What If Trump Is Not Elected?

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

When you tell others what they should do, based on your stoop-assed opinion of facts that do not support even basic logic, then I ask you to to try telling me so to my face. You will have to defend yourself in more ways than one. Give that shit up.

Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

Like I said; you wanna wear a mask - Just do it, but STFU about it already. Before I forget, you can take it Greek for contact tracing as well. Who knows, maybe you get a tip for it even. How's that free speechy thing working out?

I'm not going to STFU. So what are you going to do about it? The courts don't look kindly on people who sexually assault midgets.

This is a good summary of recent studies that show face masks are effective:

https://www.businessinsider.com/face...esearch-2020-6

[eccielover]

Originally Posted by Tiny

This is a good summary of recent studies that show face masks are effective:

https://www.businessinsider.com/face...esearch-2020-6

It's a rather hodgepodge of information presented there in a confusing set of numbers and they don't really discuss homemade masks, which is what a large portion of the population is doing. And they stress the effectiveness of N95 respirator.

When talking masks they say the base transmission rate is 17.4% and with medical grade N95 drops to 3.1%.

When talking social distancing they say the base transmission rate is 12.8% and with 3-6 feet social distancing drops to 2.8%.

When talking goggles and face shields they say the base transmission rate is 16% and with goggles drops to 5.5%.

So playing devils advocate based on their numbers, absent medical grade masks, social distancing and goggles could give better protection than cheap homemade masks.

[Levianon17]

Originally Posted by Tiny

Yeah, assembly on private property must be protected. And also we should exercise common sense in how we do that given the Covid-19 epidemic.

I think the argument is stronger for masks than for seat belts. They both save lives. The difference is that seat belts are mostly for the benefit of the person who's wearing them, so there's a strong argument that decision should be left up to the individual. Admittedly though that's not entirely true because the taxpayer and other insurance policy holders often pick up the tab for the medical expenses.

With masks, you're protecting other people more than you're protecting yourself. You're less of a health risk to others when you wear one. But like you in general I don't like the government telling people what to do, unless it's necessary. For masks, the benefits to the economy and to public health outweigh the abridgment of freedom IMHO.

I'm probably a hypocrite because I am eating in restaurants, although trying to stay away from the crowded ones where you can't social distance.

Your chances of catching a Food Born Illness is far greater than catching a virus, no mask can prevent that. Dumb on.

[farmstud60]

Originally Posted by pfunkdenver

Please explain. We need details.

Details? You have no clue what the Constitution says, how the Democrats have been ignoring for the last 15 years, and they have corrupt judges that don't even follow the Constitution.

[rexdutchman]

Damn the way things are going "lock & load "

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by rexdutchman

Damn the way things are going "lock & load "

You ain't "loaded" yet?

[Why_Yes_I_Do]

Originally Posted by Tiny

... The courts don't look kindly on people who sexually assault midgets.
This is a good summary of recent studies that show face masks are effective:
https://www.businessinsider.com/face...esearch-2020-6

Trust me on this one; I'm not looking to sexually engage with you in any form or fashion. But thanks for providing the link that links to yet another glowing body of work from Lancet. I'll put it in my kimchi jar and let it ferment a week or two and see if it's retracted and profusely apologized for by then.

The body of evidence against mass face mask wearing is tremendous. But what about May 7th?

[LexusLover]

What if Trump is not elected?

Is hanging your mask by one year considered "wearing a mask"?

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by eccielover

It's a rather hodgepodge of information presented there in a confusing set of numbers and they don't really discuss homemade masks, which is what a large portion of the population is doing. And they stress the effectiveness of N95 respirator.

When talking masks they say the base transmission rate is 17.4% and with medical grade N95 drops to 3.1%.

When talking social distancing they say the base transmission rate is 12.8% and with 3-6 feet social distancing drops to 2.8%.

When talking goggles and face shields they say the base transmission rate is 16% and with goggles drops to 5.5%.

So playing devils advocate based on their numbers, absent medical grade masks, social distancing and goggles could give better protection than cheap homemade masks.

They were mostly looking at transmission rates from exposed individuals (patients with SARS, MERS or Covid-19) to health care workers. The 3.1% is for face masks in general, not just N95. They say it was for "N95 or similar respirators or face masks (eg disposable surgical masks or similar reusable 12-16 layer cotton masks.". They do say the N95 works better than the surgical mask which works better than the cotton mask.

