|
Any and all updates regarding the COVID-19 will need a source provided. Please do your part in helping us to keep this thread maintainable and under control.
It is YOUR responsibility to fully read through the sources that you link, and you MUST provide a brief summary explaining what the source is about. Do not expect other people to do the work for you.
Conspiracy theories and fear mongering will absolutely not be tolerated in this thread. Expect harsh mod actions if you try to incite fear needlessly.
This is not a politics thread! You are allowed to post information regarding politics if it's related to the coronavirus, but do NOT discuss politics in here.
Added a disclaimer on page 662. Many need to post better. |
On November 18 2020 20:36 Uldridge wrote:
How is it still not getting through that masks are literally an extra aid. They dont fix the problem. They don't get rid of transmission. They aid in reducing transmission. Every. Extra. Bit. Helps. The 1.5m distance is BY FAR the most effective strategy due to how liquid droplets tend to travel. It's not 100% effective either, though. But it's the best until vaccines come around.
You don't get to talk about masks in a vacuum, it does not make any sense.
Depending on the type of mask you're using it's going to be more or less effective, but less effect is still better than no effect. Lets just drop this awful stupid debate. Care for your fellow human being by wearing a fucking mask in public, stop being an irrisponsible asshole because it's uncomfortable. This is not directed at you, Magic Powers.
Even though this wasn't directed at me, I wanna say there's a problem with simply saying masks help and leaving it at that.
Lets say you plan on jumping from a bridge without a parachute. Well, in such a case you'd want to wear protective gear, right? Well... yes, but actually no. Protective gear doesn't reduce your risk of death to a meaningful degree. You should simply not jump from any bridges.
This is very similar to the mask mandates. By telling people to wear masks, we're implying that - since the masks make them and/or others (a little) safer - they can start seeing people more often than without masks. So the advice backfires and drives infections up rather than down. That's what could well have happened in the weeks or months leading up to the latest wave, potentially making it worse than it could've been otherwise. The reality is that the supermarkets were filled to the brim and people didn't follow the 1-2 meter distancing guidelines, etc. Every time I went shopping I saw how careless people were. And not just some people, but almost everyone. Some virologists warned us of that exact scenario already in February.
|
The inability of people wearing masks to respect social distancing measures is twofolf (at the very least).
It's government bodies not communicating (enough) the fact that keeping the social distancing measure in effect are always paramount.
Secondly people getting a false sense of security, kind of - but not completely - ties into my previous comment. It also means that people will find any reason to get close to eachother.
|
The argument that people will act unsafe because of the safety that masks provides is like the argument that seatbelts leads people will drive recklessly: true to some minor degree but likely irrelevant in the grand scheme of things and nowhere enough to counter the good done.
|
On November 18 2020 21:25 Sbrubbles wrote:
The argument that people will act unsafe because of the safety that masks provides is like the argument that seatbelts leads people will drive recklessly: true to some minor degree but likely irrelevant in the grand scheme of things and nowhere enough to counter the good done.
Indeed, car companies pushed that theory back in the 70s, they insisted that mandatory seatbelts would lead to more speeding and more deaths.
|
Norway28874 Posts
Trondheim mandated mask use on public transportation yesterday.
Earlier I was used to seeing maybe 25%-ish wearing masks, this morning it was 100%. Mask use isn't really something that allows you to be social like you normally would have been. Myself I see no point in hanging out with people while I'm wearing a mask, I would rather just stay at home then. But the big benefit is if it helps me get to and from work with a lower chance of getting infected or infecting anyone.
And while I can see scenarios where you have to shut down schools and digitalize learning, as a teacher, I also have to say that there is no question that the learning experience is significantly worsened for most pupils - this should be a last resort type of thing. If I can keep going to work and my students can keep coming to school and mandated mask wearing can allow those of us who don't drive a car to still show up without it causing a big increase in R-number, then wearing masks is a great tool that we should utilize. But I'm not gonna go to a party or a restaurant or a concert wearing a mask.
|
On November 18 2020 16:17 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 18 2020 16:14 KwarK wrote:On November 18 2020 15:41 Mohdoo wrote:On November 18 2020 14:56 Belisarius wrote:
Hey, if a TL staffmember is going to do a horrendous driveby, we should at least be thankful he's incompetent enough to do it at the end of a page.
