Corona Virus

[rippadonn]

Just now, LinvilleGorge said:

Nailed it. It's impossible to have a civil intellectually honest debate with someone who ignores facts and data and evidence to insert their own opinions as if they carry the same weight.

Common sense should overrule false science. Newsflash: scientists can be wrong and often have been.

I was about to back up what I said with information from the association of surgeons and physicians that proved my point that THOSE ARE THE WRONG MASKS, but you shut me down. Not my fault oh one who knows EVERYTHING.

 

[Paintballr]

1 minute ago, rippadonn said:

Common sense should overrule false science. Newsflash: scientists can be wrong and often have been.

I was about to back up what I said with information from the association of surgeons and physicians that proved my point that THOSE ARE THE WRONG MASKS, but you shut me down. Not my fault oh one who knows EVERYTHING.

 

So post the info on facts on masks? I’m interested to know honestly 

Edited July 16, 2020 by Paintballr

[LinvilleGorge]

I can't do this again today. I'm done with the idiocy. All the data is wrong. All those other countries that have virtually snuffed out COVID evidently just got lucky. We're on the right path despite blowing every other country on Earth out of the water in both case count and deaths.

It's just stunning arrogance and ignorance.

[rippadonn]

Just now, Paintballr said:

So post the info on facts?

Listen, some people here are very immature but what little power they have they'll use that to back up mainstream thought.

If I feel like it in a minute, yes I'll post it. It won't be appreciated anyways though.

Maybe you deserve Dr Cooper

[rippadonn]

20 minutes ago, R0CKnR0LLA said:

This is the spoiled ignorant entitled attitude that is precisely the problem.

The idea that someone's dumbass retarded opinion, based on made up BS they saw on facebook, is just as valid as facts and scientific findings coming from the worlds top experts.

No, the world doesn't need more of these dumbass "viewpoints" thrown in to muddy the waters and give people that are already selfish toddlers an excuse to be idiots.

If you don't have useful information to add, based in reality and facts, then just STFU, you're only making things worse.

I'm not on Facebook so.....

Before I could post the REAL info Linville pulled my plug.

Oh well, paging Dr Cooper

[LinvilleGorge]

Just now, rippadonn said:

I'm not on Facebook so.....

Before I could post the REAL info Linville pulled my plug.

Oh well, paging Dr Cooper

You're currently posting. You got a one hour timeout for spamming after being warned to take it to the TB. Cry about it more. Let's see your "REAL info".

[KSpan]

37 minutes ago, 45catfan said:

Let me try this again.

Not sure what you're 'trying again' but as I and others have posted it's not only about deaths. A big part of this is that this infection is novel and its mechanism of action and risk factors are not yet fully clear, so no one knows what the long-term outcomes will be for either children or adults while the long-term outcomes of things like the flu are well known and documented.

Even if risk of child death does end up being ultimately higher with other seasonal circulating diseases, this specific discussion continues to ignore the risks to those who works in these environments. At least, however, as adults they have the option and (seemingly) cognitive ability to weigh the risks and make their own informed decisions.

Again, I speak this as someone who works in pharmaceutical development and disease research (having just left a company that is playing a large role in COVID tracking and tracing initiatives). There are comments in here about science being wrong and changing... and that's because that's what science is and does. It's about gathering information, organizing it as best it can be with what's available, and then drawing conclusions based on said information. In a dynamic situation like this one a balance must be struck between these analyses and informing action to be taken, and it does happen that new data leads to new conclusions.

[rippadonn]

If you've got time learn the truth about "masks" and handkerchiefs.

https://aapsonline.org/mask-facts/

 

Remember: Ripp loves you all

I'm out!

Edited July 16, 2020 by rippadonn

[45catfan]

18 minutes ago, KSpan said:

Not sure what you're 'trying again' but as I and others have posted it's not only about deaths. A big part of this is that this infection is novel and its mechanism of action and risk factors are not yet fully clear, so no one knows what the long-term outcomes will be for either children or adults while the long-term outcomes of things like the flu are well known and documented.

Even if risk of child death does end up being ultimately higher with other seasonal circulating diseases, this specific discussion continues to ignore the risks to those who works in these environments. At least, however, as adults they have the option and (seemingly) cognitive ability to weigh the risks and make their own informed decisions.

Again, I speak this as someone who works in pharmaceutical development and disease research (having just left a company that is playing a large role in COVID tracking and tracing initiatives). There are comments in here about science being wrong and changing... and that's because that's what science is and does. It's about gathering information, organizing it as best it can be with what's available, and then drawing conclusions based on said information. In a dynamic situation like this one a balance must be struck between these analyses and informing action to be taken, and it does happen that new data leads to new conclusions.

