OT: Coronavirus chat

[The Kingslayer]

Certainly could, but if they were still packaged, they could have gone to better use elsewhere. Judging by the amount I see, I'd find it hard to believe that they all had some prior.

Yah mine are out of package. I have about 6 of them.

 

[Foppa2118]

it's incredible to me how badly our society flails in the wind without "data"

I'm watching people go mind numb because there's not 15 years of research, statistics, algorithms, numbers, etc on covid...... And there's not going to be - for a while.....It's absolutely fascinating to watch and see just how frustrated and desperate people are for "numbers". I used to be a super data/process driven guy but stepping back and looking at it now - I've let go a bit. Sometimes people are trying to do what's best for them just with what's faced in front of their eyes at single instantaneous moments......I could tell you a doctor in NY probably doesn't give two $h$#'s about a curve/model/whatever right now.

The ironic thing is that most who work in these fields know this. It's those who work in other fields and are just educating themselves now, who are becoming data obsessed, and were operating under the assumption these models were gospel. An assumption they were even being told not to make.

Those who are knowledgable about these topics know it's hard to get highly accurate projections in the best of times. So when a novel coronavirus comes around, no one actually working on the issue thinks they have it absolutely right at the moment, when there is such a huge amount of data missing from the lack of testing.

They're making these projections based on the data they have, because that's the data they have. They don't have any other scientific option, and the scientific option beats the laymen hunch the vast majority of the time.

As you allude to, the same goes for those in the medical community treating patients right now. They're interested in what they know NOW, because that's the best way to save lives. You make your decisions based on what you know in the moment, even if it's incomplete, because that's the best and only reasonable option you have.

It's not a hospital physicians job to source the data and apply it to the models. That's someone else's job. They spent decades learning how to do this, and the MD in the ER spent decades learning how to save lives on the front lines.

All this monday morning quarterbacking was expected, but it doesn't make it any less frustrating when it inspires others to mistrust health experts who are vastly more educated on these topics.

 

[Balthazar]

So about that heard immunity that everyone seemed to bank on...

Some coronavirus patients 'cured' in South Korea tested positive again

How Worried Should We Be about Reinfection or Reactivation of the Virus? | National Review

 

[Foppa2118]

So about that heard immunity that everyone seemed to bank on...

Some coronavirus patients 'cured' in South Korea tested positive again

How Worried Should We Be about Reinfection or Reactivation of the Virus? | National Review

There are many reasons for this as the article alludes to. False negatives do impact the numbers when you've tested as many people per capita as South Korea has.

There's also the common sense idea that the virus isn't completely eradicated, so when you open things back up, there's going to be another increase in the numbers.

The concern many have had though is the anecdotal evidence that this virus is much harder to stamp out than other coronaviruses. Reinfection is something that has been a concern for a while because we don't have any studies on it, and there are aspects of the models that say something might be missing from the data, to give the numbers they're giving. One concern is that reinfection might play a factor, but it's too early to know for sure.

The incubation period of 2-14 days, the viral shedding for up to 37 days (unlikely it leads to infection in others for 37 days) the asymptomatic/presymptomatic transmission, and new studies detecting other coronaviruses (SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV) transmitted by human breath, and another increasing the amount of time this novel coronavirus (SARS COV-2) lives on surfaces (3 hours on paper, 2 days on cloth and wood, 3 days on glass and money, 7 days on steel, plastic, and surgical masks) mean that this thing can infect people for long periods of time, in many ways.

This is part of the reason they've gone from not recommending masks out of a fear of giving people a false sense of security (social distancing is still way more effective) to recommending that people wear masks in public. This thing isn't going anywhere anytime soon, and lots of us will be walking around with it all year. Even after they open the economy back up.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(20)30003-3/fulltext

Respiratory virus shedding in exhaled breath and efficacy of face masks

 

[Foppberg]

If there's any silver lining in any of this.. hopefully.. The world will be better prepared for future pandemics like this. Can't be too many happy billionaires right now having their bottom line disrupted.

