America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 3 years ago by RobertHively. 63 replies replies.
2 Pages12>
Team Trump winning big on COVID 19!
Speyside Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Based on Johns Hopkins weekly information updated today, Red states hold the top 16 positions highest infection percentage. California comes in at a paltry number 17. Now that's winning biggly! Those hell holes of New York and Illinois have a sadly low percentage of 1.03% and 2.67% respectively.
victor809 Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
... well, give it time... With the infection rate so high in the burbs it's bound to become bad in the cities once they reopen.
HockeyDad Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,142
Infection percentage? First it was deaths. Then # of cases. Is this the new statistic we are going to report?

Deaths still trending downward since April?
MACS Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 02-26-2004
Posts: 79,800
Let him have it, HD.
HockeyDad Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,142
My neighbors are having a pool party and clearly social distancing has broken down. I just want to get my official statistic straight before calling in to SWAT, a social worker, or Gavin’s brown shirts.
Speyside Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
I've been talking this percentage for some time. Can't help it you don't understand that this is the most significant metric. I have explained why a few times. Really it is disappointing that a relatively simple mathematical concept applied relative to infectious disease is beyond your grasp. So in Trump speak. Infection bad. No infection good. More infection bad bad. Less infection good good. Higher infection percentage bad bad bad. Lower infection percentage good good good. Can you keep up with that? Mad MACS, sorry, can't think of simple enough terms for you.
victor809 Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
I know HD. It's hard for you to manage more than one metric.
HockeyDad Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,142
It’s just weird that this is the most important metric yet I can’t find it reported. Definitely not seeing something putting Cali at 17. Sounds good though. I guess I’ll go join the neighbor’s party. We’re kicking butt!
Speyside Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Its hard to find. No where Trump can control is showing it. Look up covid 19 Johns Hopkins and do some looking around. It is on a weekly 50ish page download.
Speyside Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Actually here is a link to get there. https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/testing/testing-positivity
rfenst Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,336
Speyside wrote:
Actually here is a link to get there. https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/testing/testing-positivity

Good link for info and good explanation of what numbers really mean anything.
HockeyDad Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,142
OK got it now. That the test positivity rate. I was looking for infection rate or infection percentage.

This is the number that is creeping up in California that caused a pause or even rollback of opening in 19 counties. We’re running 6.5% statewide.

tonygraz Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,268
The virus will not subside as long as the morons claiming freedom from wearing masks and social distancing survive unless there is a very effective vaccine. And I'm sure the morons will take the first one offered particularly if their orange prophet say its great.
HockeyDad Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,142
We need to end freedom to end the virus.
ZRX1200 Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,617
Only a moron thinks wearing a mask is going to make the virus go away.....


Are the cold and flu a new thing?
rfenst Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,336
ZRX1200 wrote:
Only a moron thinks wearing a mask is going to make the virus go away.....


Are the cold and flu a new thing?

Masks will never make the virus go away. But, they will help in keeping the virus away from me and my family.

As to whether covid and the flue are the same thing, I don't think so. Which would you prefer?
Speyside Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Z I was thinking of replying just as meanly but I won't. Wearing a mask and socially does greatly decrease my odds of passing COVID 19 to someone else. I do this out of decency and consideration for other human beings. As every state is constitutionally garunteed the ability to implement emergency health measures no freedom has been taken away. All you have to do is watch one of the videos showing the spread of droplets, and or aerosol and the effect various face coverings have on this. That is verifiable proof that face coverings work. No one is saying that face coverings and social distancing will eradicate COVID 19.

As far as your cold and flu question, it is irrelevant. With your career you should know this. You are talking about different categories of virus. I can in no way shape or form say anything other than we do not know enough about COVID 19 to make any predictions that are relatively exact. I can say with 100% certainty that COVID 19 is a very dangerous virus. I can point out with 100% certainty COVID 19 is a direct cause or deadly serious autoimmune issues in a significant % of people who contract COVID 19. I can point out with 100% certainty that COVID 19 has mutated into a virus with a greater transmission rate.
ZRX1200 Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,617
Robert yes and no. You’re going to come into contact or you aren’t period, and what good hygiene practices you employ will matter more singularly than a mask. A mask is more productive at slowing the spread FROM an infected person.

