Covid cases, hospitalizations, death trends and other touchy subjects…

[Bernard Gui]

On 9/5/2021 at 4:53 PM, Rain said:

 

I really liked the thing posted a few weeks ago showing the effectiveness of different types of masks and different ways of wearing them.  I was surprised that the least effective mask was still stopping 26%.  Obviously nothing compared to 50, 75, 90%+, but still stopped some.  

That gave me hope and gave me a good reason to continue wearing masks most everywhere. It isn't going to stop it all, but maybe it can slow it down.

26% is scary infection possibility, a lousy batting average, an abysmal pass completion rate, a fireable free throw average, an awful algebra test score, and you-should-join-the-choir number of out of tune notes in a violin concerto performance. In my perfect world, everything below 89% would be outta here and mass production of 90%+ would be priority 1. Why do officials even suggest them?  If we’re serious about this, of course.😌

Edited September 6, 2021 by Bernard Gui

[Chum]

1 minute ago, Bernard Gui said:

26% is a below par batting average, an abysmal pass completion rate, an awful algebra test score, and an unacceptable number of out of tune notes in a violin concerto performance. In my perfect world, everything below 89% would be eliminated and mass production of 90%+ would be priority 1. If we’re serious about this, of course.😌

thats

not

how

medicine

works

[Bernard Gui]

3 minutes ago, Chum said:

thats

not

how

medicine

works

Hold on a second, Chum. We’re talking about mask effectiveness here. Why would anyone who is serious about stopping COVID wear or recommend wearing a mask that lets 50-75% of those bad little buggers through? Imagine an infield with that kind of leakage. Or a surgeon whose patients have a 26% chance of survival. No, no, no.

[Chum]

1 minute ago, Bernard Gui said:

Hold on a second, Chum. We’re talking about mask effectiveness here. Why would anyone who is serious about stopping COVID wear or recommend wearing a mask that lets 50-75% of those bad little buggers through? Imagine an infield with that kind of leakage. Or a surgeon whose patients have a 26% chance of survival. No, no, no.

This is some seriously convoluted apocalypse bait.

[Bernard Gui]

2 hours ago, BlueDreams said:

I would assume obviously dry. I can't think of a time I wore a "wet" mask. Including times I've worn them for several hours. 

 

With luv,

BD

You never have had condensation, perspiration, or saliva and mucus from a sneeze or a cough in your mask? I’ve seen people take the mask off in order to sneeze. A wet mask is very dangerous according to the CDC.

Last Sunday at Church the humidity was high enough that I was sweating under my mask. 1. I felt like I was being waterboarded. 2. The area around my nose was wet to the touch. 3. It was really uncomfortable. 4. My mask was dampened.

Here’s a funny story for you….kinda gross, though….

Kinda gross, though…In January I was asked to play a violin solo for sacrament meeting. We were under strict government and Church mandates to be masked and separated. I had to play with the mask on.

I made the mistake of not practicing at home with a mask in place. When I started to play, the violin pushed the edge of the mask under my glasses and into my left eye which immediately started watering.  The irritation caused me to clamp my left eye shut as tears flowed profusely and kicked my sinuses into high gear, filling my mask and covering my mouth with copious amounts of mucus. I struggled like this through the piece. When I sat down in frustration next to Sister Gui, I removed my bodily-fluids-soaked mask and wiped my eyes, nose, and face with tissues. I was so embarrassed. She laughed.

At the end of the meeting, a number of people came up and said, “Oh, Brother Gui! We loved how you became so emotional while you were playing. It was so beautiful and inspiring!”

Little did they know, and I wasn’t about to tell them.

 

Edited September 7, 2021 by Bernard Gui

[Bernard Gui]

27 minutes ago, Chum said:

This is some seriously convoluted apocalypse bait.

Indeed! Can’t wait until the Omega variant arrives. Let the wild rumpus begin!

Edited September 7, 2021 by Bernard Gui

[Chum]

1 minute ago, Bernard Gui said:

Yep. Can’t wait until the Omega variant arrives. Let the wild rumpus begin!

Personalized Plague Cups are the hot new Festivus gifts.

[Bernard Gui]

40 minutes ago, Chum said:

Personalized Plague Cups are the hot new Festivus gifts……

….filled with black mamba venom and exchanged with friends as DEATH strums the Empty Chord on his primordial cosmic guitar, then smashes it on the onyx altar of Krom, releasing ក, the first COVID Variant of the Khmer alphabet………..