Let's just move on. The way mods let Travis off the hook is very similar to how American police departments treat "bad apples". It makes absolutely no sense. He consistently posts nonsense like this and nothing happens. He's posted similar stuff in this thread before. TL mods have never made any indication why he is treated this way. It just happens and people accept it. It is wrong and reflects poorly. As far as I recall Travis isn’t staff but does have his own user type which gets treated by the code as a kind of emeritus staff. He’s the only user with that type and it doesn’t come with any special powers etc. I think he paid Nazgul to give him it in the early days of tl. I would argue "the code" is fundamentally a blemish on TL as it pertains to Travis. There's no question he is treated wildly different than other members. How many people have you seen banned from this thread for condescendingly posting crazy bullshit like he posted? Its not like its kinda bad, he's particularly bad.
If you let posts like this go without moderation in this thread:
On October 09 2020 15:58 Artisreal wrote:Show nested quote +On October 09 2020 08:13 cLutZ wrote:On October 09 2020 06:21 WombaT wrote:On October 09 2020 06:07 cLutZ wrote:On October 09 2020 05:20 JimmiC wrote:
He was not perfect, nor was anyone. The old Hindsight is 20/20. The issue is that you have a commander and chief as more and more info came in and more and more was known he continued to use his "gut" not too mention his version of "transparency" is lying to keep people "calm". Travel bans would have made a difference, but not what trump did, because China was not the only hot spot not even close. Not to mention he was still lying to people about severity and spouting that the summer would just kill it off so don't worry.
...
You can have a hate on for fauci but you have to look outside your borders and for you to be in the right 99.998 % of the doctors and experts in the public and private world have to be wrong. I'm sure you are a intelligent fellow but I also know you have no medical background so this kind of hubris is just insane levels. Do you think people with no legal training or experience would know you were completely wrong on legal questions? And these people have a lot more training and schooling than even lawyers.
These two are in contradiction. I'm not criticizing him for getting some things wrong, I'm criticizing him for being worse than flipping a quarter. If you sent me 10 potential inventions and asked me to evaluate which ones were likely to be successful patent applications, and which ones would not be, and then you asked the same question to a flipped quarter, I would beat the quarter 99% of the time, the other time being random chance because there sometimes is an extremely lucky quarter. Fauci has lost to the quarter a statistically improbable amount of times such that he is basically an anti-expert. Like one of those radio sports personalities where you make money just betting the opposite of whatever they pick. What’s he been wrong on that hasn’t been subsequently corrected? Specifically There is little value in correction. Good experts predict. I pity you.
I don't understand why you would penalize Travis in this case.
|
On November 18 2020 21:37 Liquid`Drone wrote:
Trondheim mandated mask use on public transportation yesterday.
Earlier I was used to seeing maybe 25%-ish wearing masks, this morning it was 100%. Mask use isn't really something that allows you to be social like you normally would have been. Myself I see no point in hanging out with people while I'm wearing a mask, I would rather just stay at home then. But the big benefit is if it helps me get to and from work with a lower chance of getting infected or infecting anyone.
And while I can see scenarios where you have to shut down schools and digitalize learning, as a teacher, I also have to say that there is no question that the learning experience is significantly worsened for most pupils - this should be a last resort type of thing. If I can keep going to work and my students can keep coming to school and mandated mask wearing can allow those of us who don't drive a car to still show up without it causing a big increase in R-number, then wearing masks is a great tool that we should utilize. But I'm not gonna go to a party or a restaurant or a concert wearing a mask.