Spey, I don’t recall telling you where I work but I don’t doubt you do know. Doubt you know what I did before this though and that puts me in unique company in the medical industry. I worked industrial hazmat clean up, specifically setting up high risk decontamination booths.

So yeah I am pretty familiar with droplets, surface and other ways of transmission.
HockeyDad Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,142
I can’t wait until we get another week or two out from the protests and riots so we can start driving the case rate back down.
victor809 Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
You already tried that tactic HD. The numbers aren't in the right states to be driven by that.

I'm sure they don't help. But you're being an idiot to pretend that's what's causing Florida's or Texas's spike
delta1 Offline
#21 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,797
pretty sure we can blame it on alcohol...
frankj1 Offline
#22 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,222
certainly conscientious personal hygiene is a giant step in protecting oneself.
For many years I have avoided holding escalator rails, pushing elevator buttons with my fingers, door knobs especially for bathrooms, lots of stuff like that.
And whenever possible I keep a reasonable distance from others' personal space, though less so due to cold and flu.
But primarily to minimize colds and flu for me. And it has been pretty effective.

But I hadn't gone out of my way to think too much about how many cases of such and such could be eliminated or at least minimized with the wearing of a mask. I may now wear one from time to time even if a vaccine is developed for covid just to not innocently spread my own colds or flu before I become aware of them.

So, sure. Do all the diligent work keeping yourself clean. And it won't make as much of a difference in a pandemic or epidemic if you don't add the mask as step one for everyone else in proximity.
If I have the cooties, and breathe on you in the line at the store for a few minutes, I don't care if you walk through a car wash with a light tube in your butt, you've got bad odds of escaping this.
delta1 Offline
#23 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,797
every haz mat worker I've ever seen wears masks (in addition to a suit of PPE) and they're not doing so to protect the scene
Speyside Offline
#24 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
No, I did not know about your hazmat background. That does give you a unique perspective. Is hazmat applicable in any of this? Not meaning to degrade you in any way. Just curious about COVID 19 from that perspective.
delta1 Offline
#25 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,797
if you enter a space/place where there's a possibility of being exposed to the virus, why not wear a mask?
frankj1 Offline
#26 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,222
the masks that theoretically violate conservatives' rights are the type that protect everyone else, not wearer. I just can't take the infantile tears any more.

Try to stay with me...

A common misguided whine here is the complaint of conflicting mask messages from "so-called" experts like Fauci. "What in heaven's name are we to believe" is a common bleat...and it is embarrassing for them. It's kinda simple.

Originally we were told we don't need masks because they wanted to make sure there were enough for the medic people and front liners...the N95's or whatever they are called. Designed to protect the wearer, so it's easy for most (but I guess not all) to understand why they needed to be saved for those in the riskiest professions.

soon thereafter we were told that almost anything that inhibits the wearer's personal expelling of droplets to protect OTHER people should be worn by the populace to slow the high contagious talents of this virus. To protect others in case we were positive but didn't know it. Not to protect the wearer (I repeat for emphasis.)
So most smart places said you should wear one. Like MA.

I'm sure the idiots of real science would apologize for learning and reacting to your needs as things changed in real time even though you demand they should know all things science in advance.

Why does this illness still smack of politics?
And how is it Obama's fault when 2.5 of 3 sections of our gov are controlled by the GOP?


