Will Joe Biden be the next president?

[The_Doc_Man]

We can't forget that when we (the USA) originally declared our independence, we named Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness - in that order. The masks relate the first item and all other issues like personal liberty come second when life is on the line. And going out partying clearly falls in third place.

 

[Deleted member 147267]

I just can't relate to the notion of rebelling if a branch of government dictates that you wear a mask. Those people must have been rebellious kids and yet they probably wouldn't tolerate such behaviour from their own kids who acted that way. The concept of the greater good must be totally foreign to them and they'd rather argue about their rights and take covid into their house, their relatives house, or even the retirement homes. Around here, the same people who rant about their rights over wearing a mask are usually OK with being told they can't smoke in public places - at least they're quiet about it. Heck, you can't even smoke in a commercial vehicle (truck, cab, whatever), in the workplace, nor even in your own car if any occupant is under the age of 16 (or thereabout). Those laws exist to protect the non-smokers from un-filtered carcinogens, especially the very young. I don't see how being told to wear a mask is any different in terms of the greater good. I'll say it again, why say "Give me liberty or give me death" when you can have both? Y'all can proselytize on the subject of rights trumping masks but I'll warn you that you'll be wasting your effort.

 

[Isaac]

I just can't relate to the notion of rebelling if a branch of government dictates that you wear a mask. Those people must have been rebellious kids and yet they probably wouldn't tolerate such behaviour from their own kids who acted that way. The concept of the greater good must be totally foreign to them and they'd rather argue about their rights and take covid into their house, their relatives house, or even the retirement homes. Around here, the same people who rant about their rights over wearing a mask are usually OK with being told they can't smoke in public places - at least they're quiet about it. Heck, you can't even smoke in a commercial vehicle (truck, cab, whatever), in the workplace, nor even in your own car if any occupant is under the age of 16 (or thereabout). Those laws exist to protect the non-smokers from un-filtered carcinogens, especially the very young. I don't see how being told to wear a mask is any different in terms of the greater good. I'll say it again, why say "Give me liberty or give me death" when you can have both? Y'all can proselytize on the subject of rights trumping masks but I'll warn you that you'll be wasting your effort.

Well I think the last several posts have been in agreement with what you are saying.

I will say I think the smoking thing - SOME places go too far. Not smoking in public areas which are totally outdoor? The smoke breaks up to 1 part per million how fast. But eliminating smoking indoors (in places where other people have to be, or public places), that totally makes sense.
Maybe a fair balance would be a rule that you must be a certain distance away from people - but places like California that have banned it just anywhere and everywhere has gotten ridiculous. And if they do that + include vaping .. that's just beyond ridiculous.
I was in a California town once meeting for something at a church, and they said people couldn't smoke anywhere outside in the whole town!

 

[Deleted member 147267]

Not smoking in public areas which are totally outdoor? The smoke breaks up to 1 part per million how fast.

I'm going to guess that your notion of what happens to the smoke is purely conjecture, regardless of how true it may be. However, I am fairly certain that the restriction in some public places is true here - e.g. for public parks. Seems like overkill to some people no doubt, but have you ever followed anyone downwind along a path - even being 20 feet behind them, and their smoke billows towards you? It stinks if you're a non-smoker. If you can smell it, you can suffer the effects if not simply be offended by the stench. I don't want to start something over smoker's rights here - I just wanted to draw a parallel between those who will accept those restrictions where I live (especially when it comes to their kids in a car) yet whine about being asked to help with stopping the spread of covid. Maybe the problem is that there is a disconnect between the request/mandate and any message that explains the upside of it.

Do most those people ride around with their seat belts undone and have rallies to protest? I think not, so why not? Do they comply with the law strictly because of the possible punishment (fine and/or demerit points)? Or is it because they understand the life saving potential of wearing them and have come to accept the law? My point is, the current beef over masks might be largely due to the lack of a consistent and repeating message as to the at least potential benefit. I say if you want to defend your right to smoke, not wear a seat belt and not wear a mask, you should go to the bottom of the list when you need emergency or long term care as a result of that choice.

 

[Isaac]

I see what you mean. That, basically, we all submit to a variety of common-sense restrictions (for safety's sake), every day. Regardless of the specific items. And so why pick out the masks for a fight. I agree..
One thing that annoys me is when people in my neighborhood on Nextdoor (social media app - I rarely use but have seen some posts), start saying that covid is like the flu. I mean really??

