Coronavirus (Sports-Related and General)

California_Dreamin 2020-06-13 20:07:49 UTC #1245

LegoDoom...good for you, have a great time! I just got an email from my boss and he said we will be resuming travel in August and that the travelers are waaaaaaaaaaaaaay more than ready to go and get back to living life. Those that don't wish to go can stay home and thats OK, not one problem with that.

Masks indoors? At a restaurant? How can you eat and if you are allowed to take them off to eat, how does that not completely counteract the entire reason for wearing the mask in the first place? Does the virus know when to jump and when to rest? Did this virus know that going to the beach was bad but protests were good? Church bad, Walmart good?

The simple fact is that we are learning more about this virus every day and many of the assumptions we had in March have been shown to be wrong...thats what science is truly all about. But one scientific fact that they have failed to show is how masks worn by healthy people stops the spread. Oh, we can theorize, pontificate, even conjecture up logic.

But there is no true evidence. If there was, how can we in California explain counties like Riverside which don't require masks and yet have low covid numbers vs Los Angeles, which Garceti pretty much demands you sleep with a mask on yet the LA numbers are atrocious. No one here in California can explain it because they don't want to, it doesn't fit the narrative.

Again, look, if masks make a person feel better, I am fine with it. Just don't make me wear one unless or unless you can show me the evidence that they work. I am a non smoker because evidence shows me that smoking is bad for the lungs. I don't do drugs because evidence shows me that it messes with the mind. I am not anti-evidence. I am against pseudo science.

Nevertheless, have a great time!

allentown 2020-06-13 20:16:12 UTC #1246

A lot of this is not actual change, other than having enough tests to test those who are not suffering severe cases of Covid. This would be expected to lead to an increased ration of recovered to active cases. In the early stages of this pandemic, you had to be about to go on a respirator to get tested.

In many places, including where I live, the number of new cases and deaths per day have declined significantly. There are still areas in the United States which haven't peaked yet. Much of the Southern Hemisphere has yet to peak. Even in the U.S., we are still seeing close to 1000 deaths per day. That is significant.

We still do not know if the United States will see a second wave this Fall and how that will compare in severity to the first wave, which much of the nation is still in the heart of.

LegoDoom 2020-06-13 20:29:54 UTC #1247

That is my point. Masks indoors should always be required. Being as you can't wear a mask in a restaurant and eat/drink, I am more comfortable in a plane with a mask than I would be at a restaurant, or store, without one.

Church bad, walmart bad, all places bad. Just wear a mask. This is not a Covid thing, so don't blame the lack of knowledge... it's for all airborne viruses. Just wear a mask. The US had to go through a hand sanitizing tutorial at the start of this, when we should have been told to wear masks.

If you want to go county by county, then obviously less densely populated areas are not going to have a higher spread rate.

Masks are not meant to make a person feel better, they are meant to keep anything emitted from their mouth/nose into the air. I feel like this has already been posted in this thread, so I don't want to post it again, but if you want a few studies into how many droplets get into the air through talking, coughing, etc, then I will be happy to post it again.

Pseudo science is kind of a laughable statement to make given how much information has been pushed into the public's eye in the last 3 months. There is lots of evidence that droplets/aerosols transmit virus and that masks contain them from circulating in the air. Even taking the science out of it.... it should be fairly remedial. Unless you're arguing the fact that this is transmitted via droplet/aerosol.

California_Dreamin 2020-06-13 20:35:24 UTC #1248

allentown...huh? Of course its good news that the recovered rate is much higher than the active cases, especially since this only began to take place two weeks ago, whereas the virus has been being monitored world wide via John Hopkins since mid March. That is significant and even more important is the rapid jump. A week ago it was less than 100,000 to the good and by the end of the weekend it will be well over a + 600,000 to the good. How can that not be A] positive news and B] a sign that things are getting better.

Virologists world wide [France, Italy, USA, Spain] have all been saying they are noticing that the virus is getting weaker and less virulent, they have been saying this for a couple of weeks now. This is not revolutionary stuff here, the history of these types of viruses is that they weaken as they spread and eventually they either die out or herd immunity takes over.

I believe the numbers show this and refuse to allow the naysayers and scaremongers in the press to tell me something different that what my own eyes and experience are telling me. Look, there are a lot of people who have much to gain by keeping us afraid and sheltered, we all know this. But I believe it is more important to share the good news about this virus when it really is all around us if we simply take the time to look.

The fact that a Good News book about the virus by Alex Berenson is #1 on the Amazon sell list today indicates that people are thirsting for more info and the fact that Amazon, which has benefited as much as anyone by this lockdown, didn't want to sell it is even more indicative to me.

