[Byte1]

Originally Posted by tophcfa

Having spent time recently both in the Villages and at our northern home, I personally feel much safer going out and about, and not catching Covid, while in the Villages. Sure, the Villages has it‘s share of Covidiots and Maskholes, but in general it is much safer in the bubble. Outside of the bubble it is very evident that quarantine burnout is growing daily. Older people are more vulnerable and tend to be more patient, making the Villages relatively safe. In general, wherever younger people are, watch out! This will get even worse up north as it gets colder and more people gather indoors. It’s going to be a long fall and winter, Covid won’t suddenly disappear when the ball drops on New Years : (

Personally, it is my belief that the reason we do not have more infected by the virus is the lack of school age kids in The Villages. Yes, it does seem like we live in a "bubble" doesn't it? I feel that way also.. But, if you think about it we have less contagious illnesses here than in other parts of the country, that extends year round. It's not just this virus, but the flu, colds, etc. School children interact with contagious children and bring it home. Less children, less chance of infection. Thus, the feeling that we are protected. Same goes with crime. Less adolescent children, less juvenile delinquents and crime.
This is just my opinion, not science and not based on any factual studies.

[coffeebean]

I would like to comment on the mantra, "Stay home" that some people have been spouting........

Staying home does absolutely nothing to stimulate the economy but does everything to promote depression and hopelessness. Shouldn't we be all about getting our economy to be prosperous again? Shouldn't we be all about getting the children back in schools safely? Shouldn't we be all about getting college campuses operating safely? Shouldn't we be all about getting sports up and running again with actual fans in the seats and filling those stadiums and arenas to full capacity? How about being able to do grocery shopping in the store and not having to order on line? Not to mention, dining in restaurants and giving the service people their livelihoods back to what they were prepandemic.

Staying home stifles all of this. Yes, I do believe telling people to "stay home" is absolutely wrong on every level. We have to learn to live with this virus out there. That does not mean we should "stay home". That means social distancing, wearing masks, washing our hands frequently and do not touch our faces when our hands are not freshly washed.

Listen to the experts and do what they say. Don't be a science denier and write your own rules. Most of all, please don't tell people to "stay home".

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by coffeebean

i would like to comment on the mantra, "stay home" that some people have been spouting........

Staying home does absolutely nothing to stimulate the economy but does everything to promote depression and hopelessness. Shouldn't we be all about getting our economy to be prosperous again? Shouldn't we be all about getting the children back in schools safely? Shouldn't we be all about getting college campuses operating safely? Shouldn't we be all about getting sports up and running again with actual fans in the seats and filling those stadiums and arenas to full capacity? How about being able to do grocery shopping in the store and not having to order on line? Not to mention, dining in restaurants and giving the service people their livelihoods back to what they were prepandemic.

Staying home stifles all of this. Yes, i do believe telling people to "stay home" is absolutely wrong on every level. We have to learn to live with this virus out there. That does not mean we should "stay home". That means social distancing, wearing masks, washing our hands frequently and do not touch our faces when our hands are not freshly washed.

Listen to the experts and do what they say. Don't be a science denier and write your own rules. Most of all, please don't tell people to "stay home".

well said!!!

[Pettys1]

That's just crazy... That's like people who get cancer if there lifestyle is different don't pay for treatment...Most people out are wearing mask. An there are some who don't. So if you have a mask then your protected... So don't worry bout the ones who don't. If you really want to protect yourself live in a bubble no context with anything in the outside world.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by Pettys1

That's just crazy... That's like people who get cancer if there lifestyle is different don't pay for treatment...Most people out are wearing mask. An there are some who don't. So if you have a mask then your protected... So don't worry bout the ones who don't. If you really want to protect yourself live in a bubble no context with anything in the outside world.

What gave you THAT idea?

[Malsua]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

What gave you THAT idea?

The media has pushed this idea.

Anyone that has paid any attention to this you learn a couple things.

1. You can't hide from it.
2. You can reduce your inoculum. How much? Any helps. You can go from an LD50 dose of virus to a toxic or "therapeutic" dose which might mean you have an asymptomatic case or just some sniffles.
3. Mask wearing seems to be associated with increasing cases. That's bad right? Except that the cases seem to be 95% asymptomatic. That's a win anyway you look at it.

One particular study on it is here:
Masks Do More Than Protect Others During COVID-19: Reducing the Inoculum of SARS-CoV-2 to Protect the Wearer

I don't think wearing masks outside does anything. Driving alone in your car? Asinine. In close proximity, indoors, to people with unknown infection status? Better than nothing. Masks will stop viral laden droplets going both directions, in or out. This will give you the best chance at a low initial inoculum.