 

[Pat Hartman]

All you have to do is look at countries that have been successful in getting over this thing,

The studies cannot differentiate between whether it is social distancing or masks that actually offer protection. You do recall at the beginning before all of this was politicized, the experts universally agreed that the masks available to the public did NOT stop viruses. That hasn't changed. Unless you're wearing an N95 (down to around $6 a pop) and changing it every couple of hours, you get no virus protection from masks. Just read the specs. None of them claim to stop virus particles. So, the claim is that they stop droplets if you sneeze (not the virus mind you). Think about that folks. If you sneeze into your mask are you going to leave it on? That would be pretty disgusting. Do you carry a spare? Are you going to whip it up and sneeze into your elbow or your hand?

Mask wearing has been politicized. If I wear a mask, I am a good person. If I don't wear a mask, I am an evil person and there is no room for objectivity or personal choice. I am good or I am evil. It is really hard to argue with that. Science be damned. We are still forgetting about social responsibility. If you have symptoms, you need to isolate yourself. Don't go out and infect me. We are now punishing the innocent because they "might" be infected and not know it. Science is still out on how infected people who are asymptomatic are. Science is out on how people actually become infected. My mother-in-law was living in an Assisted Living facility and fell so they had to send her to a rehab center. They tested her and she was negative. She spent three days in rehab and was disoriented and afraid. They weren't dong an rehab anyway so my Brother-in-law took her to his home where he could keep her for a few weeks and get therapists to treat her. She stayed for three weeks and was fine so they were going to send her back but she needed to get tested again. She tested positive. So John and his wife and all the people who had been treating her for three weeks had to also get tested and they were all negative. So, Ceile was in close contact with 5 people everyday for three weeks and she didn't infect anyone. My mother-in-law never had any symptoms and she never infected anyone. I realize that this is only one case but when you live with someone or have to give them physical therapy, you can't really keep your distance. Many scientists think that if you are asymptomatic, you don't shed virus and so you are not likely to infect other people. Someday, we'll actually know if this is true.

Everyone talks about the "science" but we are not allowed to hear about any study that doesn't conform to the "masks work" theory. I'll give you an example of "science" as interpreted by our governor. Overnight camps are bad. Day camps are good. I'm not sure what his reasoning is but it seems to me that getting tested and going away to spend two weeks with other people who are isolated with you and who have also been tested would logically appear to be safer than a day camp where you can't possibly check everyone every day and at 5 PM every one goes home and mixes with whomever and then comes back at 9AM the next morning to infect everyone else. You can't make this stuff up and yet the politicians do. Throw politics and virtue signalling into the mix and you get GIGO. Garbage in, garbage out.

When did we switch to the French philosophy of guilty until proven innocent? We are now supposed to assume that everyone is infected and instead of protecting ourselves we expect others to protect us.

The science is in on seat belts.
The science is in on cigarettes but over exaggerated on second-hand smoke. I'm not sure why people who object to cigarette smoke don't object to marijuana smoke or even smoke from wood fires.
The statistics on COVID are reported in such a way as to scare you to death rather than to accurately portray the danger. For example, when you do more testing, you expect more positive results but that isn't how that stat is portrayed by the media. Florida was even inflating positive tests by not reporting negatives at all. So, for some period of time, everyone tested in Florida tested positive. The CDC specifically instructed all coroners and hospitals to log a death as COVID whether the person tested positive or not or even if they had flu-like symptoms so the deaths are also inflated. The "news" keeps telling you that we have the most COVID deaths in the world. OK. We also have the second largest population. Only China is larger (I think the USSR might have been also before the break up) and we know how trustworthy the Chinese are. The meaningful statistic is deaths per unit of population and that put us around 20th on the list last time I noticed or even lower if you count NY as a country in and of itself. For some reason that escapes me, Cuomo keeps getting praised for his handling of COVID. The "news" media does not "see" Cuomo's order to send COVID positive patients to nursing homes despite having an empty hospital ship and an almost empty Javitts center field hospital where they could have been safely isolated during rehab. Instead, his bone head order caused thousands of unnecessary deaths!!!

 

[Jon]

When did we switch to the French philosophy of guilty until proven innocent? We are now supposed to assume that everyone is infected and instead of protecting ourselves we expect others to protect us.

We could also remove all the speed limits and say unless you kill someone through going too fast, you are essentially innocent. Yet we don't. Why? Because common sense dictates that while you might punish the "innocent" high speed drivers who haven't killed anybody yet, you on aggregate cut the death toll. Same with Covid.

You do recall at the beginning before all of this was politicized, the experts universally agreed that the masks available to the public did NOT stop viruses.

I believe it was Dr Fauci himself who admitted that they said masks were not effective so that the medical workers could get their hands on the limited supply. You can read through my Coronovirus thread where I talk about masks and my predictions of what the experts will say. I said they will say they don't work, then use them sometimes, then compulsory. This prediction has come true in the UK. From this Saturday, we have to use them when going into shops.