That would make it an added benefit of the mask mandate. :-P
On November 18 2020 21:41 Elroi wrote:
I don't understand why you would penalize Travis in this case.
cLutZ said something utterly ignorant. Artisreal was being rude. Travis is literally spreading dangerous misinformation, for the nth time.
|
On November 18 2020 21:25 Sbrubbles wrote:
The argument that people will act unsafe because of the safety that masks provides is like the argument that seatbelts leads people will drive recklessly: true to some minor degree but likely irrelevant in the grand scheme of things and nowhere enough to counter the good done.
I don't think that's a fair comparison.
First of all, car crashes are isolated cases, a single crash doesn't start an endless chain reaction of crashes. Sars-cov-2 infections cause a chain reaction, so a single change in collective behavior has a lot of potential to either improve or worsen the infection rate.
Secondly, driving requires a license. It can be assumed that a driver is most likely an expert at driving and therefore the average driver is very unlikely to cause a crash. Due to that expertise there's little room for improvement to decrease the rate of accidents. Everyday behavior however doesn't require a license and the average citizen is not an expert on combatting viruses, so the ceiling is much higher up. Therefore there's much more room for a single collective behavioral change to drastically increase or lower the infection rate.
So I think a comparison to people without driving experience is more apt. Teaching them the basics of driving or improving the rules of the road drastically reduces their rate of accidents. For sars-cov-2 this would mean telling them to socially distance should have priority over telling them to wear masks. But that's not what happened, as the mask is the first thing many people mention when they're being asked about safety measures.
|
In my experience I personally have met/talked to no one that didn't social distance because they were wearing a mask. I know people that think neither are necessary, or that social distancing is sufficient, but none that think masks are enough on their own.
The exception to that would be owners/bosses claiming it is "safe" to work places where social distancing isn't possible/practical because there are masks (often just cloth). I do find that aspect of masking (this is especially true of indoor dining where the mask is a formality but not practically applicable) problematic myself.
|
On November 18 2020 22:17 Magic Powers wrote:Show nested quote +On November 18 2020 21:25 Sbrubbles wrote:
The argument that people will act unsafe because of the safety that masks provides is like the argument that seatbelts leads people will drive recklessly: true to some minor degree but likely irrelevant in the grand scheme of things and nowhere enough to counter the good done. I don't think that's a fair comparison. First of all, car crashes are isolated cases, a single crash doesn't start an endless chain reaction of crashes. Sars-cov-2 infections cause a chain reaction, so a single change in collective behavior has a lot of potential to either improve or worsen the infection rate. Secondly, driving requires a license. It can be assumed that a driver is most likely an expert at driving and therefore the average driver is very unlikely to cause a crash. Due to that expertise there's little room for improvement to decrease the rate of accidents. Everyday behavior however doesn't require a license and the average citizen is not an expert on combatting viruses, so the ceiling is much higher up. Therefore there's much more room for a single collective behavioral change to drastically increase or lower the infection rate. So I think a comparison to people without driving experience is more apt. Teaching them the basics of driving or improving the rules of the road drastically reduces their rate of accidents. For sars-cov-2 this would mean telling them to socially distance should have priority over telling them to wear masks. But that's not what happened, as the mask is the first thing many people mention when they're being asked about safety measures.
I don't disagree that social distancing may be more important. That's an interesting discussion but one that I'm not really getting into.
I disagree with your notion that calling for use of masks is detrimental to social distancing to a point that it's counterproductive. I haven't seen solid evidence of this, and the anecdotal evidence (like when you say, "mask is the first thing many people mention when they're being asked about safety measures") is just that, anecdotal. Following the car analogy, I've yet to see why you can't both train people AND mandate seatbelt usage.
There's a secondary discussion here, that I would state as "if we don't know with certainty whether mandating masks will reduce adherence to social distancing, what should we assume when devising policy?". When faced with solid uncertainty but the political need to act, I would 100% lean on acting first (in this case, mandating masks) then figuring things out later, because this allows the question to be settled by analising the policy effects ex-post. Not acting (that is, assuming, despite uncertainty, that masks are counterproductive) doesn't answer the question of whether masks are counterproductive, and the "cost" to this policy is, potential counterproductiveness aside, very low.
|
|
|
On November 18 2020 23:26 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 18 2020 21:07 Uldridge wrote:
The inability of people wearing masks to respect social distancing measures is twofolf (at the very least).