 

[Foppa2118]

If there's any silver lining in any of this.. hopefully.. The world will be better prepared for future pandemics like this. Can't be too many happy billionaires right now having their bottom line disrupted.

That is the hope. It helped parts of Asia take this more seriously after the original SARS outbreak.

With so much of the stimulus bill going towards big businesses though, interest rates at such a low number, and the stock market at incredible bargain prices right now, those who are wealthy, especially the billionaires will have the capital to ride this out, and possibly even prosper from it.

As always it's the poor who are the most vulnerable having no health insurance or being underinsured, the mom and pop small businesses that may lose their business, and the working class who are living paycheck to paycheck that will suffer the most.

 

[Bonzai12]

[QUOTE="Foppa2118, post: 171863624, member: 13293]All this monday morning quarterbacking was expected, but it doesn't make it any less frustrating when it inspires others to mistrust health experts who are vastly more educated on these topics.[/QUOTE]

Thanks for responding - you put this in so much better terms than I could because I’m a bit more aggravated and rough around the edges on this whole thing.

in this pandemic everyone thinks they’re all of a sudden a data scientist, pharmacist, politician or doctor based on an article they read on CNN, the New York Times, Fox News or whatever. There’s like a whole layer of bullshit in between what’s actually happening and what people read/comprehend/analyze and I’m just so over it. How did we end up with 100 news channels in my cable package and just a stream of continuous bad data/innuendo. All for a few bucks. The only people who matter in this whole ordeal are the ones who either have covid or are trying to help by being in the medical/grocery/logistics businesses. All of us other “outsiders” just want to data this up or make it a stupid headline instead of doing whatever we can to help these folks.

 

[ASmileyFace]

Yeah the PPE shortage is a real dumb thing that could have been easily avoided. I'll say it irritates me when I see young people in the grocery store with N95 masks, not fitted properly... those should be in health care worker's hands, not a random 20-35 year old.

I was sitting in a couple N95s that were open from previous work stuff. Of course I'm going to use them when I go to the grocery/liquor stores. Do you want me to make an ineffectual mask out of a buff just so I don't get judged by folks?

I say this because I got harassed by a old women yesterday walking into the grocery store. Sorry that I have a few pairs of single use gloves and a n95 sitting around that I couldn't donate. I'll be sure to throw them away so I'm just as likely as you to catch this thing

 

[henchman21]

I was sitting in a couple N95s that were open from previous work stuff. Of course I'm going to use them when I go to the grocery/liquor stores. Do you want me to make an ineffectual mask out of a buff just so I don't get judged by folks?

I say this because I got harassed by a old women yesterday walking into the grocery store. Sorry that I have a few pairs of single use gloves and a n95 sitting around that I couldn't donate. I'll be sure to throw them away so I'm just as likely as you to catch this thing

You're missing my point

There is such an influx of them being worn around, that every single one of them were just laying around is a near impossibility for the general public. Especially this far into the pandemic.
They are designed as a limited re-use item, reusing them lowers their effectiveness drastically for preventing viral spread. If they are being reused more than a few times, they get to the point of being completely ineffective.
Many are being worn around by people who don't know how to fit them, leaving gaps and lowering their effectiveness drastically. Even if you take the mask off wrong, it becomes ineffective.
Young people who are not significantly impacted, but have these masks laying around that have been unused (but not able to be donated), should be giving them to people who need them. All of us young people know people older than us who could benefit from their use far more than us.

 

[Avsboy]

Why is HF slow generally, and not opening when I type HFBoards.com in the browser? Instead I have to include .mandatory now.

 

[SirLoinOfCloth]

My fiancee is now quarantined in our bedroom. She got tested yesterday at a drive-thru testing facility in Colorado. I'm 90% sure she has the virus and I can attest this shit is vicious. She has these deep red rings around her eyes, the dry cough, intermittent fever, some difficulty breathing at times when exerting herself, terrible muscle aches and cramps, headache, nausea, diarrhea and some vomiting. She's being kicked really hard. She's also immuno-compromised as she has an autoimmune disorder. So I'll be keeping my fingers crossed that things don't get any worse.