Edited September 7, 2021 by Bernard Gui

[pogi]

1 hour ago, Bernard Gui said:

26% is scary infection possibility, a lousy batting average, an abysmal pass completion rate, a fireable free throw average, an awful algebra test score, and you-should-join-the-choir number of out of tune notes in a violin concerto performance. In my perfect world, everything below 89% would be outta here and mass production of 90%+ would be priority 1. Why do officials even suggest them?  If we’re serious about this, of course.😌

When a huge percentage of the population is batting at zero percent, I would count 26% a huge success and starting point.  If I could get 26% more cheesecake for the same price...score!

26% reduction in hospitalization would cause our ICU nurses to shout for joy.   If we could reduce the death toll by 26%...hallelujah!

You remind me of the naysayer antagonist in this story, but with a more persistent rebuke.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/eventsforchange.wordpress.com/2011/06/05/the-starfish-story-one-step-towards-changing-the-world/amp/

Maybe you are aiming your ridicule in the wrong direction.  26% will always be better than zero percent. 

Maybe it’s time you start picking up starfish instead of mocking a boy for his efforts.

Edited September 7, 2021 by pogi

[Chum]

13 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

….filled with black mamba venom and exchanged with friends as DEATH strums the Empty Chord on his primordial cosmic guitar, then smashes it on the onyx altar of Krom, releasing ក, the first COVID Variant of the Khmer alphabet………..

I was going to say that but I didn't want to appear bumptious.

[Bernard Gui]

Just now, Chum said:

I was going to say that but I didn't want to appear bumptious.

Bumptious? Never! Perish the thought. 
 

Ive used up all my serious tokens for today.

[Bernard Gui]

8 minutes ago, pogi said:

When a huge percentage of the population is batting at zero percent, I would count 26% a huge success and starting point.  

26% reduction in hospitalization would cause our ICU nurses to shout for joy.   If we could reduce the death toll by 26%...hallelujah!

You remind me of the naysayer antagonist in this story:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/eventsforchange.wordpress.com/2011/06/05/the-starfish-story-one-step-towards-changing-the-world/amp/

Maybe you are aiming your ridicule in the wrong direction.  26% will always be better than zero percent. 

Maybe it’s time you start picking up starfish instead of mocking a boy for his efforts.

Baloney. Total misrepresentation of my point.

Muve over Delta Variant. Here comes the next threat: the MuMutation.

“Fauci said the Mu variant, technically known as B.1.621, has mutations suggesting ’it would evade certain antibodies,’ potentially including those from vaccines.

"’But there isn't a lot of clinical data to suggest that. It is mostly laboratory in vitro data,‘ he added. ’...We don't consider it an immediate threat right now.‘”

No bull! Wait a minute! Its not a threat…..right now? It could dodge vaccines?

Oh joy! Here comes Mu!
 

Quote

Health officials believe mu is even more transmissible that the delta variant and has the potential to resist vaccines.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/new-mu-covid-variant-now-found-in-49-u-s-states/ar-AAO9Uf6

 

Edited September 7, 2021 by Bernard Gui

[juliann]

4 hours ago, Rain said:

Maybe that's the difference - I've never once thought someone or some source was saying masks make us "safe".  What I have always seen or read or heard I saw as "safer".  

And I don't think of it as "there is a 26% chance of me being safe if I do this."  Rather I think more like "since I'm going to do this (shop, go to church, go to work etc) then I might as well do this really easy thing and make it 26% more safe."

I can and have upgraded my masks, but I can't and don't want to control others.   So if they wear a 26% mask then I am grateful they are actually wearing something even if I prefer they wear a better one.

 

No one is answering my question. Would you put someone in a car with the assurance that there was a 26% chance they wouldn't get into a crash?

 I really don't understand the difference with masks other than the transmission crash isn't visible.

[juliann]

7 minutes ago, pogi said:

When a huge percentage of the population is batting at zero percent, I would count 26% a huge success and starting point.  If I could get 26% more cheesecake for the same price...score!

26% reduction in hospitalization would cause our ICU nurses to shout for joy.   If we could reduce the death toll by 26%...hallelujah!

You remind me of the naysayer antagonist in this story, but with a more persistent rebuke.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/eventsforchange.wordpress.com/2011/06/05/the-starfish-story-one-step-towards-changing-the-world/amp/

Maybe you are aiming your ridicule in the wrong direction.  26% will always be better than zero percent. 

Maybe it’s time you start picking up starfish instead of mocking a boy for his efforts.

Um, you are dodging. What about the 74% who might have been saved had they been properly educated about mask efficacy? Are they just collateral damage to avoid doing that while negligent leaders enjoy their cheesecake?