As I have said countless times, I am a truth seeker and if the info changes for me, I will change my mind accordingly. But I don't think I will have to and don't expect or anticipate a second wave, except among the doomsday prophets who can never admit they were wrong in the first place.

bkox 2020-06-13 20:37:47 UTC #1249

I find it amazing that so many pro life conservatives now put travel and other luxury ahead of doing stuff that could save some lives. What's that expression? What would jesus do? If he were here right now would he say... screw it let's go see some monuments and historic places and lets not care if it may negatively impact others?

California_Dreamin 2020-06-13 20:46:35 UTC #1250

You ask "what would Jesus do?" a most appropriate question. I know what the Bible says and the main theme of the entire Bible is centered around our Lord and Redeemer. It says no less than 365 times, the most repeated command in the entire Bible, "Do not fear" and Jesus said it countless times. It has been said that the number is not coincidental as there are 365 days in the year. I suspect that is what he would say today, tomorrow and yesterday.

andyb 2020-06-13 22:38:58 UTC #1251

I am not sure what you mean by recovered rate. Most people who get COVID recover. This is going to happen with any disease where the fatality rate is 0.5% to 1.0%. But the way you are using recovery rate is kind of meaningless. Over time more people that get sick will recover. What is key is the percentage of people testing positive and the overall number of cases (and of course fatalities).

It really looks like you are using numbers that are dictated by time and assuming they mean something entirely different.

I get why people want to open up the economy. We also need to realize that it is a risk where we need to balance a complicated equation. This whole political mask fight is counterproductive. Of course people should wear masks indoors in public. To not do that is simply to be selfish.

bkox 2020-06-13 23:26:14 UTC #1252

These men of god thought the same. Looks like not having fear failed them.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/14/us/bishop-gerald-glenn-coronavirus.htm

https://www.newsweek.com/two-southern-churches-reclose-indefinitely-after-pastor-dies-leaders-churchgoers-catch-coronavirus-1505291?amp=1

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5ec60a00c5b6dfc078e0f7ee/amp

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1187076

And that fear thing is a bad argument . If there is a god then he gave us the emotion of fear to protect us. If the human doesnt fear the lion, the lion is going to have a good supper. To deny fear is denying one of the tools given to us by the creator.

But in the context of Coronavirus... yiu are basically saying I could decide to cross a busy 6 lane highway with not even looking and if I'm not meant to get injured I wont... and who cares if cars have to swerve around me and the drivers crash and die as long as crossing there was more convenient for me.

schillingfan 2020-06-13 23:38:07 UTC #1253

California_Dreamin:

zambonir...by the way, I never said I thought face masks in large gatherings was the worst idea. I simply believe requiring people to wear them is foolish, there is no evidence that they work. None. If there was, we wouldn't be playing the game of "she loves me, she loves me not" so often. I can count at least 5 times since March when the WHO, CDC and local and state governments have changed their minds, you know this as well as I do. And never with a shred of evidence either way.

Look, let me be clear...I have no problem with those who wish to wear masks all the time, have no problem with those not yet comfortable venturing out or going to restaurants, no problem with those who aren't ready to get back to normal. Fine, I am OK with all of that. What I have always had a problem with was the dictatorial way these rules were put into practice and then changed on a dime depending on which way the wind was blowing. I have never been one to change direction simply because the wind does.

What do you mean no evidence face masks work? I listen to real doctors and follow one one Facebook who cites the statistics every day. We could argue numbers all day, so let’s try some common sense.

It is proven that this disease is spread by respiratory droplets.
Likelihood of spread is based on distance from infected person, length of contact with infected person, degree which infected person is spewing droplets, such as singing, shouting, coughing.
Spread is less likely outdoors as there are more air currents for wider dispersal of respiratory droplets than indoors.

Given this, How can masks be ineffective or useless. The number I have heard is that contact time is doubled if both infected and uninfected persons wear masks. Indoors, contact less than five minutes, like at grocery store checkout is not as likely infectious, raised to ten minutes with a mask. Outdoors ten minutes is raised to twenty minutes.

Look it’s not opening versus not opening. It’s learning which behaviors are riskier. Bring outdoors, moving around is not as risky. Bring indoors in large crowd closely together is risky behavior.

You are over sixty. CD, with all love, wear a mask, don’t go to a Trump rally indoors and stop listening to Fox News.

schillingfan 2020-06-13 23:51:40 UTC #1254

Please read this article, it’s from the National Association of Sciences.

It is about respiratory spread. You want science and data. It’s her.

julio 2020-06-13 23:54:10 UTC #1255

Well, Herrera I agree with, but Stoney... I think he still has an outside shot?

zambonir 2020-06-14 01:33:47 UTC #1256

My post with the article from the Washington Post had nothing to do with the CDC or large gatherings (even though that was the headline of the overall web page), I was more interested in the fact that Orange County "decided" to change its mask laws merely because their health officer resigned (after, among other things, receiving death threats).

And, to paste again, therese were two of the comments made at a recent Board of Supervisors meeting.