Anyone still unable to understand should PM jade.
Plowboy221 Offline
#27 Posted:
Joined: 03-03-2013
Posts: 5,151
Just read an article that said mask literally do nothing 🤷🏼‍♂️
frankj1 Offline
#28 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,222
I'll take that over Fauci any day.
delta1 Offline
#29 Posted:
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,797
here's an article about the effectiveness of cloth masks...they're better than nothing, and with high thread count cloths, can stop up to 79% of corona sized particles

https://scitechdaily.com/how-effective-are-cloth-masks-against-coronavirus-video/
Plowboy221 Offline
#30 Posted:
Joined: 03-03-2013
Posts: 5,151
Got my new InvisaMask in the mail the other week. If you order now they’ll send ya two for 29.99 plus free shipping!
rfenst Offline
#31 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,336
I posted this on another thread, but it bers being reposted here too:



SEEING IS BELIEVING: EFFECTIVENESS OF FACEMASKS

Currently, there are no specific guidelines on the most effective materials and designs for face masks to minimize the spread of droplets from coughs or sneezes to mitigate the transmission of COVID-19. While there have been prior studies on how medical-grade masks perform, data on cloth-based coverings used by the vast majority of the general public are sparse.

Research from Florida Atlantic University’s College of Engineering and Computer Science, just published in the journal Physics of Fluids, demonstrates through visualization of emulated coughs and sneezes, a method to assess the effectiveness of facemasks in obstructing droplets. The rationale behind the recommendation for using masks or other face coverings is to reduce the risk of cross-infection via the transmission of respiratory droplets from infected to healthy individuals.

Researchers employed flow visualization in a laboratory setting using a laser light sheet and a mixture of distilled water and glycerin to generate the synthetic fog that made up the content of a cough-jet. They visualized droplets expelled from a mannequin’s mouth while simulating coughing and sneezing. They tested masks that are readily available to the general public, which do not draw away from the supply of medical-grade masks and respirators for healthcare workers. They tested a single-layer bandana-style covering, a homemade mask that was stitched using two-layers of cotton quilting fabric consisting of 70 threads per inch, and a non-sterile cone-style mask that is available in most pharmacies. By placing these various masks on the mannequin, they were able to map out the paths of droplets and demonstrate how differently they perform.

Results showed that loosely folded facemasks and bandana-style coverings stop aerosolized respiratory droplets to some degree. However, well-fitted homemade masks with multiple layers of quilting fabric, and off-the-shelf cone style masks, proved to be the most effective in reducing droplet dispersal. These masks were able to curtail the speed and range of the respiratory jets significantly, albeit with some leakage through the mask material and from small gaps along the edges.

Importantly, uncovered emulated coughs were able to travel noticeably farther than the currently recommended 6-foot distancing guideline. Without a mask, droplets traveled more than 8 feet; with a bandana, they traveled 3 feet, 7 inches; with a folded cotton handkerchief, they traveled 1 foot, 3 inches; with the stitched quilting cotton mask, they traveled 2.5 inches; and with the cone-style mask, droplets traveled about 8 inches.

“In addition to providing an initial indication of the effectiveness of protective equipment, the visuals used in our study can help convey to the general public the rationale behind social-distancing guidelines and recommendations for using facemasks,” said Siddhartha Verma, Ph.D., lead author and an assistant professor who co-authored the paper with Manhar Dhanak, Ph.D., department chair, professor, and director of SeaTech; and John Frakenfeld, technical paraprofessional, all within FAU’s Department of Ocean and Mechanical Engineering. “Promoting widespread awareness of effective preventive measures is crucial at this time as we are observing significant spikes in cases of COVID-19 infections in many states, especially Florida.”

When the mannequin was not fitted with a mask, they projected droplets much farther than the 6-foot distancing guidelines currently recommended by the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The researchers observed droplets traveling up to 12 feet within approximately 50 seconds. Moreover, the tracer droplets remained suspended midair for up to three minutes in the quiescent environment. These observations, in combination with other recent studies, suggest that current social-distancing guidelines may need to be updated to account for aerosol-based transmission of pathogens.

“We found that although the unobstructed turbulent jets were observed to travel up to 12 feet, a large majority of the ejected droplets fell to the ground by this point,” said Dhanak. “Importantly, both the number and concentration of the droplets will decrease with increasing distance, which is the fundamental rationale behind social-distancing.”

