badecker even you debunked your own 'didnt pass koch' earlier in this topic
you realised it did pass koch then switched gear to then say koch is irrelevant.
stop circling the same old scripts. especially when you debunked yourself already by knowing it passed koch
wake up its 21st century not 12th century
there is a thing called technology and science now.. its not the days of magic and myth
Topic: Coronavirus Outbreak - page 54. (Read 29873 times)
The reason why they can't detect the virus in droplets coughed by most people who have the disease is, they don't really know what the virus is like enough to claim that it is there. All their virus knowledge shows something that may not be a virus at all. This is because the first virus screening methods were flawed. So, there isn't any accurate data about what the virus really is.
In addition, when testing a person for the virus, the test methods are flawed. How are they flawed? The tested materials aren't screened properly. And the materials/viruses found are not given to others to see if they produce any sickness. Yet this is the standard method for detection - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koch%27s_postulates. But it hasn't been followed for any Covid detection, right from the start, on down to the present.
In other words, the reason we don't see Covid in asymptomatic folks wh supposedly are Covid positive, is that we don't really know that they are Covid positive, and we don't really know what we are looking for in their body fluids.
The whole Covid thing is built on inconclusive and false data.
What's the consensus of reopening schools? Per usual shitty U.S. politics, even that has become a politicized issue.
The other concern is about teachers which has legitimate merit. Older teachers are going to be at risk and they need to be protected. I think having younger teachers could be used to teach in person classes while older teachers could hold virtual meetings with their students in class with student teachers proctoring classrooms.
The other concern is about teachers which has legitimate merit. Older teachers are going to be at risk and they need to be protected. I think having younger teachers could be used to teach in person classes while older teachers could hold virtual meetings with their students in class with student teachers proctoring classrooms.
your forgetting the rest of the family when the kids come home from school in the afternoons.
EG granny and grandpa babysitting the kids while the parents work
visiting the grandparents when its the weekend
..
having 30 kids mingling per class can make the virus spread to many families fast
kids are not good(well some idiot adults in this forum too) at social distancing.
kids are not good at hygiene
the reason its politicised is because schools are regulated and funded by government. and if schools need to hire more teachers or build more classrooms to reduce the ratio of teacher:student from 1:30 to 1:15 it needs governments sign off
funny part is that they knew about these issues and were making worse case scenario plans back in march-april. but even now most schools have not even changed one bit. no recruitment drives no building new classrooms. not much change in budgets.
its like they are wanting to leave it to the last minute and be reactive instead of proactive
what their 'hope' is(cheapest/no work needed option). that if one student in a class of 30 gets sick. the whole class gets a 2 week break to protect their families
but if one kid gets sick and has not passed it to his classmates. then next time a different kid in the same class gets sick from a different source. another 2 week break for that teacher and all students.
rinse and repeat 30 times =60 weeks minimum(if no virus free weeks in between) for spread avoidance
or 20 weeks if they allow 3ish kids to get it before they enact a class 2week break
People need to use hygiene and good nutrition from the start. This way, if they have a kid each year, by the time the first one is 20-y-o, he/she can help support the family, while Mom is having her next one. If the health is good enough, Grandma will be having her 40th. All these family people will support the family.
The problem is, government is getting the people to support government family, and taking away a lot of the support through taxes. If anybody sat down and realized how much he is losing in taxes without gaining anything in return, he would start doing things differently.
What's the consensus of reopening schools? Per usual shitty U.S. politics, even that has become a politicized issue.
The other concern is about teachers which has legitimate merit. Older teachers are going to be at risk and they need to be protected. I think having younger teachers could be used to teach in person classes while older teachers could hold virtual meetings with their students in class with student teachers proctoring classrooms.
The other concern is about teachers which has legitimate merit. Older teachers are going to be at risk and they need to be protected. I think having younger teachers could be used to teach in person classes while older teachers could hold virtual meetings with their students in class with student teachers proctoring classrooms.
your forgetting the rest of the family when the kids come home from school in the afternoons.
