Jump to content
KJP

Coronavirus Pandemic

Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, X said:

 

I don't think people should be wearing their masks outside, at least under most circumstances.  Maybe if they're in prolonged close contact with someone else, but otherwise no.

 

It should be worn anywhere where you're likely to come into close contact with people.  There are plenty of outside places that would apply, and we've seen a lot of pics and videos of very crowded parks, beaches, patios, etc.  6ft isn't even scientifically supported.  It's at least 2x that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It depends on how close you will be to other people and how long you will be exposed to other people. The sidewalks around UC are narrow and were packed with people this evening. If I was walking down a street that busy, passing dozens of people I don't know, I would absolutely be wearing a mask. Not to mention, many of the people I saw were going in and out of businesses along McMillan, and none of them stopped to put on a mask before they went inside.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jonoh81 said:

It should be worn anywhere where you're likely to come into close contact with people.  There are plenty of outside places that would apply, and we've seen a lot of pics and videos of very crowded parks, beaches, patios, etc.  6ft isn't even scientifically supported.  It's at least 2x that. 

 

Viral load is key, and the spread outdoors is pretty minimal.  Contact tracing has shown spread outdoors to be around 0.3% of all cases traced.

 

https://www.erinbromage.com/post/the-risks-know-them-avoid-them


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, taestell said:

It depends on how close you will be to other people and how long you will be exposed to other people. The sidewalks around UC are narrow and were packed with people this evening. If I was walking down a street that busy, passing dozens of people I don't know, I would absolutely be wearing a mask. Not to mention, many of the people I saw were going in and out of businesses along McMillan, and none of them stopped to put on a mask before they went inside.

 

If I understand the science right (and I realise that both the science and my understanding of it are fallible), then your first sentence is correct, which makes your scenario in the second two sentences a situation where it would be understandable to want to wear a mask, but not really necessary because the time factor of the exposure isn't really there.  I also agree that people should be putting on the masks before entering the confined spaces of the businesses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And

 

Edited by KJP

"Nearly every problem that we have in the USA -- unaffordable health care, prison overpopulation, hyper militarization, climate change, racism, gun violence, poverty, poor education, urban sprawl and others -- cannot be positively addressed because bribery and conflicts of interest are legal under campaign finance laws which protect the uber-wealthy and the narrow self-interests who grossly benefit from our afflictions."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The ignorance and stupidity is just mind-blowing.

 

Face masks should be used when within close proximity of others, wherever that may be.

 

I would also consider wind speed in an outside venue. If its windy, you may want to consider increased usage of a face mask because viral particles from vapor droplets can travel farther.

Edited by Frmr CLEder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, X said:

 

I don't think people should be wearing their masks outside, at least under most circumstances.  Maybe if they're in prolonged close contact with someone else, but otherwise no.

 

Or a prolonged series of close contacts with many people, i.e., a crowd.  Though obviously crowded outdoor patios are showing that there are different schools of thought on people's risk threshold for that.

 

This will become more relevant as concerts and sporting events start to return.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Frmr CLEder said:

The ignorance and stupidity is just mind-blowing.

 

Face masks should be used when within close proximity of others, wherever that may be.

 

I would also consider wind speed in an outside venue. If its windy, you may want to consider increased usage of a face mask because viral particles from vapor droplets can travel farther.

 

Actually, if it is windy you're at a lower risk of transmission because the viral particles will disperse and degrade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, X said:

 

If I understand the science right (and I realise that both the science and my understanding of it are fallible), then your first sentence is correct, which makes your scenario in the second two sentences a situation where it would be understandable to want to wear a mask, but not really necessary because the time factor of the exposure isn't really there.  I also agree that people should be putting on the masks before entering the confined spaces of the businesses.

 

This is my understanding as well. You're at very low risk simply passing someone outside. You have to be standing within six feet of them and the longer you are in their space the more the risk is increased. But just passing them quickly is not very dangerous. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being indoors with people not in your household is the highest risk. General outdoor activity is low to medium risk. I dont wear a mask to walk, hike, run, or cycle around. I remove my mask when I leave a store. They aren't generally needed outdoors unless it is a gathering of some sort. Walking or running past people briefly is very low risk. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are we testing 22k people today?

 

Pretty amazing DeWine/Husted set goals for reopening...we're consistently falling short of those goals...but we're just going to continue opening things.


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, DEPACincy said:

 

Actually, if it is windy you're at a lower risk of transmission because the viral particles will disperse and degrade.

The viral particles will disperse and eventually degrade however, if you are downwind from an unmasked, asymptomatic carrier, particularly if they are coughing, talking or laughing, that places you at risk.

