COVID-19 (f/k/a "the Coronavirus")

[mu03eng]

I understand and appreciate the point you're trying to make, but have we really come to the point where we can't point out (and yes, even shame) bad and harmful behavior because we fear that those engaging in it will dig in their heels. When did appeasing bad actors at the expense of public health become a thing?
Not wearing a mask is selfish because it puts your fellow citizens at risk of  a dangerous disease. We shouldn't be afraid of saying that. There's nothing wrong with telling people they're putting their fellow citizens at risk. We're not afraid of telling people not to drink and drive because it may cause them to drink and drive more.

And - at the risk of a pissing match, which I honestly don't want - the problem isn't the media" doing a poor job of identifying when priors have changed. I suspect everything you've included in your excellent list of what we now know about the virus is something you learned through "the media."
The problem is certain voices in the media - and in our political leadership - are sending mixed messages, or even encouraging bad behavior, for their own gain.

Overly snarky admittedly, but we think shaming people who ultimately view shame like as a badge of honor is going to work?? Culturally we've gotten better about adjusting communications and targeting messaging around "triggers" and sensitivities on the left, why would we not do that for those on the right as well? It comes back to the phrase "winning friends and influencing enemies", the shame approach doesn't work for either. We need the "bad actors" to join us and poking them in the eye doesn't feel like the correct approach to me.

As to the info and the media, actually the list I generated was because I was watching general media and not seeing the info I wanted nor presented in a way that made sense to me. I dug up articles, studies, looked up subject matter experts on twitter(they exist, not just keyboard warriors ), etc to educate myself and that was the light bulb moment where I said we just aren't putting out the right info with the right context and walking back some of the early hysteria and sensationalism.

I totally but that the hyper partisan environment makes this tough, especially as it's an election year but that means the media needs to step up even more to get facts out, be level headed, and keep the opinion to the opinion pages

[forgetful]

Not to take away from the pissing matches of who's more wrong but I thought we might circle back to where we are in our knowledge of the virus(and acknowledge we've made a ton of progress since March which was one of the main outcomes of the lockdown). So I tried to make a list of things we now know* about the virus and how prevent and/or treat it

-General virus transmission rules apply so minimize duration with infected person, maximize distance, wash hands as much as possible, and outside is much preferred to inside
-Infected people who wear masks reduce transmissions, transmissions are significantly reduced if all parties wear masks
-This virus tends to transmit in "large batches" meaning that a casual encounter with a person at a store is a lot less likely to cause infection(especially in an exponential growth style) than are large events like church service, concert, etc
-the contagion period seems to be two days prior to symptoms and 2-3 days after symptoms start
-the preponderance of severe cases is in the elderly and/or those with significant comorbidities
-Once you get Covid you very likely have immunity for a period of time(length is unknown at this time)
-early intervention in the form of intebation is to be avoided
-lay patients prone as much as possible and watch for clotting events
-Vaccine of some sort is very probable to happen the only question is how much immunity does it confer and how long does it lost (is it flu vaccine effective or MMR vaccine effective). The other question is when it would be available
-UV light kills the virus on surfaces

What did I miss, anything I got really wrong? My point here is we really are starting to get a handle on this virus and that should guide as we go forward. We also need to let go of our "priors" we developed in February/March when we were just learning of this virus(prime example is Fauci saying masks don't matter in March, we know a lot more now).

*I mean this to be probably known or scientifically verified, we don't know a lot with 100% certainty....but we can't make decisions on just the 100% certain info

With the exception of the contagion period, and immunity. Essentially all this was known in February. The actual new things we know.

-Children suffer potentially deadly illnesses.
-Asymptomatic/mild symptom individuals can suffer catastrophic strokes or heart attacks. Including in young otherwise healthy individuals.
-There are a larger number of asymptomatic individuals. They are a significant driver of the spread.
-Cats can readily spread infection.

Regarding masks. When the "they don't help" news was out. I posted that people at the CDC were admitting, that caution was to try to stop people buying all the N95's because hot zones were unable to get any. They didn't actually think they didn't have an effect, it was a political decision to protect front line workers.

[ZiggysFryBoy]

God I wish the banhammer would come down on you.....

Careful, the scoop intelligentsia will label you a snowflake.   

[mu03eng]

With the exception of the contagion period, and immunity. Essentially all this was known in February. The actual new things we know.

-Children suffer potentially deadly illnesses.
-Asymptomatic/mild symptom individuals can suffer catastrophic strokes or heart attacks. Including in young otherwise healthy individuals.
-There are a larger number of asymptomatic individuals. They are a significant driver of the spread.
-Cats can readily spread infection.