EG granny and grandpa babysitting the kids while the parents work
visiting the grandparents when its the weekend
..
having 30 kids mingling per class can make the virus spread to many families fast
kids are not good(well some idiot adults in this forum too) at social distancing.
kids are not good at hygiene
the reason its politicised is because schools are regulated and funded by government. and if schools need to hire more teachers or build more classrooms to reduce the ratio of teacher:student from 1:30 to 1:15 it needs governments sign off
funny part is that they knew about these issues and were making worse case scenario plans back in march-april. but even now most schools have not even changed one bit. no recruitment drives no building new classrooms. not much change in budgets.
its like they are wanting to leave it to the last minute and be reactive instead of proactive
what their 'hope' is(cheapest/no work needed option). that if one student in a class of 30 gets sick. the whole class gets a 2 week break to protect their families
but if one kid gets sick and has not passed it to his classmates. then next time a different kid in the same class gets sick from a different source. another 2 week break for that teacher and all students.
rinse and repeat 30 times =60 weeks minimum(if no virus free weeks in between) for spread avoidance
or 20 weeks if they allow 3ish kids to get it before they enact a class 2week break
What's the consensus of reopening schools? Per usual shitty U.S. politics, even that has become a politicized issue. There's been studies published about how young people are not as vulnerable to the virus as older folks but I've seen people make claims that reopening schools aren't safe for kids. This isn't the case according to numerous studies and available data that's out there.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0962-9
The other concern is about teachers which has legitimate merit. Older teachers are going to be at risk and they need to be protected. I think having younger teachers could be used to teach in person classes while older teachers could hold virtual meetings with their students in class with student teachers proctoring classrooms. This would allow simultaneously for these student teachers to gain classroom experience and also make sure there's an authority figure in class. If you're a college student with goals of teaching, it'd be a good opportunity to take and solves the problem of having older teachers in the classroom. If a student lives with grandparents who are worried about bringing the virus back home, that individual student could opt in for online learning instead of forcing all students to opt in for online learning.
The long term affects of shutting down schools isn't being considered at all. Shutting down schools is going to cause educational issues for kids that don't have good home learning environments and online schooling isn't a replacement for in person instruction when you're just a teenager or even younger. Too many kids don't care enough to do school work unless they're in person and forced to. Online instruction is too easy to blow off and you're not doing kids any justice by having the schools closed.
No clue why this is becoming politicized.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41591-020-0962-9
Quote
COVID-19 shows an increased number of cases and a greater risk of severe disease with increasing age5,6, a feature shared with the 2003 SARS epidemics7. This age gradient in reported cases, which has been observed from the earliest stages of the pandemic1, could result from children having decreased susceptibility to infection, a lower probability of showing disease on infection or a combination of both, compared with adults. Understanding the role of age in transmission and disease severity is critical for determining the likely impact of social-distancing interventions on SARS-CoV-2 transmission8, especially those aimed at schools, and for estimating the expected global disease burden.
The other concern is about teachers which has legitimate merit. Older teachers are going to be at risk and they need to be protected. I think having younger teachers could be used to teach in person classes while older teachers could hold virtual meetings with their students in class with student teachers proctoring classrooms. This would allow simultaneously for these student teachers to gain classroom experience and also make sure there's an authority figure in class. If you're a college student with goals of teaching, it'd be a good opportunity to take and solves the problem of having older teachers in the classroom. If a student lives with grandparents who are worried about bringing the virus back home, that individual student could opt in for online learning instead of forcing all students to opt in for online learning.
The long term affects of shutting down schools isn't being considered at all. Shutting down schools is going to cause educational issues for kids that don't have good home learning environments and online schooling isn't a replacement for in person instruction when you're just a teenager or even younger. Too many kids don't care enough to do school work unless they're in person and forced to. Online instruction is too easy to blow off and you're not doing kids any justice by having the schools closed.
No clue why this is becoming politicized.
Number 1. The statistics about how many this or that, are not accurate. They are manipulated by government.
Number 2. Lockdowns for the general populace has never been done before. So, nobody knows what any resulting numbers are really from. For all we know, any adverse disease activity has been CAUSED by the lockdowns.
Number 3. Hospital statistics are being lied about in other places, so why would you think that Arizona is NOT lying?
Until you can prove that you have accurate numbers for these 3 things, you don't have anything to even talk about. You might as well be formally talking science fiction.
If you ever get accuracy on these 3 things, then we might be able to start talking the hows and whys.
