Early on in the pandemic over a year ago when I read and heard competent medical authorities explain that the disease can be spread asymptomatically and that community spread was already demonstrably happening.
Why do you ask?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Covid: ICU nurse speaks out
- Thread starter sun rise
- Start date
Early on in the pandemic over a year ago when I read and heard competent medical authorities explain that the disease can be spread asymptomatically and that community spread was already demonstrably happening.
Why do you ask?
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
Thanks for answering. I ask because, since I'm so removed from this in person, it seems like overnight people were fine one day and feel they are time-bombs the next. On its own its fine but when projected on others is where the problem lies.
For me, my state of urgency has more to do with what's happening around me-things that I can see, hear, and so forth. Unless it's a bomb threat where urgency comes from primal instinct, I don't put too much emotional energy into it based on stats and experts.
In some respects, I'm interested in human behavior and psychology but only to a certain point due to other reasons.
And that is the point.
Let's get rid of "If you don't think like I do, it is because you are not rational", since I find doctors on both sides of the coin...
What does this mean to you?
Nonpharmaceutical Measures for Pandemic Influenza in Nonhealthcare Settings—Personal Protective and Environmental Measures
Hopefully we don't have a "flat earth" viewpoint of CDC.
So let's see: say a 300 pound man decides to throw his body to the ground from a 40 foot height -- just where you are standing below. You good? His body, his choice -- you're just an accident. You should've been somewhere else, so it's your own fault, right?
Mary Mallon (Typhoid Mary) carried the typhus asymptomatically, and infected 53 people -- 3 of whom died. She was forced to quarantine. That means she was denied the freedom to use her body the way she wished (she was a cook, so a little dangerous), in order to protect other people. Do you disagree? Should she have been permitted to carry on infecting and killing people?
Again, you present something as 50/50 when it is not. This is the issue.
AMA survey shows over 96% of doctors fully vaccinated against COVID-19
What does this mean to you?
Nonpharmaceutical Measures for Pandemic Influenza in Nonhealthcare Settings—Personal Protective and Environmental Measures
Hopefully we don't have a "flat earth" viewpoint of CDC.
It means certain personal protective measures weren't found to be effective at reducing the spread of influenza.
Of course, since you have a non-flat earth view here, you agree with the CDC's findings here:
Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)
Right, Ken?
So,.,, we have the CDC saying one thing and then saying something different which proves my point. Conflicting reports. Which one is correct? And why should I trust CDC if they have conflicting reports?
I see you ignored the whole "96% of doctors are on one side of this issue" thing. Since it completely undermines your attempt to "both sides" this discussion.
As for conflicting reports...one report was about influenza. The other is about COVID-19. Also, one thing we know about mask efficacy is it is dependent on the type of mask you wear and how you wear it - not unlike contraception. Additionally, with science data is continually being improved and updated, as situations change and our understanding improves. So we abide by the best, most current data we have.
The best, most current data we have tell us that masks and vaccines are effective at preventing the spread of COVID. Thus the CDC and other similar scientific organizations strongly recommend them.
I see you tend put blinders on common sense to help soothe your position. Influenza and Covid are both viruses and the results would be the same. Common sense... "how many masks that people are using are actually stopping the viruses" or is it just a piece of cloth. Common sense... If it will work with Covid, it will work with Influenza.
Interesting you don't want to admit my position that "conflicting reports" causes confusion.
April 2009
The CDC issues recommendations for the use of face masks and respirators in areas where H1N1 ‘swine flu’ has been detected.
“Information on the effectiveness of facemasks and respirators for the control of influenza in community settings is extremely limited,” the agency explains. Face coverings should only be used when caring for sick individuals or in other specific circumstances, the CDC says, adding that “relying” on masks for protection in crowded settings is ill-advised. The health authority maintains this position throughout the duration of the pandemic.
February 5, 2020
As Covid-19 begins to spread across the globe, Anthony Fauci, director of the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the chief medical adviser to the president, receives an email from a former senior US government official asking if she should wear a mask while traveling, as a precautionary measure.
He advises against it: “The typical mask you buy in the drug store is not really effective in keeping out [the] virus, which is small enough to pass through the material.”
February 28, 2020
“CDC does not currently recommend the use of facemasks to help prevent novel #coronavirus,” the public health agency tweets.