Some complained that the virus was a “hoax,” that they have been discriminated against because they could not go into a store without a mask and that the science behind wearing these masks was incorrect and contradictory to advice from medical experts.

“You are kneeling on the necks of people, and you are continuing to act in a thuggish manner,” one woman said.

I'm not interested in arguing with anyone who plays the "hoax" or "discrimination" card and the person quoted in the second graf is a terrible, terrible human being.

I'm also not interested in arguing science or politics the same way we argue about the value of OBP or Gabe Kapler's managerial style so I hope when this post hits 1500 the next one doesn't include the sports stuff, which tends to get buried here anyway. Whether that means a separate thread or just returning to our usual topics (including keeping football, NBA and NHL info in those places).

allentown 2020-06-14 01:35:58 UTC #1257

What do you mean huh? Your stat comparison is meaningless. People with Covid either recover or die. If the death rate is even way high at 20%, and even if 4000 people catch the disease every day and 800 die and the recovery time for those who don't die is 3 months, the number of recovered will in not very much time match and then quickly outstrip the number who die. If the infections and deaths continue undiminished at that rate and then suddenly there are no new infections 8 months after the disease began, then 3 months after the infections stop, we will have exactly 4 times as many recovered as we have fatalities. There is no magic here. Play with the numbers yourself. There are only two ultimate outcomes, plus the group in hospital waiting to either die or recover. If the fatality rate is onl 10%, then the recovered rate will pass the fatality rate sooner and will eventually be 9 times as large. This happens whether or not the number of infections and deaths each day decreases or not. It is not some great stat which indicates a marvelous improvement when the number of recoveries exceeds the number of deaths.

The more testing which is done, the quicker the number of recovered will exceed the number of dead. This is true, because as tests become more available, those with only minor infections, who will not die and who will quickly recover, will be added to the recovered tally. Again, nothing magic here. We just learned of more minor infections, because those with minor infections weren't previously able to get tested.

BostonRoss 2020-06-14 04:37:55 UTC #1258

I agree that healthy people wearing masks does very little. The issue is that there some people are infected without realizing it. (And that some sick people refuse to wear masks.) Having everyone wear masks makes it harder for these people to spread the virus.

(I'm speaking as someone who is a bit claustrophobic and hates wearing a mask, but I do it when I am near anyone outside my household. It's unlikely that I will infect someone, but I would feel awful if I did when I wasn't masked.)

zambonir 2020-06-14 05:18:06 UTC #1259

The reason to wear a mask is definitely to protect others. And to make it normal for everyone to wear a mask. But even wearing a shitty mask - or a bandana - actually would still protect you to some extent if, say, a jogger with the coronarvirus passed you and sneezed. Compared to an N95 you might still get it, you might not, but, you've still been exposed to fewer droplets. Science is always a work in progress and this is all very new but the body of work has been pretty clear:

I'm sure we shared this before, it's from freakin' April

And, the the other day:

We're gonna have to live with the virus and that means distancing and testing and contract tracing more than eternal lockdown, but if the PPE stock could get to the point where average people could wear them - maybe even it a 50% capacity baseball game - that would sure be good too.

andyb 2020-06-14 12:47:52 UTC #1260

There are starting to be additional studies on the effectiveness of mask-wearing. Most are not the ideal "double blind" studies because you just can't do that in a pandemic and randomly assign people to do something potentially unhealthy (i.e. not wear a mask). There is starting to be enough data out there though, to show that masks do help even if it is hard to know how much.

One big thing we have learned is that the amount of virus is important in how it is spread. While it is possible to get it from a handful of droplets, it spreads more with sustained exposure. If masks eliminate lots of these droplets (not all but the majority) then it lowers the risk. That is the intent here.

allentown 2020-06-14 13:19:53 UTC #1261

Even a healthy person without symptomless Covid should benefit from mask wearing. It doesn't need to stop a tiny virus, it needs to stop the aerosol droplets if somebody coughs at you. Won't help for long, so I'd remove and replace, but the virus is in the droplets, not free, so if you catch the droplet, you stop the virus. I suspect it will migrate through the mask, which is why I wouldn't trust the mask for more than one cough, bray spray, or whatever in my face. The facts are clear: countries which masked religiously have fared better than we have. We have, by far, the most Covid deaths in the world. Draw your own conclusions from that.

jimbomill 2020-06-14 13:29:46 UTC #1262

Pretty much the same thing here in "jooysey".

jimbomill 2020-06-14 14:08:40 UTC #1263

I tend to agree with this

jimbomill 2020-06-14 14:17:12 UTC #1264

I seem to recall that, at least for scale, if the Covid-19 virus is 2 microns in size, that the N95 mask works at 5 micron minimum. So, the mask is like trying to stop a golf ball with a chain link fence. That is, plenty of room to get through.