Regarding masks. When the "they don't help" news was out. I posted that people at the CDC were admitting, that caution was to try to stop people buying all the N95's because hot zones were unable to get any. They didn't actually think they didn't have an effect, it was a political decision to protect front line workers.

1. We didn't "know" those things in February, there were a lot of conflict reports in the media, hell within this thread. That's why I called them out, they are by and large definitive now

2. Those items are suspected, but they certainly aren't definitive. Take the children, I've seen conflicting reports about the severity of the cases themselves versus being exasperated because parents are afraid to take them in to doctors until they are already critical. I think the statement of "children aren't immune and there may be a severity impact" makes sense. As to the spread I left off the asymptomatic because there are starting to be studies that indicate that majority of spread is A) pre-symptomatic and/or actual symptomatic folks and B) super spread events where the combination of time spent and volume of people creates the actual spread. So making a run to target where a "spreader" happens to be is relatively low risk versus say a church service or a small concert or something that. Still very unclear though so that's why I left it off

[Pakuni]

Overly snarky admittedly, but we think shaming people who ultimately view shame like as a badge of honor is going to work?? Culturally we've gotten better about adjusting communications and targeting messaging around "triggers" and sensitivities on the left, why would we not do that for those on the right as well? It comes back to the phrase "winning friends and influencing enemies", the shame approach doesn't work for either. We need the "bad actors" to join us and poking them in the eye doesn't feel like the correct approach to me.

Honestly, what makes you think the people refusing to wear marks because "Freedom!" or marching on state capitals with guns would be persuaded if only everyone were nicer to them?

The shame and insults come only after these people have rejected efforts at reason through data and scientific recommendations. It's not as if the sentiment goes from "Don't wear a mask" to "You're a jerk if you don't wear a mask" in an instant. The scientific community issues a recommendation based on the best evidence before it, and political leaders enact guidelines intended to promote public health and ask people to follow them.

The "you're a jerk" part comes only after these people selfishly decide their personal politics - and can't we admit that's what this all about? - are more important than the health and well-being of their neighbors. I just can't get on board with the idea of coddling stupid and selfish people who are putting the health of others at risk - not just because they don't deserve it, but because it won't work.

[Galway Eagle]

I think it's easy to say we should be nicer to them And respect their till one of them who contracts it has spent 14 days breathing and sneezing on everybody around them causing a multitude of people to get sick. Maybe one dies, maybe one has lasting lung damage. I wonder if then we'd still have that same let's be nicer and respectful of their viewpoint that wearing a mask is akin to nazi Germany.

[mu03eng]

Honestly, what makes you think the people refusing to wear marks because "Freedom!" or marching on state capitals with guns would be persuaded if only everyone were nicer to them?

The shame and insults come only after these people have rejected efforts at reason through data and scientific recommendations. It's not as if the sentiment goes from "Don't wear a mask" to "You're a jerk if you don't wear a mask" in an instant. The scientific community issues a recommendation based on the best evidence before it, and political leaders enact guidelines intended to promote public health and ask people to follow them.

The "you're a jerk" part comes only after these people selfishly decide their personal politics - and can't we admit that's what this all about? - are more important than the health and well-being of their neighbors. I just can't get on board with the idea of coddling stupid and selfish people who are putting the health of others at risk - not just because they don't deserve it, but because it won't work.

Just look at this thread(like 100 pages ago) that turn happens fast. And honestly, the first significant peer study of mask impact on transmission of Coronavirus didnt come out until 10 days ago and the mask debate kicked off long before that so the true science was lacking. Yes it 100% made sense that masks would make a difference but when you get mixed messages I see where people can come to the wrong conclusion.

Factor in that everything Trump does/says is either celebrated or hated makes all of this worse. The mask thing just turned into the 9,438th front in the political war being waged right now.

[mu03eng]

I think it's easy to say we should be nicer to them And respect their till one of them who contracts it has spent 14 days breathing and sneezing on everybody around them causing a multitude of people to get sick. Maybe one dies, maybe one has lasting lung damage. I wonder if then we'd still have that same let's be nicer and respectful of their viewpoint that wearing a mask is akin to nazi Germany.