By the same token, it certainly looks like this thing burns through a region, taking out the weakest and then it's predominantly done. The Northeast went through it in March and April, the south in June and July, now it's the upper midwest's turn. Then it's mostly done, running out of hosts. It's the same everywhere. Look at where it was active in Spain in the spring, look where it's active in Spain now. They are opposites. Every country, it's the same. I hate to break it to New Zealand but eventually they are going to get the big spike. Locking the doors doesn't work forever. Maybe they can hold on until there's an effective vaccine.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by Malsua

The media has pushed this idea.

Anyone that has paid any attention to this you learn a couple things.

1. You can't hide from it.
2. You can reduce your inoculum. How much? Any helps. You can go from an LD50 dose of virus to a toxic or "therapeutic" dose which might mean you have an asymptomatic case or just some sniffles.
3. Mask wearing seems to be associated with increasing cases. That's bad right? Except that the cases seem to be 95% asymptomatic. That's a win anyway you look at it.

One particular study on it is here:
Masks Do More Than Protect Others During COVID-19: Reducing the Inoculum of SARS-CoV-2 to Protect the Wearer

I don't think wearing masks outside does anything. Driving alone in your car? Asinine. In close proximity, indoors, to people with unknown infection status? Better than nothing. Masks will stop viral laden droplets going both directions, in or out. This will give you the best chance at a low initial inoculum.

By the same token, it certainly looks like this thing burns through a region, taking out the weakest and then it's predominantly done. The Northeast went through it in March and April, the south in June and July, now it's the upper midwest's turn. Then it's mostly done, running out of hosts. It's the same everywhere. Look at where it was active in Spain in the spring, look where it's active in Spain now. They are opposites. Every country, it's the same. I hate to break it to New Zealand but eventually they are going to get the big spike. Locking the doors doesn't work forever. Maybe they can hold on until there's an effective vaccine.

I agree with most of what you posted, except:
1) You really can't apply the term LD50 to a viral inoculum like you would to a dose of poison---the correlation between dose and death isn't that tight
2) the best way to reduce inoculum size is distance.

[Malsua]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

I agree with most of what you posted, except:
1) You really can't apply the term LD50 to a viral inoculum like you would to a dose of poison---the correlation between dose and death isn't that tight
2) the best way to reduce inoculum size is distance.

I agree that distance is best, far and away.

As to LD50 and viral inoculum, they did exactly that with mice. They kept shooting them up the nose with stronger and stronger viral inoculum of H5N1 until they found the LD50 dose of it.

A Mouse Model for the Evaluation of Pathogenesis and Immunity to Influenza A (H5N1) Viruses Isolated from Humans

Of course with humans, there is a lot more involved since we aren't lab rats and no two humans are identical. There is certainly a correlation with the amount of initial exposure to virus to outcome. It also appears that in many cases, tcells squash the virus before you end up with any level of bcell antibodies. The PCR test in the "asymptomatics" in many cases is probably detecting viral debris, not active virus. This is probably because the initial inoculum was quite low. Either that or they are running the cycle threshold out to 40+.

Best way to get a low inoculum is distance. Second best way is shielding. Since I can't walk around in a plexiglass cocoon, I'll have to settle on masking indoors in close proximity only.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by Malsua

I agree that distance is best, far and away.

As to LD50 and viral inoculum, they did exactly that with mice. They kept shooting them up the nose with stronger and stronger viral inoculum of H5N1 until they found the LD50 dose of it.

A Mouse Model for the Evaluation of Pathogenesis and Immunity to Influenza A (H5N1) Viruses Isolated from Humans

Of course with humans, there is a lot more involved since we aren't lab rats and no two humans are identical. There is certainly a correlation with the amount of initial exposure to virus to outcome. It also appears that in many cases, tcells squash the virus before you end up with any level of bcell antibodies. The PCR test in the "asymptomatics" in many cases is probably detecting viral debris, not active virus. This is probably because the initial inoculum was quite low. Either that or they are running the cycle threshold out to 40+.

Best way to get a low inoculum is distance. Second best way is shielding. Since I can't walk around in a plexiglass cocoon, I'll have to settle on masking indoors in close proximity only.

All true, of course it is a lot easier to kill a mouse than a person. I agree that severity of illness is proportional to inoculum. The correlation between death and severity of illness would empirically seem correct, but as you know it doesn't always work that way

[coffeebean]

Originally Posted by Pettys1

That's just crazy... That's like people who get cancer if there lifestyle is different don't pay for treatment...Most people out are wearing mask. An there are some who don't. So if you have a mask then your protected... So don't worry bout the ones who don't. If you really want to protect yourself live in a bubble no context with anything in the outside world.