She did a video chat with her physician who then referred her to do another video chat with an urgent care, who then told her to go get tested. So far, so good. They did 2 nasal swabs and a 2 throat swabs at the drive-thru testing and unfortunately one of the nasal swabs broke off inside her nose so they had to dig it out. Painful, and unfortunate, but not really anyone fault.

Then she was told she had to go to the pharmacy this morning, in person (but drive-thru) to collect some medication. They said it had to be her as they needed to give her instructions on how to use it. She almost literally crawled out of the house, got in the car and went to Walgreens wearing gloves and a homemade mask. They were out of the medication and we need to go back later. She told them it was crazy that someone with a high probability of having covid should have to turn up in person, especially when breathing can be hard when exerting one's self. She told them she would not come back and had to sign a document to allow me to collect her meds.

Her PCP called and asked if she had been given meds at the testing facility. She said no, her PCP thought she should have. Now they are saying that test results can be 10-14 days. It just feels like an octopus where all the arms are working independently and have no idea what is going on with the others.

For those that remember, my (also immuno-compromised) 5 year old daughter was suspected to have it a while ago, but it turned out she didn't. So now this is our second brush in a family of 5 with the virus.

In the meantime, I'll be looking after my fiancee, our 3 daughters and attempting to work too. I've banned the kids from seeing her until this is over, we do video chats at story/bedtime so they can say goodnight and the bedroom door is locked so they cannot get near her. I'm keeping her fed and hydrated as best as I can. This f***ing sucks. But I still have to stay grateful because the rest of us are OK, I still have a job.

 

[CobraAcesS]

So they've been used more than once?

At this point it is getting to be too late as Michigan turned the corner a while ago, but assuming they were packaged, would have been a good donation!

Hell we use them for five patients as long as there is a face shield with it lol. I think wearing them a few times for going to the grocery store or liquor store is fine. No they were laying around from consecutive years of fit testing. They have you put on one of three sizes, then put a hood over your head and spray a stank ass aerosol into the hood to make sure it is sealed.

I figured I'd put them to use if I was ever spraying for bugs or woodworking. It is better than a cloth mask at least, and is not something I jacked from work. Which I could do, but don't.

I used the first one while washing my dog after she got skunked lmao. Only had three total.

Also seeing as I am exposed to it at work a sealed mask is just as fair for others I walk past in public.

Certainly could, but if they were still packaged, they could have gone to better use elsewhere. Judging by the amount I see, I'd find it hard to believe that they all had some prior.

I bet they are mostly nurses or EMS that had them from work fit testing, training, etc. Especially if they are legit with two straps. Either that or people that already had them in their garage for woodworking etc.

What is funny to me is when I see someone in scrubs wearing either mask all sorts of jacked up lol.

I was sitting in a couple N95s that were open from previous work stuff. Of course I'm going to use them when I go to the grocery/liquor stores. Do you want me to make an ineffectual mask out of a buff just so I don't get judged by folks?

I say this because I got harassed by a old women yesterday walking into the grocery store. Sorry that I have a few pairs of single use gloves and a n95 sitting around that I couldn't donate. I'll be sure to throw them away so I'm just as likely as you to catch this thing

Funny enough the liquor store had a package of two at the front register for 6$. They were really suspect as N95 though because they were flat cloth, and not formed. They were labeled N95 though.

I'm also not donating something I've already had on my face that isn't packaged.

 

[Sheet]

I can tell you at least in my facility we had over fifty boxes stolen, and I live in a very low crime area. When all this hit, I think the US still had 3000 cases, people started taking them off the walls. That’s a combo of n95 and surgical masks. Not all n95.

It was probably a combo of visitors and staff honestly. When we get fit tested they don’t just give us a box. At least in a hospital setting I can’t imagine why they would.

 

[Foppberg]

Yeah at my work place we have about 6 boxes of N95's stashed because everyone went crazy and started hoarding them all.

 

[ABasin]

I'm not a big fan of the current Surgeon General, but he was right that the masks people are wearing don't help much in the prevention of contracting the virus. There's too much leakage around the sides, and they start to break down once they get wet from your breath.