I got an idea, let's make them wear masks

[forgetful]

1. We didn't "know" those things in February, there were a lot of conflict reports in the media, hell within this thread. That's why I called them out, they are by and large definitive now

2. Those items are suspected, but they certainly aren't definitive. Take the children, I've seen conflicting reports about the severity of the cases themselves versus being exasperated because parents are afraid to take them in to doctors until they are already critical. I think the statement of "children aren't immune and there may be a severity impact" makes sense. As to the spread I left off the asymptomatic because there are starting to be studies that indicate that majority of spread is A) pre-symptomatic and/or actual symptomatic folks and B) super spread events where the combination of time spent and volume of people creates the actual spread. So making a run to target where a "spreader" happens to be is relatively low risk versus say a church service or a small concert or something that. Still very unclear though so that's why I left it off

On (1) it depends where you looked in January and February. Yeah, the media didn't know it, because frankly the media is a lagging source of information. All of it was readily published in primary medical/scientific literature. I guess, because I read a good bit of that, I was aware of it fairly early.

On (2) we certainly know it is true, which is why there are extensive warnings by the medical community. Kawasaki's, is always a severe disease that is fatal unless addressed very quickly. It progresses extremely rapidly, and manifests in weird ways, which sometimes delays treatment.

I think a difficult part is what is called "asymptomatic." The phrase is very liberally used. So a person with a light cough, is usually considered "asymptomatic," I think you and some others would call them a "symptomatic spreader," both are reasonable statements. Similarly, some patients have pneumonia, but don't even know it, because they have no outwardly obvious symptoms. So are they "symptomatic" or "asymptomatic". What I'm saying, here, is we agree, but the language complicates the interpretation.

[Pakuni]

Just look at this thread(like 100 pages ago) that turn happens fast. And honestly, the first significant peer study of mask impact on transmission of Coronavirus didnt come out until 10 days ago and the mask debate kicked off long before that so the true science was lacking. Yes it 100% made sense that masks would make a difference but when you get mixed messages I see where people can come to the wrong conclusion.

Factor in that everything Trump does/says is either celebrated or hated makes all of this worse. The mask thing just turned into the 9,438th front in the political war being waged right now.

eng03 ... you may be 100 percent correct. Maybe an ongoing gentler approach is the answer.
But I just can't buy the idea that the reason these people aren't wearing masks is because of the earlier confusion or mixed messages. They're not wearing masks as a political statement.

[mu03eng]

eng03 ... you may be 100 percent correct. Maybe an ongoing gentler approach is the answer.
But I just can't buy the idea that the reason these people aren't wearing masks is because of the earlier confusion or mixed messages. They're not wearing masks as a political statement.

I 100% there is at least a large segment that are doing it as a political statement and you would never get 100% support no matter what you tried. I'm just saying it becomes less of a political statement if there is less push back. People fight to fight sometimes, why give them the fight they want?

I guess my thesis is, that A) we'd never get 100% compliance, but B) a kinder, gentler approach yields more compliance than a full throated defense and shame campaign does. I definitely could be wrong on both, but that's more than debate I want to have then anything.

[pbiflyer]

Honestly, what makes you think the people refusing to wear marks because "Freedom!" or marching on state capitals with guns would be persuaded if only everyone were nicer to them?

The shame and insults come only after these people have rejected efforts at reason through data and scientific recommendations. It's not as if the sentiment goes from "Don't wear a mask" to "You're a jerk if you don't wear a mask" in an instant. The scientific community issues a recommendation based on the best evidence before it, and political leaders enact guidelines intended to promote public health and ask people to follow them.

The "you're a jerk" part comes only after these people selfishly decide their personal politics - and can't we admit that's what this all about? - are more important than the health and well-being of their neighbors. I just can't get on board with the idea of coddling stupid and selfish people who are putting the health of others at risk - not just because they don't deserve it, but because it won't work.

If we were only nicer to this Colorado guy, he'd listen to reason, right?

[mu03eng]

On (1) it depends where you looked in January and February. Yeah, the media didn't know it, because frankly the media is a lagging source of information. All of it was readily published in primary medical/scientific literature. I guess, because I read a good bit of that, I was aware of it fairly early.

On (2) we certainly know it is true, which is why there are extensive warnings by the medical community. Kawasaki's, is always a severe disease that is fatal unless addressed very quickly. It progresses extremely rapidly, and manifests in weird ways, which sometimes delays treatment.

I think a difficult part is what is called "asymptomatic." The phrase is very liberally used. So a person with a light cough, is usually considered "asymptomatic," I think you and some others would call them a "symptomatic spreader," both are reasonable statements. Similarly, some patients have pneumonia, but don't even know it, because they have no outwardly obvious symptoms. So are they "symptomatic" or "asymptomatic". What I'm saying, here, is we agree, but the language complicates the interpretation.