1. the numbers are of actual hospital beds in your state given by hospitals before they even get to any media/government office to manipulate
2. you say you dont care and for all you know' is jsut you admitting you dont wanna know or learn you just wanna make a opinion without research. actual science actual blood work actual scans and tests show whats the causes. but you would need to understand 21st century science and not think its 12th century voodoo
3. your youtube influencer is saying stats are lied about. but maybe ask your own states health department.
its your state, its your area its a situation thats close to you. if you want real answers from source speak to the source.. trying to get third hand info just shows your not even looking for real truths
until you realise that doctors are not 12th century voodoo witches but instead doctors that have equipment and training and that there are actual tests and results. you wont accept the truth even if it slapped you in the face
Did you go to my own State authorities and ask?
You haven't gone back to the beginning, yet. Watch this to see that there isn't a beginning: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5meH2iAjIU. If you don't understand the things in the video, there is no way for the statistics to matter, even if they happen to be somewhat real statistics.
The whole statistical basis is lies.
Number 1. The statistics about how many this or that, are not accurate. They are manipulated by government.
Number 2. Lockdowns for the general populace has never been done before. So, nobody knows what any resulting numbers are really from. For all we know, any adverse disease activity has been CAUSED by the lockdowns.
Number 3. Hospital statistics are being lied about in other places, so why would you think that Arizona is NOT lying?
Until you can prove that you have accurate numbers for these 3 things, you don't have anything to even talk about. You might as well be formally talking science fiction.
If you ever get accuracy on these 3 things, then we might be able to start talking the hows and whys.
1. the numbers are of actual hospital beds in your state given by hospitals before they even get to any media/government office to manipulate
2. you say you dont care and for all you know' is jsut you admitting you dont wanna know or learn you just wanna make a opinion without research. actual science actual blood work actual scans and tests show whats the causes. but you would need to understand 21st century science and not think its 12th century voodoo
3. your youtube influencer is saying stats are lied about. but maybe ask your own states health department.
its your state, its your area its a situation thats close to you. if you want real answers from source speak to the source.. trying to get third hand info just shows your not even looking for real truths
until you realise that doctors are not 12th century voodoo witches but instead doctors that have equipment and training and that there are actual tests and results. you wont accept the truth even if it slapped you in the face
i just said some states didnt get it as bad..
but look at your own state. the lockdown kicked in while ur state was low. due to places like california and newyork being high..
by locking down your state ur numbers stayed low..
but now lockdown is relaxed your states numbers are going up
january-july for you was
_ ____3400 patients with covid in hospital (90% bed capacity(ICU))
/
|
|
|
___/ ____600 inpatients with covid
___/
J F M A M J J
without lockdown
|
|
|
| not able to get a bed due to no capacity, even overflow used up
|
|
| using overflow beds not originally designed for ICU use
|
| ____4000 impatients
|
|
|
/
/
/ ___600
___/
J F M A M J J
see the difference
more people would have got it without lockdown.
if there were say 1-2 beds per 100 populous then lockdowns wouldnt be a problem
but because theres only 2 beds per 1000. (0.2%) then there is a problem
you cant have a virus going wild that has a ~10% hospitalisation rate and a more than 2% spread per fortnight(0.2% bed requirement a fortnight)
there just wont be enough beds
yes your state could have stayed open until some time in april. but then the lockdown would have needed to be inplace for a bit longer than 2 months and relaxed in july instead of may
but look at your own state. the lockdown kicked in while ur state was low. due to places like california and newyork being high..
by locking down your state ur numbers stayed low..
but now lockdown is relaxed your states numbers are going up
january-july for you was
_ ____3400 patients with covid in hospital (90% bed capacity(ICU))
/
|
|
|
___/ ____600 inpatients with covid
___/
J F M A M J J
without lockdown
|
|
|
| not able to get a bed due to no capacity, even overflow used up
|
|
| using overflow beds not originally designed for ICU use
|
| ____4000 impatients
|
|
|
/
/
/ ___600
___/
J F M A M J J
see the difference
more people would have got it without lockdown.
if there were say 1-2 beds per 100 populous then lockdowns wouldnt be a problem
but because theres only 2 beds per 1000. (0.2%) then there is a problem
you cant have a virus going wild that has a ~10% hospitalisation rate and a more than 2% spread per fortnight(0.2% bed requirement a fortnight)
there just wont be enough beds
yes your state could have stayed open until some time in april. but then the lockdown would have needed to be inplace for a bit longer than 2 months and relaxed in july instead of may
Number 1. The statistics about how many this or that, are not accurate. They are manipulated by government.