If masks are not effective in reducing the risk, why do medics wear them at all? I think we all know why. Its because they do have some effect.

Regarding virus particle size, as I understand it, the whole concept of water droplets is how far the virus can travel. So, whatever size the virus particles are, if the masks reduce the distance of water droplet travel, it helps.

The incompetent WHO is now recommending certain people wear masks.

The WHO director general, Dr Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, said the body’s position that masks alone would not protect people remained the same. But, he said, “in the light of evolving evidence, WHO advises that governments should encourage the general public to wear masks where there is widespread transmission and physical distancing is difficult, such as on public transport, in shops or in either confined or crowded environments”.

The WHO has got egg on their face with this issue. (Sorry @Uncle Gizmo, I know you are dieting!)

I think the concept of virtue signalling is irrelevant to this issue. Whether or not someone virtue signals, it does not affect the science. The science says mask usage cuts risk, according to the evolving evidence. To me, it is the bleeding obvious. Even without data on the topic, just model countries who have a low infection rate. You know their package of measures work, so if if some are unnecessary, who cares. The aggregate of measures works.

You can use common sense on this issue. You don't need a scientific experiment for everything. There probably hasn't been an experiment to test how safe a chicken is from fire if you put them in a hexagonal wooden box lined with platinum. But you don't need to. You can extrapolate from general principles to get likely outcomes.

 

[Isaac]

Honestly I am just trying hard not to get the Virus at this point. It's OK for me if there are some restrictions. I am in a semi-risky situation if I get the virus, and worry that I might not fare well. Plus I think of the practical results. If everyone would just agree on the masks here, we probably could have more businesses open, and that would help everyone, especially those who are near starvation & bankruptcy due to being out of work for 3 months.

 

[Jon]

I think the cultural differences between individualism and collectivism is why the West and East have faired differently under Covid. Also, campaigning for your civil rights leads to more death and destruction, because the virus loves such behaviour. They can then nom nom on all the new hosts who are out and about.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

start saying that covid is like the flu. I mean really??

Really. Corona virus is part of a family of respiratory illnesses that indeed ARE somewhat like the flu. Some diseases are much worse and some much better. Sort of like a surgeon's scalpel, a well-tended sword, and a guillotine are sharp cutting instruments.

 

[Isaac]

I think the cultural differences between individualism and collectivism is why the West and East have faired differently under Covid.

I hate to have to see it that way, but I think there is some truth to what you have said.

Take what you said about collectivism / obedience, and throw in what I mentioned about cultures whose customs involve a LOT of physical contact including kiss greetings (Hispanic), then consider both factors (and what their opposites are), and what do you get? A formula that perfectly explains Japan. IMHO.

 

[Isaac]

Really. Corona virus is part of a family of respiratory illnesses that indeed ARE somewhat like the flu. Some diseases are much worse and some much better. Sort of like a surgeon's scalpel, a well-tended sword, and a guillotine are sharp cutting instruments.

Of course what I meant was people saying the overall COVID situation is no worse than the overall yearly FLU situation.
I wasn't taking issue with those who point out the scientific similarities. Sorry..I thought that was more apparent.

I'm referring to the obvious stupidity of people I've heard say "What's the big fuss about COVID-19? I had it and it was better than the flu".
(As their overall, sweeping response to the general problem).

 

[The_Doc_Man]

We are still forgetting about social responsibility. If you have symptoms, you need to isolate yourself. Don't go out and infect me.

Pat, it is unfortunately the young idiots who never learned the word "responsibility" who end up causing the need for some kind of facial covering. There have been many documented cases of kids going to parties. I will counter your anecdote of your mother-in-law with the case on-line where a young man in his 30s went to a party without a mask, got sick, got hospitalized, and from his ICU bed he posted a facebook entry stating regret for his stupid, selfish choice. Then he died the next day. The thing about comparing anecdotes is you need a lot of them before you can claim statistical significance. (It's related to the "Law of Large Numbers" that indirectly has to do with data reliability.

I am not an M.D. but I am a Ph.D. who dealt with face coverings in the labs where I earned my degree. We learned about airborne poisons which is almost as scary as corona virus. It was part of the organic chemistry lab about learning to handle hazardous material, for those of us who were going to Med school rather than remaining as chemists, but it was a good elective for me because of the high odds that my first post-college job would relate to the petroleum industry.