Edited by Frmr CLEder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Frmr CLEder said:

The viral particles will disperse and eventually degrade however, if you are downwind from an unmasked, asymptomatic carrier, particularly if they are coughing, talking or laughing, that places you at risk.

 

There are virtually no confirmed cases of "community spread" occurring outdoors among countries that have done extensive contact tracing.


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, DarkandStormy said:

 

There are virtually no confirmed cases of "community spread" occurring outdoors among countries that have done extensive contact tracing.

 

There's also significant evidence that asymptomatic carriers are nowhere close to as infectious as the symptomatic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

There's also significant evidence that asymptomatic carriers are nowhere close to as infectious as the symptomatic.

 

You have a source attached with that claim. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ I dont rely upon confirmed cases because those numbers identify few asymptomatic carriers. Asymptomatic carriers are the greatest challenge. Most sick people will stay home.

 

So there was no community spread on Florida Beaches during Spring Break, nor the Lake Party in Missouri, nor countless other events ocurring nationally, as confirmed cases spike.

 

Then take the risk. You know what the risks are. How much risk you're willing to take is your prerogative.

 

As a provider, if there's potential, I won't be.

 

 

Edited by Frmr CLEder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0869-5

 

Quote

We observed the highest viral load in throat swabs at the time of symptom onset, and inferred that infectiousness peaked on or before symptom onset. We estimated that 44% (95% confidence interval, 25–69%) of secondary cases were infected during the index cases’ presymptomatic stage, in settings with substantial household clustering, active case finding and quarantine outside the home.

 

https://virologie-ccm.charite.de/fileadmin/user_upload/microsites/m_cc05/virologie-ccm/dateien_upload/Weitere_Dateien/analysis-of-SARS-CoV-2-viral-load-by-patient-age-v2.pdf

image.thumb.png.9e492e0960aa08217341be065b585b9b.png

Quote

The amount of virus released from an infected person changes over the course of infection and it is also different from person-to-person. Viral load generally builds up to the point where the person becomes symptomatic. So just prior to symptoms showing, you are releasing the most virus into the environment. Interestingly, the data shows that just 20% of infected people are responsible for 99% of viral load that could potentially be released into the environment.

 


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Frmr CLEder said:

^ Then take the risk. We know the risks. How much risk you're willing to take is your prerogative.

 

As a provider, if there's potential, I won't be.

 

What I'm saying is, there's basically no risk in passing a stranger at a park.  That is what the scientists and experts are telling us.  Very brief encounters in an outdoor setting are not long enough exposures to result in an infection.

 

We have not been wearing masks on our walks or hikes because we know a) there's no risk of being infected or infecting others as long as we b) keep our distance and don't hang around talking to strangers for more than a second (to comment on our/their dog or whatever).

 

To me, wearing a mask for every second leaving the house is overkill.  The science has shown us the greatest risk areas are indoors and with lots of people in close proximity.  These are made worse when people are spreading germs through the air (they cited a choir practice as an example...but also any time people are sneezing or coughing without a mask would also increase the risk).


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ This does not exclude any outdoor activity where there are numerous disassociated individuals within close proximity of one another. There's a reason baseball, NASCAR, football, street fairs, all outdoor activities, are without spectators and/or cancelled.

 

Even amusement parks are exercising social distancing rules prior to reopening, including Cedar Point.

Edited by Frmr CLEder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Frmr CLEder said:

^ This does not exclude any outdoor activity where there are numerous disassociated individuals within close proximity of one another. There's a reason baseball, NASCAR, football, street fairs, all outdoor activities, are without spectators and/or cancelled.

 

Even amusement parks are exercising social distancing rules prior to reopening, including Cedar Point.

 

Well, everything you mentioned includes likely shared indoor space (restroom, at the very least) and a lot of shared surface touch space (restrooms, concessions, potentially fair games, rides, etc.) and/or sitting in close proximity to one another for a very extended period of time (sports, mostly).  I did read OSU is looking into limiting crowd capacity to ~20-25k - I assume to spread out the rows and such.

 

I'm referring more to walks in the park, biking, hiking, strolling around the neighborhood, etc.


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DEPACincy said:

 

This is my understanding as well. You're at very low risk simply passing someone outside. You have to be standing within six feet of them and the longer you are in their space the more the risk is increased. But just passing them quickly is not very dangerous. 

 

Ergo, the safest course of action is to spend as much time as possible this summer outside biking.

 

ImeanImjustsayingitslogical ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I'm referring more to walks in the park, biking, hiking, strolling around the neighborhood, etc"

 

These activities are fine and make sense. Use your common sense.