What the masks do is help prevent someone who does have the virus, from spreading it by catching some of the respiratory droplets on the INSIDE of their mask

What he specifically said was "They are NOT effective in preventing the general public from catching coronavirus". Which is simply not true, given what you say, re: catching droplets inside the mask.

That wasn't what I was saying. What I was saying is that Fauci and others were telling EVERYONE that they could get below those numbers. They were also trying to get people's attention with those projections, so they'd stay home, because not enough people were.

The mitigation was only part of the reason the numbers were lowered. The other reason, as Fauci stated multiple times, was that the models were only as good as the assumptions made, and the assumptions were only as good as the data they had. And the data was incomplete, everyone knew that.

Now people are saying the projections were wrong like someone made a mistake. Everyone knew they might be lower than the projections. The mistake was they didn't have enough testing, which even a lay person would know affects the accuracy of the projections.

So I'm a little confused why some are making such a big deal out of this. Nobody in the epi world is surprised by this. Feels like it's an effort to suggest they didn't need to take the extreme measures they did, which is absolute false.

Given how utterly unprepared we were/are for this sort of thing, I'm not sure what else we could have done. So, I'm not coming at this from a place of criticism on that front.

That said, the numbers in the models were bullshit. I'm not saying anyone lied per se (aside from the Surgeon General, who did), but the models were clear public misinformation. The reason I believe this a big deal is as follows:

To me, the really big deal that's on the horizon, is the 2nd wave. Whether this thing comes back either next month, or more likely, in the Fall. When that does happen, what will the American public tolerate?

Because right now, we have a situation where we're falling in the lower end of the model estimates in terms of death, and just about the highest end possible in terms of economic damage. And all along, aside from a handful of hospitals in NYC, has the healthcare system been overrun anywhere in the country?

So, I believe the bogus numbers could have the following result: I believe it's quite possible that America will not believe ominous model numbers a 2nd time, and therefore won't be willing to go through this again, even if it should. Which could really be tragic.

They only had the data they had to base those recommendations on. What were they gonna do just ignore what the data was saying because of a hunch? That's not how science works. You work with the data you have, and when tens or hundreds of thousands of people might die, and there's a big risk of overwhelming the health care system, you err on the side of caution.

There's a difference between the numbers being an estimate subject to correction, and the numbers being flat pulled out of thin air. If I tell you that 10 x 10 = 108, one could call that a semi-reasonable estimate that I'm now going to correct down to 100. If I tell you that 10 x 10 = 913, that's not estimating. That's useless (given the current situation, one could even say irresponsible). Picking stocks by having blindfolded monkeys throwing darts sort of thing.

In the end, I think it could cost us.

 

[Foppa2118]

What he specifically said was "They are NOT effective in preventing the general public from catching coronavirus". Which is simply not true, given what you say, re: catching droplets inside the mask.

I think we might be getting hung up on the phrasing he was using.

What he meant to say is what pretty much every public health official knows, and that is that the surgical masks are very ineffective at preventing someone from contracting a virus. What they help cut down on is preventing someone who might have the virus, and is asymptomatic/presymptomatic (so they're not isolating) from spreading it to others.

Technically that helps in, "preventing the general public from catching coronavirus" but that's not exactly how he meant it. He was talking about a healthy person wearing a mask hoping to prevent themselves form catching it. They simply don't work well for that because there's too much leakage around the sides, not everyone wears them properly, and they start to break down real quick from the moisture of your breath.

The bigger reason why public health officials don't like recommending wearing masks (aside from taking away equipment from hospitals) is that it gives people a false sense of security. They think it's ok to get close to people, or not worry about touching their face as much, when distancing is still by far the most effective way at preventing the public from contracting the virus.

The reason for the change is because of the higher rates of asymptomatic and presymptomatic spread than they anticipated. It's a numbers game. Everyone wearing masks may only cut down a small percentage on the spread, but everything helps at this point, especially when the stay at home guidelines are lifted.

Given how utterly unprepared we were/are for this sort of thing, I'm not sure what else we could have done. So, I'm not coming at this from a place of criticism on that front.