February 29, 2020
Americans begin to panic-buy masks, greatly irritating the nation’s top health authorities.
“Seriously people- STOP BUYING MASKS! They are NOT effective in preventing general public from catching #Coronavirus,” US Surgeon General Dr. Jerome Adams tweets. He adds that ordinary Americans should focus more on hand-washing and other sanitary measures, and let healthcare workers wear the masks – advice in perfect harmony with years-old CDC guidance. The tweet is later deleted, but the internet never forgets.
March 8, 2020
A month after the Trump administration declares a public health emergency due to the coronavirus outbreak, Fauci says in an interview with 60 Minutes: “There’s no reason to be walking around with a mask. When you’re in the middle of an outbreak, wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better and it might even block a droplet, but it’s not providing the perfect protection that people think that it is.”
In keeping with longstanding CDC guidance, he stresses that masks should be reserved for healthcare providers and those who are ill.
March 29, 2020
Doubling down on his previous remarks, Surgeon General Adams underscores that his office has “consistently recommended against the general public wearing masks as there is scant or conflicting evidence they benefit individual wearers in a meaningful way.”
March 31, 2020
In an article dunking on Donald Trump’s suggestion that Americans could wear scarves to shield their faces from Covid-19, NBC facetiously reports: “While the science behind whether masks can prevent a person from catching the coronavirus hasn't changed (a mask does not help a healthy person avoid infection), public guidance may be shifting.” In the same article, the outlet stresses that there is “no scientific evidence that wearing face coverings would have a measurable impact on flattening the coronavirus curve.”
On the same day, CNN reports that Fauci supports “broadening” mask use among the general public, provided there are enough face coverings for healthcare workers.
“Because if, in fact, a person who may or may not be infected wants to prevent infecting somebody else, the best way to do that is with a mask. Perhaps that's the way to go,” Fauci declares, in a bold U-turn from his previous position on the matter.
April 2, 2020
The CDC’s FAQ page about Covid-19 reads: “CDC does not recommend that people who are well wear a facemask to protect themselves from respiratory illnesses, including Covid-19. You should only wear a mask if a healthcare professional recommends it. A facemask should be used by people who have Covid-19 and are showing symptoms.”
Use of surgical face masks to reduce the incidence of the common cold among health care workers in Japan: a randomized controlled trial - PubMed -0 2009
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/epidemiology-and-infection/article/face-masks-to-prevent-transmission-of-influenza-virus-a-systematic- review/64D368496EBDE0AFCC6639CCC9D8BC05 - 2010
Error - Cookies Turned Off - 2012
Effectiveness of N95 respirators versus surgical masks in protecting health care workers from acute respiratory infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis - 2016
Effectiveness of Masks and Respirators Against Respiratory Infections in Healthcare Workers: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis - 2017
N95 Respirators vs Medical Masks for Preventing Laboratory-Confirmed Influenza in Health Care Personnel - 2019
Error - Cookies Turned Off - 2020
Interesting how you would favor AMA or CDC. Do you know how many the called? How large was the sample? Which areas did they call?
Why should I throw out 7 technical studies for a "survey of opinions"? After all, I am not a flat farther.
I can see how if you are not a doctor or other scientist, which you are not, you'd assume that. However, if you bothered to read thr very study you cited, you'd see that they state themselves that their findings do not necessarily generalize to other diseases. Viruses differ.
Given the large body of data we've collected in a year and a half on the efficacy of masks (depending on type/how they're worn) at reducing the spread of COVID, you'd think that would be pretty clear for you. But alas.
I can understand how seemingly conflicting reports would cause confusion for a layperson. Especially a layperson who likely gets a substantial amount of their information from sources that are less than reputable.
What are you quoting here? Please cite sources when you quote them.
Without looking at each of these, is the point that respirators are more effective than surgical masks at preventing spread?
No **** Sherlock.
Most of us don't have the money for a respirator. So guidance for for typical person is to social distance, stay away from sick people, and use a mask that is less effective but better than nothing.
Isn't that obvious?
The answers to your questions are in the study which I linked for you. Which you didn't read. They surveyed 301 American physicians.
Why should I throw out 7 technical studies for a "survey of opinions"? After all, I am not a flat farther.
None of the studies appear to have anything to do with the effectiveness of COVID vaccines, so they're a non sequitur.
halbhh
The wonder and awe of "all things".