It's government bodies not communicating (enough) the fact that keeping the social distancing measure in effect are always paramount.
Secondly people getting a false sense of security, kind of - but not completely - ties into my previous comment. It also means that people will find any reason to get close to eachother. I've been also reading that it is simply not true. People that wear masks are not more likely to ignore social distance, in fact it is the opposite. People who won't use or miss use masks are most likely to ignore social distancing because they already believe the virus is not bad is a hoax or masks and social distancing do not work. Not only is it incorrect for the reasons you are stating but the premise itself is completely flawed.
I'm responding to MagicPowers' post there, were he makes that statement.
By the way, people in public areas (train stations, supermarkets) abolutely DO NOT keep 1.5m distance in any occasion. And public mask wearing in public places has been mandatory since march here. People can't follow the 1.5m rule at least over here it seems.
|
|
|
Pfizer's vaccine must be kept at -70C. So when it warms up above -70C a viral agent of some kind starts to multiply ? I guess the primary agent is neither dead nor crippled?
Does the average DR's office in the USA have -70C freezers? In Canada, a DR having a -70C freezer is very rare. Hell there are hospitals in Canada that don't have a -70C freezer.
Covid has been going on so long ... I'm surprised talk about immune system strengthening is so rare. It is a critical part of any person winning the Covid fight.
A vaccine requires one's immune system to react to it correctly and build sufficient antibodies. Any vaccine's effectiveness hinges upon a solid immune system response. The Pfizer vaccine requires two doses which means an inadequate immune response will require 3+ shots with tests after each shot to see if your immune system did its job. The relatives I have that have a medical practice say 5 shots being required for a 2-does vaccine happens plenty of times.
Thus, I'd say the news article claiming 40 million doses will immunize 20 million people is incorrect.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/11/17/covid-vaccines-what-you-need-to-know/?arc404=true
"the government projects that Pfizer and Moderna will provide 40 million doses, enough for 20 million people, by the end of the year"
All things being close to equal I'd go with the vaccine that requires -30C storage rather than the one that requires -70C storage.
If the article below is correct, we are probably months away from this nightmare being over.
https://www.bbc.com/news/health-54986208
|
Do you have any sources on that something starts to multiply, or is that something you came up with?
Because my first guess as to why it needs low temperatures is that something in there isn't stable for longer periods of time at higher temperatures (And thus stops being useful after some short-ish period of time.)
But sure, all things being equal, something that is easier to store is better. There are still a bunch of situations where we need really low temperatures, though.
|
On November 19 2020 00:32 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Pfizer's vaccine must be kept at -70C. So when it warms up above -70C a viral agent of some kind starts to multiply ? I guess the primary agent is neither dead nor crippled? Does the average DR's office in the USA have -70C freezers? In Canada, a DR having a -70C freezer is very rare. Hell there are hospitals in the Canada that don't have a -70C freezer. Covid has been going on so long ... I'm surprised talk about immune system strengthening is so rare. It is a critical part of any person winning the Covid fight. A vaccine requires one's immune system to react to it correctly and build sufficient antibodies. Any vaccine's effectiveness hinges upon a solid immune system response. The Pfizer vaccine requires two doses which means an inadequate immune response will require 3+ shots with tests after each shot to see if your immune system did its job. The relatives I have that have a medical practice say 5 shots being required for a 2-does vaccine happens plenty of times. Thus, I'd say the news article claiming 40 million doses will immunize 20 million people is incorrect. https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/11/17/covid-vaccines-what-you-need-to-know/?arc404=true"the government projects that Pfizer and Moderna will provide 40 million doses, enough for 20 million people, by the end of the year" All things being close to equal I'd go with the vaccine that requires -30C storage rather than the one that requires -70C storage.