Number 2. Lockdowns for the general populace has never been done before. So, nobody knows what any resulting numbers are really from. For all we know, any adverse disease activity has been CAUSED by the lockdowns.
Number 3. Hospital statistics are being lied about in other places, so why would you think that Arizona is NOT lying?
Until you can prove that you have accurate numbers for these 3 things, you don't have anything to even talk about. You might as well be formally talking science fiction.
If you ever get accuracy on these 3 things, then we might be able to start talking the hows and whys.
i just said some states didnt get it as bad..
but look at your own state. the lockdown kicked in while ur state was low. due to places like california and newyork being high..
by locking down your state ur numbers stayed low..
but now lockdown is relaxed your states numbers are going up
january-july for you was
_ ____3400 patients with covid in hospital (90% bed capacity(ICU))
/
|
|
|
___/ ____600 inpatients with covid
___/
J F M A M J J
without lockdown
|
|
|
| not able to get a bed due to no capacity, even overflow used up
|
|
| using overflow beds not originally designed for ICU use
|
| ____4000 impatients
|
|
|
/
/
/ ___600
___/
J F M A M J J
see the difference
more people would have got it without lockdown.
if there were say 1-2 beds per 100 populous then lockdowns wouldnt be a problem
but because theres only 2 beds per 1000. (0.2%) then there is a problem
you cant have a virus going wild that has a ~10% hospitalisation rate and a more than 2% spread per fortnight(0.2% bed requirement a fortnight)
there just wont be enough beds
yes your state could have stayed open until some time in april. but then the lockdown would have needed to be inplace for a bit longer than 2 months and relaxed in july instead of may
but look at your own state. the lockdown kicked in while ur state was low. due to places like california and newyork being high..
by locking down your state ur numbers stayed low..
but now lockdown is relaxed your states numbers are going up
january-july for you was
_ ____3400 patients with covid in hospital (90% bed capacity(ICU))
/
|
|
|
___/ ____600 inpatients with covid
___/
J F M A M J J
without lockdown
|
|
|
| not able to get a bed due to no capacity, even overflow used up
|
|
| using overflow beds not originally designed for ICU use
|
| ____4000 impatients
|
|
|
/
/
/ ___600
___/
J F M A M J J
see the difference
more people would have got it without lockdown.
if there were say 1-2 beds per 100 populous then lockdowns wouldnt be a problem
but because theres only 2 beds per 1000. (0.2%) then there is a problem
you cant have a virus going wild that has a ~10% hospitalisation rate and a more than 2% spread per fortnight(0.2% bed requirement a fortnight)
there just wont be enough beds
yes your state could have stayed open until some time in april. but then the lockdown would have needed to be inplace for a bit longer than 2 months and relaxed in july instead of may
so first complain about quarantine. but now complain about no quarantine but being asked to atleast do something to lessen the risk.
will you guys ever be happy. or are you just trying to cause more deaths to then have something else to complain about
will you guys ever be happy. or are you just trying to cause more deaths to then have something else to complain about
What does happiness have to do with it. Generally in the past, quarantining had to do with locking down sick people and those in close proximity to them.
This is the first time the healthy people of the world have been locked down, even if they had no contact with the sick people. It's totally unscientific, and is based on some medical theory which isn't really even a theory. It's all blab based.
When are you going to wake up and see that the whole lockdown thing is a lie.
when are you going to realise that when places had hospitals over run. they could not see who would get sick next week because it takes time for symptoms to manefest. so with hospitals over run the only course of action is to just stop people from getting it because they didnt know who was at the incubation period
yes some places jointly locked down in some states with less illness in the wild nearby. and i get that lockdowns should have been more localised/regionalised. but with roads/rail/air transport to prevent a local area moving to another area they decided to just lock it all down.
yes i get it that in february they should have initiated contact tracing and forced isolation and monitoring of those repatriots and those that are sick. but hey some countries wanted the voluntary ethos .. so they can just ignore the advice and mingle. which also caused the government to step in further.