That said, the numbers in the models were bullshit. I'm not saying anyone lied per se (aside from the Surgeon General, who did), but the models were clear public misinformation. The reason I believe this a big deal is as follows:

To me, the really big deal that's on the horizon, is the 2nd wave. Whether this thing comes back either next month, or more likely, in the Fall. When that does happen, what will the American public tolerate?

Because right now, we have a situation where we're falling in the lower end of the model estimates in terms of death, and just about the highest end possible in terms of economic damage. And all along, aside from a handful of hospitals in NYC, has the healthcare system been overrun anywhere in the country?

So, I believe the bogus numbers could have the following result: I believe it's quite possible that America will not believe ominous model numbers a 2nd time, and therefore won't be willing to go through this again, even if it should. Which could really be tragic.

It would only have that effect on the public if people who are politically motivated try to exploit that and get the public not to trust healthcare experts and science in general. Whether that's for other reasons like global warming denial, or so that they will trust the president or other politicians who want to open the economy up too soon.

I don't think the models were misinformation. The vast majority of scientists don't have ulterior movies, especially when putting their name on something. The models they relied upon were done by Chris Murray who is the Diretor of the Department of Health Metrics Sciences at the University of Washington. He's not putting those numbers out for misinformation, that's just the calculations they made from the data they had.

What I think they did do though, was take those projections and emphasize them strongly to the public, because not enough people were staying home. Which to me is a perfectly understandable strategy from a position of public health. They didn't make up numbers to get them to stay inside, they just made sure everyone heard the numbers they had. That's a big difference.

 

[Foppa2118]

There's a difference between the numbers being an estimate subject to correction, and the numbers being flat pulled out of thin air. If I tell you that 10 x 10 = 108, one could call that a semi-reasonable estimate that I'm now going to correct down to 100. If I tell you that 10 x 10 = 913, that's not estimating. That's useless (given the current situation, one could even say irresponsible). Picking stocks by having blindfolded monkeys throwing darts sort of thing.

In the end, I think it could cost us.

They definitely didn't pull the numbers out of thin air AB. There's very robust calculations, and tons of people working on them, with tons of data sets factoring into them. Doesn't meant they're always accurate, that's why they're projections, and only as good as the assumptions you make, and the data you have.

In addition to the mitigation efforts bringing the estimates down, they also received a big influx of data from Spain and Italy, where as they were were using primarily data from Wuhan before. They also got some new data suggesting not as many people will need to be hospitalized as they expected from the data in Wuhan.

Here's some info from an NPR piece that helps explain why the numbers were lowered:



"ANTHONY FAUCI: What you do with data will always outstrip a model. You redo your models depending upon your data, and our data is telling us that mitigation is working.

GREENE: OK. We have heard from the White House about this particular model often. It was created by researchers at the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation at the University of Washington, which is why it's called the IHME model. So can we feel optimistic based on this? Well, I want to bring in NPR data editor Sean McMinn. Hi there, Sean.

SEAN MCMINN, BYLINE: Good morning.

GREENE: So as you look at this model and these revisions, what changes stand out to you?

MCMINN: Well, first of all, this model looks at each state and projects when it (inaudible) start seeing a consistent downward shift in new deaths. That's what they call the peak. For the U.S. as a whole, the model places the peak daily deaths on this upcoming Easter Sunday. In total, it projects between 31,000 and 127,000 people dying in this country. Now, that's lower than some numbers that they had previously reported.

What we're seeing with these new projections are more intense spikes but generally shorter ones. So what that means is that at the height of the disease in each state, there could be a fairly large number of people who die on a single day. But the model expects there to be fewer of those days overall, bringing the total death count down. They also looked at new data on how many people with the disease need to be hospitalized, and they said that they think that number is lower than what they originally expected.

GREENE: OK. So Fauci said - I mean, this is something you do; you redo your models. So what exactly is behind the changes in these projections?

MCMINN: So the team at the University of Washington was originally just using Wuhan as a case study in how long it takes for a region the top off after their first deaths are reported. Well, since then, they're now getting data in from places like Spain and Italy. And when they baked those into the model, they saw it was actually a shorter amount of time between the first cases and the peak than what they originally thought, which is good news - right? - because it means that this thing will slow down faster than what they were thinking before as long as people continue to maintain social distance.