[Bernard Gui]

And then after being scared spitless, you read at the very end of the story that

Quote

The U.S. saw its peak of mu variant cases in mid-July but case numbers involving that variant have been declining since, signaling either a weakening of the strain or indicating a worrisome future.

What the heck does this mean?

Weakening or worsening?
More intentional confusion. 
QED. 

Edited September 7, 2021 by Bernard Gui

[juliann]

9 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Baloney.

Oh joy! Here comes Mu!

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/new-mu-covid-variant-now-found-in-49-u-s-states/ar-AAO9Uf6

 

Well, not really....at the very, very bottom of the article,

Quote

 

“Even though it has not in essence taken hold to any extent here we always pay attention to at all times variants,” Fauci said.

The U.S. saw its peak of mu variant cases in mid-July but case numbers involving that variant have been declining since, signaling either a weakening of the strain or indicating a worrisome future.

 

The press will always pick a worrisome future, of course. 

[Bernard Gui]

19 minutes ago, juliann said:

Well, not really....at the very, very bottom of the article,

The press will always pick a worrisome future, of course. 

Thanks. And in this case couches it in contradictory reporting. And only days ago Mu was in just a few states and now it’s in 49, but not to worry, it’s either waxing or waning. Or something. Whatever.

 

 

 

Edited September 7, 2021 by Bernard Gui

[Bernard Gui]

30 minutes ago, juliann said:

No one is answering my question. Would you put someone in a car with the assurance that there was a 26% chance they wouldn't get into a crash?

 I really don't understand the difference with masks other than the transmission crash isn't visible.

No, I wouldn’t do that. Would safety watchdogs recommend a car with airbags that only work 26% of the time?

[Hamba Tuhan]

2 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

So, you were not being truthful when I asked you if you were rebuking me and if you were saying I call the prophets’ messages inconsistent, and you said, “Neither.” In fact, you were doing both and worse.

To which I respond, as you have:

36 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Baloney. Total misrepresentation of my point.

 

[Hamba Tuhan]

2 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Would safety watchdogs recommend a car with airbags that only work 26% of the time?

How about 29 and 32 per cent?

Quote

In frontal crashes, front airbags reduce driver fatalities by 29 percent and fatalities of front-seat passengers age 13 and older by 32 percent (Kahane, 2015).

 

[Bernard Gui]

Just now, Hamba Tuhan said:

To which I respond, as you have:

 

Thank you, but obviously you haven’t followed the lengthy debate between Pogi and me.

I laid out a solid case showing that your comments about me in this thread are unfair and untruthful. This is so disappointing, but we’ll let it stand unanswered as you wish. 

 

 

[Calm]

46 minutes ago, juliann said:

No one is answering my question. Would you put someone in a car with the assurance that there was a 26% chance they wouldn't get into a crash?

 I really don't understand the difference with masks other than the transmission crash isn't visible.

It is not one safety measure in isolation from others, it is the cumulative effect that matters.

[pogi]

36 minutes ago, juliann said:

Um, you are dodging. What about the 74% who might have been saved had they been properly educated about mask efficacy? Are they just collateral damage to avoid doing that while negligent leaders enjoy their cheesecake?

What am I dodging?  You folks are battling the wrong side.  Quit battling those who are at least trying to make at least some improvements and start battling the notion that masks don’t work at all.  

 I would love for folks to wear the best masks (not N95’s though).  I have always advocated for that.  You are setting up a srawman.  Good, better, best.  I will only criticize those who do nothing, and I will try and educate everyone else.

[Calm]

50 minutes ago, juliann said:

What about the 74% who might have been saved had they been properly educated about mask efficacy?

Is anyone here arguing that education through media and some government sources  about mask effectiveness has not been confusing in the US?

And not sure what you mean by “saved”.  A mask being 26% effective does not mean for example 74% of the population get seriously ill or die.  Could you clarify how you are using “saved” here please?

What do you believe would have been the result in the US if mask education had been decent from the beginning?

Edited September 7, 2021 by Calm

[Bernard Gui]

38 minutes ago, Hamba Tuhan said:

How about 29 and 32 per cent?

 

The point is that there are masks readily available that provide 90%+ protection and here we are debating about cloth masks and studies that determine the efficacy of various types of inferior protection. Mass produce the 90%+ to drive the cost down, stop production, promotion, and sale of less effective masks, and strongly urge their exclusive use wherever possible. I think this is reasonable and doable.

Edited September 7, 2021 by Bernard Gui