Everyone is unique, but this one thing was about (when I did it) reducing the amount of virus I might breath in --
Reducing total virus you breathe in by 80% -95%, so you get only 1/10th or less as much virus breathed in as you would have gotten, helps you. (I was surprised when I first learned this)
Why?
Because when you breathe in a small amount of virus, your immune system T-cells might entirely eliminate the virus (!) even before you have much replication at all, stopping it cold. You don't even get a detectible infection, because the T cells won the battle at the outset.
Or, if it's more than the T cells can entirely eliminate, then still having the virus start at a low level, 5 or 10 or even 20 times less virus at the beginning (such as an effective or double mask vs no mask at all), then it gives the body more time until the virus multiplies up to a high level enough to make you sick.
That extra time gives your immune system more time to get going to beat the virus.
So, the effect of the mask is you get less severely ill.
Less ill can be pretty significant. Sometimes less ill means life instead of death, for some.
LOL... OK... variety is the spice of life. Regardless of our position, we thank God for doctors and all that people do to make this place a better place.
Wandering Monk
Well-Known Member
You touched on something that gets lost in the noise about falling antibodies in people after vaccination and infection. Antibodies are only ONE part of the bodies immune response. If they DIDN'T reduce our bloodstreams would be filled with antibodies of all infections we ever had. It would be sludge. Antibodies MUST decline, but the body remembers the infection and can adapt to the reappearance of the virus later on, reactivating the immune response.
Adaptive immune system - Wikipedia
Unveiled Artist
Veteran Member
My point was, though, people are afraid and do very silly things because of this fear.
That would mean a person who wears two masks, a shield, and jumps in the street to avoid me for two seconds as I run by them is better than just walking by even with their head turned?
Is COVID worse than getting hit by a car over fear?
Do you think they can breathe in my air for that few seconds get sick and die?
The context is that people fear and make ill decisions based on their fear. In this case many vaccinated people made decisions based on fear and likewise unvaccinated. If you guys feel that all unvaccinated made decisions based on misinformation, why can't that same logic apply to vaccinated?
Moonjuice
In the time of chimpanzees I was a monkey
Wait a minute. Aren't you and your father responsible for yourselves? If you or your father are worried about being infected you should get vaccinated, you should wear masks, you should socially distance as well. If you are seriously worried, you could also stay home and keep yourselves on total lockdown. You can make sure you have zero chance of catching Covid. I'm responsible for myself, I'm not responsible for keeping you and your dad safe. That is up to you.
halbhh
The wonder and awe of "all things".
I've seen that kind of overly reactive fear a couple of times also, so I know what you mean there.
It's been found that Delta is far more contagious than past variants -- people caught it, documented, by just fleeting proximity(!).
I was really surprised by that.
Australia was controlling Covid for over a year by very rigorous screening and contract tracing, and strict rules about people entering the country. Australia had been impressive in stopping Covid before vaccines.
So, Australia has very good documentation.
In Sydney, Australia, several people were infected in “fleeting” non-physical contact in a cafe and a shopping mall.
Infection Through “Fleeting Contact” With The Delta Variant Leads To Lockdowns Across Australia
Imagine if someone knows that Delta is superinfectious and also that person themselves has little immune function, such as due to chemotherapy or such....
For them, with little immune system function, getting Delta would likely just be a death sentence.
Jumping in uninvited.....
& staying home in lockdown. That would be social separation,
mask wearing, & vaccination. It's easy as pie. I'm pretty lazy,
& that's what I do.
No fear.
No worries.
Just do what's reasonable, & let what will happen unfold as it will.
He just said he isn't worried.
There is a reasonable middle ground between being unconcerned,
& staying home in lockdown. That would be social separation,
mask wearing, & vaccination. It's easy as pie. I'm pretty lazy,
& that's what I do.
No fear.
No worries.
Just do what's reasonable, & let what will happen unfold as it will.
Moonjuice
In the time of chimpanzees I was a monkey
He said he wasn't worried about catching it himself, but "I would rather not unknowingly carry it and infect others with it, especially someone like my ailing, elderly father."
Shadow Wolf
Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
That's no excuse.
Serbian hermit discovers there is a pandemic, gets COVID-19 vaccine
If a hermit who has lived in a cave gets it because even he knows he interacts with others, no one can use isolation as an excuse.