Storage is gonna be a real issue in poorer countries like Brazil, possibly even a deal-breaker for outside the big cities. From what I've read, the chinese vaccine doesn't have these storage restrictions (I don't remember the russian one).
|
On November 19 2020 00:40 Simberto wrote:
Do you have any sources on that something starts to multiply, or is that something you came up with?
Because my first guess as to why it needs low temperatures is that something in there isn't stable for longer periods of time at higher temperatures (And thus stops being useful after some short-ish period of time.)
please note the question mark at the end of my sentence. it is a question and a guess ... like yours. my lab tech friend has the same question/guess... so i'm throwing it out there. maybe someone knows for sure.
the 5 days before being useless ... is interesting...
On November 19 2020 00:40 Simberto wrote:
But sure, all things being equal, something that is easier to store is better. There are still a bunch of situations where we need really low temperatures, though.
I'd say its rare.
Almost no DRs offices in Canada have -70 freezers. The lab at the hospital in the 6th largest city in Canada does not have a -70 freezer. Its a pretty big lab. In my experience working at various Canadian hospitals ... most don't have -70C freezers.
Now, my experience could be an anomaly. Which is why I asked what the -70C freezer situation was like in US hospitals and DRs offices.
On November 19 2020 00:42 Sbrubbles wrote:Show nested quote +On November 19 2020 00:32 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Pfizer's vaccine must be kept at -70C. So when it warms up above -70C a viral agent of some kind starts to multiply ? I guess the primary agent is neither dead nor crippled? Does the average DR's office in the USA have -70C freezers? In Canada, a DR having a -70C freezer is very rare. Hell there are hospitals in the Canada that don't have a -70C freezer. Covid has been going on so long ... I'm surprised talk about immune system strengthening is so rare. It is a critical part of any person winning the Covid fight. A vaccine requires one's immune system to react to it correctly and build sufficient antibodies. Any vaccine's effectiveness hinges upon a solid immune system response. The Pfizer vaccine requires two doses which means an inadequate immune response will require 3+ shots with tests after each shot to see if your immune system did its job. The relatives I have that have a medical practice say 5 shots being required for a 2-does vaccine happens plenty of times. Thus, I'd say the news article claiming 40 million doses will immunize 20 million people is incorrect. https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2020/11/17/covid-vaccines-what-you-need-to-know/?arc404=true"the government projects that Pfizer and Moderna will provide 40 million doses, enough for 20 million people, by the end of the year" All things being close to equal I'd go with the vaccine that requires -30C storage rather than the one that requires -70C storage. Storage is gonna be a real issue in poorer countries like Brazil, possibly even a deal-breaker for outside the big cities. From what I've read, the chinese vaccine doesn't have these storage restrictions (I don't remember the russian one).
I think a key factor will be the effectiveness of these various vaccines for people over 65.
Any way you cut it.. things are looking up. Some people being vaccinated is better than none.
|
Don't think finding a freezer for -70 is that hard. Dry ice is -78 and back when I was working as a chemist, I've never worked at a lab that didn't have the possibility to store dry ice.
|
looks like the -70C storage requirement is going to create all kinds of challenges.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-vaccine-pfizer-distribution-logistical-nightmare/
i guess the -70C freezer situation in Canada is similar to the situation in the USA.
Hospitals can buy ultra-cold freezers, which will keep the vaccinations up to six months. But few hospitals or pharmacies have the specialty freezers, which can cost as much as $20,000 each, and are in short-supply. Manufacturer K2 told CBS MoneyWatch the wait for its ultra-cold freezers is now six weeks.
|
Yes, I'd heard it was going to cause issues a while back (transport is also going to be hard). However, it should still be possible to setup distribution across Canada/US. If we can get a distribution center in each major population center then it should only require an hour or two of driving for 98-99% of the population (which is a larger ask for some than others).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