As we've discussed a lot here, if you wear a mask, the benefit is primarily for other people, not you, unless maybe it's an N95. They were looking at transmission the other direction, from the infected person to health care workers. Presumably if they had been able to study transmission from the mask wearer to others, the transmission rate would have been reduced by more than the 82% (from 17.4% to 3.1%) in the paper.

And yes, it looks like social distancing is about as effective as wearing a mask, to reduce your own risk of getting the disease. I'll add that they had more confidence in their results from looking at the social distancing studies than the mask studies.

You probably know the reproduction number for a disease, or "R", is the number of people on average that are infected by one carrier. The initial value of R, which is called Ro, may be anywhere from 2.5 to 5 for Covid-19 based on various estimates. So on average, at the onset of the epidemic before doing anything to control the spread, on average a person will transmit the disease to 2.5 to 5 other people.

If R falls below 1 and stays below 1, then the disease will die out.

If you're getting, say, a 50% reduction in R by wearing masks (I think it would be more) and another 50% by staying 6 feet away from others, you've got this licked -- 0.5 x 0.5 = 0.25, so if I'm thinking about this correctly that's a 75% reduction in R. The effects on the economy would be very positive. One of the papers referenced in the Business Insider article referred to something like that: "When facemasks are used by the public all the time (not just from when symptoms first appear), the effective reproduction number, [R value], can be decreased below 1, leading to the mitigation of epidemic spread." Another described infections falling to almost "0" in a German town after people started using masks.

To get this to work, I suspect most people need to do it. See the article about the ship in the article. The person who just wears the mask or who just follows social distancing guidelines will have a lower chance of getting the disease, but to really knock this out you've got to have have a lot of people doing it.

[Texas Contrarian]

Speaking of masks ...


Seems that the late Sara Little Turnbull may have been the Thomas Edison of medical mask design.


https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/...-using-bra-cup


Maybe this bit of progression makes sense, at least on some level. I mean, who among us hasn't attempted from time to time to place our mouth and nose on something that was recently in a bra cup?


(Hat tip: Barry Ritholtz, who linked this somewhere else that doesn't really have all that much to do with masks -- that is, a post on a market-related topic)


.

[oeb11]

CM_ Thanks for an intersting read on Female contributions - which are a bit less recognized at times
.

Actress Hedy Lamarr's greatest life work was far from the silver screen. At the height of her film career, and in the midst of a world war, Hedy invented the basis for all modern wireless communications: signal hopping.
Example above - never underestimate a woman.

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by oeb11

CM_ Thanks for an intersting read on Female contributions - which are a bit less recognized at times
.

Actress Hedy Lamarr's greatest life work was far from the silver screen. At the height of her film career, and in the midst of a world war, Hedy invented the basis for all modern wireless communications: signal hopping.
Example above - never underestimate a woman.

especially one who is vicious and catty.

[Texas Contrarian]

Originally Posted by oeb11

CM_ Thanks for an intersting read on Female contributions - which are a bit less recognized at times
.

Actress Hedy Lamarr's greatest life work was far from the silver screen. At the height of her film career, and in the midst of a world war, Hedy invented the basis for all modern wireless communications: signal hopping.
Example above - never underestimate a woman. Not to worry! I'll NEVER do that!

The signal-hopping technology was an incredibly fascinating innovation, especially for the era. My read of the issue a few years ago led me to believe that for some time after the initial announcement, very few of even the most credentialed engineers thought it to be feasible or practicable.


Although I read a couple of fine articles on this topic earlier in the last decade, a quick search didn't turn them up. However, these links hit the high points:


https://blogs.scientificamerican.com...ng-hedy-lamar/


https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smith...-fi-180971584/


.

[eccieuser9500]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

What if Trump is not elected?

Is hanging your mask by one year considered "wearing a mask"?

Did you mean to state "by one ear . . . ?" I wouldn't dare correct you.

[pfunkdenver]

Originally Posted by farmstud60

Details? You have no clue what the Constitution says, how the Democrats have been ignoring for the last 15 years, and they have corrupt judges that don't even follow the Constitution.

More stream-of-consciousness nonsense. It doesn't explain, or give details. It's just verbal diarrhea. I'm pretty sure you've never read the Constitution.