GREENE: Well - and that's a key question, what people should do. I mean, when a state has reached its peak, does that mean people can relax a bit and start to resume normal lives or no?

MCMINN: No. Unfortunately, it does not. The team behind this model has really stressed that for the numbers to go down and stay down, people need to continue social distancing at least through the end of May. That's their assumption. Chris Murray, who's the lead researcher, made that point at a press conference on Monday.

CHRIS MURRAY: If you ease up prematurely, the epidemic can rebound to right back to the level we are at now in a matter of weeks. So the potential for rebound is enormous if we let up on social distancing.

MCMINN: So even though the model has had some increasingly optimistic projections, it's all based on the premise that social distancing continues. It also assumes that states that haven't mandated stay-at-home orders yet will do so in the next week, which of course is not guaranteed to happen. So I think a helpful way to think about it is this - that the model doesn't give us a hard date when life can go back to normal; it helps state officials and hospitals have an idea for when their health systems need to be ready for a surge of patients.

GREENE: Let me just - I mean, this is one model, right? Is there a reason to trust this over the others that are out there?

MCMINN: Yeah. So the IHME researchers have told us that they're getting requests from all sorts of government agencies, including the White House, for information on how this model sees the situation on the ground and asking them to run different scenarios. The thing is, the White House's own guidelines only advise social distancing through the end of April, which is shorter than what this model assumes. So any kind of hopeful conclusions that this model might show about what death counts are expected to do, that's predicated on something that the White House, so far, has not said it is willing to do.

Now there's other models out there, including one at Columbia University, which projects later peaks than what IHME does (ph) (inaudible). The two models look at social distancing differently, though. IHME assumes people will follow stay-at-home and other government orders, whereas Colombia expects people will do a better job social distancing once things gets bad where they live. So neither of these are really definite forecasts; they're more the guideposts for what states should be preparing for."

"

 

[Metallo]

These models can’t predict actual numbers because the end result depends on what we do and the model can’t predict that. However they can predict general outcomes and help us to chose between different scenarios. Expecting exact numbers out of these models is really naive. Also these models are unverifiable, you only get real-life data relative to the scenario chosen. You don’t know how other mitigation methods would have worked in the end.

 

[Foppa2118]

These models can’t predict actual numbers because the end result depends on what we do and the model can’t predict that. However they can predict general outcomes and help us to chose between different scenarios. Expecting exact numbers out of these models is really naive. Also these models are unverifiable, you only get real-life data relative to the scenario chosen. You don’t know how other mitigation methods would have worked in the end.

There's a common phrase among those that do this.

"All models are wrong, but some are useful.”

- George Box


The problem is there aren't enough models right now. Even Chris Murray acknowledges the need for more. Different states and cities are using their own as well, with different rates and timelines.

The Murray model I think might be the most optimistic right now. Which means it's possible they could end up closer to the original numbers they had.

 

[Sheet]

So today I went grocery shopping, and the amount of n95s I saw was staggering.

Frankly, it was a waste of masks. I firmly believe even if we did have enough masks for everyone in America I wouldn’t issue a single one. After what I was watching, these people put themselves at much greater danger by wearing the masks than they would have been if not.

I had a lengthy mansplanation about how poorly fitted masks were more dangerous and how touching your mask is more dangerous than not wearing a mask but honestly that information is out there already.

I get it. Every time I put one on, or even just gloves, my face all of a sudden needs to be itched. Doubly so if I’m sterile. It’s annoying and it’s something that plagues us all.

Simply put, you’re putting yourself in more danger by wearing a mask and then not keeping your hands off it, then you would just not wearing it.

I’m not judging anyone for wearing an n95 in public. Ill check my personal feelings on it at the door, but for Christ’s sake, whether it’s an n95 or surgical mask or homemade mask, keep your filthy hands off your face, eyes included. If you can’t not fiddle with the mask, don’t wear it. You’re going to inadvertently infect yourself by wearing something that is meant to protect.