 

I also have to remember that, except for limited areas, Cleveland doesn't have a lot of pedestrian traffic anymore, like some cities.

 

https://trib.al/7sWKmre

Edited by Frmr CLEder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Gramarye said:

 

Ergo, the safest course of action is to spend as much time as possible this summer outside biking.

 

ImeanImjustsayingitslogical ...

This is true whether there is a pandemic or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, troeros said:

 

You have a source attached with that claim. 

 

https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/coronaviruse/situation-reports/20200402-sitrep-73-covid-19.pdf

"Asymptomatic transmission An asymptomatic laboratory-confirmed case is a person infected with COVID-19 who does not develop symptoms. Asymptomatic transmission refers to transmission of the virus from a person, who does not develop symptoms. There are few reports of laboratory-confirmed cases who are truly asymptomatic, and to date, there has been no documented asymptomatic transmission. This does not exclude the possibility that it may occur. Asymptomatic cases have been reported as part of contact tracing efforts in some countries."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Laboratory confirmed case" means they were tested. 

 

We already know that until very recently, most "asymptomatic carriers" have not been tested, because we didn't have adequate testing supplies. Testing has been reserved for those who are symptomatic, at risk or on the front lines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another one with their head up their own a$$...

 

Ohio lawmaker refuses temperature check, calling it an invasion of privacy

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2020/05/27/ohio-lawmaker-refuses-temperature-check-calling-invasion-privacy/5265700002/


"Nearly every problem that we have in the USA -- unaffordable health care, prison overpopulation, hyper militarization, climate change, racism, gun violence, poverty, poor education, urban sprawl and others -- cannot be positively addressed because bribery and conflicts of interest are legal under campaign finance laws which protect the uber-wealthy and the narrow self-interests who grossly benefit from our afflictions."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Sad. She happened to lose her primary this year so she won’t be back next year.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^These people lose Republican races badly. Some Rs are totally forgetting about all the old people they are scaring the hell out of by "rebelling" against health guidelines during this. By hoping to score points with 54-year-old Harley guys they're throwing the senior citizens the Rs take for granted under the bus. So everyone over 65 hates them and everyone under 45 hates them. That's why they lose all their momentum politically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why Ohio’s coronavirus testing rates are among the nation’s worst

 

https://www.dispatch.com/news/20200527/why-ohiorsquos-coronavirus-testing-rates-are-among-nationrsquos-worst?template=ampart&__twitter_impression=true

 

Will be hard to gauge surges that way if you barely test. Keep an eye on hospilization metrics. 111 new hospilizations just in the last 24 hours. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, troeros said:

 

FYI, this is the temporary setup that Big Ash had put into place:

ls.jpg

 

I will reiterate that I think it's too soon for restaurants, bars, and other non-essential businesses to be reopening.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, DarkandStormy said:

^That's honestly not a terrible setup, all things considered.


I've seen much worse happening here in Cleveland.   That entire fenced in area would be packed with people standing and drinking!  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 


"Nearly every problem that we have in the USA -- unaffordable health care, prison overpopulation, hyper militarization, climate change, racism, gun violence, poverty, poor education, urban sprawl and others -- cannot be positively addressed because bribery and conflicts of interest are legal under campaign finance laws which protect the uber-wealthy and the narrow self-interests who grossly benefit from our afflictions."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fairfax's Karrikin Spirits Co., which opened at 3717 Jonlen Drive in December 2018, posted to Facebook that it was closing temporarily following the employee's diagnosis.

 

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2020/05/28/east-side-distillery-closes-temporarily-after-posi.html?ana=TRUEANTHEMFB_CI&csrc=6398&utm_campaign=trueAnthem%3A+Trending+Content&utm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=facebook

 

Cincinnati businesses have had horrible luck with the reopening thus far...

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If it was only the MAGAts who were doing this to themselves, I wouldn't care. But it's not. It's affecting the innocent too....

 

Wisconsin reports record number of new coronavirus cases, deaths

Wisconsin saw a record number of new coronavirus cases and deaths, two weeks after the state’s Supreme Court struck down its stay-at-home order.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/wisconsin-reports-record-number-new-coronavirus-cases-deaths-n1216471


"Nearly every problem that we have in the USA -- unaffordable health care, prison overpopulation, hyper militarization, climate change, racism, gun violence, poverty, poor education, urban sprawl and others -- cannot be positively addressed because bribery and conflicts of interest are legal under campaign finance laws which protect the uber-wealthy and the narrow self-interests who grossly benefit from our afflictions."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.google.com/amp/s/wcfcourier.com/news/local/update-watch-now-state-reaches-500-deaths-all-99-counties-have-cases-iowa-now-at/article_67bb3740-0937-5251-bfe3-5c73e94fd581.amp.html

 

State reaches 500 deaths, all 99 counties have cases; Iowa now at 12th in nation per capita

 

Two Iowa counties have now had 3% or more of their population test positive for coronavirus: Buena Vista and Louisa counties.