Your statement is true but to some small degree. Masking protects the people around the wearer of the mask. Wearing a mask offers less protection to the wearer.

[oldtimes]

Originally Posted by coffeebean

I would like to comment on the mantra, "Stay home" that some people have been spouting........

Staying home does absolutely nothing to stimulate the economy but does everything to promote depression and hopelessness. Shouldn't we be all about getting our economy to be prosperous again? Shouldn't we be all about getting the children back in schools safely? Shouldn't we be all about getting college campuses operating safely? Shouldn't we be all about getting sports up and running again with actual fans in the seats and filling those stadiums and arenas to full capacity? How about being able to do grocery shopping in the store and not having to order on line? Not to mention, dining in restaurants and giving the service people their livelihoods back to what they were prepandemic.

Staying home stifles all of this. Yes, I do believe telling people to "stay home" is absolutely wrong on every level. We have to learn to live with this virus out there. That does not mean we should "stay home". That means social distancing, wearing masks, washing our hands frequently and do not touch our faces when our hands are not freshly washed.

Listen to the experts and do what they say. Don't be a science denier and write your own rules. Most of all, please don't tell people to "stay home".

On this we agree. I think there is a very fine line between protecting people from the virus and killing them with the restrictions. My heart bleeds for the people with no job because of this who are unable to pay their bills. I try to support the local businesses as best I can.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by Pettys1

That's just crazy... That's like people who get cancer if there lifestyle is different don't pay for treatment...Most people out are wearing mask. An there are some who don't. So if you have a mask then your protected... So don't worry bout the ones who don't. If you really want to protect yourself live in a bubble no context with anything in the outside world.

If you wear a mask properly (covering your nose and face) then you have REDUCED YOUR RISK of infection. You are not "protected."

If everyone around you is also wearing a mask, that risk is significantly reduced even more. If you don't wear a mask, and everyone else is wearing one, then you might well be spreading that virus to them - because the greatest risk is with people who are infected, and not masked, spreading the infection to everyone else. Because masks don't prevent you from getting sick. It only reduces your risk.

Risk Reduction.

You can google it, or bing it, or duck duck go it, whatever floats your boat. But please look up the term "risk reduction" to learn what it means. It's basic stuff.

[OrangeBlossomBaby]

Originally Posted by oldtimes

On this we agree. I think there is a very fine line between protecting people from the virus and killing them with the restrictions. My heart bleeds for the people with no job because of this who are unable to pay their bills. I try to support the local businesses as best I can.

It's not a fine line at all. There's plenty of wiggle room here. And the "best practices," the best method of risk reduction while keeping the economy flowing:

Wash your hands.
Wear a mask (properly, covering nose and mouth)
Maintain a respectful distance from others.

At this point, it's not even 6 feet. If you're wearing a mask, stay at arm's length. It's not too much to ask, it's not an unreasonable request, it doesn't infringe on 'mah freedums." Don't touch me, don't breathe on me, don't get in my space. This is something you should've been doing most of your life. It's called common courtesy. Or it used to be, until someone decided that "mah freedums" were more important.

[Boomer]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

It's not a fine line at all. There's plenty of wiggle room here. And the "best practices," the best method of risk reduction while keeping the economy flowing:

Wash your hands.
Wear a mask (properly, covering nose and mouth)
Maintain a respectful distance from others.

At this point, it's not even 6 feet. If you're wearing a mask, stay at arm's length. It's not too much to ask, it's not an unreasonable request, it doesn't infringe on 'mah freedums." Don't touch me, don't breathe on me, don't get in my space. This is something you should've been doing most of your life. It's called common courtesy. Or it used to be, until someone decided that "mah freedums" were more important.

Yes. Those 3 things on your list are all we’ve got so why not? It makes no sense not to try.

One thing that really surprises me is that there are women falling into the Orwellian traps.

When women love, really love, that love comes with an almost primitive instinct to protect those they love. Women can love like tigresses or mama bears.

Yet, here we are, seeing women caught up in believing what they WANT to believe about Covid — even though they could end up putting those they love at risk. I don’t get it.

Boomer

PS: I am in Ohio right now. My phone just rang. I have a doc’s appointment today and was planning to go in person. But the office just called to ask if I could do the appointment on Zoom due to increased Covid. We have taken a half step forward and two or three steps backward. . .Damn, right, I am tired of Covid but I am also tired of those who will not do what they can to get us through this. This started in winter, then came spring, summer, now fall. Four seasons — with no end in sight. This is reality.

[PugMom]

was called the hong kong flu, & don't forget the bird flu about 16 years ago