in my view the government should not have done repatriation flights to even bring it in but instead do proper 14 days enforced quarantine on those sick people and contact traced who they came near in the previous 14 days to control the spread without it going wild
but there are idiots that would have disobeyed any request to quarantine and would still mingle and spread it because they are idiots that want it to spread. thus forcing the government to step in further and tighten restrictions.
maybe if you get out of the myths of the 12th century and the stories of january. and actually follow what actually occured from then on until now. you will understand more.
maybe if you realise that its not a visual virus like spray paint coming out of peoples mouths and painting other people. thus making it hard to just quarantine the infected on first contact/pre symptom
maybe if you realise that if you stay away. then you wont get it.. if you stay at a distance you might get a low dose of viral load and not get as sick but get the immunity..
but knowing you you want to get upclose and personal and get people as sick as possible just so you can trigger a problem so you then have something to complain about
When in the world are you going to realize that the hospitals weren't overrun? When you do, it might prompt you to check the other lies you think are true, and then you will see that the pandemic is Covid in name only.
EDIT: I think we all know that you have an agenda to promote unnecessary medical intervention, and maybe even medicine's take-over of the world. So, I suppose it doesn't matter what you believe is true. You will simply keep on promoting your world take-over agenda.
so first complain about quarantine. but now complain about no quarantine but being asked to atleast do something to lessen the risk.
will you guys ever be happy. or are you just trying to cause more deaths to then have something else to complain about
will you guys ever be happy. or are you just trying to cause more deaths to then have something else to complain about
What does happiness have to do with it. Generally in the past, quarantining had to do with locking down sick people and those in close proximity to them.
This is the first time the healthy people of the world have been locked down, even if they had no contact with the sick people. It's totally unscientific, and is based on some medical theory which isn't really even a theory. It's all blab based.
When are you going to wake up and see that the whole lockdown thing is a lie.
when are you going to realise that when places had hospitals over run. they could not see who would get sick next week because it takes time for symptoms to manifest. so with hospitals over run the only course of action is to just stop people from getting it because they didnt know who was at the incubation period
yes some places jointly locked down in some states with less illness in the wild nearby. and i get that lockdowns should have been more localised/regionalised. but with roads/rail/air transport wouldnt prevent a local area moving to another area. so they decided to just lock it all down.
yes i get it that in february they should have initiated contact tracing and forced isolation and monitoring of those repatriots and those that are sick. but hey some countries wanted the voluntary ethos .. so they can just ignore the advice and mingle instead. which also caused the government to step in further.
in my view the government should not have done repatriation flights to even bring it in but instead do proper 14 days enforced quarantine on those sick people and contact traced who they came near in the previous 14 days to control the spread without it going wild.
only problem with that is it just delays the inevitable. and just gives them more prep time
ofcourse there are idiots that would have disobeyed any request to quarantine and would still mingle and spread it because they are idiots that want it to spread. thus forcing the government to step in further and tighten restrictions.
so there would have been no way to have stopped the virus without any intervention. all that can be done is lessen the speed of the spread/stall it
maybe if you get out of the myths of the 12th century and the stories of january. and actually follow what actually occured from then on until now. you will understand more.
maybe if you realise that its not a visual virus like spray paint coming out of peoples mouths and painting other people. thus making it hard to just quarantine the infected on first contact/pre symptom
maybe if you realise that if you stay away. then you wont get it.. if you stay at a distance you might get a low dose of viral load and not get as sick but get the immunity..
but knowing you you want to get upclose and personal and get people as sick as possible just so you can trigger a problem so you then have something to complain about
so first complain about quarantine. but now complain about no quarantine but being asked to atleast do something to lessen the risk.
will you guys ever be happy. or are you just trying to cause more deaths to then have something else to complain about
will you guys ever be happy. or are you just trying to cause more deaths to then have something else to complain about
What does happiness have to do with it. Generally in the past, quarantining had to do with locking down sick people and those in close proximity to them.
This is the first time the healthy people of the world have been locked down, even if they had no contact with the sick people. It's totally unscientific, and is based on some medical theory which isn't really even a theory. It's all blab based.
When are you going to wake up and see that the whole lockdown thing is a lie.
so first complain about quarantine. but now complain about no quarantine but being asked to atleast do something to lessen the risk.
will you guys ever be happy. or are you just trying to cause more deaths to then have something else to complain about
will you guys ever be happy. or are you just trying to cause more deaths to then have something else to complain about
Little update on the Coronavirus outbreak and some current day news relating to it.