 

[Balthazar]

So today I went grocery shopping, and the amount of n95s I saw was staggering.

Frankly, it was a waste of masks. I firmly believe even if we did have enough masks for everyone in America I wouldn’t issue a single one. After what I was watching, these people put themselves at much greater danger by wearing the masks than they would have been if not.

How about showing people how to wear them properly and how to remove them safely? Not allowing people to wear masks because they don't know how to wear them is straight out one of the dumbest anti-mask argument out there.

There's one and only one valid reason not to allow people to wear masks and it's because we don't have enough, period. N95's should be wore once and for a relatively short period of time. So yes, a trip to the highly infected grocery store is a damn good reason to wear an N95.

 

[Ruiner058]

Over here in my hospital we get 1 surgical mask per week. N95s are reserved for confirmed COVID or the normal stuff like TB. We're to reuse the N95s 6 times before getting rid of them... which isnt great. The public wearing surgical masks I get because it cuts down the spread of asymptomatic people shedding virus... but the idea that a N95 would effectively save you from getting the virus is low, as the virus has many many ways to get into your system. But it is what it is. Cant say I dont get irked seeing them in the public when I cant get enough of them to take care of people though.

That's not the biggest issue right now though. The biggest problem is that our screening test is not a good screening test. If its positive you can be fairly sure they have COVID but the false negative rate is high so we've had to test people multiple times.

As to when to reopen the country.... I dont think there is a right answer. I think closing down everything was the absolute right call though.

And I don't usually comment on political stuff, but the president recommending the hydroxychloroquine was horrendous. We've yet been able to complete a treatment of 1 patient without having to stop due to unsafe QT prolongation. Ridiculous.

 

[Cousin Eddie]

So today I went grocery shopping, and the amount of n95s I saw was staggering.

Frankly, it was a waste of masks. I firmly believe even if we did have enough masks for everyone in America I wouldn’t issue a single one. After what I was watching, these people put themselves at much greater danger by wearing the masks than they would have been if not.

I had a lengthy mansplanation about how poorly fitted masks were more dangerous and how touching your mask is more dangerous than not wearing a mask but honestly that information is out there already.

I get it. Every time I put one on, or even just gloves, my face all of a sudden needs to be itched. Doubly so if I’m sterile. It’s annoying and it’s something that plagues us all.

Simply put, you’re putting yourself in more danger by wearing a mask and then not keeping your hands off it, then you would just not wearing it.

I’m not judging anyone for wearing an n95 in public. Ill check my personal feelings on it at the door, but for Christ’s sake, whether it’s an n95 or surgical mask or homemade mask, keep your filthy hands off your face, eyes included. If you can’t not fiddle with the mask, don’t wear it. You’re going to inadvertently infect yourself by wearing something that is meant to protect.

Don’t make things up. There are plenty of ways masks can be helpful. Sure, some people are using them for the wrong purposes but don’t fill people’s heads with negativity about something that can save lives.

 

[Sheet]

How about showing people how to wear them properly and how to remove them safely? Not allowing people to wear masks because they don't know how to wear them is straight out one of the dumbest anti-mask argument out there.

There's one and only one valid reason not to allow people to wear masks and it's because we don't have enough, period. N95's should be wore once and for a relatively short period of time. So yes, a trip to the highly infected grocery store is a damn good reason to wear an N95.

That education is already out there and has been pushed. It takes discipline and practice. Are you trying to tell me you didn’t know you’re not suppose to put your hands all over the thing that’s right next to your airway?

I don’t believe spuriously increasing someone’s risk of infection so they have their safety blankie is the way to go. We clearly have a different opinion.

 

[Sheet]

Don’t make things up. There are plenty of ways masks can be helpful. Sure, some people are using them for the wrong purposes but don’t fill people’s heads with negativity about something that can save lives.

I didn’t say the masks weren’t useful. I didn’t even say that people were wearing them for the wrong purpose. I have my own opinion on that.

What I said was people are wearing masks and then they can’t keep there hands off their faces, which is opening them up to greater risks. Are you trying to tell me that’s not true?