Strange...not sure what I was talking about, but then again knew exactly what I was talking about.  A vaccine isn't around the corner as much as the media keeps hyping one.  The reason is very obvious.  Even so, it will likely be a seasonal vaccine and not a cure, likely with spotty effectiveness.   This will continue to make its round every year for a while.  Therapeutics is the best way to tackle this.  We can't even eradicate the common cold, but a cure for a novel viral disease is just over the horizon!!!  I'm not buying it.  So what, we lock down until more studies are done on the linger effects? What then?  Wait for more studies to be done based off those findings for some consensus in the scientific community?

Thanks for somewhat acknowledging my post, however, even though you skirted around it.  Yes, deaths have dipped below pandemic levels in America, at least for the time being.

Edited July 16, 2020 by 45catfan

[KSpan]

6 minutes ago, rippadonn said:

If you've got time learn the truth about "masks" and handkerchiefs.

https://aapsonline.org/mask-facts/

 

Remember: Ripp loves you all

I'm out!

Your own source says that droplets are large enough to be stopped by the masks, so if the viral particulates are in the droplet... the particulates are stopped/slowed as well. The whole point of the masks isn't really to protect on the inhale, though wearers benefit from a layer blocking touching of the face, it's to disrupt the exhalations of the wearer. Also, of course other methods like regular hand-washing are crucial. 

This whole line of thinking is silly. There is no harm in wearing one and given the rate of infection in the US masks can also cause people to just be generally more aware. From your the NEJM article quoted on your link:

Quote

There may be additional benefits to broad masking policies that extend beyond their technical contribution to reducing pathogen transmission. Masks are visible reminders of an otherwise invisible yet widely prevalent pathogen and may remind people of the importance of social distancing and other infection-control measures.

It is also clear that masks serve symbolic roles. Masks are not only tools, they are also talismans that may help increase health care workers’ perceived sense of safety, well-being, and trust in their hospitals. Although such reactions may not be strictly logical, we are all subject to fear and anxiety, especially during times of crisis. One might argue that fear and anxiety are better countered with data and education than with a marginally beneficial mask, particularly in light of the worldwide mask shortage, but it is difficult to get clinicians to hear this message in the heat of the current crisis. Expanded masking protocols’ greatest contribution may be to reduce the transmission of anxiety, over and above whatever role they may play in reducing transmission of Covid-19. The potential value of universal masking in giving health care workers the confidence to absorb and implement the more foundational infection-prevention practices described above may be its greatest contribution.

This is similar to how studies show that people who complete a food diary lose more weight than control groups simply because they're aware of their behaviors (https://research.kpchr.org/News/Press-Releases/CHR-Study-Finds-Keeping-Food-Diaries-Doubles-Weight-Loss). There is quite literally no downside to wearing one for most people, even if there does end up being little to no upside tied to the mask functionality.

[rippadonn]

25 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

You're currently posting. You got a one hour timeout for spamming after being warned to take it to the TB. Cry about it more. Let's see your "REAL info".

Say you're sorry

[LinvilleGorge]

Yeah, masks aren't going to do a great job of filtering aerosolized particles. I think everyone already knew that. The thing is that we're not really generating all that many aerosolized particles in normal everyday life. It's why so many outbreaks have been linked to choirs and churches. Singing and shouting does produce a lot more aerosols.

They really cheapened their own paper when they referenced this study:

https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/M20-1342

I took a quick look. Holy poo, that's a laughable study. First of all, they had a sample size of four. Second of all, in their testing they found no virus detected on the inside of two masks while finding virus on the outside. That screams control issues or even outright data falsification. You mentioned common sense earlier, now use it. Do you really think a mask being worn by an infected person would have no virus detected on the inside of it? Did the virus teleport itself through the mask and then consciously decide to cling to the exterior? There testing was also done at a distance of roughly 8" away. Much closer than any normal social encounter and far closer than the recommended six feet of social distancing which mask wearing does not change.

At the end of the day, their entire paper was based on theory and their conclusions of ineffectiveness were based on ineffectiveness from very small aerosolized particles. Not just aerosolized, but very small even for aerosols.

Fortunately, in recent weeks we accidentally found a very good real world case

https://www.livescience.com/hair-stylists-infected-covid19-face-masks.html

Two infected hair stylists cut the hair of 139 people while wearing masks and requiring clients to wear masks. None of those 139 people have tested positive despite spending significant time in very close proximity to an infected person.

[LinvilleGorge]

1 minute ago, rippadonn said:

Say you're sorry

I'm absolutely not sorry for warning you and then following through with my unheeded warning.

[NanuqoftheNorth]

Anecdotal Observation:  I can't recall a day when I've been out in public recently where there hasn't been at least one or more people sneezing without covering their mouths.