Walmart is now going to require all of the people that go to their stores, regardless on state law, to wear a face-mask in their stores. Haven't seen any other retailer do this, but they're most likely follow this and the rest of the large chain stores will do that as well.
Story from the WSJ - https://www.wsj.com/articles/walmart-to-require-face-masks-in-all-u-s-stores-starting-july-20-11594824256?mod=hp_lead_pos2
Walmart is now going to require all of the people that go to their stores, regardless on state law, to wear a face-mask in their stores. Haven't seen any other retailer do this, but they're most likely follow this and the rest of the large chain stores will do that as well.
Story from the WSJ - https://www.wsj.com/articles/walmart-to-require-face-masks-in-all-u-s-stores-starting-july-20-11594824256?mod=hp_lead_pos2
alot of maths goes into the guidance
yes a norm cloth face covering is only 20% vs an N95 mask of 95% effectiveness
but its also about time in proximity to a sick person. and distance from sick person
basically 2 metres away no masks and talking for 15 minutes is like being lip to lip kissing and hugging for
just 12 seconds
wearing a face covering can be 18-20min before its same risk
yes a norm cloth face covering is only 20% vs an N95 mask of 95% effectiveness
but its also about time in proximity to a sick person. and distance from sick person
basically 2 metres away no masks and talking for 15 minutes is like being lip to lip kissing and hugging for
just 12 seconds
wearing a face covering can be 18-20min before its same risk
Do you even have a clue that you don't know what you are talking about?
Coronavirus can live on surgical masks for 7 days, but 'standard disinfection methods' can kill it: study - https://www.foxnews.com/science/coronavirus-on-surgical-mask-7-days.
if your really aware.. then you would know that surgical masks should be thrown out as soon as taken off
..
again if you think people continually wear the same mask for 7 days.. then i am definitely calling out your lack of hygiene standards.. yet again
i know your stuck in the middle ages of voodoo medicine and you cant grasp some basic modern concepts. but please understand we are in july of 2020. and for months they have been telling people to not touch their face and not keep tugging at their masks and replace the mask after use.
wash hands and such
im sorry you ignored the public advice. but just because you ignored it. doesnt mean people dont know it.
by now it should be considered common knowledge.. and its weird that you think that its not common practice.
i know you have spent alot of time and devotion to promote reasons for people to buy bleach.. but safer, faster less risk is just dispose of the mask and grab a clean one.
Maybe in your mind the things that you say have something to do with something. Are you trying to inform the general public that they are doing masks wrong? Are you trying to tell them to throw their masks out after every use? Why aren't you showing them where they can get the masks cheap? And you haven't even instructed them on how to properly use the masks. Is that the sort of thing you are talking about?
It seems that you don't have many links for what you say. I show the links where people can go to find the science. Seems that the things you say aren't even strong enough to be classified even as voodoo. Why? Because if they were, you would check out the links I show, and see that there is science backing what I say.
And, of course you are sorry. What I say doesn't have anything to do with what I show. Common knowledge is often the thing that is wrong. This is the reason I link to the science, and the reason why you are sorry. If you look anything like you talk, you really are sorry.
Promoting people to buy bleach? A couple months ago the shelves at Walmart were almost 100% devoid of bleach. The shelves still aren't entirely full. So, you are telling me that my influence among the people is so great that it caused the people to buy bleach?
You really should wheel your wheelchair in front of a mirror, and say the stuff you are going to post, to yourself, before you post it. Or have you been doing that lately? And that is why you haven't been posting so much lately?
alot of maths goes into the guidance
yes a norm cloth face covering is only 20% vs an N95 mask of 95% effectiveness
but its also about time in proximity to a sick person. and distance from sick person
basically 2 metres away no masks and talking for 15 minutes is like being lip to lip kissing and hugging for
just 12 seconds
wearing a face covering can be 18-20min before its same risk
yes a norm cloth face covering is only 20% vs an N95 mask of 95% effectiveness
but its also about time in proximity to a sick person. and distance from sick person
basically 2 metres away no masks and talking for 15 minutes is like being lip to lip kissing and hugging for
just 12 seconds
wearing a face covering can be 18-20min before its same risk
Do you even have a clue that you don't know what you are talking about?