The truth is, virus-sized and smaller particles don't travel very well in air by themselves due to slow diffusion rates. But if they have a carrier, they go for a greater distance. The droplets have a bigger "cross section" which affects the convection rate and the range of said droplets. Every droplet of your sputum or mucous that your mask catches is a disease vector that doesn't travel far. And that is not only solid science, it is also common sense.

The kids won't use a mask so blindly take the risks and forget that once they are infected, they have two weeks during which they still don't necessarily know they have it. Further, if they are one of the lucky ones who have the blood type that protects them from the worst effects, they might NEVER know they have it even after the two weeks.

Then, of course, there is south Louisiana where I live, where we have heat/humidity that can kill by itself. We have a really high incidence of various and sundry respiratory afflictions here including hay fever, post-nasal drip, and tons of pollen from all the plants that just LOVE our moist atmosphere. We might NEVER know whether we had COVID-19 because the biggest symptoms of coughing and sneezing and nasal effects are part of our everyday lives. Mine included. If you ask me whether I have a cough and runny nose, my answer is "since 2nd grade."

Here, we have mandatory mask orders for going into a commercial establishment. Our governor (today) said he was extending the "Phase II" order because we are not out of the woods yet. We don't need a mask when we are outdoors. We can take off the masks while eating in a place that otherwise observes social distancing. But to protect the business owners and ourselves, we have mask rules.

 

[Pat Hartman]

If masks are not effective in reducing the risk, why do medics wear them at all? I think we all know why.

They wear them because they can't practice social distancing. They also wear masks that are more effective than what is available to the general public. AND, they wear them correctly.

The science says mask usage cuts risk,

Actually it doesn't. What are you going to do if you are sick and sneeze? Are you going to sneeze into your mask? What happens after that? Do you clean yourself up and whip out your spare mask? The problem is that clinical trials can't actually be performed because they would risk infecting people and so they would never be allowed. The tests are purely lab controlled and yes if you sneeze into your mask, it will stop large particles but the mask will NOT stop viruses. They just fly on through. If you put a chain-link fence around your yard, would you expect it to stop mosquito's? Some masks are better than others. You need three ply at a minimum with a replaceable filter from non-woven material AND you need to wear it properly.

The truth is, virus-sized and smaller particles don't travel very well in air by themselves due to slow diffusion rates

I just saw a man walking his dog through my yard. It's 86 degrees, the sun is shining (best disinfectant around), and he's wearing a mask. How scared is he?

I would be much happier if the PTB would stop trying to manipulate the statistics to be worse than what they are. We were still in flu season when COVID struck. All of a sudden, we stopped counting flu deaths. EVERYONE from that point forward died of COVID. When you politicize something like this, you can and should get resistance.

 

[Steve R.]

Hot topic today.

Everyone talks about the "science" ....

I'm suffering from sensory overload over this term being bandied about. (No offense meant, Pat; your quote was simply available.) Time for another relevant Dilbert cartoon that just came out last week. Is Scott Adams dropping in on this website?

 

[Isaac]

Hot topic today. I'm suffering from sensory overload over this term being bandied about. (No offense meant, Pat; your quote was simply available.) Time for another relevant Dilbert cartoon that just came out last week. Is Scott Adams dropping in on this website?

View attachment 83662

That does bring up a valid point. In the sense that, while people are saying "follow the science, the science"...Yet, 'science' (scientists' conclusions, really), often changes its mind! New things come to light that either confirm or deny various theories, either new or old.
Like, say, the discovery of a human footprint in the so-called "Permian" layer ...

In the context of covid-19: Even though I still would pay attention to whatever seemed to be the most certain scientific conclusions of the moment, still, it is totally fair to factor in the changes and mistakes into your own personal 'credibility equation' that all of our brains run when we decide how believable something is.

This is why most of my focus is on the behavior (and relative success/failure) of other nations. It might be one of the best indicators we have, actually.

 

[Deleted member 147267]

The first panel renders the announcement itself as worthless.
Never have seen a catch 22 situation in a cartoon (that I can recall, even if it was intentional) but I think I just did.

This is why most of my focus is on the behavior (and relative success/failure) of other nations.

Read it and weep (or at least wonder no more). India, with about 4x the US population is at half your rate at this point. Mouse over the data points to see the infections & deaths as a percentage of population.

Wait, never mind. The cartoon renders this data as meaningless and wrong. It's obviously Democratic propaganda.

 

[Isaac]

The first panel renders the announcement itself as worthless.
Never have seen a catch 22 situation in a cartoon (that I can recall, even if it was intentional) but I think I just did.


Read it and weep (or at least wonder no more). India, with about 4x the US population is at half your rate at this point. Mouse over the data points to see the infections & deaths as a percentage of population.