Let me re-articulate 1 because I think we're in strong agreement, I just didnt explain well. Over the last several months, the narrative within the media has felt like somehow Coronavirus is unique as a virus,  obviously it is unique to some extent, but the feel has been that even the base understanding of how viruses transmit could be undercut by this new virus. What I saying is that the fundamentals are still the fundamentals but that feels like it's been lost in the breathless and sometimes sensational reporting. I mean, we had panic about beaches and parks being open, the fundamentals would say those are some of the safest places to have open.

[mu03eng]

If we were only nicer to this Colorado guy, he'd listen to reason, right?

Neat, you've found a raging bigot that you can then paint anyone that has any position similar to his(100% this is a dude right?) with the same brush. My point is never you can get everyone but that you can get more people to your side if you're just not a d!ck about it

[injuryBug]

1. We didn't "know" those things in February, there were a lot of conflict reports in the media, hell within this thread. That's why I called them out, they are by and large definitive now

2. Those items are suspected, but they certainly aren't definitive. Take the children, I've seen conflicting reports about the severity of the cases themselves versus being exasperated because parents are afraid to take them in to doctors until they are already critical. I think the statement of "children aren't immune and there may be a severity impact" makes sense. As to the spread I left off the asymptomatic because there are starting to be studies that indicate that majority of spread is A) pre-symptomatic and/or actual symptomatic folks and B) super spread events where the combination of time spent and volume of people creates the actual spread. So making a run to target where a "spreader" happens to be is relatively low risk versus say a church service or a small concert or something that. Still very unclear though so that's why I left it off

To point B Fauci brought up in early April the biggest way to spread was to be in direct contact for an extended period of time.  He said that was the reason many nurses got it at first cause they were in contact with a patient before it was known they had the virus.

It makes complete sense why you do not see target or walmart or your local grocery stores shutting down cause of a huge outbreak among the employees.

with that said I think schools and sporting events will go on this fall with fans and student in attendance.  Schools will need to get creative in the way they set up classrooms and conduct school.  As for games I do not think we will see a full stadium until 2021. 

[pbiflyer]

Neat, you've found a raging bigot that you can then paint anyone that has any position similar to his(100% this is a dude right?) with the same brush. My point is never you can get everyone but that you can get more people to your side if you're just not a d!ck about it

You mean like those lovely open protesters? Please. The majority of the people that don't want any restrictions or wearing of masks are not going to have their minds changed unless they themselves are hospitalized with the virus.

I think this guy is about the only way to change minds of the openers. Coronavirus Florida: Jupiter Farms man was virus skeptic until it infected him
https://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/20200518/coronavirus-florida-jupiter-farms-man-was-virus-skeptic-until-it-infected-him

Brian Lee Hitchens was a coronavirus skeptic until the illness led him to be hospitalized at Palm Beach Gardens Medical Center. Now the Jupiter Farms resident wants people to know the virus is dangerous and real. He has taken to Facebook to share his experience.

He told The Palm Beach Post on Monday that he doesn’t understand how coronavirus deniers who in past weeks protested shelter-in-place measures still believe the virus — which has kept him hospitalized since April 19 — is a hoax.

[MUfan12]

Honestly, what makes you think the people refusing to wear marks because "Freedom!" or marching on state capitals with guns would be persuaded if only everyone were nicer to them?

I hate wearing a mask. It's uncomfortable. It makes me incredibly anxious. I try to avoid situations where I'd have to wear one, if possible. And I'll admit, there have been times where I have very quickly popped and out of a place without wearing one.

I can't stand the President, or the "freedom fighters" that show up at state capitals. It has nothing to do with my politics. By taking the tone you do, you lump everyone into one group or the other. And you alienate people who may not be perfect, but are far from the problem.

[Galway Eagle]

I hate wearing a mask. It's uncomfortable. It makes me incredibly anxious. I try to avoid situations where I'd have to wear one, if possible. And I'll admit, there have been times where I have very quickly popped and out of a place without wearing one.

I can't stand the President, or the "freedom fighters" that show up at state capitals. It has nothing to do with my politics. By taking the tone you do, you lump everyone into one group or the other. And you alienate people who may not be perfect, but are far from the problem.

Bandana, scarf, pull up a hoodie, doesn't need to be a mask if you aren't comfortable with it. It's not for your benefit but those around you. The rest of your point makes sense regarding lumping people all together.