The pathogen responsible for COVID-19 is found primarily in respiratory droplets that are expelled by infected individuals during coughing, sneezing, or even talking and breathing. Apart from COVID-19, respiratory droplets also are the primary means of transmission for various other viral and bacterial illnesses, such as the common cold, influenza, tuberculosis, SARS (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome), and MERS (Middle East Respiratory Syndrome), to name a few. These pathogens are enveloped within respiratory droplets, which may land on healthy individuals and result in direct transmission, or on inanimate objects, which can lead to infection when a healthy individual comes in contact with them.

Our researchers have demonstrated how masks are able to significantly curtail the speed and range of the respiratory droplets and jets. Moreover, they have uncovered how emulated coughs can travel noticeably farther than the currently recommended six-foot distancing guideline,” said Stella Batalama, Ph.D., dean of FAU’s College of Engineering and Computer Science. “Their research outlines the procedure for setting up simple visualization experiments using easily available materials, which may help healthcare professionals, medical researchers, and manufacturers in assessing the effectiveness of face masks and other personal protective equipment qualitatively.”

-FAU-
Plowboy221 Offline
#32 Posted:
Joined: 03-03-2013
Posts: 5,151
https://www.google.com/amp/s/theplantstrongclub.org/2020/07/04/healthy-people-should-not-wear-face-masks-by-jim-meehan-md/amp/
Speyside Offline
#33 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Sorry plowboy. Read the article. Its just a hack job. The only fact in the whole article is the economic damage. Most of that BS is debunked easy with a quick Google search. Some of the rest is so ridiculous the are no articles either way on the net. A MD and a neurosurgeon have no business commenting on virology or epidemiology. The piece about furin cleavage is beyond stupid. The plants strong club is the only place willing to print this clown opinion. I'll stick with JAMA, NEJM, and other highly regarded sources. Oh, this clown doesn't know chit about cellular membrane physiology.
Plowboy221 Offline
#34 Posted:
Joined: 03-03-2013
Posts: 5,151
Most people have their head so far up there ass they don’t need a mask anyway.

Victor said he gets funny looks as Aldi’s when he’s shopping with his mask on.
https://www.amazon.com/Funnel-Bondage-Fetish-Cosplay-Women-mask/dp/B087671F3K
rfenst Offline
#35 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,336
Spey, I agree with you.
Brewha Offline
#36 Posted:
Joined: 01-25-2010
Posts: 12,192
The real reason people don't wear masks in public is because they are irresponsible.

Or because the just hate America - remind you of anyone?
HockeyDad Offline
#37 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,142
Brewha wrote:
The real reason people don't wear masks in public is because they are irresponsible.

Or because the just hate America - remind you of anyone?


Obama?
frankj1 Offline
#38 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,222
there's research that informs the reader.

and there are readers researching for anything that gives credence to what they hope is true.

one is helpful.
one is political.
HockeyDad Offline
#39 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,142
So let me get this straight....we should be wearing masks?
BuckyB93 Offline
#40 Posted:
Joined: 07-16-2004
Posts: 14,209
And only believe the research that says mask wearing saves lives otherwise your are a selfish unamerican person who wants everyone to die. They factored that into their model so it's true.
frankj1 Offline
#41 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,222
BuckyB93 wrote:
And only believe the research that says mask wearing saves lives otherwise your are a selfish unamerican person who wants everyone to die. They factored that into their model so it's true.

how is it transmitted?
Speyside Offline
#42 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
At least for me not exactly. Though I will say I haven't seen any research that shows masks aren't effective. I base my thoughts on masks on video that shows disbursement patterns of coughs and sneezes with no mask and various types of masks. Obviously breathing aerosol has no videos as any mask stops it and no mask doesn't.
BuckyB93 Offline
#43 Posted:
Joined: 07-16-2004
Posts: 14,209
Is sneezing a new thing? How often does someone sneeze in your direction close enough for you to get sprayed? What did you do for the past umpteen years to defend against these types of illnesses?

Are these lab tests, vids, experiments run in real world environments or in controlled environments? How does these test results reflect the real world?