Wait, never mind. The cartoon renders this data as meaningless and wrong. It's obviously Democratic propaganda.

I don't think the cartoon renders this data meaningless and wrong, but I wouldn't be being honest if I didn't admit that, when faced with a choice as to how much credibility to give a momentary scientific conclusion, it is totally reasonable to factor in how many times the conclusions have gone back-and-forth on a particular issue. That is all I was saying. It is a legitimate factor. In fact, it would be odd not to account for it at all.

I think the point the cartoon is making is clear. How to process the fact that scientific studies often conclude other scientific studies were wrong. Then more studies later conclude the 2nd one was wrong. You may deny it all you wish, but every human brain will automatically take this into account when attaching credibility to the next one they hear. It is the nature of an evolving set of knowledge.

As far as your link, thanks. That was interesting. Nice visualization, too - I bet it was created in Tableau.
So here's a question for you. I was playing around with the visualization on that page. One thing I came across was % of cases who have died. I started out thinking "this is great! - I can really gain some insight by this metric".
Then I stopped to think about it. How do I know who is reporting what? Am I really supposed to go along with the idea that every little village in India is reporting cases exactly like they are in Houston, TX or Bogota, Columbia? How do I know what qualifies as a covid-19 death? Some people test everyone who dies, some are testing those with symptoms, some are counting those who died after treatment from covid, some aren't counting at all, others are counting those who died with covid-like symptoms, and who counts those who die in a rural place in India without ever seeing the door of a hospital??, and most importantly, I'd be very surprised if every time someone dies there, there is a comprehensive "yes" or "no" as to whether or not it was covid. Probably the most obvious question is whether in poorer countries, they even have ways of catching most of the deaths at all.
Last week it was discovered that in Florida, they are counting every time someone tests positive for Covid as a "new case". There are many people, especially elderly and in certain industries, who are getting tested regularly. When they test positive, it counts once. When they test again in a week and test positive again, it counts a second time. This is a fairly small impact, probably - but it gives you an idea of just one of the many ways supposed "data" can be just about anything from a-z.

I can stare at that "death rate per million" count in India all day long, but it's only as good as the assumption that every time someone dies in every little random place around planet Earth, all of their Testing, Autopsy, Care, Hospitals, Databases, etc. are functioning exactly the same. I would go so far as to say it is almost silly to imagine that the mostly technology- and testing-dependent reporting mechanisms of all deaths operate precisely the same way in Bangladesh and India as they do Germany and the US. As database people, we really ought to understand this clearly.

Do you really think they are?

 

[isladogs]

Thanks @Micron for the link in the last post as well as pointing out the (deliberate?) absurdity of the first frame comment in the Dilbert cartoon.
In case anyone wants the webpage itself its https://informationisbeautiful.net/visualizations/covid-19-coronavirus-infographic-datapack/

The % of cases who have died is one of the most interesting items of data (and one where the UK has come out particularly badly).
Compare and contrast how effectively different countries have imposed and implemented lockdowns.
The countries where it was done firmly and quickly have generally performed 'well'

India imposed a sweeping lockdown with only four hours notice. It caused a lot of hardship but has been very effective despite High population densities in cities such as Delhi and Kolkata. By comparison, countries such as the US, UK and Brazil made a mess of implementing any form of lockdown and the data shows the outcomes of that

 

[Jon]

They wear them because they can't practice social distancing. They also wear masks that are more effective than what is available to the general public. AND, they wear them correctly.

You have no control over others socially distancing from you in an enclosed space. So you can't always be socially distanced.

Wearing them correctly is no different to the washing your hands correctly argument. You could say don't wash your hands because they might do it incorrectly.

Who says the masks many medical practitioners use are more effective than what is available to the general public? I have a woodworking mask with a valve that are supposed to be very effective. My understanding is that they just don't have the insurance requirements for them. It is a costs issue. Many nurses are using the less effective ones that are just cloth based.

Actually it doesn't. What are you going to do if you are sick and sneeze? Are you going to sneeze into your mask? What happens after that? Do you clean yourself up and whip out your spare mask?

Sneeze into the mask. But its not just about sneezing. People might not sneeze but cough instead. Just breathing spreads the virus airborne too.

it will stop large particles but the mask will NOT stop viruses.

I covered this in my previous reply. The virus cannot travel so far without water droplets as a carrier. Also, there is research suggesting that the viruses can float in the air in water droplets for potentially hours.

You can ignore all these factors but then I think its a case of digging your heals in rather than objective analysis. At least that is my view. We agree on most of the political stuff, but I am in stark contrast regarding this particular topic.