[MUfan12]

Bandana, scarf, pull up a hoodie, doesn't need to be a mask if you aren't comfortable with it. It's not for your benefit but those around you. The rest of your point makes sense regarding lumping people all together.

Thanks, I hadn't heard that anywhere before.

[Pakuni]

I hate wearing a mask. It's uncomfortable. It makes me incredibly anxious. I try to avoid situations where I'd have to wear one, if possible. And I'll admit, there have been times where I have very quickly popped and out of a place without wearing one.

I can't stand the President, or the "freedom fighters" that show up at state capitals. It has nothing to do with my politics. By taking the tone you do, you lump everyone into one group or the other. And you alienate people who may not be perfect, but are far from the problem.

I'm sorry wearing a mask makes you uncomfortable. Sincerely. I don't like it either. But I wear one because it's a minor sacrifice made for the public good. It sounds like you do the same.
My issue isn't with those who don't like wearing a mask. Most of us don't like it. My issue is with those who refuse that minor sacrifice, especially for political reasons or because they believe whacked out conspiracy theories. And I'm not alienating those people. They're alienating themselves through their choices.

[mu03eng]

You mean like those lovely open protesters? Please. The majority of the people that don't want any restrictions or wearing of masks are not going to have their minds changed unless they themselves are hospitalized with the virus.

I think this guy is about the only way to change minds of the openers. Coronavirus Florida: Jupiter Farms man was virus skeptic until it infected him
https://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/20200518/coronavirus-florida-jupiter-farms-man-was-virus-skeptic-until-it-infected-him

Brian Lee Hitchens was a coronavirus skeptic until the illness led him to be hospitalized at Palm Beach Gardens Medical Center. Now the Jupiter Farms resident wants people to know the virus is dangerous and real. He has taken to Facebook to share his experience.

He told The Palm Beach Post on Monday that he doesn’t understand how coronavirus deniers who in past weeks protested shelter-in-place measures still believe the virus — which has kept him hospitalized since April 19 — is a hoax.

The audience of your message shouldn't be those open protesters, they are either astroturfers or unconvincable no matter what approach/tactic you take. Your audience are the Karen's and Karl's at home who are persuadable. Or the people in this thread that are skeptical but not unreasonable people, etc.

I can't do the math, but if 100% compliance yields 75% elimination of transmission then 80% compliance also yields a non-zero reduction in transmission. In this case, half measures make an impact too.

[#UnleashSean]

You have read and participated in this thread.

My statement, "Masks have become a political issue," is approximately the 5,233rd-most political comment in this thread.

I do get how facts can be annoying, though.

Nah they banned chicos. they banned jb. you kept saying how they were the problem and why you do what you do.

But they are gone and you are still doing the same political crap.

[mu03eng]

I'm sorry wearing a mask makes you uncomfortable. Sincerely. I don't like it either. But I wear one because it's a minor sacrifice made for the public good. It sounds like you do the same.
My issue isn't with those who don't like wearing a mask. Most of us don't like it. My issue is with those who refuse that minor sacrifice, especially for political reasons or because they believe whacked out conspiracy theories. And I'm not alienating those people. They're alienating themselves through their choices.

Honest question, how much of the non-mask wearing public do you think fits in the bucket you are describing?

[Galway Eagle]

Thanks, I hadn't heard that anywhere before.

Well figured I'd reinforce the concept. I was wearing an N100 respirator out, because it was all I had, if you want to talk about uncomfortable. But if I was Asymptomatic and that prevented 10 people at the grocery store or liquor store from getting it I'm happy. Those who don't wear it because it's uncomfortable or they don't have the perfect mask shouldn't go out then, plain and simple.

[tower912]

When the protestors started in Michigan, I attempted to differentiate between the whack jobs looking for an excuse to carry an AR15 into the capital and those who had reasoned, principled arguments for wanting the quarantining eased.    I could make the case that certain additional industries should be allowed to open sooner and totally understood that argument.   
   With masks, it feels like the principled are aligning themselves with the goons.   Perhaps out of frustration.    I know that I tune out the overweight shaved head guy with the ZZ Top beard waving a rebel flag and his AR15 complaining he is being oppressed.   And sadly, for me, allowing that person to be the face of a movement cheapens and weakens and basically neutralizes any principled argument.

Because I  intellectually understand and have sympathy for the arguments for wanting to reopen.   Less so for not wearing masks.  And I think that if the masks were more universally embraced, opening would be easier.