I'm not going to wrestle with the "it could... it can... it has been shown... there's a possibility that... in some cases it... traces of it was found by.... some evidence suggests... there's a probability of....
Speyside Offline
#44 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
You know what? I'm not playing your game. Believe what you want. You do not have the credentials to debate what experts are saying. You don't have the credentials to debate with me what this virus does to human beings at a systemic level or cellular level. I have stated my credentials previously, I will not state them again for you. I am one of the experts from the direction of physiology. Yes I read the summaries. I also read the actual papers. Believe what you will, I believe what I will. On certain points my beliefs are no more valid than yours. Though I will always trust the experts. On other points I am correct and know it.
HockeyDad Offline
#45 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,142
Still haven’t cured it though. Fricking sudo experts.
Speyside Offline
#46 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Ain't gonna cure it just yet. Though dealing with it better. Plus Regeneron has moved to phase 3 and a cocktail is coming together. My worry really is the potential long term health issues, not ready to say they are long term health issues just yet. I think they are but there is no way to verify that. They death rate will keep dropping as those in high risk categories die. Just the way it is. Death isn't the main problem. Hell of a thing to say. In fact I would put it a ways down the list. I'm not an economist but it sure is easy to see the daily devastation occurring. Open it back up. Not so easy. It may crash even worse. We have to find the razors edge we need to walk. I really am only in a position to talk with confidence about the nature of how the disease effects our body. I really would like to hear from constitutional scholars about rights infringement or not. Equally as much from great economists about how to best recover from this.
frankj1 Offline
#47 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,222
BuckyB93 wrote:
Is sneezing a new thing? How often does someone sneeze in your direction close enough for you to get sprayed? What did you do for the past umpteen years to defend against these types of illnesses?

Are these lab tests, vids, experiments run in real world environments or in controlled environments? How does these test results reflect the real world?

I'm not going to wrestle with the "it could... it can... it has been shown... there's a possibility that... in some cases it... traces of it was found by.... some evidence suggests... there's a probability of....

a huge part of what I did was expect people to cover up when they sneezed or coughed around others.
I always do that courtesy...I'm betting on you as well.

It's normal to care at that level, it's not a political conspiracy.

And that was just for colds and flu, even could have been allergies but decent people respect others.

If your kid has measles I'm also betting you don't send him/her to school. If you aren't sure, do you roll the dice?

And by now you must have seen enough to agree this ain't no common cold or flu.
frankj1 Offline
#48 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,222
Speyside wrote:
Ain't gonna cure it just yet. Though dealing with it better. Plus Regeneron has moved to phase 3 and a cocktail is coming together. My worry really is the potential long term health issues, not ready to say they are long term health issues just yet. I think they are but there is no way to verify that. They death rate will keep dropping as those in high risk categories die. Just the way it is. Death isn't the main problem. Hell of a thing to say. In fact I would put it a ways down the list. I'm not an economist but it sure is easy to see the daily devastation occurring. Open it back up. Not so easy. It may crash even worse. We have to find the razors edge we need to walk. I really am only in a position to talk with confidence about the nature of how the disease effects our body. I really would like to hear from constitutional scholars about rights infringement or not. Equally as much from great economists about how to best recover from this.

hit "enter" every once in a while.
frankj1 Offline
#49 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,222
BuckyB93 wrote:
Is sneezing a new thing? How often does someone sneeze in your direction close enough for you to get sprayed? What did you do for the past umpteen years to defend against these types of illnesses?

Are these lab tests, vids, experiments run in real world environments or in controlled environments? How does these test results reflect the real world?

I'm not going to wrestle with the "it could... it can... it has been shown... there's a possibility that... in some cases it... traces of it was found by.... some evidence suggests... there's a probability of....

and...

I call them out if they don't cover up coughs and sneezes.
Filthy pigs that they are
Speyside Offline
#50 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
Wow! That's all you want to mention? I think I broke every rule of the English language in one post.
Users browsing this topic
Guest (3)
2 Pages12>