Four Iowa counties -- Crawford, Marshall, Tama and Woodbury -- have had 2% or more of their population test positive, while another five are over 1%: Black Hawk, Dallas, Muscatine, Wapello and Wright counties

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, troeros said:

 

It's on dispatch.com if you have free articles to use up there, or a subscription.

 

Basically expanded testing = increase in cases.  So the Enquirer has asked what "metrics" DeWine and Acton are looking at in terms of decision-making, but they've declined to say what, exactly, and what would trigger an action.

 

1) Hospitalizations - no number or % cited as to what would be concerning.

2) R0/Rt - but again, there isn't a figure that has been made public that would result in any action.

3) Percent positive on tests - as testing increases, they're watching the percentage of tests that come back positive.

 

Mostly about the metrics they're watching, but also noting that the state hasn't publicly set any standards around them.


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2020/05/29/death-m29.html

 

Quote

Data collected by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) suggests that tens of thousands of deaths attributed to pneumonia were more likely caused by the coronavirus pandemic, and that the real death toll from COVID-19 is nearly 50 percent higher than the officially reported number of about 103,000.

 

According to provisional data from the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), there were at least 63,752 deaths caused by the pandemic from the week ending April 4 through the week ending May 2, reflecting the sharp rise in cases in the United States beginning in mid-March. During that same period, there were 47,812 pneumonia deaths, which is 65 percent higher than normal, based on seasonal averages.

 

Assuming that these excess deaths were actually caused by the pandemic, either directly by the virus or by those who fell sick and were afraid to get treated at a hospital, this would bring the COVID-related mortality in April to 92,524. Extrapolating through May, this would bring the actual number of dead as a result of the coronavirus to just under 150,000.

 


Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Does this work kind of like HIV vs. AIDS in that people might have gotten coronavirus but got pneumonia instead of COVID-19?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, GCrites80s said:

Does this work kind of like HIV vs. AIDS in that people might have gotten coronavirus but got pneumonia instead of COVID-19?

 

I'm not entirely sure.  But the annual mortality rate from pneumonia in the U.S. is typically around 50,000.  So to have nearly that entire number in about a month is a huge abnormality.  My guess is they were either misdiagnosed as pneumonia cases OR they were infected with covid-19, which led them to being more susceptible to pneumonia.  You will note the covidiot truthers like Elon Musk complaining about the cause of death.  Does it really matter if it was covid-19 or pneumonia?  Coronavirus infection happened first and then they died.  It's not like there aren't excess deaths happening.  The covidiots just want to blame it on anything other than covid-19.

Edited by DarkandStormy

Very Stable Genius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is like AIDS; nobody dies of AIDS, they die of the flu or a stomach infection, et al that they wouldn't have trouble fighting otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. Right wingers i know think its all a hoax. “I don’t know anyone that has had it!!”  They feel its a “money grab” by hospitals to call everything covid so they can get paid by the feds. I’m guessing this is a Hannity theory, since they get all their talking points from these silly wankers. 
 

EDIT:   So its a crazy theory since some states are refusing to have them assigned as covid yet other states are.Wouldn’t it be screwing over the hospitals in Florida -and Texas from “getting paid”?

Edited by audidave

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, KJP said:

 

 

There's certainly historic precedent with other diseases and viruses spreading from one continent to another and into populations with low immunity. European diseases killed off as much as 90% of native populations in the Americas in the first century after first contact.  The native populations had virtually zero immunity as they'd never been exposed to them before. This disease spread killed as much as a fifth of the global population at the time, and arguably changed the course of history.  Had that not happened, European colonization may never have been possible.

Edited by jonoh81

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, GCrites80s said:

Does this work kind of like HIV vs. AIDS in that people might have gotten coronavirus but got pneumonia instead of COVID-19?

 

The confusion about what to label a Covid death is why there should be national classification standards.  I generally think that if the person would've lived longer even with the underlying condition had they not caught the virus, it should be classified a Covid death.  So if the person has pancreatic cancer, which is almost always fatal, but caught Covid and died sooner than they would have with the cancer, Covid is the cause of death.  I don't think that's the same with HIV as it directly attacks the immune system, allowing other usually minor conditions to be fatal, so HIV was, in fact, the underlying cause of death.  There's not really any confusion like there is with Covid.

Edited by jonoh81

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...