Coronavirus can live on surgical masks for 7 days, but 'standard disinfection methods' can kill it: study - https://www.foxnews.com/science/coronavirus-on-surgical-mask-7-days.
if your really aware.. then you would know that surgical masks should be thrown out as soon as taken off
..
again if you think people continually wear the same mask for 7 days.. then i am definitely calling out your lack of hygiene standards.. yet again
i know your stuck in the middle ages of voodoo medicine and you cant grasp some basic modern concepts. but please understand we are in july of 2020. and for months they have been telling people to not touch their face and not keep tugging at their masks and replace the mask after use.
wash hands and such
im sorry you ignored the public advice. but just because you ignored it. doesnt mean people dont know it.
by now it should be considered common knowledge.. and its weird that you think that its not common practice.
i know you have spent alot of time and devotion to promote reasons for people to buy bleach.. but safer, faster less risk is just dispose of the mask and grab a clean one.
alot of maths goes into the guidance
yes a norm cloth face covering is only 20% vs an N95 mask of 95% effectiveness
but its also about time in proximity to a sick person. and distance from sick person
basically 2 metres away no masks and talking for 15 minutes is like being lip to lip kissing and hugging for
just 12 seconds
wearing a face covering can be 18-20min before its same risk
yes a norm cloth face covering is only 20% vs an N95 mask of 95% effectiveness
but its also about time in proximity to a sick person. and distance from sick person
basically 2 metres away no masks and talking for 15 minutes is like being lip to lip kissing and hugging for
just 12 seconds
wearing a face covering can be 18-20min before its same risk
Do you even have a clue that you don't know what you are talking about?
Coronavirus can live on surgical masks for 7 days, but 'standard disinfection methods' can kill it: study - https://www.foxnews.com/science/coronavirus-on-surgical-mask-7-days.
alot of maths goes into the guidance
yes a norm cloth face covering is only 20% vs an N95 mask of 95% effectiveness
but its also about time in proximity to a sick person. and distance from sick person
basically 2 metres away no masks and talking for 15 minutes is like being lip to lip kissing and hugging for
just 12 seconds
wearing a face covering can be 18-20min before its same risk
if both stand 1 metre apart. they can then be at the same risk for
~6 minutes, both with face covering. compared to the 12 second hug or 2metre 15m scenario
~5 minutes, one with face covering. compared to the 12 second hug or 2metre 15m scenario
~4 minutes, none with face covering. compared to the 12 second hug or 2metre 15m scenario
..
as for plastic visors
particles in the air are not like bullets that are on one trajectory. yes the real large fast particulates from a sneeze can be stopped but the normal breath air will just circulate around a visor
so a plastic visor is only useful if you know ur getting directly coughed/sneezed on.. but you still need a mask underneath for the air filtering of normal breath
..
yes n95 / respirators are best. but distance is more important than the 20% cloth cover difference
yes a norm cloth face covering is only 20% vs an N95 mask of 95% effectiveness
but its also about time in proximity to a sick person. and distance from sick person
basically 2 metres away no masks and talking for 15 minutes is like being lip to lip kissing and hugging for
just 12 seconds
wearing a face covering can be 18-20min before its same risk
if both stand 1 metre apart. they can then be at the same risk for
~6 minutes, both with face covering. compared to the 12 second hug or 2metre 15m scenario
~5 minutes, one with face covering. compared to the 12 second hug or 2metre 15m scenario
~4 minutes, none with face covering. compared to the 12 second hug or 2metre 15m scenario
..
as for plastic visors
particles in the air are not like bullets that are on one trajectory. yes the real large fast particulates from a sneeze can be stopped but the normal breath air will just circulate around a visor
so a plastic visor is only useful if you know ur getting directly coughed/sneezed on.. but you still need a mask underneath for the air filtering of normal breath
..
yes n95 / respirators are best. but distance is more important than the 20% cloth cover difference
The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, after many studies, have come to this conclusion: Wearing masks will not reduce SARS-CoV-2.
Does anyone wear them?
https://aapsonline.org/mask-facts/
I was thinking of making a one-layer-thick fiberglass window screen mask,
Jump to: