVID-19.’”

All masks, including something as simple as a cloth face covering, have been shown to slow the spread of viruses like COVID-19 — which spread via tiny air droplets when speaking, coughing, sneezing and even breathing — by as much as 90%, the research confirmed.

What’s more, there is no evidence that masks adversely affect the majority of the population, Abbott added, including limiting oxygen intake, increasing carbon dioxide intact or inhaling more pathogens.

"We found zero evidence in the scientific literature, after reading 130 papers, that masks were a risk for healthy individuals," the BYU professor said. "For all healthy individuals — children, adults, and elderly — it’s really safe."

Still, masks aren’t particularly effective at protecting the wearer — but those around them who may otherwise be infected, even unknowingly.

“We need to keep politics from stopping us from doing what we need to get us back to our normal life,” Abbott said. “We can conquer this if we work together.”

Some adverse effects do occur to a small percentage of the population, such as those who struggle with compromised respiratory systems like COPD and end-stage renal disease, those with severe disabilities that make removing or adjusting a mask extremely difficult, and children under 2 years in age, Abbott added.

But even for that small section of the population, those who don’t wear masks correctly may contribute to and benefit from the greater mask-wearing society — if everyone else is "masked up."

"Even if not everyone is wearing their mask correctly or anything else happens, it still can have a really positive impact," Abbott said. "Even though cases are increasing rapidly, areas that include masks have lower mortality rates.

"The problem is, of course, it only works when the majority of people are wearing masks."

Abbott added that even when infection occurs in areas with frequent mask usage, mortality rates are relatively low. There appears to be a correlation between the volume of infected air droplets consumed while spreading the virus and the severity of the symptoms: the fewer droplets, the less severe the symptoms, and less likely to lead to significant cases or even death.

In countries where at least 80% of the population was wearing a mask, such as most Asian countries, the rate of spread was found to decrease dramatically. Those countries had COVID-19 infection rates as low as half that of similar countries where mask-wearing was not as culturally complicit.

Scientists at Oxford University who began human trials on a potential vaccine for the virus back in April have recently shown promising results, too, producing a dual immune response in test cases between age 15 and 55 that lasted at least two months after they received the immunization.

That’s only part of the response of the worldwide scientific community’s Herculean effort to fast-track a vaccine as soon as possible. And before a vaccine is introduced to the masses — White House officials believe that may not be available until at least Christmas, or early next year — the best response still likely includes a mask.

Of course, masks and face coverings also don’t work by themselves; they should be used in addition to other precautions to prevent spread, such as social distancing when appropriate and frequent sanitization of hands and high-touch surface areas.

But the evidence is clear, Abbott said: if you want society to return to normal — or a "new normal," as state and national political leaders have said — then wear a mask.

"It looks like masks could be our safest and fastest bridge back to normal," Abbott said. "Countries and regions that have implemented masking have reduced the spread of COVID drastically."

[Bernard Gui]

8 minutes ago, Daniel2 said:

But the evidence is clear, Abbott said: if you want society to return to normal — or a "new normal," as state and national political leaders have said — then wear a mask.

"It looks like masks could be our safest and fastest bridge back to normal," Abbott said. "Countries and regions that have implemented masking have reduced the spread of COVID drastically."

What do "back to normal" and "reduce the spread of COVID drastically" mean? I'm asking as one who is in the high risk category.

Edited July 21, 2020 by Bernard Gui

[Ahab]

22 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

What do "back to normal" and "reduce the spread of COVID drastically" mean? I'm asking as one who is in the high risk category.

It's actually considered to be, for now, the "new" normal.  We won't be going back to the old version of normal again, even if we develop a vaccine for this COVID thing, because the COVID thing will never go away, entirely.

And as someone who is in that high risk category with you, along with my wife, the "new" normal is to wear a mask when out in public and wash your hands before you touch your (or anyone else's) mouth, or nose, or eyes.

Oh, and also try to stay at least 6 feet away from people you do not know, who are not wearing a mask, who might have that COVID thing.

If you do those 3 things, you're far less likely to catch and spread that COVID thing.

Edited July 21, 2020 by Ahab

[Daniel2]

6 minutes ago, Ahab said:

It's actually considered to be, for now, the "new" normal.  We won't be going back to the old version of normal again, even if we develop a vaccine for this COVID thing, because the COVID thing will never go away, entirely.

And as someone who is in that high risk category with you, along with my wife, the "new" normal is to wear a mask when out in public and wash your hands before you touch your mouth, or nose, or eyes.

Oh, and also try to stay at least 6 feet away from people you do not know, who are not wearing a mask, who might have that COVID thing.

If you do those 3 things, you're far less likely to catch that COVID thing.

Well said, Ahab.

[Daniel2]

21 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

What do "back to normal" and "reduce the spread of COVID drastically" mean? I'm asking as one who is in the high risk category.

I agree with Ahab's answer regarding your question about what "back to normal" means.

As far as what "reducing the spread of COVID drastically" means, the article itself states:

Quote

"All masks, including something as simple as a cloth face covering, have been shown to slow the spread of viruses like COVID-19 — which spread via tiny air droplets when speaking, coughing, sneezing and even breathing — by as much as 90%, the research confirmed."

 

[Ahab]

4 minutes ago, Daniel2 said:

Well said, Ahab.

I edited my post to say what I said even better than I said it before,  Good to know what we need to do to try to be safe and healthy.

[Bernard Gui]

17 minutes ago, Daniel2 said:

I agree with Ahab's answer regarding your question about what "back to normal" means.

As far as what "reducing the spread of COVID drastically" means, the article itself states:

"All masks, including something as simple as a cloth face covering, have been shown to slow the spread of viruses like COVID-19 — which spread via tiny air droplets when speaking, coughing, sneezing and even breathing — by as much as 90%, the research confirmed."

So we slow the spread.  Flattening the curve does not reduce the area under the curve. At what point is it then safe for us in the at-risk group to venture forth in normality?

For example, Sister Gui teaches kindergarten. She is over 65 and I am 73. At what point will it be OK for her to be in the room with 20 kids and come home to be with me?

Edited July 21, 2020 by Bernard Gui

[Ahab]

14 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

So we slow the spread.  Flattening the curve does not reduce the area under the curve. At what point is it then safe for us in the at-risk group to venture forth in normality?

For example, Sister Gui teaches kindergarten. She is over 65 and I am 73. At what point will it be OK for her to be in the room with 20 kids and come home to be with me?

I would like to hear Daniels answer too, but I think the correct idea is that you and your wife will be able to safely be with other people, including those that are that much younger than both of you, as long as you both 1) wear a mask over your nose and mouth, 2) wash your hands before touching your (or their) eyes or nose or mouth, and 3) stay at least 6 feet away from them.  They and others should also do those 3 things too, so they can also be safe and healthy.

[Bernard Gui]

4 minutes ago, Ahab said:

I would like to hear Daniels answer too, but I think the correct idea is that you and your wife will be able to safely be with other people, including those that are that much younger than both of you, as long as you both 1) wear a mask over your nose and mouth, 2) wash your hands before touching your (or their) eyes or nose or mouth, and 3) stay at least 6 feet away from them.  They and others should also do those 3 things too, so they can also be safe and healthy.

How do you do that in a kindergarten class?

[Daniel2]

50 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

So we slow the spread.  Flattening the curve does not reduce the area under the curve. At what point is it then safe for us in the at-risk group to venture forth in normality?

For example, Sister Gui teaches kindergarten. She is over 65 and I am 73. At what point will it be OK for her to be in the room with 20 kids and come home to be with me?

I think the only time it will be safe for your wife to teach a kindergarten class is once a vaccine is developed.

Until then, I second Ahab's answer: all are safest by following the recommendations of the CDC, including a multi-layered approach of mask-wearing, hand washing, and social distancing whenever possible. 

When it comes to being a member of a high-risk category and in which one's job makes such impossible.... the best option I see to preserve your own personal health is to avoid large groups of people, especially those incapable of social distancing and/or wearing masks (as kindergartners are).  I am blessed to work in a field where my employer offers short-term disability to employees who have high-risk health factors, until a vaccine is found.  I don't know if that's an option for your wife or not.  Obviously, each individual and family need to choose whether to continue employment where they put their own health at risk, find out if short-term disability leaves are possible, or find other options.

I know the choices involved aren't easy... I wish you and your wife all the best!

Edited July 21, 2020 by Daniel2

[Daniel2]

24 minutes ago, Ahab said:

I would like to hear Daniels answer too, but I think the correct idea is that you and your wife will be able to safely be with other people, including those that are that much younger than both of you, as long as you both 1) wear a mask over your nose and mouth, 2) wash your hands before touching your (or their) eyes or nose or mouth, and 3) stay at least 6 feet away from them.  They and others should also do those 3 things too, so they can also be safe and healthy.

The only concern I would personally have is that the masks that we ourselves wear are really to protect others, not ourselves, and vice versa.  And since children aren't ask likely to abide by mask-wearing requirements, I personally would be concerned about having my high-risk spouse subject themselves to a group of children who may end up being  asymptomatic carriers.  So in answer to Bernard's question: I'm not sure you CAN do that in a kindergarten class.  That's why I'd check into other options (i.e. a disability leave or other employment opportunities) until a vaccine or a cure is found.  Of course, that's my view only; others may think I'm reactionary and would just proceed with life as normal, and let the consequences (if any) follow.

Edited July 21, 2020 by Daniel2

[Ahab]

15 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

How do you do that in a kindergarten class?

What part seems difficult to you?  Wearing a mask?  Staying at least 6' away from others?  Washing your hands before you touch your (or their) mouth or nose or eyes?

I can see the need for some new equipment, maybe... like some 6' long poles with grabbers on them to grab some things, maybe.  Like to grab some child to stop him or her from getting too close to some other child, maybe.

[Ahab]

11 minutes ago, Daniel2 said:

The only concern I would personally have is that the masks that we ourselves wear are really to protect others, not ourselves, and vice versa.  And since children aren't ask likely to abide by mask-wearing requirements, I personally would be concerned about having my high-risk spouse subject themselves to a group of children who may end up being  asymptomatic carriers. 

I would see that concern addressed by having some way to keep everyone at least 6' apart from others.  So if someone is prone to getting too close to others, someone would need some way to grab that person and keep him or her away.

Otherwise it's just a matter of wearing a mask and the washing of hands when necessary.

p.s. Oh, and hey, if you and your wife really want to be safe you could get an outfit like this... kinda spendy but worth it to me and my wife.

Edited July 21, 2020 by Ahab

[Daniel2]

9 minutes ago, Ahab said:

I would see that concern addressed by having some way to keep everyone at least 6' apart from others.  So if someone is prone to getting too close to others, someone would need some way to grab that person and keep him or her away.

Otherwise it's just a matter of wearing a mask and the washing of hands when necessary.

I agree that social distancing (of at least 6 feet) would address the concern of exposure.... I just don't know how someone who's a member of a high-risk population could expect that kindergartners would abide by the 6 feet requirement, let alone appropriate hand-washing and mask-wearing.

I have a family member who is a member of a high risk population and within the age group of concern.  He still works, but in an adult office and is in a position where his floor is marked to remind people to maintain a 6 foot distance, they're required to wear masks, and he stocks his office with hand sanitizer.  

I just don't know if that's feasible with a bunch of kindergarten-aged children, which is why I empathize with Bernard's concerns for his wife.  These aren't easy times, and living through a global pandemic certainly causes hardship for many of us.

Edited July 21, 2020 by Daniel2

[Ahab]

15 minutes ago, Daniel2 said:

The only concern I would personally have is that the masks that we ourselves wear are really to protect others, not ourselves, and vice versa.  And since children aren't ask likely to abide by mask-wearing requirements, I personally would be concerned about having my high-risk spouse subject themselves to a group of children who may end up being  asymptomatic carriers.  So in answer to Bernard's question: I'm not sure you CAN do that in a kindergarten class.  That's why I'd check into other options (i.e. a disability leave or other employment opportunities) until a vaccine or a cure is found.  Of course, that's my view only; others may think I'm reactionary and would just proceed with life as normal, and let the consequences (if any) follow.

When someone doesn't wear a mask others just need to be able to stay at least 6' away from them.  That's how to counter that problem.  And then wash hands as necessary.  Not too much of a problem. 

I'm considering getting a 10' long wooden pole or staff to make it easier for me to keep people away from me and my wife.

[Ahab]

4 minutes ago, Daniel2 said:

I agree that social distancing (of at least 6 feet) would address the concern of exposure.... I just don't know how someone who's a member of a high-risk population could expect that kindergartners would abide by the 6 feet requirement, let alone appropriate hand-washing and mask-wearing.

I have a family member who is a member of a high risk population and within the age group of concern.  He still works, but in an adult office and is in a position where his floor is marked to remind people to maintain a 6 foot distance, they're required to wear masks, and he stocks his office with hand sanitizer.  

I just don't know if that's feasible with a bunch of kindergarten-aged children, which is why I empathize with Bernard's concerns for his wife.  These aren't easy times, and living through a global pandemic certainly causes hardship for many of us.

I think you may not realize how helpful a long wooden staff can be.  At least 6', maybe as much as 10', although a 10' pole or staff would be more difficult to carry around in a car.

I will not be at all surprised to see 6' long wooden poles or staffs become more popular soon, as they were once popular in the past.

[Ahab]

Just found this on Amazon.  Not very expensive.  Very easy to use.

https://www.amazon.com/Tiger-Claw-Foam-Bo-Staff/dp/B00E35FKQ2/ref=sr_1_4?dchild=1&keywords=bo+staff&qid=1595367499&sr=8-4